Source: Wikimedia Commons

Reactionary Nostalgia on Display

Trump plays battleship.

11

Comments

As is often the case, the Dumbest Timeline and Meanwhile in North Korea collide. Defense News reports: Trump-class battleship program will cost $275 billion, CBO report says.

The potential cost of the Navy’s new nuclear-powered battleship procurement program is estimated to be an eyewatering $275 billion, with the first Trump-class battleship (BBG(X)) costing $23.4 billion, according to a Congressional Budget Office report published Wednesday.

The Trump administration in December announced its intention to build a new class of large surface combatants, designated as the Trump-class guided missile battleship.

The naming of these as the “Trump-class” covers the North Korea part pretty well, although it certainly contributes to the dumbness rather substantially.

But the truly dumb part is that this is Trump guiding US policy based not on expertise or sound advice, but because he has some vague notion of the way things used to be when he was a kid. His yearning to recreate an idealized past, but with a new coat of paint (likely gold) and some new gizmos, continues unabated.

After all, this is the guy who wants new aircraft carriers redesigned because he has a fondness for how they are supposed to look (in his mind). As The Hill reported: Navy considers major aircraft carrier revamp to better suit Trump’s aesthetic.

The Navy is performing an internal review to weigh the possibility of moving the multistory aircraft carrier’s command center tower, known as the “island,” toward the middle of the vessel to better match the aesthetic of older warships, a former senior U.S. official familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, told The Hill on Sunday.

The review, which was kick-started in part because of Trump’s concerns about the aesthetics of the Ford-class aircraft carriers, is due in “several” weeks, the official said.

Reportedly, Trump wants the new carriers to look more like the WWII-era craft. This is just more reactionary nostalgia.

And, of course, there’s his obsession with steam.

On Thursday, Trump directed the Navy to remove the electromagnetic catapult system on aircraft carriers and revert back to using steam catapult systems, an adjustment that officials and experts say would cost billions of dollars and would hamper operational efficiency. 

Additional dumbness is relevant to the battleship because, as best I can tell (and I am not an expert on naval warfare), we don’t need this type of ship.

I would recommend this detailed CSIS write-up from December: The Golden Fleet’s Battleship Will Never Sail.

All of this is just a further example, in a mountain of them, of the foolishness of giving all this power to a huckster who loves attention and thinks putting his name on things and/or painting/designating them gold is both his right and a really classy thing to do.

And, of course, the added cost of all this shouldn’t be forgotten. For all his rhetoric about getting rid of wasteful spending, there is no doubt in my mind that Trump was engaged in more gratuitous and avoidable wastefulness than any president in history.

In passing, here’s another item for the “can you imagine how Fox News would react if Obama did it” pile via USNI News: New White House Memo Calls for Foreign-Built Warships, Return to Steam Catapults on Ford Carriers.

By law, American warships and cutters have to be built in the U.S., but the president has broad authority to waive that requirement for general “national security interests.”

[…]

Congress is trying to halt the executive push for foreign shipbuilding, with the Senate Armed Services Committee in its draft of the FY 2027 defense policy bill removing the presidential waiver authority from Title 10 that allows the commander-in-chief to use an undefined “national security interest” exception to buy foreign warships for the U.S. armed forces. The draft legislation would allow the Pentagon to purchase auxiliary ships from allies.

By the way, one of the ways to make the Navy’s defense of global waterways more effective is to have plenty of friends around the world and also not to start pointless wars near geostrategic choke points.

11 responses to “Reactionary Nostalgia on Display”

  1. One hopes that on both the “battleship”* and the changes to the Ford class the Navy will drag these studies out past Jan 2029. Various elements love a long drawn out study contract.

    _* Noun
    battleship (plural battleships)

    (military, nautical) A large capital warship displacing thousands to tens of thousands of tons, heavily armoured and armed with large-caliber guns; now obsolescent and replaced by smaller vessels with guided missiles. – Wiktionary.

  2. I suspect Trump will eventually find the aesthetics of the new battleships not to his liking. The dictates of stealth and vertical launch tubes yield ugly ships. Maybe not quite Zumwalt ugly, but closer to that than to the old Iowa-class ships.

