Again, no disrespect, I guess there were always naysayers who been there done that in the past said that you cannot launch aircraft off a ship when some brainiac told them that it is theoretically possible. I guess you can testify how wrong those been there done that naysayers were and how happy you are that those brainiacs persisted and insisted.
Look, the facts are simple.
Steam Cats, and now EM Cats can launch heavier aircraft with fuller loads into the air than a Ski Jump can, and do so reliably (for the steam cats as proven by time) and with maintenance cost that are very acheivable and stable.
Carriers exist to put the most and best aircraft into the air that can attack other targets and defend the carrier force and the attaclking aircraft if necessary.
To date, there is no better system to do that in terms of reliability and maintenance than a cat.
Ski-jumps exist for countries who either cannot afford a cat, or who have not figured out how to make one work...or who mnake a conscience decision that they do not need all that a cat offers.
In most cases, if they knew how, and if they could afford it, they would choose a cat over a jump for the reasons stated above.
Popeye has spent many many years wotrking on the decks of carriers. He understands the practical.
The practical rules in the end because all of the theories, assumptions, calculations against known issues, etc. are proven one way or the other in the real world. A good officer puts very high regard on his NCO personnel precisely because of this issue. An officer comes out of an academy understanding all of the theory...and that is good. But the theory has to be applied in an environment where personnel live and breathe...get fatigued, have issues, etc. And that is what an NCO has lived and breathed...and so he can advise an officer on what will actually work and get the job done while keeping the force alive and as intact as possible. Until the officer has those years of experience, if he is wise, he listens to good NCOs.
Same is true in Engineering. An Engineer understands a lot of theory about materials, equations, dynamics (potentially) and force application...and that too is good But a good field mechanic understands the reality of the real world.
I am an engineer, and have learned this lesson. it is one my Dad taught me (God rest his soul) long ago as I was in college.
We all know what BS stands for.
MS stands for "More of the Same", and PHD stands for "Piled Higher and Deeper."
A good engineer will understand the implications of this little saying and listen to the field folks and avoid a lot of rework, money and potential accidents until he/she gets the field experience themselves and undertsands that what is good in theory certainly does not always work in the reral world.
Theory and calculations always try to account for every variable imagineable...but, invariably, there are some that they do not "imagine," and have to go back to the drawing board to factor them in. People who have "been there and done that," for years on end, know a lot about the "unimaginable."
Anyhow, both systems work for what they are designed for pretty much. Nations and militaries have to choose what their goals are, what they can afford, and what they are trying to accomplish and then choose between the two.
They are not neccessarily mutually exclusive, but to date, if one can have cats, they generally pick to have as many as possible and to use as much as possible of the deck to be able to line up aircraft to launch from them. In that scenario, the redundancy of a ski-jump and its limitations compared to a cat and its reliability and mantainability have shown to date to mean that people who can do so, use cats exclusively.
^^^
