"Why only 70 aircrafts on US CV s??" Topic

back in the cold war those same kind of US carriers had 90 aircrafts on them; why do they only have 70 now? space?
contingency to bring in when/where needed a dozen more?

Planes are bigger?

I mean – those A-4 were on the small side.

It's been a while, but "Back in the Day" on NIMITZ we had two squadrons each of F-14s and A-7s, a squadron of A-6s, and 4-aircraft detachments of EA-6Bs, E-2s, S-3s and SH-3s. Toss in two C-2s and I think that was it. I can't remember if a squadron was 12 or 15 aircraft (hey, I was a nuke!), but that comes out to something like 70-90 aircraft.

When we shifted from A-7s to F-18s, I seem to remember a 1 for 1 swap, so no change in the number of aircraft. The aircraft mix on LINCOLN was pretty much the same.

The big change from then to now is the absence of the A-6s and S-3s, and the exchange of F-18s for F-14s. I do not remember the A-6s being replaced, and I'm pretty certain the S-3s weren't replaced, so that might count for the decrease in numbers. I don't think the size of the squadrons was reduced due to deck space limitations as the deck multiple of an F-18 is pretty much the same/just a little bigger than an A-7 and smaller than an F-14.

Regards,

Scott Chisholm

Because nobody really wants to spend the money. That's also why the CVN air wing of the '80s and '90s was actually more powerful than today's.

We could put more aboard if we had the cash, or if we felt we needed to in a a war, or something.

However, there is a mandate to keep a fairly robust number of CVN hulls in service, and we're broke, and cutting the size and quality of air wings is one way to reconcile those things.

Look at the pathetic state of what they call a CVBG these days – a carrier and a couple cruisers or destroyers, an SSN, and maybe a replenishment ship. Back in the day, a CVBG was a dozen warships.
-Kle.

If you're talking over the course of the entire Cold War, then it's because planes got bigger and heavier and took up more space. If you're talking about say the 1980's to now, then yes, it is due in large part to cost savings.

-Will

There has also been a substantial increase in the capabilities of the aircraft. The F/A-18E/Fs can do the job of the F-14s in defending the group as well as being strike aircraft and they can do refueling.

And would you not expect them to be running lighter than under war time conditions? If necessary I bet they can get the other twenty aircraft on to the carrier to increase the number of sorties they can maintain.

So I don't think this is a crisis. The last few times we've used carriers they seemed to get the job done. Obviously I don't mean they overcame fearsome opponents, but they got a lot of planes in the air day after day and carried out a lot of missions without accident or interruption,

If you're comparing between the 1970s and today, it's because the airplanes are much bigger. A4 has a max takeoff weight of 25,000lbs; A7 has a max takeoff weight of 42,000lbs (in extreme overload, 'normal' is closer to 28,000lbs!); F4 has a max takeoff weight of 62,000lbs; an F18C/D has a max takeoff weight of 52,000lbs; the Super Hornets have a max takeoff weight of 66,000lbs.

Since 1991, well, there have been a few aircraft replacements (F14s for Super Hornets, F18C/Ds for A6s), but it's mostly a $$ thing.

Don't forget that digital equipment and smart systems have eliminated the need for a lot of those aircraft. The digital revolution has transformed the military and continues to do so.

I didn't think of the whole that 'do more with less' this that the Super Hornet allows.

I have no doubt that in time of a major war, the numbers would be increased. At present, we're in no active conflict and even then, the smaller air wing size is able to handle the missions very adequately for short, specific missions.

70 combat aircraft are more than about a third of the world's nations have in inventory (individually). Put 2 carriers together in the same region, they have more aircraft than almost half of the world's nations (individually).

A bit more subjective, the overall quality of the aircraft, level of maintenance, depth of supplies, and caliber of pilots … those 70 aircraft are worth far more in combat than the larger numbers of many nations.

I'd be more interested in ASW defenses preserving that flight deck than anything else…

Just a humble opinion from a non-aviator.

Chalfant