Does anybody still need aircraft carriers? (deploy, policy, military, moving)

[Baldrick]

An interesting article with a couple of viewpoints for and against.

BBC News - Does anybody still need aircraft carriers?

"A major piece of Britain's new one has arrived at a dockyard, China is testing its new one, but 100 years after the concept was invented, does anybody still need aircraft carriers?
They are floating airfields that can deploy a nation's military might across the world's oceans.
In May 1912, the first plane took off from a moving warship, HMS Hibernia, temporarily adapted for the purpose. The idea of dedicated floating platforms had been mooted in 1909, but it wasn't until 1918 that HMS Argus became the first proper carrier."

[stillkit]

In a word...yep. There is no substitute for a carrier and sea power is still the basic military necessity.

All wars must be supplied and those supplies still come mostly over the oceans. No military force on earth has the capability to sustain itself totally by air, so keeping sea lanes open is a fundamental of war making.

[xwarpathx]

When things get bad with Japan, youre going to want as many carriers as possible on our side..

[Crew Chief]

Sure is easier to move the "airfield" where you need it than having to hassle with countries like France that get in a snit when you want to use their airspace...

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by xwarpathx

When things get bad with Japan, youre going to want as many carriers as possible on our side..

Japan?

[Baldrick]

Originally Posted by Crew Chief

Sure is easier to move the "airfield" where you need it than having to hassle with countries like France that get in a snit when you want to use their airspace...

It's an old question (but i'll raise it anyway).

So, are Aircraft Carriers purely a mobile aquatic airfield or are they more a demonstration of political intent/capability and/or an extension of a countrys foreign policy?

[Crew Chief]

Originally Posted by Baldrick

It's an old question (but i'll raise it anyway).

So, are Aircraft Carriers purely a mobile aquatic airfield or are they more a demonstration of political intent/capability and/or an extension of a countrys foreign policy?

BaldrRick, I'd say that aircraft carriers are "a demonstration of political intent/capability and an extension of a country's foreign policy" AND they can be moved anywhere at any time.

[Baldrick]

[quote=Crew Chief;24594450]

Originally Posted by Baldrick

It's an old question (but i'll raise it anyway).

So, are Aircraft Carriers purely a mobile aquatic airfield or are they more a demonstration of political intent/capability and/or an extension of a countrys foreign policy?[/quote BaldrRick, I'd say that aircraft carriers are "a demonstration of political intent/capability and an extension of a country's foreign policy" AND they can be moved anywhere at any time.

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by Baldrick

It's an old question (but i'll raise it anyway).

So, are Aircraft Carriers purely a mobile aquatic airfield or are they more a demonstration of political intent/capability and/or an extension of a countrys foreign policy?

D: All of the above.

[Philip T]

And they are popular targets.

Sort of like Battleships at Pearl Harbor . . . like say maybe a little over 70 years ago.