Return of the CVLs?

You can put the same aviation on a far smaller ship than America class, if you don’t combine with air assault role. Just compare Spain’s Principe d’Asturias sea control ship and Juan Carlos LHD/A. I agree automation can help, but there is a limit to how few crew you can get down to.

We have the America class that should cover our needs quite nicely.

The America class are fine ships, and by themselves provide far more aviation capability than most Navies possess. The argument FOR CVLs is that they could be even better at one part of their role (by having ski jumps for F35s and/or catapult for heavy airframes) if the decision was made to make them worse at another part (by having fewer helo spots).

For myself I cannot see CVL getting anywhere, for the same reason they haven’t previously; they represent a threat politically and economically to CVNs

How would a version of this ship be good for the US Navy?

Distributed lethality.

There is hard cap on the number of CVNs that even the USN can field

Having a greater number of smaller hulls provides a greater number of platforms able to launch fast jets and/or AEW
The Queen Elizabeth class have been designed for a Navy with far worse manning level problems than the USN, and so take far fewer crew to operate; so even fielding more flat tops manning levels may remain stable or even drop

The escorts argument is an interesting one
Jinan’s comment is correct as a first order analysis, more HVUs = more escorts. But ….. if I have more flat tops each one becomes less vital and I become less terrified of losing an individual one and might be happier to allocate fewer escorts.

As with any such argument we reach a point of diminishing returns (and the temptation to take either side of the argument to its illogical extreme is strong)

It is an interesting topic for a hobby forum and for a think tank. But as I said above, I cannot see the USN risking funding and political backing for their mighty CVNs.

We have the America class that should cover our needs quite nicely.

For the USN, dispersing air assets of a large carrier over several smaller once is not cost effective: more ships and crew, more escorts needed, to deliver the same aerial punch.
Of course, that doesn’t preclude the usefullness of smaller carriers for smaller navy’s, which will never have CVNs anyway….

How would a version of this ship be good for the US Navy?

A US version of the QE with a catapult on the angled flight deck (just like the old Soviet planned super carrier) would make a lot of sense

It would even make more sense if there was some provision made to clear the ramp for a single catapult for heavier launch like long range CoD or a tanker.

Ugh.. Just buy the UK carriers (Dev is done) and give the USMC more F-35Bs since they never wanted the F-35C.

Same argument been going on since the end of WW2.