Comments by "Geoffrey Lyons" (@granatmof) on "Is the Navy’s $13 Billion Aircraft Carrier Obsolete?" video.

  1. The fact is military planners try to predict the methods and tactics and strategy of the next war but often base those plans at what worked in the last war. Battle plans are the first casualty when making contact with the enemy. Taking WW2 as an example, the tank and Battleship were successful from WW1, but the battleship was quickly out of step in WW2, while faster heavier more powerful tanks were effective, and became a key point in modern deployments. The Carrier found success in WW2, and had contribution in conflicts since, although we've not officially been at war since WW2. Carriers meanwhile have proven effective at soft and hard power projection serving as a platform for aid support for seaside disasters, and pressuring regional competitors and adversaries. Force projection would remain even if a carrier is sunk, which honestly would be an achievement. By the time of the Next War, the US will have completely new weapons and systems to address many of the projected limitations of the current systems CIWS has a max range of 2-3km. It couldn't hit a civillain airliner at altitude. Currently only 3 Ford class are planned at this time. The fact is though WW2 carriers were effective because the sheer number. The US shipbuiding capacity cannot expand production that's to the decline of civilian shipbuilding. China and Korea are the center of civilian shipbuilding. The US is losing institutional knowledge and skills, and will be 3-5 years behind in production as kills are reassembled. The size of China's Navy matters in part because China is a regional military power, every nation is except the US and our global bases and carriers are key to that global reach. So no matter what happens, the US will not deploy is full force against China, who would use their full force. It means an even high k/d ratio. However the US could develope and deploy drone boats for added defense and sensors.
    1