New NAVY ships ?

[Tisto]

President Trump has declared that America would once again build battleships. Currently, the only US battleship that has not been decomissioned is the USS ARIZONA which is underwater in Pearl Harbor.

America's NAVY is without question, the very best naval force in the world, hands down. The next best naval force is lightyears behind us.

The announcement of the new class of ships leads me to ask some rather basic questions. What exactly is the purpose of these ships ? Unless they are merely a mobile platform for UAV forces, what are they ? Drone warfare and cyber warfare are clearly the method of future warfare. The days of destroyers packing dozens of 16" guns is gone. Naval force today is ruled by aircraft carriers and submarines. Aircraft carriers made battleships obsolete. Jets have a much further range, and much higher hit rate than the 16"guns of yesteryear, all while keeping the carrier group safely out of range.

So ? What are they ? What is their mission ? What role are they to play in our naval fleet ?

I applaud the idea of renewing our NAVY as well as USCG fleets, especially using American technology, American steel, American components, and American labor. All of that is a good thing. I just don't quite understand the purpose yet. Perhaps more information will come out soon that will get me to fully embrace the plan, but right now I just ask WHY ?

 

[Bigfoot]

What We Know About The Trump Class “Battleship”​

What We Know About The Trump Class "Battleship"

The USS Defiant would be the first Trump class battleship, but major questions remain about affordability and logic of such a massive design.

www.twz.com

"President Donald Trump has rolled out plans for new Trump class large surface combatants for the U.S. Navy. These are to be armed with a wide array of missiles, including nuclear-armed and hypersonic types, as well as electromagnetic railguns, laser directed energy weapons, and more."

“As we forge the future of our Navy’s Fleet, we need a larger surface combatant and the Trump class Battleships meet that requirement,” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle also said -"

 

[Tisto]

What We Know About The Trump Class “Battleship”​

What We Know About The Trump Class "Battleship"

The USS Defiant would be the first Trump class battleship, but major questions remain about affordability and logic of such a massive design.

www.twz.com

"President Donald Trump has rolled out plans for new Trump class large surface combatants for the U.S. Navy. These are to be armed with a wide array of missiles, including nuclear-armed and hypersonic types, as well as electromagnetic railguns, laser directed energy weapons, and more."

Not to argue, but the 1970's gave us the Ohio class ( Trident class ) submarine. Onboard, it carried 24 trident missiles, which it could deliver with impressive stealth. Submarines have improved vastly since then. So what does this new ship do that isn't already being done by a different vessel in the fleet ?

There is something to be said about the imposing sight of a fighting ship. There is an undeniable deterrant there.

 

[Bigfoot]

Not to argue, but the 1970's gave us the Ohio class ( Trident class ) submarine. Onboard, it carried 24 trident missiles, which it could deliver with impressive stealth. Submarines have improved vastly since then. So what does this new ship do that isn't already being done by a different vessel in the fleet ?

There is something to be said about the imposing sight of a fighting ship. There is an undeniable deterrant there.

FWIW - AI Overview


The proposed Trump-class battleship does several things differently: it integrates new deep-strike weapons (hypersonics, lasers, railguns), adds a nuclear-armed cruise missile (SLCM-N) as a new deterrent leg, serves as a massive mobile command & control (C2) hub for fleet operations (including drones), and provides large-scale, organic power for these advanced systems, filling a gap for massive, multi-mission capital ships not fully met by current carriers or destroyers, as a centerpiece of the new "Golden Fleet".

 

[Bigfoot]

AI Overview - Railgun



A railgun is an advanced weapon that uses powerful electromagnetic forces, not chemical explosives, to launch projectiles at extremely high speeds (hypersonic) for long-range, high-impact strikes, relying on kinetic energy rather than warheads for destructive power, and it works by passing a massive electric current through parallel rails, creating a magnetic field that propels a conductive projectile (armature).

How it works

• Components:
  Two parallel conductive rails and a conductive projectile (armature) that bridges the gap between them.
  
  
• • Current Flow:
    A huge electric current flows from the power source, up one rail, across the armature, and down the other rail, creating a strong magnetic field.
  • Lorentz Force:
    This magnetic field generates the Lorentz force, an electromagnetic force that pushes the armature forward along the rails at immense velocity.
  • Velocity:
    Higher current means a stronger magnetic field and faster projectile, allowing speeds far beyond conventional guns.

Key characteristics

• • No Explosives: Projectiles don't carry explosives, making them safer to store and offering a larger magazine capacity.
  • High Kinetic Energy: Damage comes from extreme speed and mass, enabling armor penetration.
  • Long Range & Precision: Achieves greater range and faster time-to-target than traditional artillery.

