>NDAA 2022 directed the SecNav to name all future US battleships of the BB(X) series, if any, after National Parks and National Monuments.

>NDAA 2022 directed the SecNav to name all future US battleships of the BB(X) series, if any, after National Parks and National Monuments.
>Among the shortlisted names are: USS Mammoth, USS Sequoia, USS Badlands, USS Yosemite, and USS Thunder Basin.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why not making it submersible?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      So the Kinzhal can hit it easier.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        The only USN ships that the kinzhal can hit reliably are the hospital ships.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Aegis on steroids?

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >2022
    >future US battleships

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I know this is bullshit but I'm still going to go through the NDAA 2022 because of this

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    the statue of liberty is a national monument. would a ship named after it be the USS Statue Of Liberty or just the USS Liberty?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      U.S.S. banging your mom.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      USS Statue of Liberty National Monument Comprising Liberty and Ellis Islands

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        best name

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >USS Thunder Basin
    Holy goddamn, we need another battleship.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Second I read "Thunder Basin" I realized I had to urgently write a letter to Congress.

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Just looked through the bill and saw nothing related to battleships beyond some stuff about the Iowa museum
    >USS Badlands
    We really do need it though

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    USS Shenandoah mite b cool

  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    What i want
    >USS Craters of the Moon
    >USS Devils Towers
    >USS Freedom Riders
    >USS Badlands
    >USS Crater Lake
    >USS Death Valley
    What we'd get
    >USS Zion
    >USS Petrified Forest
    >USS Hawai'i
    >USS Buck Island
    >USS Dinosaur
    >USS George Washington Carver
    >USS Little Big Horn
    >USS Poverty Point

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is there any really moronic American park names like the leafs have Head Bashed in Buffalo Jump?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        For national parks.....
        Voyageurs maybe? You'd think it's misspelled but it's just named after French-Canadian fur trappers

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >USS Dinosaur
      if this isn't what you want, you're wrong

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I want one called USS Mammoth after Mammoth Cave National Park and I want it to get stuck inbetween two rocks somehow.

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >NDAA 2022 directed the SecNav to name all future US battleships of the BB(X) series, if any, after National Parks and National Monuments.
    >National Monuments
    I for one eagerly await serving on the USS Poverty Point, the USS African Burial Ground, or the USS Saint Francis Dam Disaster.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >when there actually is a sign that says dead Black person storage out front

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >No USS Montana
    Montanabros...

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      She was commissioned last year bro
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Montana_(SSN-794)

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Not a capital ship.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Montana is the only state not to have a battleship named after it.

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Good possible names (national parks)
    >USS Badlands
    >USS Mount Rainier
    >USS Olympic
    >USS Acadia
    >USS Grand Teton
    Worst (probably)
    >USS Carlsbad Caverns
    >USS Virgin Islands

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      USS Tacoma is more likely than USS Mount Rainier given the political climate
      USS Denali wouldn't be too bad

      USS Black Canyon and USS Isle Royal wouldn't be too bad either

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      USS US Virgin Islands incoming

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nah, Virgin Islands is only appropriate as the name for a formation of ships.

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Montana shafted again!

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    for me, it's the USS Big Bone Lick

  15. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Well it certainly beats having another ship named after a pedophile. We already have the USS Harvey Milk, can you imagine a USS Joseph Robinette Biden?

  16. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >USS Death

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I really wanted to see a timeline in where all of the US Navy's ships are name after ominous threatening sounding words or mighty dragons of literature and legend. Can you imagine a massive guided missile destroyer called USS Ancalagon The Black?

