Summary: GAO's analysis shows that conventional and nuclear aircraft carriers both have been effective in fulfilling U.S. forward presence, crisis response, and war-fighting requirements and share many characteristics and capabilities. However, costs for investment, operations and support, and inactivation and disposal are greater for nuclear-powered carriers than for conventionally powered carriers. Life-cycle costs for conventionally powered and nuclear-powered carriers--for a 50-year service life--are estimated at $14.1 billion and $22.2 billion, respectively. The United States maintains a continuous presence in the Pacific region by homeporting a conventionally powered carrier in Japan. If the Navy switches to an all nuclear carrier force, it would need to homeport a nuclear-powered carrier there to maintain the current level of worldwide overseas presence with a 12-carrier force. Homeporting a nuclear-powered carrier in Japan could prove difficult and costly because of the need for support facilities, infrastructure improvements, and additional personnel. The United States would need a larger carrier force if it wanted to maintain a similar level of presence in the Pacific region with nuclear-powered carriers homeported in the United States.
