I wonder what the emergence of hypersonic missiles and drones does to the carrier and calculations? Wouldn't any conflict begin with both sides targeting those vessels with weaponry that it is MUCH harder to evade or shut down? Are there measures of how willing the Japanese, Korean or American public would be to accept the lost of 5-6 carriers worth of citizens? What of the Chinese? I can't imagine any of their carriers surviving the first few days of a conflict and it takes all my creativity to imagine them surviving the first few hours. Am ai misunderstanding the modern utility of these giant, floating targets?
It's definitely a problem that, ironically, technological progress has produced in asymmetrical warfare. The proliferation of American technologies globally has helped even the playing field and allowed countries like China and Iran to pursue strategies of anti-access area denial (A2AD), which are very difficult to counter. The best answer to this I've seen is the use of AI-enabled swarming drones to neutralize air threats, but the technology remains in the experimental stages.
Your comment about carriers is correct but it does not address the need to refuel the aircraft. The US has insufficient capability to replenish carrier aviation fuel due to the lack of oilers.
True. I was just highlighting the disparity between the two naval forces. A US aircraft carrier can carry a million gallons of jet fuel, which is enough to refuel 50 jets 20 times. In a combat scenario, that means they need to replenish their fuel stocks every 2-3 days through fuel transfers, dynamic resupplies, or by accessing floating terminals. A recent article in Stars and Stripes talks about this issue, and how newly purchased oilers are also in need of crews. Here's the link: https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2024-09-18/navy-oilers-civilian-mariners-15219674.html
Great, as always! Thank you!
I wonder what the emergence of hypersonic missiles and drones does to the carrier and calculations? Wouldn't any conflict begin with both sides targeting those vessels with weaponry that it is MUCH harder to evade or shut down? Are there measures of how willing the Japanese, Korean or American public would be to accept the lost of 5-6 carriers worth of citizens? What of the Chinese? I can't imagine any of their carriers surviving the first few days of a conflict and it takes all my creativity to imagine them surviving the first few hours. Am ai misunderstanding the modern utility of these giant, floating targets?
It's definitely a problem that, ironically, technological progress has produced in asymmetrical warfare. The proliferation of American technologies globally has helped even the playing field and allowed countries like China and Iran to pursue strategies of anti-access area denial (A2AD), which are very difficult to counter. The best answer to this I've seen is the use of AI-enabled swarming drones to neutralize air threats, but the technology remains in the experimental stages.
Your comment about carriers is correct but it does not address the need to refuel the aircraft. The US has insufficient capability to replenish carrier aviation fuel due to the lack of oilers.
True. I was just highlighting the disparity between the two naval forces. A US aircraft carrier can carry a million gallons of jet fuel, which is enough to refuel 50 jets 20 times. In a combat scenario, that means they need to replenish their fuel stocks every 2-3 days through fuel transfers, dynamic resupplies, or by accessing floating terminals. A recent article in Stars and Stripes talks about this issue, and how newly purchased oilers are also in need of crews. Here's the link: https://www.stripes.com/branches/navy/2024-09-18/navy-oilers-civilian-mariners-15219674.html