Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Personally I feel carriers have reached their optium size with the new CVN-78 class. There is only so much a crew can handle.

Presently USN CVN's deploy with only about 62 aircraft. Their is certainly enough room aboard for about 30 more aircraft. But whats' the point? With the advent of PGM(Precision Guided Munitions) that help reduce storie rates those aircraft can accomplish the job of a larger CVW of the 1980's & '90's.

By the way. I deployed on board CV-66 in 1981 with an airwing with 92 aircraft.

CVW-11 embarked on CV-66 from Jan'81 'til NOV'81:

14ac= VF-114 Aardvarks F-14A(TARPS)
12ac= VF-213 Black Lions F-14A
12ac= VA-192 Golden Dragons A-7E
12ac= VA-195 Dam Busters A-7E
15ac= VA-95 Green Lizards A-6E/KA-6D
04ac= VAW-123 Screwtops E-2C
04ac= VAQ-133 Wizards EA-6B
06ac= HS-12 Wyverns SH-3H
10ac= VS-33 Screwbirds S-3A
01ac= VQ-2DET. Batmen EA-3B
02ac= VR-24DET. Lifting Eagles C-2A
92 total aircraft!

Re: Are even larger aircraft carriers possible?

Jeff Head said:

Clearly, larger carriers are possible, and in their sea-basing strategies, the US has been considering various options.

For example, the "Mobile Offshore Base":

While this particular design has been determined to be feasible, it has also been considered less cost effective than other options, like more super-carriers, or joint capabilities of several large ships operating together.

Click to expand...

I would consider this as more of a base than carrier. It looks like it's a combo of carrier, LPD, LHD, and AO.

Re: Are even larger aircraft carriers possible?

joshuatree said:

I would consider this as more of a base than carrier. It looks like it's a combo of carrier, LPD, LHD, and AO.

Click to expand...

Well...it would have been a base. An ocean-going airbase. It also would have allowed for the embarking from the base logistical supply, supplies, material, and personnel onto Amphibious Assault task forces.

Since it would have been ocean-going, and since it would have carried many, many aircraft, it would have indeed been an aircraft carrier, but also much more.

Aircraft carriers would have been a significant part of its defense.

As it is, it was deemd not as economically desirable as the alternatives, so it has been shelved.

Re: Are even larger aircraft carriers possible?

Jeff Head said:

Well...it would have been a base. An ocean-going airbase. It also would have allowed for the embarking from the base logistical supply, supplies, material, and personnel onto Amphibious Assault task forces.

Since it would have been ocean-going, and since it would have carried many, many aircraft, it would have indeed been an aircraft carrier, but also much more.

Aircraft carriers would have been a significant part of its defense.

As it is, it was deemd not as economically desirable as the alternatives, so it has been shelved.

Click to expand...

Besides being air base, the ocean platform can function as artificial islands for houses. It would be nice for people to live on these platforms especially when there's not enough room to built houses on land. I imagine this platform could increase areas for many small island countries like Singapore.

Next year sometime the USS George Washington CVN-73 will transfer to Japan. Presently she is in the shipyard in Portsmouth VA under going a re-fit prior to transfer. CVN-73 has been in the shipyard since September 2006.

This link will give you the full size pic of the ship as she is moved from drydock to a wet slip. Check out that work on the flight deck!



The USN says..>>>...The Norfolk-based Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is currently undergoing Planned Incremental Availability and Docking (PIA+D). The availability will prepare George Washington to relieve USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) as the fleet's forward deployed carrier in 2008. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jennifer Apsey (RELEASED)

bd popeye said:

Next year sometime the USS George Washington CVN-73 will transfer to Japan. Presently she is in the shipyard in Portsmouth VA under going a re-fit prior to transfer. CVN-73 has been in the shipyard since September 2006.

This link will give you the full size pic of the ship as she is moved from drydock to a wet slip. Check out that work on the flight deck!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The USN says..>>>...The Norfolk-based Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is currently undergoing Planned Incremental Availability and Docking (PIA+D). The availability will prepare George Washington to relieve USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) as the fleet's forward deployed carrier in 2008. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jennifer Apsey (RELEASED)

Click to expand...

What sort of work do you think is going on under the canvas bd popeye? It looks as though they are repairing, or rebuilding of catapults!

bd popeye said:

Personally I feel carriers have reached their optium size with the new CVN-78 class. There is only so much a crew can handle.