  17. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    uss fauci

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      embarrassing brainrot

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Watch out for the fauci ouchie

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'll allow it on condition its a warship completely dedicated to chemical and biological warfare related duties

  18. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >USS Mystery Flesh Pit

  19. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I wonder if we might get 'Battleships' at some point in the future. The Zumwalt has a complement of only 140 sailors which is almost half of what a Burke has not really sure what would cause that beyond more streamlined/efficient in design. Get a design large enough to fit some nuclear plants in it, throw on a couple of lasers and call it a day.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I mean, the trouble at the end of the day is that they just don't bring much to the table. Big guns are worse than missiles from every perspective except cost per kg of explosive delivered. Even if we could make a battleship survivable using lasers and RAM, jamming, armor, etc - what purpose would it actually serve?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >What purpose would it serve
        Besides being cool as frick? I would think the selling points would be as follows:
        1) Large nuclear powered multi-role craft capable of surface combat. With a combination of large AShMs, advanced guns, jamming, armor, point defenses, and state of the art damage control it has greater survivability than a CVN in a world where "hypersonic" missiles are becoming a threat.
        2) Nuclear plant means high energy for better sensors, radar, etc. Could also be a test bed for high energy weapon systems like lasers and rail guns, where the current bottleneck is space and power. A BBGN could alleviate both issues.
        3) One more thing to add to the arms race. We bankrupted the Soviets that way, we can wear down the Chinese that way as well.
        4) In a world where we might see a lot more naval surface actions and amphibious landings soon, a BBGN could provide important command and control support for close in task forces, again without risking a CVN.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why are you calling it a BBGN

          BBN sure.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        If we put enough nuclear plants in it to make the energy production rediculous enough we can probably get enough lasers to more or less do defense for the fleet it's a part of solo.... i honestly don't know but if you give DARPA enough of an energy budget for a ship i'm sure they can get really FREAKY

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      If we develop bigger, badder, faster, harder fricking anti ship missiles, then I could see a larger platform to carry them on. A BBG with some large VLS cells, larger magazines to carry the larger missiles, a working version of the Advanced Gun System, and tons of point defenses would be entirely kino and within the realm of possibility.

      Naming it the USS Thunder Basin or USS Glacier or something would just be icing on the cake.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >What purpose would it serve
        Besides being cool as frick? I would think the selling points would be as follows:
        1) Large nuclear powered multi-role craft capable of surface combat. With a combination of large AShMs, advanced guns, jamming, armor, point defenses, and state of the art damage control it has greater survivability than a CVN in a world where "hypersonic" missiles are becoming a threat.
        2) Nuclear plant means high energy for better sensors, radar, etc. Could also be a test bed for high energy weapon systems like lasers and rail guns, where the current bottleneck is space and power. A BBGN could alleviate both issues.
        3) One more thing to add to the arms race. We bankrupted the Soviets that way, we can wear down the Chinese that way as well.
        4) In a world where we might see a lot more naval surface actions and amphibious landings soon, a BBGN could provide important command and control support for close in task forces, again without risking a CVN.

        USS Glaurung, please make it happen.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >What purpose would it serve
        Besides being cool as frick? I would think the selling points would be as follows:
        1) Large nuclear powered multi-role craft capable of surface combat. With a combination of large AShMs, advanced guns, jamming, armor, point defenses, and state of the art damage control it has greater survivability than a CVN in a world where "hypersonic" missiles are becoming a threat.
        2) Nuclear plant means high energy for better sensors, radar, etc. Could also be a test bed for high energy weapon systems like lasers and rail guns, where the current bottleneck is space and power. A BBGN could alleviate both issues.
        3) One more thing to add to the arms race. We bankrupted the Soviets that way, we can wear down the Chinese that way as well.
        4) In a world where we might see a lot more naval surface actions and amphibious landings soon, a BBGN could provide important command and control support for close in task forces, again without risking a CVN.