Challenges

• • Power Demand: Requires massive, rapidly rechargeable electrical power, a significant hurdle for naval integration.
  • Rail Erosion: High speeds cause intense friction and arcing, rapidly degrading the rails.
  • Cost & Complexity: Developing robust, long-lasting, and power-efficient systems is complex.

Applications

• • Military: Air and missile defense, anti-ship warfare, long-range bombardment, counter-battery fire, and potentially anti-satellite roles.
  • Space: Potential for cost-effective satellite launch.

 

[Bigfoot]

AI Overview - Laser directed energy weapon


A laser directed energy weapon (DEW) is a military system that uses a highly focused beam of light (laser) to damage, disable, or destroy targets like drones, rockets, and missiles, offering advantages like low cost-per-shot and deep magazines compared to traditional munitions. These high-energy lasers work by delivering intense optical energy to heat and melt materials, disrupting electronics, or causing physical destruction, with current applications focusing on countering asymmetric threats like swarms of drones and mortars.

How They Work

• Energy Conversion:
  Converts electrical or chemical energy into a coherent light beam (photons).
  
  
• • Focus & Aim:
    Uses advanced optics and beam directors to focus the energy precisely onto a small spot on the target.
  • Target Effects:
    Causes damage through heating, burning, melting materials, or disrupting sensors and guidance systems.
  • Precision & Speed:
    Offers near-instantaneous, speed-of-light engagement with pinpoint accuracy, notes G&H photonics.

Key Advantages

• • Cost-Effective: Significantly cheaper per shot (dollars vs. thousands/millions for missiles).
  • Deep Magazine: Offers a nearly limitless supply of "ammunition" (energy).
  • Versatility: Can engage threats like drones, mortars, and potentially missiles, and can be scaled for different effects (dazzling to destruction).

Types & Applications

• • Low-Power Lasers (Dazzlers): Temporarily blind optical sensors or human eyes (non-lethal).
  • High-Power Lasers (HELs): Physically damage or destroy targets, effective against drones, rockets, artillery, and mortars (C-UAS, C-RAM).
  • Platforms: Being developed for ground vehicles, ships, aircraft, and space.

Examples

• • DragonFire (UK): A high-energy laser system for layered air defense.
  • THOR (USAF): Tactical High Power Microwave Operational Responder for counter-drone missions.
  • HELIOS (US Navy): High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance.

Current Status

• • DEWs are moving from research to operational prototypes, with significant investment from the DoD for defense against asymmetric threats, reports U.S. GAO.

 

[spat]

Not to argue, but the 1970's gave us the Ohio class ( Trident class ) submarine. Onboard, it carried 24 trident missiles, which it could deliver with impressive stealth. Submarines have improved vastly since then. So what does this new ship do that isn't already being done by a different vessel in the fleet ?

There is something to be said about the imposing sight of a fighting ship. There is an undeniable deterrant there.

These are supposed to have a ton more electrical power available so they can run very hungry weapons systems, like actual, honest to God, laser turrets.

Which are ideal for taking out drone swarms. Infinite, practically free ammo, instant targeting, zero time of flight, super high precision, but low damage. That's perfect for taking out a drone swarm.

1000 incoming drones ? It can hit them all in a fraction of a second. Sure, it's only going to hit them with the equivalent power of a .22lr, but for drones that's enough.

Basically it sounds like a modernized and scaled up Burke. Those are the work horses of the current Navy. We have something like 70 of them.

Last time they tried to update and upscale the Burkes, they ended up with the fairly disappointing Zumwalts, but the basic idea is still sound.

Calling them "battleships" is probably a bit of a stretch, bit it sounds a lot cooler than the "guided missile cruiser" that they called the Zumwalts.

 

[VietnamEraVet]

When I was in the USN, I served aboard a guided heavy missle cruiser, the USS Chicago, CG-11, 7th Fleet flagship. An older WWII vintage ship that was retrofitted with Talos and other missle systems in the 1960’s. Carried a crew of about 1100 sailors. I understand these newer ships will require much smaller crew numbers.

Friends in the subs used to joke with us that we were “targets” that they used to practice sneaking up on. They used to say that our life expectancy in wartime would be pretty damn short!

I had an uncle who jumped off the flight deck and survived the sinking of the USS Wasp (CV-7) aircraft carrier by Japanese sub I-19 in September 1942. Today’s subs are a hell of a lot more lethal.

 

[Zerex]

This new TRUMP CLASS ship, is part of the excellent Trump Propaganda team, responsible for blowing up democrats heads , like cancelling EV's, off shore wind farms, and allowing drilling in the Arctic. Trump is killing Greenies health........... and the CCP run planning teams in Albany, and California.


