posted on Apr, 17 2016 @ 02:23 AM
a reply to: RedSparrow47
Presumably large carriers would be more expensive than small ones, so more small carriers could be built for the same cost as a smaller number of
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, two small carriers can be built for the cost of one large one (the exact relation doesn't matter).
Those two smaller carriers have the advantages of
being able to pass through narrower channels
being able to pass through shallower waters
being multiple, so that they can be in more places at a time. Your one large carrier may be doing sterling work in the China seas, but it would be
useless for a simultaneous crisis in the Mediterranean.
being multiple, so that other vessels are available if one gets disabled.
It's also worth looking up British naval history with reference to the Dreadnought class of battleships.
The Dreadnought, in the early twentieth century, was a new kind of super-battleship which outclassed eveything else in the water, and instantly made
all the other navies of the world obsolete.
The trouble was, it also made the rest of the ships in the Royal Navy obsolete.
As a result, the British lead in the naval arms race was almost wiped out, and reduced in effect to how much faster Britain could build Dreadnoughts
than the Germans could build them.
edit on 17-4-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)