>>12147352Probably not worth, in spite of how fucking cool it would be. Even without the atomic powerplant a US carrier is a goliath military ship, the hull alone would probably be hundreds of millions of dollars of investment, refurbishing it and replacing the powerplants would likely be almost as much as a new vehicle, and of course moving that giant fuck anywhere with a diesel-electric powerplant is going to run you as much as running a cruise liner.
If I were going to get a dedicated giant rocket catcher I'd probably buy old oil or cargo tankers instead. They can also be extremely wide and would cost less to operate and modify for purpose.
A static platform as
>>12147358 points out will be much simpler and much much cheaper though. Turnaround time will be slower from a platform, but if you have multiple reusable boosters you can work the schedule to set up uninterrupted continuous launches as long as you have payload vehicles and as long as the boosters hold out.