Presently USN CVN's deploy with only about 62 aircraft. Their is certainly enough room aboard for about 30 more aircraft. But whats' the point? With the advent of PGM(Precision Guided Munitions) that help reduce storie rates those aircraft can accomplish the job of a larger CVW of the 1980's & '90's.

By the way. I deployed on board CV-66 in 1981 with an airwing with 92 aircraft.

CVW-11 embarked on CV-66 from Jan'81 'til NOV'81:

14ac= VF-114 Aardvarks F-14A(TARPS)
12ac= VF-213 Black Lions F-14A
12ac= VA-192 Golden Dragons A-7E
12ac= VA-195 Dam Busters A-7E
15ac= VA-95 Green Lizards A-6E/KA-6D
04ac= VAW-123 Screwtops E-2C
04ac= VAQ-133 Wizards EA-6B
06ac= HS-12 Wyverns SH-3H
10ac= VS-33 Screwbirds S-3A
01ac= VQ-2DET. Batmen EA-3B
02ac= VR-24DET. Lifting Eagles C-2A
92 total aircraft!

Click to expand...

That must have been a very busy flight deck. Historically I've noticed that USN carriers have always carried more of their aircraft on the flight deck than RN carriers. Up until the middle of WW2 RN carriers usually only deployed with an air group that could be stowed in the hangar. Mind you, the shortage of modern FAA aircraft meant that they were hard pressed even to manage that.

I agree with you that carriers have probably reached their optimum size and it seems that the USN is now endeavouring, in the design of CVN21 class, to concentrate on operating the airgroup more efficiently so that more sorties can be generated without increasing the size of the airgroup. In keeping with other new designs the crew will be significantly smaller than on the Nimitz class it will follow.

Janes Fighting Ships 2004/05



Cheers

BTW: Handy website Jeff!

What sort of work do you think is going on under the canvas bd popeye? It looks as though they are repairing, or rebuilding of catapults!

Click to expand...

Judging from the picture and my experience the catapults are being overhauled. So are the JBD's.(Jet blast deflectors). Actually this is pretty routine work.

On the America the hangar deck seemd to be always crowded. But somehow we did the job. I can't imangine all the room on CVN's now with a reduced air wing. Must be nice....

bd popeye said:

Judging from the picture and my experience the catapults are being overhauled. So are the JBD's.(Jet blast deflectors). Actually this is pretty routine work.

On the America the hangar deck seemd to be always crowded. But somehow we did the job. I can't imangine all the room on CVN's now with a reduced air wing. Must be nice....

Click to expand...

You mentioned that the EA-3B was part of America's air wing. Even though it was thirty one years ago I still vividly remember the visit of USS Enterprise to Hobart in 1976 and I was impressed by the size of the 2 Skywarriors that were parked on her flight deck. Photos of carrier decks in the 60s and 70's give the impression that these aircraft were always parked on the flight deck rather than being stowed below (especially photos of Modernised Essex and Midway class carriers). Was it possible for the Skywarrior to be stored in the hangar of the smaller carriers or the super carriers (I presume this information would no longer be classified)?

Cheers

Was it possible for the Skywarrior to be stored in the hangar of the smaller carriers or the super carriers (I presume this information would no longer be classified)?

Click to expand...

I don't think that info was classified.

I checked the demensions. It could have fit in the hangar with the tail folded or open. But I do not ever recall seeing the venerable "Whale" in the hangar deck. Never. On any ship I served aboard. We had them on the Kennedy & America. On the Midway we had RF-4 instead of A-3's. Now, A-3's did occasionaly come aboard on all the ships I was on except the Nimitz in 1991. When they came aboard depended upon the mission we were performing.

On the Midway we had RF-4B's from VMCJ-1 out of MCAS Iwakuni Japan. I think they had only two aircraft.

bd popeye said:

I don't think that info was classified.

I checked the demensions. It could have fit in the hangar with the tail folded or open. But I do not ever recall seeing the venerable "Whale" in the hangar deck. Never. On any ship I served aboard. We had them on the Kennedy & America. On the Midway we had RF-4 instead of A-3's. Now, A-3's did occasionaly come aboard on all the ships I was on except the Nimitz in 1991. When they came aboard depended upon the mission we were performing.

On the Midway we had RF-4c's from VMCJ-1 out of MCAS Iwakuni Japan. I think they had only two aircraft.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info Popeye.

Other impressive recce aircraft on board Enterprise during its Hobart visit were a small number of RA5C Vigilantes. Were they in service during your time in the navy? I loved the look of them and they seemed almost as large as the Skywarriors (may actually have been longer).

Cheers