ITT: We design the next greatest Warship: USS DONALD J TRUMP

>>32025584

okay but you already have the design????

>>32025584
Careful anon
A warship of that size is an easy target for radar, torpedos, aircraft, etc. plus you won't be able to sail very close to shore and it would require a big crew to man it all. Sure you could off balance these detriments with longer range capabilities and aircraft carrying, but unless you have some underwater barrier surrounding the hull at all times it is highly susceptible to subterranean destruction. Perhaps you could have a fleet of submarines to protect such a fine vessel, yet, these are unrealistic feats given the vast resource requirements to sustain this force in long term operations. Have you considered something that isn't fully retarded?

>>32025584
>uss donald DRUMPF

>>32025636
Lol change name XXXXXXXXDDDDDDD

File: Aigaion.jpg (65KB, 940x500px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 940x500px

>>32025584
>surface vessel

Airborne or bust.

File: 1331455615023.jpg (345KB, 1099x1000px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1099x1000px

>>32025584
>USS Trump
>not a space battleship
Low energy post, OP.

File: CL1201.jpg (85KB, 743x347px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 743x347px

>>32025679

File: 1479338375250.jpg (143KB, 724x1024px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 724x1024px

>>32025624
>>32025636

>>32025620
SHUT UP ITS NEEDS TO BE YUUUGE
X(

File: 1478671051572.png (292KB, 881x907px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 881x907px

>>32025620
>>32025679
>2016
>thinking ASM are still useful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcwDfaY4OW4

>>32026125
Massed AShM assault is still the only reliable way for ships and planes to kill a fully stocked battlegroup.

File: 1476069083841.jpg (107KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1000x667px

Probably gonna get my ass torn open for this and I'm okay with that

I can kinda see fuckhueg modern battleships like this become a reality in the far future

Hear me out, we all know about the arsenal ship and how it can certainly be useful (as useful as our carriers is another story)

But let's say China is gonna do what they say they do, and becomes a blue water naval that can challenge the USN in some way

I can totally see one of these ships with 150+ VLS and 2 or three railguns leading a SAG of 3-4 Burke's/Zumwaltz with a Columbia or seawolf attached paving the way for a CSG to do their thing inland. Their main purpose being to be able to take on a near peer enemy navys surface fleet and decimate them so that a Nimitz can focus on their doctrine of pooping on enemy targets inland.

Will China ever rival the USN directly? Will that ever happen?
Probably not, but its nice to dream

>>32026251
>15-25 missiles.
>For a chance of damaging a single ship.
Sounds completely unreliable, specially since ASMs are quite heavy, a Su-30 can only carry one brahmos per sortie. You would need +120 fighters to threat a battlegroup.

>>32026273
I agree that naval rail-guns may become a thing. If we consider that fuckhueg battleships are even worse of an option, instead of medium-small sized railgun armed ships.

>>32026387
Yeah, same.

They probably ever become as big as the 16 inches, but they don't need to be. Current ones (prototypes) already outperform them drastically, but they could be upscalled to an extent that could be mounted on a modern "battle"ship that can have the same doctrine of the 16s of old.

And no I don't mean modernize an iowa cause that's dumb, I'm talking about a Nimitz sized super destroyer, for lack of better words.

File: 1470496353933.gif (2MB, 480x601px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x601px

>>32025624

>>32026504
Railgun battlecruisers, perhaps?

>>32026732
In my idea, its primary armament would be a metric fuckton of VLSs and railgunz as its secondary armament for ships that get too close (as in a 100 miles or so)

Its main source of inspiration would be the arsenal ship, just relatively bigger.

