Quote:
Originally Posted by TLAM Strike
Interestingly a Harrier is shorter than a trident missile, and weighs six times less, so basically an Ohio class hull could carry 24 Harriers with about five reloads of stores and fuel. OMG an Ohio SSVN is looking better than an Invincible class carrier! 
As I mentioned before the USS Jimmy Carter deployed a surveillance UAV over Yeonpyeong island following the North Korean attack on the island last year. (So for those keeping score at home that is a submarine, launching an aircraft, under combat conditions). The German Type 212 U Boats are going to be outfitted with three short range Aladin UAVs and a 30MM Rheinmetall cannon on a mast. |
The point is not that there's a law that says VSTOL can't have folding wings, the point is to spin up a sub carrier program would also require spinning up a fighter program.
Length and weight are more or less irrelevant. You also have to take into account wingspan and crewing requirements in your idea. You can't just store 24 harriers vertically and expect things to work. It's ridiculous to think that because you have 24 missile tubes you can fit 24 harriers on an Ohio class. Missiles don't need extra fuel or maintenance; they're a complete package.
There's so much support infrastructure you'd need for an embarked airwing.
Look at the USS Wasp. It carries 1/4th the number of harriers in your design, but it's 3 times wider, almost twice as long as, and has a crew nearly 10x larger than an Ohio class SSBN. Even getting rid of everything else an LHD does, you're not going to fit an airwing in the same footprint.
Tactically it doesn't make sense either, you're going to need AWACS to make your airwing useful (try fitting one of those on a sub), you need search and rescue capabilities for downed pilots, and the fact that you'd have to spend most of your time on the surface to do air operations will negate the stealth capabilities you're trying to achieve in the first place.