3 ms·
You wouldn’t want to be in a holding pattern at bingo fuel while the one runway on the carrier has some problem preventing landing.
by yuppie_scum 5y ago
You wouldn’t want to be in a holding pattern at bingo fuel while the one runway on the carrier has some problem preventing landing.
- simonh 5y agoYou’d have twice as many carriers though, so would generally have a second carrier (or more) in the battle group.
- dragontamer 5y agoNah, that's the benefit of the Supercarriers actually. A typical carrier (Chinese Shandong) is 70,000 tons. The Gerald Ford Supercarrier is 100,000 tons. So you can see that 3x regular carriers cost as much tons as 2x Supercarriers (210,000 tons vs 200,000 tons). But 2x supercarriers have 4-runways total and 8 catapults, while 3x carriers would only have 3-runways. --------- The real problem with "Supercarriers" is that you've got all your eggs in one basket. Killing one supercarrier is kinda-sorta like killing two carriers, in terms of capabilities. More efficient for the US Navy to use, but also more efficient for the enemy to kill.
- azth 5y agoHuh? US carriers only have 1 landing runway.