So I've been working on a layout for a custom Flagg that I'm hoping to start work on this year and I've been doing a ton of research on aircraft carriers to get ready. I'm almost certain from the outline of the conning tower on the Flagg that the original design is based on a Forrestal Class carrier, and ofcourse because of the deck layout it is clearly intended to be a full blown carrier with fighters and support craft.

But then I got to watching some of the coverage about the Mersk Alabama and they started talking about the capablites of the U.S.S. Boxer, an amphibious assault ship. The ships can't launch fighters and support planes, but they can support Harriers and Helicopters. In addition to that they can carry up to 1000 marines for landing and boasts full hospital facilites.

So here is my question, in your opinion which one of these crafts would better suit the Joes or a regular enough basis to be permantly assigned to the team. A Super Carrier or an Amphibious Assault Ship?

_________________

amphibious assault ship, carriers cant deploy troops readily and the joes on the ground always outnumbered those in the air.

_________________

well the amphibious assault ship sounds tailor-made for a Joe ship...yet, I think an aircraft carrier would be the far more exciting project both to make and play with.

_________________

Just for the record, I'm totaly planning on going with a Super Carrier for my custom, but that doesn't rule out for me atleast, doing an amphibious ship later too.

I'm just interested to see what others think about the subject.

_________________

The AAS hands down. They usually have a docking well for amphibious assault craft like the Whale, Warthog, and small attack craft like the Devilfish.
They can carry the armored vehicles the joes use, and provide the air cover they would require as it can carry Tomahawks, Dragonflys, Sky/Ghosthawks and any other jet with V/STOL capability.
Plus unlike the carrier, the AAS's primary mission is in direct support of troops. Given the nature of the Joe's missions its a better fit than the Carrier.

I think Hasbro used a carrier as opposed to an AAS because more kids know what a Carrier is. And they already had an F-14 toy so they went for it.

I agree that the AAS is a more fitting option for the Joes. It fits their mission profile. It fits the special forces budget since this ship unlike a carrier could actually be assigned to them. There is some debate right now too as the Navy wants to move towards an even larger supercarrier while Congress wants them to have more, cheaper assault carriers.

_________________

LHA's are awesome and the part about them that works best for GI Joe is that a hovercraft launches out of a bay below the stern. It's small and more manueavarable. The LHAs are constructed in Pasagoula, MS and Avondale, LA - my buddy from highschool was responsible for their robotic weapon systems. A contract for stealth ones was signed almost a decade ago, but they haven't finished building the current round of ships first.

_________________

If they were going to make a mobile PITT, this should be the medium to make it in, no?

_________________

why not make a super amphibious assault carrier

_________________

why choose between one or the other....DO them both as one ship...I can't find it anymore...but Camper had written up a nice little ficticious bio about the flagg and why it was the only one of it's kind...

_________________

Actually I'm already working on something like this for my joeverse, atleast explaining whare the ship came from.

_________________

Yep.

My brother-in-law serves on the Boxer, and it is a very cool ship. I've been reading a lot of books on the special forces lately, and one thing that was brought up in several regarding the failed attempt by Delta to rescue the hostages in Iran is that one reason the mission failed was because the politics dictated that all the branches of the military have a role. The choppers launched from a carrier, but the pilots weren't experienced in flying those distances and hadn't worked with the Air Force and Army resources, not to mention the choppers they used were known to have a lot of issues and it was so bad Delta assumed that several wouldn't start the next day, but the mission was scrapped because they lost their spares too early in the mission.

I guess where I'm going with all of that is that the Navy Carriers aren't going to be as accustomed to working with Marines, Special Forces, and other land forces as the crew of an AAS would be. The only disadvantage of an AAS is that it isn't designed to launch and recover traditional fighters, but in most cases when Special Forces need that type of Air Support it can be launched from nearby bases instead.