Keep in mind this probably wouldn't be made in our lifetimes, being built in somewhere in the early 2100s late 2080/90s for all of the crazy innovations that would be needed for something that can rival a Nimitz shipbuilding wise

File: USS_Trump.png (183KB, 3464x1253px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 3464x1253px

here you go:

File: sB67DY0.jpg (356KB, 1020x1404px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1020x1404px

>>32025679
Fuck it, invest in laser technology and shoot them from space

Market it as a "bird of peace" to win the libertards

File: 1415971577042.jpg (244KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1280x960px

>>32025584
steal the german design

File: tmp_images.duckduckgo.com626952276.jpg (105KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1280x720px

>>32025584
Trump is going to make pagoda masts great again

>>32027024
thats alot of 18.1 inch guns

>>32026732
Battlecruisers are shit
If you make a ship designed to get within range of the enemy to trade shots, you'd better protect it against what the enemy's throwing at you.

>>32027024
>German design
>Yamato turrets and secondary turrets

>>32027054
4U

File: 1479355885549.jpg (49KB, 480x653px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 480x653px

>>32025584
>opened this thread
>opened pic
>started clapping

Holy shit....I just went full burger

never go full burger

>>32025620
Such a vessel could only be intended as the flagship of a battlegroup.

>>32025584
>it's a battleship

neck urself

File: 1469984312514.jpg (1MB, 2465x6751px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2465x6751px

>>32027036
Das it mane

File: IDET2007_ceramic_armor_tiles_SICADUR (1).jpg (1MB, 2576x1932px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2576x1932px

>>32026831
>In my idea, its primary armament would be a metric fuckton of VLSs and railgunz as its secondary armament for ships that get too close (as in a 100 miles or so)
>Its main source of inspiration would be the arsenal ship, just relatively bigger.
>Keep in mind this probably wouldn't be made in our lifetimes, being built in somewhere in the early 2100s late 2080/90s for all of the crazy innovations that would be needed for something that can rival a Nimitz shipbuilding wise

Railguns go much further than that, they behave more like hypersonic cruise missiles. Conventional guns have velocity limits that can't be solved by adding more explosives. Missiles only make sense for 1000km+ if you have effective railguns.

What I can never work out is if armor is worthwhile. I compared the newest composites to iowa battleships cast steel, you get around 4x more protection per kg. If you did a straight swap you would end up with a ship armored to about 500mm - 2000mm RHAE across the entire ship. I don't know how modern ASM perform when hitting a huge 1000mm thick RHA plate.

>>32026938
>>500MJ rail gun
>Literally only slightly more effective than 16 inch naval gun (Muzzle energy of 403 MJ)
>There's only one of them

The only thing worse than a BB fag is a railmeme fag.

>>32028594
This is like saying we shouldn't bother with guns because we can just throw large rocks at each other.

>>32028639
I'm fine with railguns, I just despise the people that don't understand them and think they're ooga booga magic.

My point was that he just slapped a random number on there without context and it triggered my autism, I never said anything against railguns themselves. Also nice false equivalency, faggot.

This is like le stealth meme all over again, where all /k/ was ~3 years ago was MUH STEALTH ECKS DEE and every discussion on stealth was debated using only industry buzzwords or warisboring citations. Now it seems /k/ is getting a super hard on for attacking or defending the Zumwalt and other future ship projects and one of the main pillars always seems to come back to the railgun or the propensity to mount a railgun system. Then /k/ proceeds to autistically screech and completely misunderstand the point of a railgun or the science behind the system itself.

>>32028344
>I don't know how modern ASM perform when hitting a huge 1000mm thick RHA plate.

HARMs and other anti-radiation missiles coupled with EW missiles to blind and cripple it.

fuck. we are gona have a ship named after Trump in a few years....

>>32028662
That's not a false equivalency, though. You compared only their muzzle energies. He did the same thing.

>>32027024
You can't have any aircraft anywhere on that deck when salvo time.

>>32029060
Special aircraft tho

>>32025584
This actually raises a good point, since he's been elected, as long as he makes it into office, that means that per naming doctrine, the U.S. Navy can now name a carrier after trump

>>32025684
I need to know where that pic is from

>>32028156
well, at least it would have a great radar horizon

>>32025584
what are those catapultson the aft for?

