Capital ship an operational perspective

The us being a maritime nation, protected yet separated from the world by oceans, has needed the oceans as highways for economic and military power projection. a fundamental requirement for power projection is the command of the sea. having command means having control of ocean transit, securing it for one's self and one's allies while denying it to the enemy. command of the sea is seized and maintained by a strong navy centered around powerful warships. these powerful warships--capital ships--have evolved over time, constantly shaped by mission, threat, geography, technology and resources. from the constitution-class frigates at the founding of the navy to the nuclear powered aircraft carriers of today, us navy fleets have centered around the capital ship. a reciprocal relationship exists between the capital ship and the posture of the navy. this paper seeks to determine to what degree the capital ship has determined the strategic and operational posture. it begins by offering a tentative definition of the capital ship through examination of the thoughts of key naval theorists, particularly bernard brodie, alfred t. mahan and clark reynolds. from this point of departure the paper examines the evolution of the capital ship in the u.s. navy from 1794 to the present. based on the assembled theoretical and practical evidence, the paper then presents a comprehensive definition of the capital ship. the paper then explores the concept of command of the sea and examines the relationship between the capital ship and the posture of the navy in attaining that command. the paper concludes with the notion that the capital ship and the posture of the navy are reciprocal, that the capital ship is both creator and creation of the navy's operational and strategic posture. in an age of uncertainty where the u.s. navy must be prepared for a wide variety of potential conflicts, its capital ship and posture at the onset of conflict will dictate how it will fight the war.