International "Trump-class Battleships"

[Ruprecht]

Are they going to be gold plated?

 

[lsa]

Are they going to be gold plated?

something like this

 

[Ruprecht]

something like this

Needs more branding and a viagra sponsored gold rostrum.

 

[44nutman]

Has a president ever been narcissistic enough to try and put his fucking name on anything while in office let alone everything the way this train wreck has ?

Trump has the most small dick energy I have even seen out of a President.
No other President, put their name on so much shit while they were President, than Micro-Phallus Trump. That is what dictators do that run shit hole countries.
George Washington power doubled King George, so we would not have a King, and Tiny Dick Trump does not want to lead but wants to be worshipped like a king.
Only dudes with Little Johnsons want to be worshipped. I guess the freakishly small hands and Stormy calling him a two pump tiny dicked Trump, is true based on his pension for trying to name everything after himself.
I guess inflation has been solved and the increasing unemployment has also been solved.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

"We're gonna build cruisers. Navy cruisers. We're gonna call em Big Beautiful Cruisers. Big, beautiful, cruisers. BBC. Everyone loves a BBC. Especially me, just ask anyone." - Trump, probably.

 

[oldshadow]

The explicit claim is that it will be the "biggest battleship" ever built which guarantees it will be obsolete. The issue isn't the capability, but the size. There's already concern over the viability of aircraft carriers in an actual war because of how big they are.

Do you understand the mission of aircraft carriers in an all out war and even in a non nuclear engagement. They have a vital mission in all cases.

The question in this case we dont know the proposed armament or the battle mission. The size of the ship isn't a problem the mission and the capabilities that are intended and the ability to carry it out is the question.

Again do you have a link to answer that question.

I want to know the thoughts of the Admirals and other high ranking Navy officers on this ship and the mission capabilities before I judge.

Sometimes ships designs look good and even sound good even perform well until design flaws show themselves.

Take for example the light weight aluminum supper structures on some class of ships.

Now as far as naming the class I can think of a lot better name for the class. Say named a state or better yet a Navy medal of honor recipient. Traditionally the first ship named after one of theses and thats what the class.

 

[Rational Poster]

Do you understand the mission of aircraft carriers in an all out war and even in a non nuclear engagement. They have a vital mission in all cases.

The question in this case we dont know the proposed armament or the battle mission. The size of the ship isn't a problem the mission and the capabilities that are intended and the ability to carry it out is the question.

Again do you have a link to answer that question.

I want to know the thoughts of the Admirals and other high ranking Navy officers on this ship and the mission capabilities before I judge.

Sometimes ships designs look good and even sound good even perform well until design flaws show themselves.

Take for example the light weight aluminum supper structures on some class of ships.

Now as far as naming the class I can think of a lot better name for the class. Say named a state or better yet a Navy medal of honor recipient. Traditionally the first ship named after one of theses and thats what the class.

Yes I understand what an aircraft carrier is, lmao.

Spare me.

 

[oldshadow]

Yes I understand what an aircraft carrier is, lmao.

Spare me.

Really i dont think you do. Do you understand the mission of the carrier group in a nuclear war. Do you understand the carriers mission and the escorts mission.

Show us you understand and tell us.

 

[avenue94]

IDK I think you could easily make a massive drone carrier that could hold hundreds of these types of drones after the US improves them.

Why not just modify an existing carrier or amphibious warfare ship instead of spending tens of billions to develop new ships that will only have one use?

Is the Aim 9X range short? Sure. But that's why you send them 200-300km out to form a massive circumference. Even at 300km radius, you still need less than 100 drones every 20km to form full 360 degree coverage. These drones could also be equipped with a small number of Ukraine-style interceptor drones, the tiny ones they use to intercept Shahed drones.

That's less range than radar and a significantly smaller range than air cover and AWACs. What problem are you trying to even solve here?

The Sidewinder addresses threats within a dozen miles or so. Naval warfare is on the scale of hundreds of miles.

Probably the biggest risk of approaching fighter jets would be those that are low to the water's surface and more difficult for radar to detect. These drones would shine at deflecting those. Fighter jets high in the sky can and should be dealt with by AIM-120D AMRAAMs anyway. And if these sea drones get destroyed, great. They are expendable, and now you've identified where you are getting attacked from.

Flying low to the water kills range and combat radius, not to mention there's no ground clutter to get lost in in the middle of the ocean.

How would these drones even detect anything? Most drones used in Ukraine are guided by navigation or visually, both of which are not as useful in naval warfare.

IDK how well the US destroyers will handle Shahed or other drone swarms if they are ever attacked by them. I know US naval CRAM style defense guns are impressive [edit: I forgot the Phalanx CIWS was the naval version], but how many drones can they handle?

Probably pretty well given that the Ukrainians have had a lot of success shooting them down while not even having control of Ukrainian airspace. Shahed drones are slow and easy to identify if you have the tools the US does.

Not to mention that, again, you're presenting Shahed drones as being guided by magic to find targets in naval warfare.

