General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs We Not Learning?
Big, expensive capital ships are not the battle platforms that they were early in the last century. When several battleships were lost at Pearl Harbor, the Navy was smart enough to not build replacements. They knew in 1941 that carriers and airplanes would be more effective than giant artillery platforms slowly floating offshore. Even the vaunted Battleship Missouri was retired soon after it's re-deployment to Iraq.
Fast forward to present day. While giant aircraft carriers have been very effective, a new generation of armaments have made their protection difficult and expensive.
Ukraine, a country without a navy, has destroyed 1/3 of Russia's floating assets in the Black Sea. Cheap drones have changed the whole seascape of war.
What is the role of "Trump class" battleships in modern military planning.
Walleye
(43,831 posts)bucolic_frolic
(54,052 posts)Nimble they won't be. Too big to maneuver quickly. Sitting ducks.
crud
(1,199 posts)The amount of money to be made, the sweetest of sweetheart deals, the griftiest grift, sitting there for the taking.
dweller
(27,844 posts)Steam powered aircraft carriers

✌🏻
rsdsharp
(11,794 posts)Apparently believing magnets dont work underwater, or some such bullshit.
rsdsharp
(11,794 posts)on December 7, 1941. Its no surprise Trump doesnt know the history, or understand its strategic implications, but everybody in the military generally, and the US Navy in particular does. Yet, apparently, they failed to make the point to Donnie.
Maybe they can make the point to Congress. If not, they can just appropriate a little extra money to paint bullseyes on Trump class battle wagons.