Data Confrontation Orders: The Technological Game of U.S. Aircraft Carriers Escalates

[Global Times Special Correspondent Wu Yan] According to a report on the U.S. Naval Institute website on the 24th, as the top official of the U.S. Navy, Admiral Darryl Caudle, the Chief of Naval Operations, publicly praised the "Ford" class aircraft carrier's sortie generation efficiency, stating it is 20%-30% higher than that of the "Nimitz" class carriers. The report noted that Caudle made these remarks at a time when President Trump was requesting the U.S. Navy to modify the design of the follow-on "Ford" class carriers, including changing the electromagnetic catapults on this latest U.S. aircraft carrier to steam catapults, which has sparked significant controversy. It is widely believed that Caudle hopes to use this data to persuade Trump to change his previous stance.

The report stated that Caudle announced a set of data at the "Tailhook" Association seminar held in Reno, Nevada: a four-day "sortie generation rate" stress test conducted in the Caribbean in February showed that the sortie generation efficiency of the "Ford" class aircraft carrier, which had previously faced criticism for reliability issues with its electromagnetic catapults, was equivalent to 120% to 130% of that of the "Nimitz" class carriers using steam catapults. According to data from the Pentagon's Operational Test and Evaluation Office, the standard sortie rate for "Nimitz" class carrier aircraft is about 120 sorties in 12 hours, with a peak of about 240 sorties in 24 hours. Based on this, the "Ford" class carrier's aircraft sortie rate could reach a maximum of 156 sorties in 12 hours and 312 sorties in 24 hours.

Recently, Trump signed a national security memorandum directing the U.S. Navy to redesign the fourth "Ford" class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), abandoning the electromagnetic launch system and advanced arresting gear, and reverting to traditional steam catapults and hydraulic elevators. He also requested that the Pentagon and the U.S. Navy submit specific recommendations within 60 days. Additionally, U.S. media reported that Trump wants to modify the position of the carrier's island, moving it from its current aft position forward, "hoping the new carrier looks closer to his preferred World War II-era carrier design."

Several U.S. Navy experts have stated that Trump's modification suggestions would not only incur tens of billions of dollars in additional redesign costs and significantly extend the delivery timeline of the carriers, but would also affect the actual combat capability of the carriers. For example, the current aft island design is based on considerations of efficiency and safety, providing more parking space for carrier-based aircraft and improving landing safety; the electromagnetic catapult theoretically can also enhance the sortie generation efficiency of carrier-based aircraft, thereby increasing the combat capability of the carrier.

The U.S. Naval Institute website stated that Caudle acknowledged that the "Ford" class carrier had indeed faced issues with reliability and other factors in the past, but emphasized that "this was due to the carrier integrating too many new technologies." He noted that with ongoing improvements, these issues are gradually being resolved—the latest stress test results are proof of this. He also stated that the sortie generation rate of the "Ford" class carrier's aircraft significantly exceeds that of the traditional "Nimitz" class carriers, and this achievement "is not only due to the electromagnetic catapults and arresting gear but also the comprehensive result of all new technologies—the entire system is functioning," which includes the redesigned flight deck layout, weapon elevators, and more. These are precisely the parts that Trump specifically requested to be changed in the follow-on models of the "Ford" class.

Caudle also mentioned that Trump is concerned about the reliability of the new systems on the "Ford" class carriers, and the U.S. Navy needs to provide complete information, stating, "If we really reconsider steam catapults and hydraulic elevators, we must fully understand the relevant costs associated with such a significant design change."