 

[Rational Poster]

Really i dont think you do. Do you understand the mission of the carrier group in a nuclear war. Do you understand the carriers mission and the escorts mission.

Show us you understand and tell us.

Read my last post and spare me.

 

[avenue94]

I think we could build some Seadoo-sized deplorable drones with a 500nm range pretty easily. And I wonder how many of those we can produce OUTSIDE OF OUR CURRENT SHIP BUILDING PORTS in lieu of a battleship?

Im reminded of my experiences in GWOT where we were using $1M missiles to blow up $100 tents. In large scale combat operations we already know we do not have the stocks to maintain long term operations.

How do you propose making the range of a jet ski 500nm when you'd be lucky to get a hundred miles at cruising speeds?

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

I just peered into my crystal ball:

Trump will declare war on Venezuela, and pilot one of the Trump Class battleships into port to declare MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

 

[avenue94]

Take for example the light weight aluminum supper structures on some class of ships.

Now as far as naming the class I can think of a lot better name for the class. Say named a state or better yet a Navy medal of honor recipient. Traditionally the first ship named after one of theses and thats what the class.

The funny thing is the US has never named battleships after people. In fact, names of famous figures have up until fairly recently been reserved for smaller warships.

 

[BlankaPresident]

I want to know the thoughts of the Admirals and other high ranking Navy officers on this ship and the mission capabilities before I judge.

Every single US Navy battleship has been decomissioned in the previous century. That says a lot about the current role and capabilities of battleships in modern naval warfare.

It's insane that this is even being discussed.

 

[aerius]

Do you understand the mission of aircraft carriers in an all out war and even in a non nuclear engagement. They have a vital mission in all cases.

The question in this case we dont know the proposed armament or the battle mission. The size of the ship isn't a problem the mission and the capabilities that are intended and the ability to carry it out is the question.

We do have the proposed armament of the ship:

Trump Battleship Will be Largest Surface Combatant Since WWII - USNI News

The centerpiece of the Trump administration’s revamp of the U.S. Navy is the largest surface combatant America will build since World War II. The U.S. Navy will buy two new “battleships” as part of the “Golden Fleet” effort, President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Navy...

news.usni.org

12 launch cells for a proposed hypersonic missile which isn't even on the drawing boards yet, 128 standard missile launch cells, and a bunch of railguns & lasers which are all still computer renderings. This is literally less than the armament of 2 Burke class destroyers which have 96 launch cells each. This stupid ship is 4 fucking times the displacement of a Burke DDG with only ~1.5 times more firepower, and unlike an aircraft carrier or amphibious assault ship there's nothing it can do which other ships can't.

 

[lsa]

We do have the proposed armament of the ship:

Trump Battleship Will be Largest Surface Combatant Since WWII - USNI News

The centerpiece of the Trump administration’s revamp of the U.S. Navy is the largest surface combatant America will build since World War II. The U.S. Navy will buy two new “battleships” as part of the “Golden Fleet” effort, President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Navy...

news.usni.org

12 launch cells for a proposed hypersonic missile which isn't even on the drawing boards yet, 128 standard missile launch cells, and a bunch of railguns & lasers which are all still computer renderings. This is literally less than the armament of 2 Burke class destroyers which have 96 launch cells each. This stupid ship is 4 fucking times the displacement of a Burke DDG with only ~1.5 times more firepower, and unlike an aircraft carrier or amphibious assault ship there's nothing it can do which other ships can't.

“The U.S. Navy will lead the design, along with me, because I’m a very aesthetic person,” Trump said.

“The future Trump-class battleship – the USS Defiant – will be the largest, deadliest and most versatile and best-looking warship anywhere on the world’s oceans,” Phelan said during the presentation.

what a time to be alive

That article is gold

 

[avenue94]

We do have the proposed armament of the ship:

Trump Battleship Will be Largest Surface Combatant Since WWII - USNI News

The centerpiece of the Trump administration’s revamp of the U.S. Navy is the largest surface combatant America will build since World War II. The U.S. Navy will buy two new “battleships” as part of the “Golden Fleet” effort, President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Navy...

news.usni.org

12 launch cells for a proposed hypersonic missile which isn't even on the drawing boards yet, 128 standard missile launch cells, and a bunch of railguns & lasers which are all still computer renderings. This is literally less than the armament of 2 Burke class destroyers which have 96 launch cells each. This stupid ship is 4 fucking times the displacement of a Burke DDG with only ~1.5 times more firepower, and unlike an aircraft carrier or amphibious assault ship there's nothing it can do which other ships can't.

I can already see the cancellation after building 1 or 2 ships, if it even makes it that far.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

Are they going to be gold plated?

haters gonna hate

 

[oldshadow]

Read my last post and spare me.

Just like I said.

 

[oldshadow]

The funny thing is the US has never named battleships after people. In fact, names of famous figures have up until fairly recently been reserved for smaller warships.

Yea its always been states which i see no reason to change.