by Kris Osborn, President, Warrior
The oldest and longest-serving carrier in the US Navy’s fleet is slated to retire in 2026, yet there might be a rationale for further extending its service life. There are a few reasons why this could make great strategic sense, in large measure because the USS Kennedy Ford-class carrier is nearing deployment and operational status as well.
Should the USS Nimitz hold on for an additional 5 to 10 years, something likely regarded as a “tall order,” to be sure, then the US Navy could operate 12 carriers for a period of time after the second Ford-class carrier USS Kennedy arrives. This would provide such an advantage in many respects, as it would better enable the US Navy to sustain its forward presence and project power in multiple theaters at one time. The Navy and members of the Pentagon have for years debated the merits of adding a 12th carrier, something which might better respond to the persistent demand for carriers coming from Combatant Commanders.
The possibility of further extending the Nimitz raises some interesting questions, perhaps the first of which being sustainability. Can the Nimitz successfully operate for an additional five years beyond its scheduled retirement? Why not? Carriers all go through a midlife refueling overhaul which prepares them to operate for several additional decades, and should the hull and systems of the USS Nimitz maintain stability and performance, perhaps the carrier can be extended for several more years.
The other question of great relevance with this relates to questions of modernization and sustainment. Has the USS Nimitz been sufficiently modernized, upgraded and sustained such that it can remain relevant in a new threat environment? The answer to this may be yes given that carriers such as the Nimitz are intended to project air power and not necessarily operate as missile-armed warships. Secondly, the fact that the USS Nimitz would likely be protected by surrounding warships as part of a carrier strike group, so the ship could still prove relevant and useful in a conflict without needing the most elaborate layered ship defense technology. The destroyers and cruisers surrounding the USS Nimitz would be armed with Aegis Combat Systems radar and ballistic missile defense as well as new generations of EW, interceptor weapons and even lasers. This would make it well positioned to project air power while remaining defended by modern US Navy warships.
12 Carriers?
There are many reasons why it would make sense for the US Navy to try to operate an extra carrier, given the current global threat circumstances. Currently, there are serious and concerning risks from China, Iran and Russia, scenarios arguably requiring a strong forward Naval presence in position to project power as a key element of a deterrence strategy. The US Navy is also always looking to increase its carrier presence in the Pacific, and has regularly conducted dual-carrier war preparation drills. This is quite significant when one considers the potential of a great power war in the Pacific, as any ocean-launched air campaign against China would need to potentially coordinate hundreds of aircraft to “mass” power. Two or three carriers in the Pacific could exponentially increase US Navy air-attack power from the ocean, something of great relevance given that land basing for fixed wing assets in the Pacific remains challenging. New bases in the Philippines and Japan increase the realistic possibility that more land-launched fixed-wing aircraft could be launched, yet mobile maritime power projection capabilities can reposition to exact force from advantageous locations throughout the vast Pacific.
The USS Nimitz has also been greatly upgraded with a new generation of command and control technology, support for unmanned systems and communications technology. This would prove critical in the event that a dual-carrier operation was necessary as aircraft from each respective carrier would need to coordinate routes, attack vectors, mission plans and simple take-off and landing. As long as the hull of the ship was properly maintained, reinforced and sustained, then it seems it may remain well-positioned to continue service.
Kris Osborn is President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University