The debate that occurred because of Sweetman's post on the F-35 got me to thinking. What does a 44 plane airwing look like on a carrier designed to carry 100 plus airplanes? I present to you the following pictures of the USS Enterprise.
First from back in the day...
What you see above is a fully realized airwing. Strikers to go far and conduct alpha strikes. Recon planes to conduct post strike analysis in real time and to ferret out targets of opportunity...long range anti-sub airplanes to keep enemy subs away from the carrier battlegroup...even helicopters to do the close in anti-sub work and to rescue downed air crews.
Then the aircraft carrier today...
What do you see here? A largely empty deck. Helos to do the traditional anti-sub, logistics and rescue work and one type of fighter to do fleet defense, strike, recon and other work.
Gone are the still modern A-6F (prototype), the S-3 Viking, and the potentially potent F-14 Super Tomcat.
Naval Aviation is broken. Its underfunded and stretched thin. 11 carriers is way too much and only adds strain to the aircrews and the ship crews.
A move to 8 or even better 6 big deck carriers should be more than sufficient. 3 on each coast with one in refurbishment, one in deployment and one in training/refit prepping for deployment should be more than adequate.
If a big war were to arise then they can be surged to the trouble location. Name one time when we needed more than one carrier on location and didn't have time to surge it to the area?
You can't. Because its never happened.
6 will do fine and will allow the Navy to fully utilize its assets while saving money.