ALSO
Renaming the Kennedy Center, the Trump-Kennedy Center, buying Greenland, Canada, freeing up the Panama Canal, blowing up Drug Boats, Bombing the shit out of Iran.......... and giving the $1,776 bonus checks to the military.no tx on Tips, OT or SS........

GREAT Propaganda, like Trump 2028.............never let you opponents get their balance back.............many will go literally crazy

This ship will likely never be built.........but we will re invigorate our domestic warship building again...........

 

[Saltwater60]

O don’t know much but they carry a lot of firepower. They can carry mussels and warplanes. I’m sure they can carry and launch tons of drones. I’m sure part of it is flexing our might and Trumps.

 

[CNYJohn]

What's next

Sharks with frikken Lazer beams attached to their heads............


Donny is as senile as old joey was.......
We are doomed as a country after his term is over.

I hear Argentina is nice this time of year.....

 

[Bigfoot]

Trump Class Battleship

 

[tirwin1]

These are supposed to have a ton more electrical power available so they can run very hungry weapons systems, like actual, honest to God, laser turrets.

Which are ideal for taking out drone swarms. Infinite, practically free ammo, instant targeting, zero time of flight, super high precision, but low damage. That's perfect for taking out a drone swarm.

1000 incoming drones ? It can hit them all in a fraction of a second. Sure, it's only going to hit them with the equivalent power of a .22lr, but for drones that's enough.

Basically it sounds like a modernized and scaled up Burke. Those are the work horses of the current Navy. We have something like 70 of them.

Last time they tried to update and upscale the Burkes, they ended up with the fairly disappointing Zumwalts, but the basic idea is still sound.

Calling them "battleships" is probably a bit of a stretch, bit it sounds a lot cooler than the "guided missile cruiser" that they called the Zumwalts.

They better be good at taking out drones. I think a large standing navy that is unprotected from drones is as obsolete as a fleet of battleships with no air cover in world war II.

 

[FP1201]

What's next

Sharks with frikken Lazer beams attached to their heads............


Donny is as senile as old joey was.......
We are doomed as a country after his term is over.

I hear Argentina is nice this time of year.....

Ask the Nazi's that escaped Germany in its final days of WWII
Senile or not, you cannot argue the improvements in the Country.

 

[spat]

They better be good at taking out drones. I think a large standing navy that is unprotected from drones is as obsolete as a fleet of battleships with no air cover in world war II.

What do you think is the difference between a drone and a cruise missile ?

Autonomous anti-ship drones have been a thing since the '80s. Our ships are well practiced in handling them.

The standard vision of surface warfare in the 80s was 2 ships full of guided missiles launching hundreds at each other all at once. The key to winning was to shoot down more of them than the enemy could fire at you.

That's the whole premise the Aegis system was built around.

Modern drones don't change that at all. The concept of a drone swarm was alive and well in 1984, they just didn't call it that.

You are still limited by physics. If the drone carries enough fuel and payload to threaten a modern warship, then it needs to be too big for you to carry more than a couple hundred on a ship.

If it's small enough for you to have a swarm of 1000, then it doesn't carry enough payload to be a significant threat, and probably doesn't have the range to be useful in a naval battle.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

Ask the Nazi's that escaped Germany in its final days of WWII
Senile or not, you cannot argue the improvements in the Country.

Operation paperclip would shock a lot of normies.

 

[tirwin1]

What do you think is the difference between a drone and a cruise missile ?

Autonomous anti-ship drones have been a thing since the '80s. Our ships are well practiced in handling them.

The standard vision of surface warfare in the 80s was 2 ships full of guided missiles launching hundreds at each other all at once. The key to winning was to shoot down more of them than the enemy could fire at you.

That's the whole premise the Aegis system was built around.

Modern drones don't change that at all. The concept of a drone swarm was alive and well in 1984, they just didn't call it that.

You are still limited by physics. If the drone carries enough fuel and payload to threaten a modern warship, then it needs to be too big for you to carry more than a couple hundred on a ship.

If it's small enough for you to have a swarm of 1000, then it doesn't carry enough payload to be a significant threat, and probably doesn't have the range to be useful in a naval battle.

I certainly hope you are correct. My fear is the navy has prioritized DEI over basic readiness for so long that we are in for a rude surprise if hostilities start in earnest.

 

[Jmac00]

What We Know About The Trump Class “Battleship”​

What We Know About The Trump Class "Battleship"

The USS Defiant would be the first Trump class battleship, but major questions remain about affordability and logic of such a massive design.

www.twz.com

"President Donald Trump has rolled out plans for new Trump class large surface combatants for the U.S. Navy. These are to be armed with a wide array of missiles, including nuclear-armed and hypersonic types, as well as electromagnetic railguns, laser directed energy weapons, and more."

