The aircraft carrier has long been the centerpiece of naval power, projecting force and offering unmatched sortie-generation capabilities.

However, the relentless march of military technology and evolving threat environments are prompting some to question the future dominance of the aircraft carrier.

In recent years, the discussion around the relevance of traditional aircraft carriers has intensified. As Thomas Modly, the acting Secretary of the Navy initiated the Future Carrier 2030 Task Force, the debate over the future composition of naval forces has taken center stage.

One of the main alternatives to the traditional aircraft carrier is the guided missile submarine. With the ability to carry a substantial number of missiles, these submarines could theoretically provide a comparable firepower delivery system.

The Ohio-class guided-missile submarines (SSGNs), for example, have been modified to carry 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, offering a significant strike capability.

By expanding the size of these submarines, one could envisage an arsenal of over 300 missiles, delivering a hefty punch without the need for a large and potentially vulnerable surface vessel.

Large surface warships, akin to the Soviet Navy’s Kirov-class battlecruisers, represent another potential alternative. These vessels carry an extensive array of missiles and could be designed with a focus on land-attack and anti-ship capabilities.

A hypothetical American battlecruiser, benefiting from a protective destroyer escort, might present a formidable force at sea with its substantial payload of missiles.

The concept of a surface action group (SAG) composed of multiple Arleigh Burke-class destroyers also presents a compelling option.

These advanced warships, already versatile and capable, can be grouped to maximize their defensive and offensive capabilities.

However, the logistical challenges of rearming at sea and the absence of a strong aviation component would need to be addressed for this alternative to be considered viable.

Despite these emerging alternatives, the value of the aircraft carrier should not be hastily dismissed. The potential vulnerabilities of carriers, such as their size and cost, are offset by their strategic advantages.

Carriers offer unique versatility, carrying a range of aircraft capable of diverse missions, and possess an unrivaled ability to project power globally due to their nuclear propulsion and significant range.

Moreover, as the carrier air wing evolves, the integration of unmanned systems and advanced aircraft like the F-35C and the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, serve to enhance the carrier’s capabilities.

With this evolution, the United States is positioned to maintain its carriers as a preeminent weapon of war, combining both deterrence and combat effectiveness.

Relevant articles:
– Modly: Parallel Fleet Studies Could Reshape Future of Aircraft Carriers, USNI News, Mar 12, 2020
– Are Aircraft Carriers Obsolete?: 3 Ways We Could Replace Them, popularmechanics.com
– U.S. Navy Aircraft Carriers Are Nowhere Near Obsolete, nationalinterest.org
– U.S. Navy, China And France’s Future Aircraft Carriers Compared, Naval News