International "Trump-class Battleships"

From memory would be impressive because Trump has so many failures.
Or a sad admission of perverse obsession. I wouldn't want anyone following me around and noting anytime I've failed. As I've said here before, I'm from nj and Trump has always been the butt of bankruptcy jokes around here. But regardless having taken the time to compose that list to either "own" Trump or his followers doesn't seem healthy.
 
Slash all military spending by 50% IMO. Fold at least 50% of our overseas bases back. And the only new weapons being built should be drones.

Unpopular opinion but I don't care. Battleships are stupid and we are $38T in debt.
 
There is a reason battleships stopped being produced after World War 2. They dont do well against a mass of planes, subs and would not fair well against drones either.
Whats next Desk Jockey Donny is going to bring back Horse Calvary?
We spent more on military than the next 8 countries combined when Obama President. So stop with the military friendly fantasy. If Child Sex Predator Protector, Trump wanted to spend money at least get something that is not some obsolete antique. It like listening to some old drunk complaining about the lack of cobblers.
For a guy that wants to cut social programs he sure does love spending money to put his name on useless shit.
 
If he was smart he would push for an AI powered Trump Class Drone Carrier naval vessel.

I suspect drone carriers, with both seaborn drones and aerial drones, are the future of naval combat. Ukraine has produced sea drones with anti-air missile launchers strapped to them. Imagine a naval carrier that can send out its own SAM anti-air drones as well as launch drones in the air. Heck, it could even have submersible drones to hunt for submarines. That would represent sea dominance like nothing that exists right now.
What advantages would a SAM drone offer over existing SAMs?
 
What advantages would a SAM drone offer over existing SAMs?
Just spread out over a larger area. You could send a SAM drone from a drone carrier 100+ km in each direction, expanding the zone of air control.
 
Just spread out over a larger area. You could send a SAM drone from a drone carrier 100+ km in each direction, expanding the zone of air control.
You seem to be talking about a UCAV, not a SAM lol. Your post just caught my eye beacuse of all the buzzwords.

Hitting a tank with a drone is very different than hitting an airplane.
 
You all know he woke up this morning, shit his pants and said to his staff "I'm calling a press conference to announce a new class of battleships in my name" and his staff was all like "ok. And here's a new diaper for you"
 
How many other sitting presidents have named building and battleships after themselves?

I’ll take a while guess none have.
 
You seem to be talking about a UCAV, not a SAM lol. Your post just caught my eye beacuse of all the buzzwords.

Hitting a tank with a drone is very different than hitting an airplane.
Ukraine has a few versions of sea drones that they've put anti-air missiles on. They even rigged some with air-to-air missiles that launch from the sea drone. But they've built a more professional version with their Magura V7 drone:


The USA could easily build these small sea drones who's only job is to carry anti-air missiles and launch them from a drone carrier ship. They extend the range of your anti-air missiles and if you lose them, you still don't take any casualties.
 
Ukraine has a few versions of sea drones that they've put anti-air missiles on. They even rigged some with air-to-air missiles that launch from the sea drone. But they've built a more professional version with their Magura V7 drone:


The USA could easily build these small sea drones who's only job is to carry anti-air missiles and launch them from a drone carrier ship. They extend the range of your anti-air missiles and if you lose them, you still don't take any casualties.
The Sidewinder's range doesn't cut it for naval warfare and is worse than what's already available to the Navy, be it air cover or SAMs. How would these unmanned vessels even detect aircraft from a peer power?

Not to mention that you'll run into the same problem that navies ran into with the missile boat fad in the 80s and 90s, where seakeeping was too poor for actual strategic projection and they don't have the range.

Also not to mention that designing an entirely new class just to launch drones makes no sense given the US already has aircraft carriers, big and small, that could do the job.
 
The Sidewinder's range doesn't cut it for naval warfare and is worse than what's already available to the Navy, be it air cover or SAMs. How would these unmanned vessels even detect aircraft from a peer power?
Ukraine had shot down fighter jets with their MaguraV7 drone. I don't think it's capabilities have been made public, although I do not believe it has an onboard radar. I believe the goal is to eventually network these drones with something like the F16 Link system, so it can get radar data from AWACS.

These drones can have hundreds of km range (round trip). Whatever onboard targeting Ukraine uses, they have something. Because they can shoot down Russian fighter jets, so your assertion that the Aim9 on these drones can't shoot down peer power jets is incorrect.


Not to mention that you'll run into the same problem that navies ran into with the missile boat fad in the 80s and 90s, where seakeeping was too poor for actual strategic projection and they don't have the range.

Also not to mention that designing an entirely new class just to launch drones makes no sense given the US already has aircraft carriers, big and small, that could do the job.
These unmanned sea drones are cheaper and more effective with a longer roaming range than anything the US could have built in the 80s. This technology is just scratching the surface. I agree with you that right now, today, the technology is not ready for strategic air denial of a large area. But I'm assuming 10-20 years in the future, it might be.

I honestly think Ukraine's use of drones the future of warfare. And I would assume naval warfare will use layered air defenses in the future: Sea drones with anti-air missiles, air drones with air-to-air missiles, combined with the traditional naval vessels and fighter jets.
 
Ukraine had shot down fighter jets with their MaguraV7 drone. I don't think it's capabilities have been made public, although I do not believe it has an onboard radar. I believe the goal is to eventually network these drones with something like the F16 Link system, so it can get radar data from AWACS.

These drones can have hundreds of km range (round trip). Whatever onboard targeting Ukraine uses, they have something. Because they can shoot down Russian fighter jets, so your assertion that the Aim9 on these drones can't shoot down peer power jets is incorrect.

Ukraine was able to pull it off because they knew where the enemy was (aka the drones were hanging out near a Russian base. You don't get the same luxury at sea, where you have to defend a radius of hundreds of miles.

You're proposing a solution that is worse than just having fighter cover or literally any naval SAMs.

Did you not notice how close the Su-30 was in the shoot down video?
These unmanned sea drones are cheaper and more effective with a longer roaming range than anything the US could have built in the 80s. This technology is just scratching the surface. I agree with you that right now, today, the technology is not ready for strategic air denial of a large area. But I'm assuming 10-20 years in the future, it might be.

I honestly think Ukraine's use of drones the future of warfare. And I would assume naval warfare will use layered air defenses in the future: Sea drones with anti-air missiles, air drones with air-to-air missiles, combined with the traditional naval vessels and fighter jets.
You're running into basic physics problems. There's only so much you can do to make a small vessel a capable warship in open waters. The reason the Sidewinder was used was because it's extremely light, hence the useless range for naval warfare. Why put less capable missiles on drone platforms for air defense when you have destroyers that are more capable of detecting and destroying targets and carry far more missiles?

Drones will have a role, but it's more in littoral environments. The reason drones are so effective is because countermeasures haven't caught up. They will eventually, and then you'll see a new balance.
 
Back
Top