A Modern super carrier [snip] is on another level beyond any STOBAR CV
There is no doubt that a super carrier has much higher capabilities. Nobody declines this.
A Modern super carrier with F35
Currently is still fiction as F-35C can't land on carrier yet... They hadn't fixed its hook. Actually as of December 2013 Lockheed has installed an improved hook on a test aircraft but
hadn't stated testing yet. which is even more sad as 14 F-35C variants are already produced.
But then you have to consider the cost. Do you think it is better to have one super carrier, or two/three light carriers with a total aircraft complement of equal size?
It actually depends...
Lets assume that operating (i.e. sending to a task for specific mission) 1 carrier x 90 aircaft is cheaper than operating 2 carriers x 45 aircraft or 3 carriers x 30 aircraft (which BTW I'm not entirely sure about) in the same manner that it is cheaper to operate one mega tanker/container ship than 2 small tankers or container ships.
However the question is, what budget can you afford as a nation? Can you afford 5-10 super carriers? Than yes, it is probably better to operate super carriers in CATOBAR configuration.
But lets assume you can afford a 1 super carrier x90 planes or 2 smaller carriers x 30 planes. (I especially reduce the numbers to adjust for a budget), than the question is different.
(a) you are probably not operating both carriers together, in many cases it is enough to send a one carrier for a mission (so it reduces cost per request significantly
(b) you can always put a carrier to a dry dock for overhaul and you still can provide decent power of 1/2 of the force at immediate readiness.
(c) if you operate two carriers together you significantly reduce the risk through redundancy - as even if one of the carriers is hit and need some time to repair the damages (even if it takes several hours) the 2nd one remains fully operational.
But is it better than three STOBAR carriers with F-35s?
I would rephrase it, it is better to have a Super carrier vs 3 STOBAR carriers with
same class of aircraft, I personally think that 3 smaller STOBAR provide much higher flexibility.
There are two major limitations of STOBAR:
1. The ability to handle cargo and AEW planes - they all currently operate a helicopters for such a role that has lower range/payload/ceiling etc.
2. The strike payload, range.
The first one can probably be addressed with VC-22. There are already discussions about providing a AEW capabilities for VC-22. And the second one seems to be less problematic as well when you read about the capabilities of MiG-29K it looks like an amazing aircraft - it takeoffs with reasonable amount of air-to-ground weapons and with a drop tank (see the videos above), it has buddy refueling pods, has all the 4++ generation avionics, excellent A2A weapons and good performance like all modern fighters - so it looks like being as good as anything that operates from CATOBAR.
So probably yes, the 3 or 2 carriers maybe a better option. But it really depends on your goals and your budget. For US with its 10x100,000 tonne carriers it is probably to have what they have now.
Another interesting issue I thought about it. Currently all operating CATOBAR carriers are either:
- Nuclear powered (all US Nimitz class or French Charles de Gaulle)
- Powered with steam boilers like Brazilian São Paulo
That both have steam "for free"
Now modern ships usually operate on Gas Turbines and/or Diesel. So without EMALS or built in steam generator it is very hard to have CATOBAR carrier...
