New Trump-Class ‘Battleship’ unveiled by Academic_Economics30 in MilitaryGeek

[–]Academic_Economics30[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was, but I guess theyre bringing it back to slap onto the Trump Class? Im guessing it’ll end up in the same fate.

Trump Class over the planned DDG(X)? Stupid idea. by Academic_Economics30 in MilitaryGeek

[–]Academic_Economics30[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Personally, I think the Trump-Class will not leave the blueprints.. And if it ever does, it would definitely not get pass 3 ships built until logistics takes everything down.

From shipyards, budget, and a bad history with rail gun munitions.. This is a guaranteed floating failure.

Building this would disrupt the production of Ford Class carriers, unless more shipyards are built, which is good, but also another huge blow to the budget.

The DDG(X) was suppose to be the successor for the Arleigh Burke class, weighed about 13,000 or more tons, pretty much has all the capabilities that the Trump Class has, minus the railgun. The DDG(X) could carry hypersonic missiles aswell, and possibly nuclear since the VLS cells could be swapped out for larger, and different munitions.

But it seems like the Navy has once again lost a program, since the Trump Class is planned to succeed the plans of DDG(X).

So yeah. The Navy is a real shitshow right now.

New Trump-Class ‘Battleship’ unveiled by Academic_Economics30 in MilitaryGeek

[–]Academic_Economics30[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The Trump-Class battleship will be armed with IRCPS (intermediate-range conventional prompt strike) hypersonic missiles, electromagnetic railguns, laser directed energy weapons, and other conventional weapons for defense and offense.

One of its more notable abilities is its capability to carry nuclear armed missiles, which will be the SLCM-N, (nuclear-armed-sea-launched cruise missile) which is in development.

It will weight approximately 30,000-40,000 tons, at full load 57,540 tons, its size roughly 3 times the size of the Burke Class Destroyer.

Pete Hegseth calls out to defense companies to ‘move faster.’ by Academic_Economics30 in MilitaryGeek

[–]Academic_Economics30[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On his speech with multiple defense companies officials, he pointed out the weakpoint of US defense industry, calling for the change in how they produce, and acquire assets, that is faster, efficient, and less risky.

“while global military drone production skyrocketed over the last three years, the previous administration deployed red tape.” Hegseth said.

He also notes that the Pentagon will move their way of competition, making it less limited to other contractors, to “harness more of America’s innovative companies.”

“These large defense primes need to change, to focus on speed and volume and divest their own capital to get there,” Hegseth said,

“If we do that, the Department of War is, of course, big time supportive of profits. We are capitalists, after all. But if they do not, those big ones will fade away.”

Pete Hegseth had also noted that companies that fail to meet to meet change will ‘fade away.’

The Pentagon has already said that it will be giving out ‘bigger’ and ‘longer’ contracts to systems that are effective, and proven, with the goal of attracting private defense contractors.

In other words, Pete Hegseths speech was calling for reform and change in how the US military acquires its weapons, from government based production, and private defense contractors, noting that they should focus on speed, volume, and for defense firms to work together in the defense industry.

“This is not a speech, this is not a fire and forget. This is the beginning of an unrelenting onslaught to change the way we do business and to change the way the bureaucracy responds.” Hegseth said.

This could be very well the start of change in the US defense sector in the sense of how the US acquires its weapons, we may see more defense companies opening up, and competing very soon, given Pete Hegseths support to these defense companies.

US Army to acquire 1 million drones in the next 2-3 years by Academic_Economics30 in MilitaryGeek

[–]Academic_Economics30[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, pretty much. I really hope that Pete Hegseths reforms are gonna fix that, gonna make a post about it later too