A Question of Modern Warships and Navies

A few questions for my Navy friends regarding naval history and future possibilities, with regard to the announcement of the Trump-class warship.

1. Why would anyone call a ship with just a single 4-inch rail gun, two 5-inch guns, a "battleship"? The USS Texas boasted 10, 14-inch guns, and the USS Missouri (BB-63) had 9, 16-inch guns—what’s the basis for such a label? 2. The displacement of the "Trump Class battleship” nearly matches that of the old USS Arizona (BB-39), which was 600 ft long with a 97 ft beam. Yet, it’ll be about the same length and beam as the USS Missouri (BB-63)—which displaced 58 tons—only this new vessel will be very lightly armored, roughly the size of HMS Queen Mary but with much smaller guns. While it will feature missiles (not present on the Queen Mary), this design suggests a long, light, and fast ship, powered by diesel and with minimal armor. 3. POTUS SAID this would be the first "battleship" built since 1994. Am I mistaken in believing that the last U.S. battleship was the USS Wisconsin (BB-64), launched in December 1943? From what I gather, the last warship class to end construction in 1994 was the Ticonderoga Class Cruiser —the USS Port Royal (CG-73), a guided missile cruiser with two 5-inch guns—not a battleship. I support a strong navy—our national security depends on it. Yet, with systems like Israel’s "Sea Dome," a naval adaptation of the "Iron Dome," missile defense has become increasingly effective, limiting the threat from aircraft and missile attacks. Historically, the advent of aircraft carriers, along with historic battles at Pearl Harbor, Taranto, and the sinking of HMS Repulse and Prince of Wales, prompted the decline of the actual battleship. Today, we’re seeing ships equipped mainly with small guns, while missile can now be intercepted. So I wonder: could a return to large-caliber guns—like 16-inch, 3,000-pound shells fired from 25-30 miles away—be more relevant now? Could such rounds be stopped? Are we entering an era where bigger, more powerful naval artillery makes a comeback? The U.S. Army and Marines still believe in artillery larger than 5 inches. Perhaps it’s time for a new kind of warship—an 800-900 ft long ship with a 110-ft beam, armed with three turrets of three 16-inch guns capable of firing 30 miles with standard shells and 150 miles with sabot rounds. Nuclear-powered, fast enough to match Ford-class carriers, perhaps with less armor than an old battleship —but designed for devastating firepower rather than direct confrontation. Should we be building a new class of warship—a true battleship, a BBN? Or maybe resurrecting the USS Alaska (CB-1)

class as a CBN-1—an imposing, heavily armed vessel designed to dominate the seas and support Marines from the water’s edge. The question is: is it time for the U.S. Navy to craft a modern nuclear battleship or even nuclear battlecruiser - something formidable, fast, and heavily armed—to secure our maritime future?

A Question of Modern Warships and Navies