From the article:
Rickover’s response? “Forty-eight hours,” he said.Soviet Adm. Sergei Gorchakov reportedly held the view that the U.S. had made a strategic miscalculation by relying on large and increasingly vulnerable aircraft carriers. The influential U.S. Adm. Hyman Rickover shared this view. In a 1982 congressional hearing, legislators asked him how long American carriers would survive in an actual war.
Rickover was no armchair Admiral. He was a real one. And he said this back in '82. Anti-carrier weaponry has improved since then. Our defenses? Not so much. It's no secret that Chinese subs have surfaced within torpedo range of carriers and that Russian subs have been able to match the speeds of our carriers. Recent war game exercises haven't been kind to carriers.
Read the whole article. The author is right on the money --as far as this carrier sailor sees it.
Don't field an asset you can't afford to lose. The loss of even one of our carriers would be such a staggering blow to the Navy that they'd never let the rest of them leave port.
Fictitious exercises where the “enemy” sub starts in perfect position. Wow. You know everything bubblehead.
Rickover = crazy
What is the mission of the carrier force? The idea that we would be engaging in just conventional warfare against the Chicoms or the Russians is ludicrous. Look at the wars we have engaged in since the end of WWII. We have not been putting our carriers at risk. Nor would we. We know what the capabilities of our potential enemies are and act accordingly. There is no way Iran will be able to take out a carrier and what would be the consequences if they tried?
I served on an LPH during Vietnam. We had air cover from the carriers. How do we protect our amphibious forces and support vessels?