Carrier: A Guided Tour of an Aircraft Carrier

Conclusion

When I started working on this book in 1997, I had little doubt that I could justify good reasons for America to continue its support for carrier aviation. If I've done nothing else in this book, those reasons should be readily apparent by now. However, at the same time, I went into this book with a real concern about the ability of the U.S. Navy to address the many leadership and material problems that have plagued the service since the end of the Cold War. As it turned out, I need not have been so worried. The U.S. Navy is a resilient institution, which has endured trial, scandal, and other ills many times, and continued to prosper. So too, with the Navy of our times. The simple fact is that as a nation whose trade is primarily maritime based, we need the oceans the way that humans need oxygen. This country was founded on a strong maritime tradition, and will likely be that way for the rest of our existence. Therefore, the question is not whether we need naval forces, but what form and numbers those units will represent. Within our current concept of naval operations, that means that aircraft carriers and their embarked air wings are here to stay.

In fact, after the disastrous years following Desert Storm and the Cold War, naval aviation seems on the verge of a new golden age, with new carriers, aircraft, and weapons on the way, and strong leadership to guide it. Best of all though, the U.S. Navy seems to be moving away from the self-imposed tyranny that has marked the development and use of carrier airpower since the end of World War II. Far from the dreaded expectations, the new "joint" method of packaging and deploying U.S. armed forces (as a result of the Goldwater-Nichols reform bill) has actually allowed carrier admirals greater latitude in the use of their flattops. Jay Johnson's innovative use of his carriers during the 1994 Haiti operation would have been unthinkable just five years earlier. Even today, there are many naval aviation leaders who consider his actions heresy. Those voices though, are growing more silent with every new JTFEX and training exercise. Joint warfare is here to stay, and nothing will ensure a strong future for carriers and their aircraft more than regional commanders and joint task force commanders who want a carrier battle group as part of their complement of units.

From this is coming new and innovative roles and missions for aircraft carriers and their supporting battle amphibious groups. One of these is the use of "adaptive" air wing organizations, which would allow changing the mix and types of aircraft embarked for a particular mission. Haiti back in 1994 was just a point of departure for what might be possible in the future. Using aircraft, UAVs, and UCAVs from other services as well their own will allow the Navy greater participation in future military operations, and expand the range of possible supporting missions. It also raises the possibility of utilizing the big-deck flattops in disaster relief and humanitarian aide missions, which have become a hallmark of post-Cold War military operations. Ironically, these expanded missions will also help justify future construction of new carriers, since their inherent value and flexibility will become more apparent and valuable to a wider base of users. The idea of Army generals helping to support new warship construction may seem outlandish, but is already happening on Capitol Hill and the Pentagon.

It is with this knowledge that I want to take one last look ahead at what the new century may bring for naval aviators. For starters, there will finally be a new set of carrier designs. The CVX program is committed to transitioning from the existing Nimitz-class (CVN-68) ships to a new design that will be oriented toward the power projection missions of the new millennium. Though the program is undergoing a restructuring at the moment, plan on seeing a series of two or three transitional designs while the new design features are ironed out. By that time, around 2020, the future of warship design should be much clearer, given the political/world situation a generation from now. There also is the real possibility of technical breakthroughs that may effect new designs, particularly if low-temperature superconductors or high output fuel cells finally become a reality.

There also will be new aircraft, some so wondrous that I cannot even describe them. JSF and the F/A-18EF Super Hornet I have already shown to you. However, the new generation of Uninhabited Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAVs) is likely to appear sooner than later, given the rapidly escalating costs of manned aircraft. The performance of those aircraft are likely to be unimaginable by today's standards, with maneuvering capabilities more like that of air-to-air missiles than 20th-century manned aircraft. The fighter pilots of tomorrow may not even need to be flight qualified. Flown from consoles aboard ships or transport aircraft, they will be able to fly missions that today's manned aircraft would not even be considered for. Best of all, a lost aircraft will just be money, and not human lives. Before you call this science fiction, it is useful to remember that the Navy ran maneuvering trials between an F-4 Phantom and an unmanned Firebee drone in the early 1970s, and the drone consistently won!

These, though, are matters for another generation of Americans, some of whom have not even been born yet. Today the issue is finding the money to make the transition to these wondrous new ships, aircraft, and weapons, and this is the real challenge. Since the end of the Cold War, both we and our allies have downsized the armed forces to the point where their credibility is now coming into question. For the Navy, this means that the dozen carrier and amphibious groups that are being retained are the absolute minimum if we are to maintain the current rotation policies. It also has meant that the personnel are now at the breaking point, as Admiral Johnson indicated in his interview. U.S. military personnel have been exiting the services in growing numbers for the booming civilian job market. Long deployments and eroding salaries are a formula for disaster, and must be dealt with if our forces are to remain strong and credible. The answer of course is more money, and that is going to require leadership. Leadership from an elected administration and Congress, which currently is more interested in political squabbling than national security issues. It also will take military leaders willing to put their own careers on the line to tell the truth to those civilian leaders, even if they do not want to hear. Fine men like Jay Johnson and Chuck Krulak are leading this fight, but cannot do it themselves. All of us must accept the fact that the current economic boom, which has been powering the 1990s, has been accomplished in a time of virtually no military threats to America or its Allies. To assume that this happy set of circumstances will continue is folly, given the eruption of nationalism since the end of the Cold War. The threats are out there, and I have no doubt that they will find us without difficulty. Let us hope that our sea services continue to have the necessary support to protect us all from them. We're going to need it.