For much of the 20th century, battleships symbolized naval power. They were steel giants capable of launching projectiles weighing more than a ton dozens of kilometers away and dominating the oceans with their mere presence. Historically, the largest of these was the Japanese battleship Yamato. Commissioned in 1941, the Yamato displaced about 72,000 tons fully loaded. However, first embarked aviation and later guided missiles ended up relegating them to the history books.
Now the United States is studying recovering that philosophy, although adapted to a world dominated by drones, hypersonic weapons and long-range missiles. The result would be the Trump Class, a gigantic nuclear-powered warship whose displacement could reach 41,000 tonsbecoming the largest surface combatant built by the US Navy since World War II.
But size is only part of the story. Although it is sometimes compared to a destroyer, the project falls into a completely different category. According to the US Navy naval planthe Trump Class is not intended to replace the destroyers of the Arleigh Burke class. Its mission would be to act as an advanced command center and a platform capable of launching enormous quantities of long-range missiles, in addition to powering future systems with high energy demand such as combat lasers or electromagnetic cannons.
To achieve this, the Navy has opted for an unusual solution for a surface ship: nuclear propulsion. Until now, the United States reserves nuclear reactors practically for its aircraft carriers and submarines. In this case, the energy would not only allow sailing for years without refueling, but also supply the enormous electrical power that next-generation weapons will require.. If ultimately built to current specifications, the first ship, the USS Defiant, would vastly outperform any existing destroyer.
The design studied by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) contemplates a displacement of up to 41,000 tons, well above the approximately 10,000 tons of an Arleigh Burke destroyer and more than double that of a Zumwalt. Its length would be around 268 meters, dimensions typical of some light aircraft carriers. This enormous volume is not only intended to impress. It would also allow carrying a much larger number of missiles, sensors, radars and electronic systems, in addition to reserving space for technologies that are still in development.
Precisely this futuristic nature explains why the cost of the program has sparked intense controversy. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a fleet of fifteen units It could reach about $275 billion, practically double some initial estimates handled by the Navy. The first ship alone could cost around $23 billion, a figure higher than the annual defense budget of many countries.
But it’s not just about the money. The CBO warns that American shipyards would have to significantly increase their capacity to manufacture this type of ships and that the naval nuclear industry is already working close to its limit with the simultaneous construction of strategic submarines and aircraft carriers.
And then comes the logical question: Does a “super battleship” make sense in the age of drones? Proponents of the “Defiant model” argue that a ship of that size can carry many more missiles, withstand greater combat damage, and have the power to operate the weapons that will likely define the naval wars of the future.
Its critics, on the other hand, remember that concentrating so much military capacity on a single platform also multiplies the risk. A single ship would represent a gigantic investment and could become a priority target for hypersonic missiles or swarms of drones. It is not a new debate. Each technological revolution has forced us to rethink the optimal size of warships. The same thing happened when aircraft carriers replaced battleships after World War II.
Regardless of whether the project ends up materializing, the Trump Class represents a change of course in US naval strategy. For decades, the priority was to build relatively numerous and versatile ships. Now it comes up again the idea of having a few gigantic platforms capable of concentrating unprecedented firepower.
Paradoxically, the concept is reminiscent of 20th century battleships, although their cannons have been replaced by hundreds of missiles, digital radars and future laser systems. Perhaps that is why the true interest of the Trump Class does not lie solely in its 41,000 tons. What’s really at stake is a much broader question: What will be the dominant warship in an era when the oceans are no longer ruled by cannons?but by electronics, drones and long-range missiles.