[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Posted by Rick Heinbaugh on September 9, 2026, 14:29:45, in reply to "what about a, smaller but modern CVL-N?"
This call for a smaller CV isn't a bad idea. But while WWII's CVE was intended to host a small number of fixed wing aircraft, our best modern ASW asset is a helicopter and VTOL aircraft.
Nuclear powered? There is no need. If we build a reasonable number of conventional ships, then the plus of "years without refueling" is not necessary.
Speed? If this ship is intended to escort convoys, then it doesn't need to be a greyhound. Gas turbine or diesel may not sound sexy, but they can move a big ship faster than the freighters or tankers, which are built for bulk, not for speed. 24 knots should be fine. Modern rotary winged aircraft can keep up with a track.
Size? 500-600 feet should be enough to handle the mission of convoy escort.
EMALS/CATOBAR? Not necessary with vtol.
Doesn't this just sound like our existing LHDs? They are optimized for carrying troops. This ship would be optimized for carrying/supporting a large number of rotary wing aircraft and a CIC-like facility for processing data. Maybe even two levels of hangar bay? This would leave room for all the area defense and point defense weapons described in the original post.
Needs?
--Take away the nuke and we need more refueling assets.
--Lose the E-2 and we would like an AEW asset like the British AEW Merlin, son of the Sea King that provided AEW during the Falklands war.
--As ever, more frigates would help, but they would be for support, not for sub-killing.
This CVS would not be pivoted to also carry strike aircraft, like the cold war CVS.
Sounds like the Spruance DDH? Not a bad start, but too expensive to cover speed and multiple missions.
Previous Message
You take the the EMALS/CATOBAR system, shrink it the size of an angled deck Essex class SCB-27's
It carries a smaller airwing(3 squadrons including growlers), has nuclear propulsion but focuses on point defense against drones. Arm it to the teeth with CWIS(ammo is way cheaper), RIM-116 and smaller SAM's.
With a sleeker hull shape, they can go faster than than the Ford Class(CVN-65 had more of a of a cruiser like hull).
You build them on the West/East and Gulf coast, which alleviates the room required for the larger fleet CVN's that we build every 8 years?
Oh and make Nimitz a dedicated training carrier based in Pensacola.
Responses
« Index