Yes* most of the time. The purpose is the Pentagon doesn't want adversaries or anyone else getting their hands on classified gear or aircraft systems because it's basically flying around with a datacenter nowadays. If it's in deep water, NAVSEA may bust out FADOSS gear and make it a OJT exercise for junior recovery personnel.
Even if nothing was damaged (like that's going to happen) after you fish them out of the drink you think they can be put back in service? Just look at the boosters on the Shuttle--the cost to refurbish them after their dip in the ocean was almost as much as buying new. Valuable in as much as it showed the problem that lead to Challenger, but they refused to look.
Yes* most of the time. The purpose is the Pentagon doesn't want adversaries or anyone else getting their hands on classified gear or aircraft systems because it's basically flying around with a datacenter nowadays. If it's in deep water, NAVSEA may bust out FADOSS gear and make it a OJT exercise for junior recovery personnel.
In recent memory, the scorecard is:
- Truman (CVN-75): 1: JUL-22, 1: DEC-24 (friendly fire), 1: MAY-25, 1: APR-25
- Nimitz (CVN-68; decomm APR-26): 2: OCT-25
(Consider there are 9 additional carriers too.)
Nimitz does an average (mean) of 18.4 arrested landings a day over a span of 52 years.
Truman went 75000 landings (10-11 years) without a major mishap once upon a time™.
~7-8k fixed-wing landings per year per ship, roughly.