RE: Superships and Fighter capacity.

On 8 Jul 1997, Aden Steinke wrote:

> >Probably to stop people putting together fast, manuvuerable mini
> >carriers that have nothing but a fighter group on board.
> >

In modern times  you need a larger carrier to carry the more modern
(read
large) types of aircraft. The Through Deck Cruisers (British Harrier
CVs)
carry aircraft but they don't have the same range/payload of the larger
US
CVNs. 

One of the other reasons for larger Carriers is to carry the auxillary
aircraft. Long Rang Sub hunters, AEW aircraft, etc. Mainly though, the
increasing size of aircraft has dictated larger decks and more powerful
cats. 

Why not allow smaller escort carriers the ability to carry smaller light
fighter types? No Heavy Fighters, Interceptors, etc...

> The mini carrier also would not have the same recovery / repair
capacity as
> the fleet carrier.

It should still be able to repair its type of fighter, no?

The other thing to look at is the Assault Carrier type of craft...

- Ryan Montieth Gill  /|\   Scotland Forever  DoD# 0780/AMA/SOHC -
- _ryan.gill@turner.com or labrg@emory.edu_   '85 CB700S 'Mehev' -
- I speak not for CNN, nor they for me.   '72 CB750K 'The Barge' -
- www.mojoski.com/~rgill	     '76 MonteCarlo 'Bumblecrow' -
---		Senator Koella Should go to JAIL !!	       ---
--- Kill someone and leave the accident you should go to jail! ---