Rugged light carriers that outlived their plan

The Majestic discussion turns the phrase rugged, reliable, and replaceable into an explanation for why light fleet carriers lasted longer than expected. Their comparatively modest crewing demands made the ships sustainable for smaller navies. European practice used fewer people than the more labour-intensive American approach, though US damage-control choices supplied part of the rationale for larger complements. Navies with smaller populations had a stronger incentive to invest in systems that reduced the people required for each carrier. Simple structures without large embedded armour masses were also easier to repair, alter, and modernize, allowing several generations of aircraft to operate from hulls intended for short wartime service.