Working small carriers could displace Ranger and Wasp

Would successful sub-10,000-ton US carriers eliminate Ranger, Wasp, or Hornet?

Ranger and Wasp would probably lose their rationale, while Hornet would remain likely because she was a full Yorktown-class carrier rather than a compromise small design.

A proven sub-10,000-ton category would make compromised intermediate carriers less attractive. Ranger might follow Langley into a non-carrier role, while Wasp's attempt to deliver a very small fleet carrier would no longer solve a unique problem. Hornet is different because she is a full Yorktown-class ship and would probably still be built with her sisters. The resulting force would divide carrier tonnage between large strike ships and small cruiser carriers instead of forcing middle-sized designs to cover both missions. Washington Treaty exemption below 10,000 tons would also let the United States order the smaller type repeatedly without consuming its main carrier allowance.