        the neat part about the space issue of the power requirements is the proportion of the ship necessary for power generation gets smaller the larger the ship is

        imagine a neo-panamax battleship able to lob shells large enough for internal guidance systems into barely sub-orbital trajectories - you wouldn't need single-shot VLS cells to fill up half the deck and rearming would be significantly easier, while the networked fighters of the carrier group likely to accompany the ship provide targeting information and additional offensive options coupled with a potential to strike at anti-ship missile emplacements even if the carrier is lost

        get your ordnance going fast enough and the sonic shock front it creates poses a hazard to incoming missiles, drones, and potentially even fighters - to say nothing of the capacity for mission-specific alternative warheads like flak, or simply DEW in an AA role

        you might also be able to reduce some of the combat load of the carrier and allow it to serve as a mobile resupply hub for your surface combatants with some hangar space dedicated to logistical craft. slap a decent helipad on the surface combatant and equip the fleet with some cargo-capable helicopters (or hell, even a VTOL tiltrotor) and you've got, between the carrier and the surface combatants and support craft, a mobile artillery emplacement and airbase with enough logistical ability for an enormous number of potential uses far beyond naval warfare alone

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Scout out enemy ships with your planes from BVR
          >have your one BB with frick off effective Guided rounds fire off 20-30 shots at the angles necessary to have them all landing more or less simultaneously
          >They aren't missiles so actually tracking them would likely be rathe difficult i imagine
          >Enemy isn't overly concerned because they jet that found them is showing up as fricking nothing on radar so they don't know its there, nearest position they now a US fleet that lacks a carrier is to them is a hundred+ miles away they just need to keep it that way
          >All guided rounds land within 2 meters of their target and wipe out all enemy combatants before they even realize they are in range.
          Think we'd get yelled at for war crimes again?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            well maybe not 500lb jdam tier rounds but m982 Excalibur should be pretty good at this with some engineering to increase range.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, since youve just described any modern ashm spam just with a bit more masturbation potential.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >the neat part about the space issue of the power requirements is the proportion of the ship necessary for power generation gets smaller the larger the ship is
          This is correct.
          >imagine a neo-panamax battleship able to lob shells large enough for internal guidance systems into barely sub-orbital trajectories
          Replace this whole concept with electromagnetic accelerators that chuck air-breathing hypersonics without a booster charge and it begins to become compelling.
          >
          get your ordnance going fast enough and the sonic shock front it creates poses a hazard to incoming missiles, drones, and potentially even fighters
          Getting close enough to get hit by the sonic shock of a projectile in atmosphere means you're probably close enough just to get hit by the projectile.
          >allow it to serve as a mobile resupply hub for your surface combatants with some hangar space dedicated to logistical craft
          This is not a good idea. The ship is intended to directly expose its location 24/7, why make it any larger or put even more valuable stuff in it? Leave the resupply to the support fleet, that's literally their job. There's still room for an oversized helipad to be justified, though.

  20. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    That’s actually pretty badass. Park have great names for warships. In fact, we shouldn’t waste this naming convention on a category of ships that we will never have.

  21. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >USS Mammoth
    so the cannons will be its tusks, like a mammoth tank

  22. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >USS Cascade
    >1.5x the size of the Iowa class
    >two nuclear reactors
    >enough lasers to melt satellites in orbit
    >nuclear depth charges and the keel required to drop and withstand them
    >btw the nuclear depth charges are rocket boosted like ASROC and have a 100 km range
    >hypersonic Sprint-esque missiles with nukes on them for emergency area defense
    >torpedoes do not worry her as she can take several in the same spot, break in two, seal off and function as two listless but still combat capable ships
    >a gigantic mix of APS and CIWS, the APS is mounted on parts of the superstructure that are designed to blow off, the system is capable of nailing a DF-21D without any assistance from missiles or lasers and worst case detonating the missile 5 meters away from the ship's outer hull
    >the ship has a basic AI on it that can function with just a minimal crew, allowing it to kick off its sailors, charge towards the enemy, overload the reactor and dump all power into lasers
    >the ship has an emergency nuclear self destruct mechanism for those pesky Iranian speedboats

  23. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >National Monuments.
    Could you imagine if Australian did that
    >HMAS Big Banana
    >HMAS Giant Prawn
    >HMAS Big Merino
    >HMAS Dog on the Tucker Box

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *