First, it would be in orbit.
Foolishness......
There will be no more naval battles between fleets.
Aircraft and submarines will see to that
I have wanted the new destroyers to come with at least a couple more regular 5-inch guns. For things like the Somali pirates.
And before anyone says "Nuclear Powered Submarines, Hyper-Sonic missiles etc etc"
In the 60's some Air Force General told his pilots in-regards to their fighter aircraft not having a cannon, that the U.S. would never again fight a conventional war in the air due to Nuclear Weapons.
Just as Vietnam was begging to ramp up.
"Simple" ideas like a floating (and well built and survivable) artillery ship is right up our alley in 21st Century warfare.
A Battleship is like a bayonet, forgotten about until you need one.
Convert everyone to Christianity.
(And please don't bring up that lame Crusaders thing .... different times etc.)
The answer to war is a changed heart in man.
I know ... it'll never happen (globally in this era) .. so it's immediate nukes or conversion.
Or I suppose we can just go to war and may the "better" man win.
We're talking about a scaled-up USS Zumwalt, right?
Instead of 15,000 tons our new battle-arsenal ship will be 30,000+ tons and will do everything the Zumwalt does except more & cheaper?
But with nuclear power, it won't be all that cheap.
So, can somebody explain how one 30,000 ton ship will do a job more & better than two 15,000 Zumwalts, or three+ Arleigh Burkes?
What weapons go on a 30,000 ton "arsenal" ship that won't fit in smaller, more numerous, destroyers?
One big ship makes one big target - worth expending considerable resources (by an enemy) to sink. A dispersed collection of ships is a harder problem.
One, or a few, big ships can only be in one or a few places. A fleet can disperse to handle multiple issues, or amass to provide serious firepower.
One, or a few, big ships represent a single or relatively few points of failure. Lose a capital ship, it is a national tragedy. Lose a frigate or two, it's not good for the personnel lost, but the fight goes on.
Technology - netted sensors and weapons - means that all the ships and aircraft and their associated systems are in the same fight. In general, the idea of single large, very capable assets is being overtaken by lots of cooperating smaller assets that collectively bring more capability to the fight.
“everyone expects ship-to-ship combat to happen at ranges longer than heavy guns can reach”
Because of missiles and aircraft.
A battleship has to be able to counter and survive those weapons and get in range to use it’s big CHEAP guns.
Drones and UAVs will provide that defensive capability cheaply, while the big guns provide cheap offense.
A ship like that won’t be ‘cheap’ by any measure.
I am in favor of the US having several very conventional battleships. As in their primary weapons being 16 inch guns and their being heavily armored.
No country ever attacked by a US battleship has ever forgotten it, because there is nothing quite like a 16” gun to leave a lasting impression. Here is the logic.
While the US has several different classes of advanced bomber aircraft, of great cost and advanced technology, its antique B-52s do the vast majority of the work, because they are simple, low maintenance and reliable. Which is all that is needed on a low tech battlefield. So this is what we need in a battleship, with the same objectives in mind.
While steel plate and powder explosives are good, today we have much better technology and engineering. We have advanced materials much stronger than steel, and much more stable and powerful machined propellants and explosives that take up much less area. We also have lightweight advanced insulation, much more advanced alloys for gun tubes, and they could likely also mount sophisticated anti-submarine and anti-missile technologies.
So, in addition to the conventional cannon, the battleship would also likely mount both a rail gun and energy weapons, which might require it to be a nuclear ship.
Uh, Russian ships are male. Well, they are referred to as such anyway.
I think instead we will see a drone class of ships. Possibly submerged that will be controlled from a NORAD similar location.
The ship will be filled with missiles and additional drones that can be released for independent piloting - some will be kamikaze and some will have armament.
If submergible they will settle into strategic locations on the floor or patrol a region only be called upon for periodic checkouts, relocation, or action.
If not submergible they will do remote donuts in the ocean but will require sensory alarms to notify command of any nearby ships approaching to prevent piracy.
Lots of work here as always great report Thanks