“As we forge the future of our Navy’s Fleet, we need a larger surface combatant and the Trump class Battleships meet that requirement,” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle also said -"

LOL, thats what they said about the Bismarck, that fucker lasted 8 days? ( of actual battle )

 

[Tisto]

I still say that the future of warfare is drone and cyber. Drone warfare is far better served by smaller, fast ships. Multiple decentralized command centers make taking them out much more difficult than a giant lumbering platform with several types of armaments onboard. One or two good hits on this ship knocks out the whole offensive, as opposed to several smaller targets, each with their own specialized offenses.

As for rail guns that someone mentioned, all the reading I've done on them suggests that the US has been unable to produce anything even close to a duty ready product. Apparently however, Japan is very close. Perhaps they will provide us the technology.

And on to lasers....I don't really know where we stand on the whole ray gun thing - it seems very Buck Rodgers to me at this point. Or, maybe more like "Duck Dogers in the 24th and a half thentury"

Maybe that's it ! We need disintegrator guns ! Just remember to invent the reintegrator gun at the same time.

 

[Beerman]

They can carry mussels and warplanes.

Not just mussels. Barnacles, too!

 

[spat]

I still say that the future of warfare is drone and cyber. Drone warfare is far better served by smaller, fast ships. Multiple decentralized command centers make taking them out much more difficult than a giant lumbering platform with several types of armaments onboard. One or two good hits on this ship knocks out the whole offensive, as opposed to several smaller targets, each with their own specialized offenses.

As for rail guns that someone mentioned, all the reading I've done on them suggests that the US has been unable to produce anything even close to a duty ready product. Apparently however, Japan is very close. Perhaps they will provide us the technology.

And on to lasers....I don't really know where we stand on the whole ray gun thing - it seems very Buck Rodgers to me at this point. Or, maybe more like "Duck Dogers in the 24th and a half thentury"

Maybe that's it ! We need disintegrator guns ! Just remember to invent the reintegrator gun at the same time.

Generally you're correct.

The problem with railguns has always been the wear. They work fine, but you end up having to replace the rails so often they're just not useful.

Imagine if the barrel life on an Iowa's 16 inch gun was measured in a few dozen shots before replacement.

I think the only way they'll be practical will be with some massive leap in rail technology, or they just decide to make the wear parts quick change like a machinegun barrel.

Lasers are the way of the future to defend against drones, that's nearly a perfect match for their strengths and weaknesses. Limited range and damage don't matter, but hyper fast firing rate and tracking are exactly what the doctor ordered for a drone swarm.

The problem is the lasers are extremely power hungry, so they need a big ship to field them.

This could be the right answer. Better a few surivable ships than a dozen that all get taken out quickly.

 

[spat]

LOL, thats what they said about the Bismarck, that fucker lasted 8 days? ( of actual battle )

The thing I find interesting here is that they're calling it "Trump class".

That's not how that works. The class is usually named for the first ship. These would be Defiant class.

OfC, they're also breaking the tradition where US battleships are named after states.

 

[Tisto]

Ships are certainly not exclusively named after States, and they never have been. In fact, throughout US history, far more have been named after a person than have been named after a State. The tradition they're breaking is naming them after a SITTING president.

 

[spat]

Ships are certainly not exclusively named after States, and they never have been. In fact, throughout US history, far more have been named after a person than have been named after a State. The tradition they're breaking is naming them after a SITTING president.

Not ships in general. Battleships in particular.

List of battleships of the United States Navy - Wikipedia List of battleships of the United States Navy - Wikipedia

"Except for Kearsarge, named by an act of Congress, all U.S. Navy battleships have been named for states, and each of the 48 contiguous states has had at least one battleship named for it except Montana"

And there isn't a proposal to name any ship "Trump". The proposed name for the first ship of the new class is "Defiant" not Trump.

That would make the group the Defiant class. The term "Trump class" appears to be something invented for media consumption and wouldn't be the correct name of the class at all.

The right answer would be to name the new ship the Montana, and then the rest would be the Montana class battleships.

 

[Tisto]

Ok, I'll concede your point. I was thinking NAVY ships in general. That would include carriers, submarines, fuelers, and all the rest.

I do agree with you on the class designation. Traditionally a class of ships has been named after the first keel of that series. Only after significant changes to the design are made do they take on another class designation.

 

[Tisto]

Im still not convinced that one of these new ships will ever be constructed, much less a series of them.

I'm REALLY not convinced of their usefullness.

 

[Zerex]

2024 United States drone sightings - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I still want to hear about Trump retaliating against China, for the CCP spy drones over New Jersey and his Big golf club, and the other spy balloons China sent.

China and Linda Son know the truth...............