Originally Posted by bartieboy
We are seriously going off topic here but my guess is that if law enforcement that feels the need to wear vests and helmets are more often confronted by guns then by people running at them with knives
So anyone has objections to my opinion of carriers being replaced by long range fighters?
On the surface, that sounds like a practical idea. However, it is problematic for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it's not going to happen in the foreseeable future. Fossil fuels, airframes, and existing engine designs are the limiting factor. But perhaps more importantly, one of the most vital roles that CVs fill is power projection. Being able to park a carrier in troubled areas is a huge asset in encouraging those who otherwise might not listen to reason. Moreover, if we take the strict Mahanian view that a navy is for ensuring that one's maritime trade is safe while hurting the other guy's, then carriers are absolutely necessary for patrol.
Having said that, I wouldn't be averse to reducing the current inventory, or failing that, rotating the existing hulls on tours.