File: 1320014260797.png (405KB, 3264x2304px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 3264x2304px

>>32025584
>fake ship thread
>nobody's posted this yet

I'm disappointed in you all

>>32029183
>the navy brass aren't still democucks
if there is an armed rebellion versus president trump i'd put the navy on top of the disloyalty list.

>>32029717
Nips didnt have radar, thats why they needed their tall pagodas.

>>32025584
Battleships are dumb and bad.

File: Trump Class Battleship.jpg (606KB, 1624x1748px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 1624x1748px

>>32025584

>>32029764
>brass

>a bunch of naval office buildings vs a bunch of navy ships and planes

>>32029852
>"Lt.Gaylord, report to the bridge post-haste!"
>3 weeks later
>"Aye sir?"

Guy with insider naval knowledge here:

So funny, currently stationed on a fast attack. So, everyone's always 'Derherr fucking gonna do TLAM strike and kill some terrorists', but we carry a salvo of 12 in VLS. One of the GN's is a different story. But with every swinging dickhole and fartsucker getting better EW, there's a surprisingly huge push to bring back something cheaper/other than a million dollar missile that's gonna kill the marine group for CIFS. Now, a 16+ inch shell hurled from something a fuckmile away moving at Mach Gofuckyourself is a whole lot harder to shoot down. So we shat out Zumwalt, HOWEVER. Her powerplant will not be able to support anything really larger than what General Atomics is building. But we want a bigger, angrier, kinetic weapon that the Marines can go 'Awh piss, no A-10'. So we either make tiny fusion reactors to make enough power, or we scale up the ship, and I've seen some rumbles and tumbles from DARPA and some other designs and concepts. It uh, is rather interesting to say the least.

TLDR: Navy wants a bigger ship to shoot larger things that kill terrorists and saves our dudes. Maybe BB reactivation, maybe new design. But let me tell you. The Columbias are fucking glorious. Dolgoruiky has NOTHING on them.

>>32029852
>not just a floating steel battle-continent named nova America with Supreme Captain Trump at the helm

>>32025620
>Subterranean?

How will they destroy it from underground?

>>32033329
Graboids.

File: burt the best.jpg (23KB, 600x315px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x315px

>>32033577

File: trump spurdo.png (76KB, 582x297px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 582x297px

>>32025624
You have to go back

>>32025624
That's "His Excellency President Orange" to you!

>>32028662
Would it be feasible to purpose build a platform for mounting the railgun? Clearly the Zumwalt was a case of "We don't know what we want, we just know it will have a super cannon or a railgun"

It worked with the GAU-8

>>32029744
that's not a seavessel

thats a space ship

They'll call it "Pussy grabber!"

File: nazi wankery.png (118KB, 4819x1361px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 4819x1361px

>>32029744
I can do you one better

>>32034687
a battleship/aircraft, boat, and submarine carrier? love the fantasy but reality would hate the shit out of it

>>32032099
Tbh knowing DARPA they're probably going to just take an Iowa hull smack on the Enterprise's reactor system and put rail guns on it and call it a day

>>32034617
Yes, the ONLY thing that restricts use of a railgun on a ship is the load on the rails (voltage rails not magnetic rails), and recoil compensation.

In the case where a transformer cannot step down the current and create enough potential difference your railgun will be very pitiful. It's a similar problem the Nimitz is currently experiencing with its magnetic launch system which is extremely comparable to a railgun system.

The ONLY purpose desigend aspect of a ship to mount a railgun is the electronics system being relatively shielded from the insane Gauss rating of the gun and the reactors power deliver systems main voltage rails not tripping breakers or actually being able to deliver enough power at all.

A way to circumvent this is the use of more capacitors and drawing less from the ships main power system but because we don't have magix graphine super capacitors this would mean a very slow fire time for larger systems.


The point of a rail gun isn't Halo tier mass gat, it's to extend the effective range of current deck guns to provide a beyond the horizon firing solution where the kinetic energy at the end of a railguns range is still (only slightly) higher than the kinetic energy of the current deck guns round at the muzzle. Effectively taking the current deck gun point blank outside the horizon.

For a battleship or strategic strike tier railgun we're talking voltage levels where arcing between the rails is a problem. Voltages where capacitor banks are either so large it's unfeasable with current technology or there is a very real problem of the system exploding when you attempt to shoot it.

This is why current railgun technology is literally only meant to extend the range of the main gun and as a consequence make it more effective at engaging faster targets at closer ranges than the deck gun. We will be a very long time before we see Huge flash of light, nuclear explosion type energy releases, and ships being cut in two by railguns.

>>32029852
You fucker, you just cut off half of Texas! If you're going to build a giant fortified canal, at least make sure all your land is on one side.

>>32034982
In terms of the recoil compensation it is unknown (meaning I'm not quite sure and neither are engineers at this point, frankly) if the recoil forces of the rails can be redirected into a perpendicular tension force.

Meaning the recoil instead of backwards would be completely sideways, so to dissipate the recoil the gun could simply split apart on a spring or hydrlaic system or if the force is low enough dissipate as a tension frictional force into some material holding the rails together.

This would mean that VERY powerful weapons could now be mounted on much smaller platforms. Potentially (if miniaturized Fusion ever becomes a thing) mounted on aircraft, or at the very least rail assisted projectiles as well as railgun systems on any ship that is able to carry the necessary generators as well.

File: 1475875460999.jpg (721KB, 1000x731px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 1000x731px

>>32029923

>>32025584
Dude,

Presidents get air craft carriers.... except the 42nd and 44th........ those guys got tug boats.

File: 1478288530118.png (978KB, 1822x846px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 1822x846px

>>32026125
Fuck off commie scum.

>>32035011
>You fucker, you just cut off half of Texas!
Explains how we got Mexico to pay for it.

>>32026273
The problem with that idea is that any ordinance a surface ship can carry in reasonable numbers will be far outranged by carrier based aircraft with their own ordinance. This means that the carrier could stand off out of the range of the enemy's weapons and attack them with only the threat of losing some fighters that cost less than a hundredth as much as that arsenal ship would.

>>32026938
Fusion reactors? On the USS Trump?

Gotta be coal.

>>32027024

> USS Compensation is half a mile long
> gets onto the open ocean
> even mild sea states make the deck heave 15 feet at each end
> launching planes get thrown straight up and plummet straight down into the water
> landing planes get swatted like flies by rising deck
> any attempt to turn the ship fractures the hull in a dozen places and takes three days to complete

>>32029744
Oh hell yeah!

>>32035190
You throwing shit to me shows your lack of reading compression.
But hey americlaps, yay.

>>32035190
I love this so much.

>>32035206
Railgun BB's would have to either be integrated into an existing carrier fleet, defeating its purpose, or the creation of a new kind of fleet would have to take place for a railgun equipped ship to have any usability.

>>32025584
Combine the Kirov with the Nimitz. Then fold that into the Roger Mason. The bugs won't stand a chance.

File: A4C_VA146_1964.jpg (12KB, 309x240px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 309x240px

I really, really like the whole idea of a sort of crown-piece battleship (Theodore Roosevelt's battleship diplomacy is just the right way to go in so many situations), but there are dangers in putting so many eggs in one expensive basket, like how about many thousands of small boats armed with ASMs just Macrossing the shit out of the much smaller, more expensive flotilla?

>meanwhile it would be much cooler if very nearly the entire navy consisted of goode olde- fashioned, sail-powered corvettes and ships-of-the-line armed with futuristic weapons like cruise missiles and point-defense lasers just wrecking the shit out of modern warships from any range (with the added benefit of sonar/radar invisibility thanks to old technology like windpower and old materials like wood).

>we can even bring back the old school uniforms and such

>pic sorta unrelated i guess whatever i like skyhawks

>>32027024
>needs more dakka

>>32027024

What is this based on?

>>32035190
>this fucking screencap AGAIN

I'M STILL FUCKING RIGHT

File: ss+(2016-11-17+at+04.03.19).png (92KB, 1624x702px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1624x702px

I wish to submit this as the ultimate design.

File: uss donald j trump image.gif (31KB, 2142x849px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 2142x849px

USS Iowa drawn for scale. Note the ski-ramps...

>>32037918
>being this upset about being wrong months later

You must be a manlet, because you never learn :^)

>>32037935
>You Ess of fuckin A's Flagship
>using skijump

File: trumpship one.jpg (49KB, 600x272px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x272px

>>32025684

File: kakalaki.jpg (160KB, 1200x599px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1200x599px

North Carolina delivered the presidency to Trump.
Now Trump delivers for North Cakalaki

>>32034663
That's not a space ship
That's a space station

>>32025584
I wonder if going for guns on subs might not be a more viable option.
The idea behind the Surcouf is not outdated. If anything modern tech would make it's target acquisition an engagement more easy.
Get rail guns to replace the normal kinetic and torpedoes. And use her as a pop up and shoot to cripple an enemy fleet.
The biggest threat to it would be an attack sub that is nearby as it surfaces to fire. But that threat could be at least reduced by having a sub escort.

You would go shallow, float a communications device up. And once you have the targeting data surface, fire and dive/get the fuck out. Slower firing times wouldn't mater as much as you'd be poping up and shooting. Most anti subsystems have a limited range and a railgun would be able to out range them easy. Plus most adversarial powers lack update anti-sub capacity since they historically where the sub side of the equation.

File: belka.webm (2MB, 468x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 468x360px

>>32025679
i like the way you think buddy

File: 1479304793564.gif (2MB, 720x402px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x402px

>>32025624

File: sexy battleship.jpg (196KB, 1457x449px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1457x449px

>>32025584

File: HPRS Trump.jpg (1MB, 3755x2513px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3755x2513px

>>32025584
don worry I got this senpai

File: 1456539342111.png (403KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 640x360px

>>32039016
Looks like a star destroyer.

>>32038880
>railguns on subs

The ocean is a great conductor.

File: 133015071842.gif (740KB, 320x238px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 320x238px

>>32025584
Make the thing wide with twin runways and you'll be making America great again by bombing sandies at twice the rate!

Really though a combo battleship/carrier thing armed with a fuckton of VLS cells and at least one fuckhuge multi-railgun turret with a hull length runway and a nice number of aircraft would be wonderful. Then cover it in a ridiculous amount of CIWS and Mk 45 Mod 4s. To power it slap a nuclear reactor set on it powerful enough to power a whole gods damned city or ruin a whole region should anyone actually land a major blow "causing the reactors to all simultaneously meltdown and accidentally launch all missiles onboard at totally not pre-selected targets, oops".

Then make that god damn variable geometry variant of the fucking raptor and station them on it.

>USS Imma Rape Ya Bitch sailing calmly through the Gulf of Aden huntin pirates'n'shit
>Yemeni rocket surgeons decide it's a good idea to fire a SCUD in the vessel's general direction
>SCUD eats shit hard
>Captains face when

>>32025636

>Frumpd

>>32026938
Surely the bottom one in the pic should be the USS OBAMA

File: OGW-2011-03-09_044.png (145KB, 5000x1200px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 5000x1200px

>>32025584
>are you feeling it now, mr trump

>>32039627
top notch mspaint + greebling skillz senpai

File: wallace.jpg (221KB, 750x500px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 750x500px

>>32035011
Now we just have to work out how to get rid of the remaining half.

>>32040303
>>32040303
The autismmonglers at shipbucket even gave it believable stats
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1582&sid=0ccbd5f6348ff49b57bc392a761e3436

>>32037932
>Sylver
Don't.

Anything will do as long as they restore the proper hierarchy of ships.

>>32040738
>British VLS system/missiles on a US boat

Yeah, I wondered about that too.

File: IMG_1989.jpg (122KB, 900x513px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 900x513px

>>32025584
When Trump achieves world peace we wont need warships.

>>32029060
just dodge the muzzle blast you pussy

File: ISS Donald J Trump.png (156KB, 2240x1178px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 2240x1178px

>>32029852
>>32029923

>>32025624
god you fucks can't even shit post correctly

>>32041282
>need
>triggeredsnek.png

>>32025620

>A warship of that size is an easy target for radar,
RAM paint and reduced metallic construction.

>torpedos,
Buzzer decoys and anti-torpedo launchers.

>aircraft, etc.
You say that like it doesn't have enough radar on board to not cook pilots, never mind the amount of AA & CIWS it carries.

>plus you won't be able to sail very close to shore
Ships rarely get close to coastlines today, unless docking in a deep water port.

>and it would require a big crew to man it all.
Automation is a wonderful thing Anon, and it's getting better every year.

>>32029048
Doubt it, the Navy doesn't name big ships after non-Navy people.

Maybe Trump will have a LCS class boat in his name.

>>32040440
>>32039627

>Jesus fucking H Christ...

Machinery:
Two 450MW-class nuclear reactors
Two submarine-derived backup reactors (hotel load, backup power), approx. 20MW each
16 T406 SSTG (hotel, backup) approx 4.5MW each
Integrated electric propulsion
Electric motors, 6 shafts, 952,654 shp / 710,680 Kw = 32.50 kts
10 4000shp-class deployable azimuthal thrusters
7 4000shp-class shuttered bow and stern thrusters
Bunker at max displacement = 98,908 tons

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
Armament: 9,342 tons, 1.1 %
Armour: 277,232 tons, 32.3 %
- Belts: 102,720 tons, 12.0 %
- Torpedo bulkhead: 48,100 tons, 5.6 %
- Armament: 16,978 tons, 2.0 %
- Armour Deck: 104,571 tons, 12.2 %
- Conning Tower: 4,864 tons, 0.6 %
Machinery: 22,791 tons, 2.7 %
Hull, fittings & equipment: 365,641 tons, 42.6 %
Fuel, ammunition & stores: 138,109 tons, 16.1 %
Miscellaneous weights: 45,000 tons, 5.2 %

Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
3,282,712 lbs / 1,489,013 Kg = 474.9 x 24.0 " / 610 mm shells or 2,716.4 torpedoes
Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.33
Metacentric height 38.7 ft / 11.8 m
Roll period: 18.9 seconds

File: USS Donald J Trump.jpg (892KB, 1500x578px) Image search: [Google]

892KB, 1500x578px

Here's my vote

File: 1478460898302.gif (249KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 500x375px

>>32041282

>need

>>32041762
>using Ion propulsion in atmosphere

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster

That's a big no no, Anon.

>>32037935
>poverty ramps

You're fired.

>>32042071
ion engine produce almost no thrust. They should use fusion jet engines instead.

>>32025620
>Have some underwater barrier
Torpedo impenetrable wall.

if we build such a ship we have to go to war.. No use in letting such a fine vessel rust away..

File: laugh.gif (521KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 500x280px

>>32025584
>ww2-era catapults

File: Red Skull.png (536KB, 1128x353px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1128x353px

Can you put a Big Drill in the front ?

>USS Donald Trump
>3x the size of a Ford
>Has been remodeled and redesigned 8 times in the construction process
>Nothing works right
>Used mainly as a glider launch platform
>But the Flag officer and VIP suites are amazing

>>32025584
I don't want to name warships after Presidents though.

>>32038824
That's no space station, it a moon.

>>32045387
No one cares about what you want, you special snowflake dyed hair art major. Its not about you. Its about me. And I'm bigger than you.

>>32045450
Too bad about the tiny hands.

>>32045480
Big enough to use a pen and that's all I need.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (66KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1280x720px

>>32045719

>>32029852
califag here
Can you please cut a little further into socal? thanks

File: 1416432600016.jpg (16KB, 324x310px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 324x310px

>>32042197
>poverty ramps