How will the USS Donald defend itself in a naval conflict against China’s VLS/UAV/UMV spam? Seems like a bigger hull is not beneficial in modern naval operations.
lol epic.have some reddit gold, you've earned it!
>>64672550By simply calling anyone who attacks it an antisemite, and sueing them.
>>64672553Kill yourself, Migger
>>64672553>EPICMost faggot word of the REDDITOR
>>64672550Another refinery, Pietro?
That is a big GOLDEN DOME of rape
>>64672550It will have the EPS-T31N decoy system.
>>64673077>he chose a politician as his herolmao, just because daddy never loved you doesn't mean trumpstein will
>>64672550its main weapon will be dispensing evil jews to high positions in foreign countries who then traffic children to politicians and then blackmail them.
>>64672550In theory an adequate laser defense combined with ciws/rams/sm should be fine enough against everything. Saturation of like 40 incoming landing all at once it gonna mess up any ship in the world be it US or Chinese but the trump ship actually may be the most well defended ship from aerial attack there is unless they put like several megawatt class lasers on Fords (which they fucking should and I think they intend to but haven't yet).So while spam can defeat any such set of systems sooner or later there is no silver bullet if lasers are a credible anti-hypersonic solution. They cost a dollar or whatever per shot, if they really do work the nature of how you attack a ship may change. I think really fucking deep (like 3k+ feet) drone subs releasing self guiding drone-torpedos is the next step of naval warfare and there are various underwater drones already being worked on. There will always be surface vessels because they are good for transport and parking off shore for support in theatre campaigns etc but the actual naval combat I think will go underwater. All this shit about satellites and 6th gen naval fighters and lasers and hypersonics won't do fucking shit against subsurface. Drone subs going deeper than any sonar can hear which don't need a crew and its silly things like oxygen and food and can loiter for months down there are what we should be doing. Not the Trump ship. But whatever.
>>64673374Also before someone >s I mean deeper than towed sonar, which goes to 2-3k feet. Anti-sub missiles also have about that as a max depth. Yet in most parts of the world the average depth to the floor is 12k feet. Sure maybe the future would then be stronger towed sonars and deeper missiles but "make everything existing impotent and obsolete" is a damn good head start to have before counters are developed and fielded.
>>64672550It will be escorted by the USS Lolita Express and the USS Epstein Island
>>64672550By being BIGGER, MORE BEAUTIFUL, GOLDEN and THE GREATEST.
>>64673374>In theory an adequate laser defenseLasers have never been combat tested, unproven technology. /k/ doesn't accept anything that isn't COMBAT TESTED.Also in practice the intercept window on a hypersonic missile is 0.1 second, and a laser must heat up a target for several seconds to destroy it, even if that target has no ablative armor.Future missiles will have ablative armor added which will work like the re-entry shields of spacecraft, creating a protective plasma bubble while they ablate for minutes while seeing through it with terrahertz radars for terminal guidance.>combined with ciwshttps://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabh.htmA friendly-fire incident involving the USS Jarrett (FFG-33) and the USS Missouri (BB-63) took place February 25, 1991. Three US Navy warships and one UK Royal Navy warship (HMS Gloucester)(D-96) were shelling Iraqi-occupied Faylakah Island. A Seadart missile fired from the HMS Gloucester destroyed an incoming Silkworm anti-ship missile fired from one of Iraq's shore-based missile launchers. During the engagement, the USS Missouri fired off one or more chaff bundles (a standard countermeasure against radar-guided missiles). The USS Jarrett was two to three miles off the Missouri's port side. For some reason, the Jarrett's Phalanx Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) operating in the automatic engagement mode, malfunctioned and fired a quick burst at the chaff. The USS Missouri's former executive officer estimated four of the 20mm rounds, which have not been confirmed as DU, struck the ship in the bulkhead above the famed "surrender deck" (where the Japanese formally surrendered in 1945). Because their energy was mostly spent, all but one of the rounds bounced off the bulkhead, leaving dents. One round penetrated the thin upper metal of the bulkhead and passed through a guest berth on the ship. No casualties resulted. The executive officer recalled that the Navy never recovered the round, which probably fell into the sea.
>>64673374>Saturation of like 40 incoming landing all at once it gonna mess up any ship in the world be it US or ChineseWell the chinese at least have modern AESA seekers on their missiles and use modern dual pulse motors. The US SM-x missiles do not.>but the trump ship actually may be the most well defended ship from aerial attackThat would be the Type 055, with 112 extra large VLS cells with quad-packed SM-2 and 3 equivalents and 9 packed ESSM equivalents. That thing has 2-3x the missile load of that USS Smalldick
>>64672550
>>64672550That's what the laser cannons, the railgun, the 5-inchers, and the 30mms are for. We know from reported ammo usage that 5" was actually used a lot against Houthi drones, and apparently worked just fine. Likewise, a 32MJ railgun isn't enough for long-range combat (hence why the USN kept trying to push for 64MJ, which they failed to make reliable enough for production), but it can be used as AAA within ~10NM.The main defense, of course, is that these ships will likely be used with the same CONOPS as DDG(X) and CG(X) before it: to hang back at long range and use their radars to look for air and space targets worth throwing Standards at (or for cuing other assets, up to and including GBIs, to engage). Thus, only the longest-ranged ASBMs would have a shot at them as long as the CCP doesn't sneak a "fishing boat" up close during peacetime and pull a sneak attack with drones.
>>64673481I think this is the first time I've ever laughed at a slop video. Well done, you're okay for a brown.
>>64672550By nuking Nanjing as a warning.
>>64673421>quad-packed SM-2 and 3 equivalents and 9 packed ESSM equivalents.what fantasy is this, the chinese haven't even quadpacked ESSM equivalents in their fat fuck vls cell
