So the US Medium Aircraft Carrier or as I call her the Thunderbird Class

The carrier was designed in the 1970s to be cheaper than the Nimitz class supercarrier and could have been used to replace the ageing Midway class Aircraft Carrier, she had two steam catapults and three arrestor wires for the Catobar system.

Her Propulsion was to be six boilers with steam turbines driving two shafts generating 100,000 shaft horsepower giving a speed of 27–29 knots and a range of 8000 miles.

The ship’s electronic warfare system was to be the AN/SPS-49 2 dimensional Air-Search Radar and the AN/SPS-48 3 dimensional Phased Array Radar

Her defensive armament was two 20-millimetre Mark 15 Block 1 Phalanx CIWS guns and her total air wing was to be 55–65 aircraft and helicopters

Had the ship gone into service I think this was likely gonna be her aircraft and helicopter configuration

14-20 F-4N Phantom II Fighters, 6-8 A-6E Intruder Strike-Aircraft and 6-8 A-7E Corsair II Strike-Aircraft with 2-4 E-2C Hawkeye AEW Aircraft, 2 C-2A Greyhound COD Aircraft, 2 KA-6D Intruder Tankers, 4-6 EA-6B Prowler EW Aircraft, 7 S-3B Viking ASW Aircraft and 2 SH-3D Sea King ASW and 2 HH-3A Sea King SAR helicopters.

Sadly it was cancelled

Why well I quote

The problem with the CVV wasn’t that it wasn’t as cost-effective as the Nimitz or any supercarrier. The problem was that the program took long enough that the higher-ups who took a second look at the program later on forgot what the point of it was, causing them to cancel it.

A big flight deck will always be superior to a smaller flight deck (common sense). On top of that, CVV was conventional instead of nuclear (which earned the ire of Admiral Rickover). These are all huge points against CVV.

But CVV could be built (and overhauled) at more yards than you could do the same for supercarriers. Pound for pound it was much less cost-efficient than a Nimitz, but even the program’s promoters knew that–they could send it to minor deployments that didn’t warrant a full-up Nimitz but were too much for an ARG with a lone Harrier detachment.

It was borne from Admiral Zumwalt’s idea of a Navy with many flight decks, big and small, vs. the prevailing idea of the time of maximizing the efficiency of every flight deck. Zumwalt’s idea had way more cons than pros at the time, and that’s why all his small deck programs got cancelled (SCS, VSS, and CVV). But in hindsight, it might have been better to take that hit of inefficiency.