"More Midways" as a shorthand for "more attack carriers the size of the Midways"

I can see the use for small carriers as convoy escorts, where an LHA CVV/CVS would make sense. I don't really see the point of attack carriers smaller than Nimitz class. Carriers are exponentially more effective the larger they get, since they basically all need the same size crew but a bigger hull gives you more aircraft for roughly the same operating costs.
Which is why the Navy only wanted more Nimitz class instead of a "mid sized" carrier.
 
The RN used its two Commando ships to carry ASW Seakings in addition to Commando versions. The three Invincibles and the new QEs all had/have a role in delivering Royal Marines.

Given that ASW helos take up valuable space on Nimitz ships would using the LHA/LHD to carry Seahawks or Seakings have been useful in wartime?
 
Given that ASW helos take up valuable space on Nimitz ships would using the LHA/LHD to carry Seahawks or Seakings have been useful in wartime?
No, with a maximum sustained speed of 20 knots the LHAs and LHDs would be unable to accompany the CVAs/CVANs. Not to mention you're diverting valuable amphibious shipping from its intended role.
 
I was going to start a new thread but this one seems to fit quite well.

For a variety of reasons US involvement in Vietnam ends in 1973 and not 1975. The US Navy turns to the growing problem of defending sealanes from Soviet submarines in tension or war.

Although the big carriers are getting S3 Viking and Seaking ASW assets, and Spruance ASW destroyers are on order to replace ageing FRAM destroyers the Sea Control Ship (SCS) and other small carrier designs appear to offer a solution similar to the WW2 jeep carriers.

The main obstacle to adding such a ship to US and NATO fleets is the absence of credible fixed wing aircraft to supplement the Seaking ASW.

With the UK looking at Harrier variants for its Though Deck cruisers, the USN looks at developing this plane.

US manufactures Convair and NA Rockwell have their own designs to bring to the table.

Canadair meanwhile is working with HS in the UK to develop an AEW version of its CL84.

The Ford administration in 1975 takes the Soviet threat seriously and encourage by SACLANT agrees to order a small carrier to work with the new Spruance class.
 
I was going to start a new thread but this one seems to fit quite well.

For a variety of reasons US involvement in Vietnam ends in 1973 and not 1975. The US Navy turns to the growing problem of defending sealanes from Soviet submarines in tension or war.

Although the big carriers are getting S3 Viking and Seaking ASW assets, and Spruance ASW destroyers are on order to replace ageing FRAM destroyers the Sea Control Ship (SCS) and other small carrier designs appear to offer a solution similar to the WW2 jeep carriers.

The main obstacle to adding such a ship to US and NATO fleets is the absence of credible fixed wing aircraft to supplement the Seaking ASW.

With the UK looking at Harrier variants for its Though Deck cruisers, the USN looks at developing this plane.

US manufactures Convair and NA Rockwell have their own designs to bring to the table.

Canadair meanwhile is working with HS in the UK to develop an AEW version of its CL84.

The Ford administration in 1975 takes the Soviet threat seriously and encourage by SACLANT agrees to order a small carrier to work with the new Spruance class.
Honestly, the biggest force towards getting an SCS or VSS out at sea would be the CL84 AEW (though I suspect that it'd have to be a bigger airframe than the CL84). So that the small carriers can have AEW that isn't stuck on a helicopter that can't fly at 25,000ft. Harriers could play fighter, I'm sure the USMC aviators would love a chance to go chase a Bear.

"We have everything to give this an acceptable air wing. 3 AEW Dynaverts, 4 Harriers, and a dozen Sea Kings for ASW."
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom