- Joined
- 14 Mar 04
- Moves
- 213239
What he should be spending his military funds on are “Battleship” space stations. I can see the headlines now, “The 49th President of the USA, Donald J.Trump is pictured smashing a bottle of Champagne, not sparkling wine, on the first and, in his words, “GREATEST” ever battle anything at NASA’s Trump/Kennedy Space Center, in Florida. More pictures, of him, on pages 2,3,4 and 5.”
@moonbus - "Like battleships, they would be sitting ducks: easy prey to submarines and missiles.
------------------
Did you mean to say "like aircraft carriers"?
Moon, somebody has to be out there to surround the ACC and take the wack. It might as well be the carrier.
And I don't pretend to know why the Navy is going back to the use of battleships. But I am pretty sure that it id not a Donald Trump idea.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidNothing is Donald Trump's idea. He's a marionette with an attitude.
@moonbus - "Like battleships, they would be sitting ducks: easy prey to submarines and missiles.
------------------
Did you mean to say "like aircraft carriers"?
Moon, somebody has to be out there to surround the ACC and take the wack. It might as well be the carrier.
And I don't pretend to know why the Navy is going back to the use of battleships. But I am pretty sure that it id not a Donald Trump idea.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidWhy do you think the US has not built any battleships since 1944? It's obsolete technology. Its guns don't have the range of the planes on a carrier. Iowa-class battleship guns had a range of about 40kms/25 miles. Ridiculously close to any enemy installation. They had only 9 such guns: pretty pathetic compared to the effective striking power and range of an aircraft carrier.
@moonbus - "Like battleships, they would be sitting ducks: easy prey to submarines and missiles.
------------------
Did you mean to say "like aircraft carriers"?
Moon, somebody has to be out there to surround the ACC and take the wack. It might as well be the carrier.
And I don't pretend to know why the Navy is going back to the use of battleships. But I am pretty sure that it id not a Donald Trump idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16-inch/50-caliber_Mark_7_gun
A Gerald Ford class aircraft carrier can launch 75 planes flying 200 sorties per day for up to 30 days continuously, with aircraft having an effective striking range of 1000 nautical miles (with in-flight refueling).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
@moonbus saidYou are leaving information out, I fear.
Why do you think the US has not built any battleships since 1944? It's obsolete technology. Its guns don't have the range of the planes on a carrier. Iowa-class battleship guns had a range of about 40kms/25 miles. Ridiculously close to any enemy installation. They had only 9 such guns: pretty pathetic compared to the effective striking power and range of an aircraft carrier. ...[text shortened]... s (with in-flight refueling).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
There must have been newly developed weapons systems that make the battleship idea viable,
otherwise, you would be correct, something the real experts, no doubt, have considered long ago.
but the technology is beyond me here, maybe some other time
@Earl-of-Trumps saidYou think naval experts, after 81 years, all of a sudden decided there was a pressing need for battleships to be coincidentally named after Trump?
then why are you blaming donald trump for the bogus reestablishment of battleships?
Kimosabe, you speak with fork-ed tongue
You guys really are that gullible.
@no1marauder saidyou're ignorance is on display again.
You think naval experts, after 81 years, all of a sudden decided there was a pressing need for battleships to be coincidentally named after Trump?
You guys really are that gullible.
-------------------------------------------
ChatGPT:
Battleships become viable by evolving beyond just big guns, focusing on massive, heavily armored platforms that integrate advanced tech like cruise/ballistic missiles, drone command, and robust defense systems (anti-air/anti-sub), making them durable, multi-role command centers for complex amphibious assaults or projecting overwhelming firepower, essentially becoming floating fortresses for the 21st century. Their sheer size allows for huge power generation (like fusion reactors in sci-fi) and extensive redundancy, enabling them to withstand damage while housing diverse, powerful weapon systems
-----------------------
@Earl-of-Trumps saidLMAO! Did your AI mention no nation actually built one in the 21st Century?
you're ignorance is on display again.
-------------------------------------------
ChatGPT:
Battleships become viable by evolving beyond just big guns, focusing on massive, heavily armored platforms that integrate advanced tech like cruise/ballistic missiles, drone command, and robust defense systems (anti-air/anti-sub), making them durable, multi-role command cent ...[text shortened]... ing them to withstand damage while housing diverse, powerful weapon systems
-----------------------
@no1marauder saidI've known that for a long time, fool.
LMAO! Did your AI mention no nation actually built one in the 21st Century?
Apparently, you don't prefer reading to get information, you like to make it up as you go.
My AI text was explaining why battleships are suddenly viable. Did you read it?
1 edit
@Earl-of-Trumps saidI think the admiralty would know better than ChatGPT.
I've known that for a long time, fool.
Apparently, you don't prefer reading to get information, you like to make it up as you go.
My AI text was explaining why battleships are suddenly viable. Did you read it?
Given what we've seen of this presidency so far, there is a high probability that Trump &/or his cronies have vested interests in the shipyards which would receive the construction contracts.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidApparently you prefer to believe in the recommendations from an AI rather than actually consider what navies over the entire world have decided.
I've known that for a long time, fool.
Apparently, you don't prefer reading to get information, you like to make it up as you go.
My AI text was explaining why battleships are suddenly viable. Did you read it?
I rate it as about a 99% chance that this is a self-aggrandizing fantasy of a deranged old man that will never be built.
@no1marauder saidthe navy's planning on 10 of them, so we'll see.
Apparently you prefer to believe in the recommendations from an AI rather than actually consider what navies over the entire world have decided.
I rate it as about a 99% chance that this is a self-aggrandizing fantasy of a deranged old man that will never be built.
1 edit
@Earl-of-Trumps saidhttps://www.csis.org/analysis/golden-fleets-battleship-will-never-sail
the navy's planning on 10 of them, so we'll see.
Trump and Hegseth could announce they're building a fleet of Super Duper Trump Death Stars and you gullible saps would be saying what a great idea it was.
1 edit
@Earl-of-Trumps saidThe Navy Secretary actually said the first one will be "the best looking warship anywhere on the world's oceans".https://news.usni.org/2025/12/22/trump-unveils-new-battleship-class-proposed-uss-defiant-will-be-largest-u-s-surface-combatant-since-wwii
the navy's planning on 10 of them, so we'll see.
It's embarrassing to have such fools speaking about what should be serious matters not bragging how pretty their toys are gonna be.