I don’t really. The US Navy also has a number of Amphibious Assault Ships
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/lph-2.htm
they are essentially helicopter and landing craft carriers.
They don’t really take the place a full-size carrier and its wing of jet fighters and bombers.
Yep. The carrier is an excellent way to quickly place a squadron of aircraft, a couple of companies of Marines, an equipped field-hospital and tons of supplies right offshore from wherever the crisis is happenning, as long as it’s within the aircraft range from the shore.
Also, in the inter-American stage, the existence of the Brazilian carrier taskgroup can be politically useful. The old Minas Gerais was part of the Multinational Force that dealt with Haiti back in 94-95 (I had a chance to see it in port in San Juan) and I’m darn sure that it helped political-image-wise to see an other-than-USA carrier anchoring the fleet through that part of the tour.
I’ve wondered why we have an AC … and its mostly because they look nice I think 
Or because some parts of the northern country are too remote or too support a fleet group at the best.
Well back to the discussion… Aircraft Carriets means you make a lot less sleazy deals with third world dictators in order to base aircrafts for future crises. Its expensive but politically expedient.
Militarily speaking ... regular airfields are way to vunerable even if you have them everywhere. AC at least can try to run away from a major threat and keep hassling.Actually, there is a new threat to carriers and every other surface or subsurface vessel on the horizon. It’s submarines with Air Independent Propulsion. They are as quiet (or quieter) as traditional diesel-electric subs but unlike the diesel boats they don’t have to surface periodically to replenesh their air supplies and recharge their batteries. They are quieter, smaller, cheaper to build and easier to maintain than nuclear boats. As such, a country could put many more of them to sea for the price of a nuke. Their stealthiness, coupled with the ability to stay down for a long time would make them very hard to track. China is rumored to be working in this direction, retrofitting their Russian Kilo hulls.
It’s concevable that a wolfpack of such subs could put some hits on a carrier after sneaking past the screening ships. The US Navy (as well as other world navies) are rather concerned about this since the ability to track them effectively just isn’t there, and not just because of the carrier threat.
On a lighter note, here’s your sub-launched fighter!
EZ
I don’t think that’s a Navy fighter, though. I think that’s an Air Force fighter taking off from one of the underwater Air Force bases near the Central Pacific Basin.
My brother’s cousin works at one of those; he flies backseat on a Tomcat based in the Marianas Trench.
They could have based it in a trench that wasn’t so deep no ? Still it wouldn’t be a sub based fighter
Pretty deep work there. Me, I was Texas Air National Guard out of Lake Caddo.
Who are you trying to fool? Everybody knows the only underwater Air Force base is in Atlantis. That’s a sub launched fighter for sure. You can tell because of the special arresting gear near the tail to facilitate aircraft recovery in launch tubes. And those carrier guys think THEY have it tough!
EZ
BAH! That’s nothing. Forget sub-launched fighters. Check out this prototype Fighter-launched Sub!. That reddish-brown is kind of a silly color to paint an sub, though.
Looks like they’ve outfitted it with dual cruise missles as well!
I think it’s been adequately demonstrated in this thread that, no, we do not have to agree any such thing.
WOOOW!! I knew they have some super- duper jets but that one flying straight from the water,excellent!
So guys, who was right? 
I can still hear the I]whoosh!* of the engines!
EZ
I did a quick scan of this thread and saw no mention of the Phalanx antimissile/antiaircraft system. I believe all US navy ships have at least one of these- aircraft carriers have several.
It’s a 20mm gatling gun firing 4500 rounds per minute of depleted uranium ammunition, with its own radar system. It’s computer-controlled. It looks for whatever is moving over 150 mph (iirc) and getting closer. It aims/fires without human intervention. Of course it isn’t activated unless a human using another radar system detects an actual threat. Wouldn’t want it shooting down friendly aircraft.
Phalanx is a last resort defense…
Ideally you would knock down the anti-ship missiles before hand. Or even better use long range fighters and missiles like the F-14 too take enemy planes out over the horizon.
Overall could we say that a major opponent would present bigger missile threat… and smaller opponents a sneaky underwater threat ? Someone might get lucky.
