Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!xanth!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!cbnews!ugthomps@cs.buffalo.edu
From: ugthomps@cs.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Are Aircraft Carriers Obsolete?
Message-ID: <3410@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 24 Jan 89 02:52:38 GMT
References: <3200@cbnews.ATT.COM> <3233@cbnews.ATT.COM> <3291@cbnews.ATT.COM> <3356@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 20
Approved: military@att.att.com


In article <3356@cbnews.ATT.COM> ricko@rosevax.Rosemount.COM (Rick O'Brien) writes:
>I believe that there is always a U.S. Fleet on station in the Med.  The U.S.
>Navy wants 15 nuclear carrier battle groups, I believe that there are now
>13.  The Navy feels that 15 are needed to keep 5 on station at all times.
>On station does not mean in transit.  I may be wrong, but I think that there
>is always a group on station in the Med, the Indian Ocean, the Atlantic, and
>two in the Pacific.  Anyone know for sure?

[yee gads...fourth today...bill, if any of this is irrelevant, ditch it!]

Rick,  Slight correction...we don't have 13 "nuclear" groups.  I think 
it's more like 6, with the Washington coming out shortly to make 7. 
The rest are conventional.  Though, the Kennedy was designed to be 
nuclear, the protesters forced congress to make it conventional *after* 
she already had the reactors in her.  This forced them to redesign the ship
after most of it was built.  The Kennedy is really a bastardised ship
(though she is a good ship...don't get me wrong).

                            - G