Would The Navy Build Smaller, Faster 60,000-Ton Ford or Nimitz  Aircraft Carriers?

By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization

(Washington DC) There has been discussion in recent years that the United States Navy could alter, adjust, or rethink its aircraft carrier production plans following the construction and arrival of the first three Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers.

Instead of the large supercarriers, some wonder if the Navy could be better served with faster, smaller, more maneuverable, and more survivable alternatives.

But does that idea make sense?

Planning the Future Fleet

The service has conducted many future fleet studies and has taken a specific look at the Navy’s long-term aircraft carrier needs. Reports also included deep-dive studies and threat assessments related to the Chinese anti-ship-missile “carrier-killer” threat.

Exact plans may still be unclear and are subject to further analysis and evaluation as the threat calculus evolves. However, the Navy has been clear and steadfast that there is and will be a lasting strategic and operational need for carriers surging into the future given global demand and the threat landscape.

Much has been made of the Chinese Anti-Access/Area-Denial strategy, which using 2,000-mile ranged DF-26 anti-ship cruise missiles reportedly capable of tracking and destroying carriers seeking to project power offshore with a Carrier Air Wing in place to attack. The actual ability of these missiles to succeed in destroying carriers, however, remains a bit of an open question given that there may be much unknown about the DF-26’s ability to hit moving targets, achieve requisite guidance, and overcome the Navy’s growing suite of layered ship defenses.