> do you see the USN giving up its "flagship vessel" without a fight?
No. That's a problem with every change of technological paradigm in military history. Enormous vested interests (companies building ships and components, congresspeople with jobs in their districts, etc.) and people who were born and trained, and are skilled and experienced in the old tech and aren't open to change - like IT companies who can't see the disruption coming. Much of the public will react with outrage; in fact, Congress passed a law setting a minimum number of aircraft carriers.
A general recently said, 'for once, let's make the change before there's a disaster.' We'll see if it's politically possible.
No. That's a problem with every change of technological paradigm in military history. Enormous vested interests (companies building ships and components, congresspeople with jobs in their districts, etc.) and people who were born and trained, and are skilled and experienced in the old tech and aren't open to change - like IT companies who can't see the disruption coming. Much of the public will react with outrage; in fact, Congress passed a law setting a minimum number of aircraft carriers.
A general recently said, 'for once, let's make the change before there's a disaster.' We'll see if it's politically possible.