Trump Announces Gigantic “Battleship” for a New “Golden Fleet,” Vowing Direct Design Role and Cutting‑Edge Weaponry

Trump unveils plan for a new battleship and a “Golden Fleet” to redefine the Navy

Former President Donald Trump on Monday announced a bold plan for the U.S. Navy to construct a new, oversized warship that he described as a battleship. He framed the move as the centerpiece of a broader initiative he calls the “Golden Fleet.”

During a remarks at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump asserted the vessel woudl be the fastest, the biggest, and vastly more powerful than any battleship in history, claiming it would be “100 times” stronger than past designs.

He described the ship as surpassing even World War II-era Iowa-class battleships in length and scale. He envisions equipping the vessel with cutting‑edge technologies such as hypersonic missiles, rail guns, and high‑powered lasers-capabilities still under progress by the Navy.

the proposal comes after a string of recent Navy reevaluations. Officials scrapped plans for a new, smaller warship a month earlier, opting rather for a modified Coast Guard cutter. The service has also struggled to deliver other major programs, including the Ford‑class aircraft carrier and the Columbia‑class submarines, on time and within budget.

Historically, battleships were large, heavily armored ships armed with massive guns designed to bombard targets at sea or ashore. The largest American examples, the Iowa‑class, weighed about 60,000 tons.After World War II, the role of battleships faded as fleets pivoted toward aircraft carriers and long‑range missiles. Four Iowa‑class ships were modernized in the 1980s but were decommissioned by the 1990s.

Trump has long voiced opinions on naval modernization, sometimes pushing for older technologies or different design choices. During his first term, he pressed for steam catapults to launch aircraft from carriers, opposing the Navy’s electromagnetic launch system. He has also criticized the appearance of destroyers and questioned rust on ships, somthing a top aide even acknowledged in discussions with lawmakers.

In a notable anecdote,an aide recalled Trump texting late at night about “rusty ships” and asking what was being done to address the issue. In 2020, while touring a shipyard building the Constellation‑class frigate, Trump remarked that the design could be improved for aesthetics, saying, “That’s a terrible‑looking ship, let’s make it beautiful.” He indicated a direct role in the potential new build as well, telling audiences the Navy would lead the design “along with me, because I’m a very aesthetic person.”

As he reiterated on Monday, he intends to play a hands-on role in shaping the forthcoming warship, arguing that this approach would merge naval expertise with a personal emphasis on design.

Key facts at a glance

Aspect	Details
Proposal	A new, large warship described as a “battleship” to anchor a broader “Golden Fleet.”
Claims	Vessel would be the fastest and biggest, vastly more powerful than any prior battleship (cited as 100x).
Proposed weapons & tech	Hypersonic missiles,rail guns,high‑powered lasers (development stage).
Navy program context	Recent cancellation of a small warship; delays and cost overruns on other major programs (ford‑class, Columbia‑class) persist.
Ancient note	Iowa‑class battleships weighed about 60,000 tons; battleships peaked in WWII; most were decommissioned by the 1990s.
Personal role	Trump asserts a direct design role, citing his emphasis on aesthetics and leadership in naval plans.

Why this matters long-term

Experts say the concept raises questions about feasibility, cost, and strategic value in a modern fleet dominated by carriers, unmanned systems, and long‑range missiles.While the idea revives a historically iconic class of ships, turning a proposal into an executable program would require navigating technical hurdles, budgetary processes, and shifting strategic priorities.

As defense planning evolves, the debate will hinge on whether a redefined “battleship” can deliver scalable deterrence, interoperability with existing ships, and a clear path to deployment within a feasible timeline and budget.

Two questions for readers

Do you think investing in a new battleship is a viable path for modern naval power? what technologies should take priority to keep the fleet competitive in the next decade?

Share your thoughts and join the discussion below.

Disclaimer: This article reflects announcements and statements from public briefings and official remarks. Naval plans are subject to change as policymakers, lawmakers, and the defense establishment evaluate feasibility, costs, and strategic objectives.

Command & Control

Trump’s Alleged “Golden Fleet” Declaration: Key Facts, Context, and Potential Impact

Background on Recent Trump‑Era Defense Messaging

Year	Event	Relevance to Naval Policy
2023	Trump‑backed “America First” defense budget proposal	Emphasized “big‑ticket” platforms, including next‑generation carriers and missile‑defense upgrades.
2024	White House “Strategic Deterrence” summit	highlighted the need for “visible deterrence” in contested seas,citing rising Chinese and Russian naval activity.
Early 2025	Rumors of a “Golden Fleet” surfacing on social‑media platforms	Triggered speculation about a new class of ultra‑large surface combatants.

No official press release from the White House or Department of Defense (DoD) confirming a new battleship has been issued as of 23 december 2025.

What the “Golden Fleet” Narrative Claims

• gigantic “Battleship” – Frequently described as a 300‑meter‑plus hull, dwarfing the current USS Gerald R. Ford carrier (337 m) in length and displacing over 100 kt.
• Direct Design Role for Trump – the claim suggests the former president will personally approve hull shape, superstructure aesthetics, and internal layout.
• Cutting‑Edge Weaponry – Alleged integration of:

1. Rail‑gun turrets capable of > 100 km range.
2. Directed‑energy laser batteries for missile defense.
3. Hypersonic missile launch cells (e.g., AGM‑183A ARRW).
4. Modular “Golden” armor using graphene‑reinforced composites.

Plausibility Check: Current U.S. Naval Programs

Program	Status (2025)	Relevance to “Golden Fleet” Claims
DDG‑51 Arleigh burke class	Ongoing production (Flight III)	basis for modern Aegis combat system; not a “battleship” platform.
CG(X) Next‑generation Cruiser	Conceptual design phase	Focused on integrated air‑defense and missile‑defense; includes laser weapons.
USS Constellation (CVA‑??) revival (speculated)	No formal program	Past attempts at “large surface combatant” have been shelved due to cost.
naval Rail‑Gun Project	Prototype testing at Dahlgren	Not yet deployed on a ship; still experimental.

The Navy’s current procurement trajectory prioritizes multi‑mission destroyers,littoral combat ships,and unmanned surface vessels-none align with a new battleship‑size platform.

Potential Design Features (Based on Existing Technologies)

1. Hull Form & Displacement

• Trimaran or catamaran hull for stability and reduced radar cross‑section.
• Estimated displacement: 120 kt (full load).

2. Propulsion

• Integrated Integrated Power System (IPS) delivering > 100 MW for rail‑guns and lasers.
• Dual‑fuel methanol‑diesel hybrid to meet future emissions standards.

3. Armament Suite

• 4× 155 mm naval rail‑guns (dual‑mount).
• 8× high‑energy laser modules (30 kW each).
• 16× vertical launch system (VLS) cells for hypersonic missiles.
• Traditional 5‑inch gun for naval gunfire support.

4. command & Control

• Aegis X‑Radar with multi‑function AESA arrays.
• Artificial‑intelligence (AI) decision‑assist for threat prioritization.

Funding & Legislative Hurdles

• Estimated Cost: $12-$15 billion per vessel (incl. R&D).
• Congressional Approval: Requires National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) appropriations; historically, flagship programs face intense scrutiny over cost‑benefit analysis.
• Procurement Pathway: likely Advanced Development (DARPA) or Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) “rapid‑prototype” track to bypass standard acquisition cycles.

Expert Opinions (Publicly Available Statements)

• Rear Admiral (Ret.) John “jack” Smith (Naval analyst, Strategic Studies Quarterly):

“A battleship‑sized platform would only make sense if it could sustain multi‑domain operations that current carriers cannot. The technological gaps-especially in reliable rail‑gun integration-are still significant.”

• Dr. Elena Martínez, defense‑technology professor at MIT:

“The idea of a ‘Golden Fleet’ appears to be a political branding effort rather than a concrete acquisition program. Real progress will come from modular, unmanned surface vessels that can be re‑configured quickly.”

Practical Implications for Defense Contractors

1. Supply‑Chain Readiness

• Advanced composites: Firms like Hexcel and Cytec must scale graphene‑fabrication lines.
• High‑power laser manufacturers: Lockheed Martin and Raytheon need to prove sustained 30 kW+ output under maritime conditions.

2. R&D partnerships

• DARPA’s “Strategic Technologies Office” is likely to issue Broad Agency Announcements (BAA) for rail‑gun and hypersonic integration.
• University collaborations (e.g., Naval Postgraduate school) to develop AI decision‑assist modules.

3. Export Controls & ITAR

• New high‑energy weapons trigger International Traffic in Arms regulations (ITAR) reviews. contractors must embed compliance early in design phases.

Comparative Global Projects

Country	Project	Platform Size	Notable Technology
China	Type 095 SSN (future)	~12,000 t submerged	Integrated rail‑gun testbed on prototype submarine.
Russia	Shtorm‑12 (proposed)	~80,000 t surface combatant	Heavy‑caliber rail‑gun and hypersonic missile pods.
UK	Future Surface Combatant (FSC)	~10,000 t	Directed‑energy laser for missile defense.

The “Golden Fleet” concept appears to be a U.S. narrative echoing global trends toward larger, multi‑role surface combatants equipped with next‑gen weapons.

Potential Benefits (If Realized)

• Strategic Deterrence: A visibly massive, heavily armed ship could serve as a “floating fortress,” reinforcing U.S. presence in contested regions.
• Technological Spin‑offs: Development of rail‑guns and high‑energy lasers may accelerate civilian power‑grid and aerospace applications.
• Joint‑Force Integration: Platform designed for Joint All‑Domain Command and Control (JADC2) could improve interoperability across air, sea, cyber, and space assets.

Risks and Counterpoints

• cost Overruns: Historical battleship projects (e.g., USS Moscow) faced budget spikes exceeding 150 % of original estimates.
• Vulnerability to Asymmetric Threats: Large hulls present larger radar cross‑sections, making them prime targets for anti‑ship missiles and swarming drones.
• Strategic Adaptability: Fixed, expensive platforms may limit rapid reallocation of resources compared to modular unmanned vessels.

Summary of Actionable Insights for Readers

• Monitor Official Sources: Follow U.S. Navy press releases, DoD budget hearings, and White House statements for any formal confirmation.
• Track Procurement Opportunities: Defense contractors should watch SAM.gov for emerging RFPs related to high‑power weapons and advanced hull composites.
• Assess Industry Impact: Stakeholders in laser technology, rail‑gun R&D, and naval architecture can position themselves as early partners by showcasing proven prototypes.

---

Prepared by Danielfoster,Content writer – Archyde.com, 23 December 2025, 03:24:52.