  3. Yeah, I think this is a case of “drag it out and shitcan it the moment Trump leaves office because that’s easier”. Also a waste of time and money, but quite possibly the best anybody can do.

    However, I am now curious about how this will interact with a Democratic-controlled House, or perhaps Congress. I mean, funding is supposed to be approved, right? And Democrats might insist on it. I can’t really see where this is going, but I’m pretty sure it’s uncharted waters in all directions.

    1
  4. Aesthetics? The design of America’s weapons is based on aesthetics? Aesthetics as judged by someone who thinks gilt frou-frou is improving the White House? If you had told me this twenty years ago I wouldn’t have believed it.

  5. Let’s state it plainly: the era of the battleship is over. It was over after the Battle of the Coral Sea, in WWII. While battleships still played a fire support role for onshore forces (for example, see the bombardments on D-Day), the assets they brought are long, long in the rearview mirror.

    On the cost side, not only are they expensive, but they are big, slow, expensive targets for every land-based missile, ship-based missile, torpedo, bomber, and, of course, drone in the battlezone. You have to be a complete idiot to fund a class of warships that will drag sailors, steel, and taxpayer dollars to the bottom of the sea in the first skirmish.

    Oh, wait.

  6. The Navy is performing an internal review to weigh the possibility of moving the multistory aircraft carrier’s command center tower, known as the “island,” toward the middle of the vessel to better match the aesthetic of older warships, a former senior U.S. official familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, told The Hill on Sunday.

    Excuse me while I scream into a pillow.

    There, that’s better.

    I’ve been arguing for years that fascism is an aesthetic movement. But the Nazis never designed their tanks to be visually pleasing to Hitler. The “I can improve the look of everything within my reach” hubris is truly unprecedented. So is the complete undermining of national security and economic stability in the name of one man’s tacky tastes. Did Commodus redesign legionary armor to make the soldiers look more like Roman gods? This is the maddest of mad kingship.

    2
    1. If only Trump had better taste. Or more interesting taste. Tacky but baffling would be better than tacky but boring.

      I would love to see an Art Deco battleship, or an aircraft carrier with the control tower designed to suggest a Bakelite radio. And a retrofuturist tank. An entire military as a postmodern hodgepodge of styles sitting in unfortunate juxtaposition with each other.

      Fascism may be an aesthetic movement, but cheap ass red baseball hats made in China and gold painted molding is a terrible aesthetic.

      1
    2. The mad, and usually incompetent, Roman emperors like Commodus, focused more on their personal aesthetic. Like portraying himself as Hercules. He also performed in gladiatorial games, and they let him win every time (like El Taco does at golf).

  7. dazedandconfused Avatar
    dazedandconfused

    He doesn’t give any serious thought to functionality so in Trump’s mind the navy, if not the world, exists for his pleasure. I’m not a shrink but to me this qualifies as megalomania.

    “How many Don Trumps does it take to screw in a light bulb?”

    “One. He just holds the bulb and the world revolves around him.”

    1
  8. Well, there is a possible use-case for a large, armoured ship with good anti-missile capacity as a launcher and controller for air, surface and submarine drones and sensors, but smaller than an aircraft carrier.
    But it’s really not at all the same as a “battleship”.

    Perhaps the navy could placate Trump by building one and sticking gold filigree decorations on it, and calling it the USS Melania? “God bless her and all who sail in her.”

    Of course, the sensible thing would be to focus on building next-gen destroyers and frigates, and sorting out the naval construction and repair docks mess.
    But that would likely need a SecDef who’s not a tomfool.

  9. You could also have mentioned the “Golden Dome”, which reportedly the Pentagon never proposed. But Israel has an iron one, so naturally Trump had to go one better. Given incoming missiles from some potential enemies would most probably fly over the Arctic Circle, it seems counter-productive to be making an enemy of Canada. The way Trump is going, Canadians would be waving their hats and wishing the missiles “God speed!” instead of helping to shoot them down.

    BTW the latest estimated cost of the Golden Dome, according to Senate Republicans, is “trillions of dollars”. A figure whose vagueness is more honest than the CBO’s attempt to cost the battleships.