I am not versed in that part of history. Probably you are right, it might not have been that crazy idea.
But I have read a lot of other history, especially WW2 and Cold War, and it is kinda normal that military throws a lot of crazy ideas. In the end even if a very small portion of those ideas bring fruit it typically tends to give the edge that you need in conflict.
So I try to not criticize too much because people who prepared this were probably asked to do exactly that -- go wild with their ideas with low probability anything they produce is going to bring fruit.
At the time this submarine aircraft carrier has been prepared:
- Cold War was at its high
- US just started using atomic power for everything they did and it seemed nuclear reactors and atomic power are going to solve any problem from going very long time under sea to having planes reach orbit and other planets
- US had nuclear bombs but had trouble maintaining ability to reach USSR territory with them. Having ability for a submarine surface close to USSR territory and launch completely unexpected attack would be huge advantage and deterrent
- US did not have working ICBMs and only perception that USSR is leading in development of these, so there must have been huge pressure to get ANYTHING to maintain deterrent.
Now, given that kind of environment this idea doesn't sound so stupid anymore. At least not more stupid that warships made of ice and wood chips.
But I have read a lot of other history, especially WW2 and Cold War, and it is kinda normal that military throws a lot of crazy ideas. In the end even if a very small portion of those ideas bring fruit it typically tends to give the edge that you need in conflict.
So I try to not criticize too much because people who prepared this were probably asked to do exactly that -- go wild with their ideas with low probability anything they produce is going to bring fruit.
At the time this submarine aircraft carrier has been prepared:
- Cold War was at its high
- US just started using atomic power for everything they did and it seemed nuclear reactors and atomic power are going to solve any problem from going very long time under sea to having planes reach orbit and other planets
- US had nuclear bombs but had trouble maintaining ability to reach USSR territory with them. Having ability for a submarine surface close to USSR territory and launch completely unexpected attack would be huge advantage and deterrent
- US did not have working ICBMs and only perception that USSR is leading in development of these, so there must have been huge pressure to get ANYTHING to maintain deterrent.
Now, given that kind of environment this idea doesn't sound so stupid anymore. At least not more stupid that warships made of ice and wood chips.