During the 1992 campaign, President Clinton called for a Navy with 10 carriers. These force-structure goals were not challenged by the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review. As such the carrier battle group has long been regarded as sacrosanct But in an age where advances in precision navigation and location, microelectronics, information technologies, miniaturization, and advanced materials make possible alternatives for delivering ordnance on target, the validity of the requirement for the 12 aircraft carriers the Clinton Administration wants pursuant to its Bottom Up Review must be questioned. Carriers have high costs, both operationally and financially. Each carrier is protected by an escort fleet, which consists of several cruisers and destroyers and often an attack submarine.
Fleet oilers follow along, as do ships that replenish the jet fuel and ordnance of the air wing.
In terms of dollars and personnel just the carrier and its air wing can be viewed as the rough equivalent of 5 to 20 surface combatants or attack submarines. Furthermore, protection beyond that provided by surface ships is required. Traditionally F-18s were multipurpose aircraft, used in both fighter and attack roles, and as such aren't always available for the latter role. This is shown by the war against Iraq. This represented less than a quarter of a carrier's daily total of fixed-wing sorties.