Modern Alaska hulls in an age of cheap drones

Would six unfinished Alaska hulls receive reactors or gas turbines, what guns could they carry, and how many VLS cells would fit?

Gas turbines and existing single 5-inch guns are considered more practical than scarce reactors or undeveloped twin mounts. No VLS capacity is estimated.

Nuclear propulsion is unlikely because reactor production is already constrained, making gas turbines the practical choice. A twin 8-inch mount is not ready, and even a new twin 5-inch turret would require years of engineering, maintenance planning, testing, and procurement. Single guns gained favour when precision and small numbers of costly missiles dominated threat forecasts. A twin mount raises questions about the angle at which its guns converge on a target, but it can offer a higher rate of fire. Cheap drones have reopened the low end of the attack spectrum, where the number of incoming weapons can drive the defensive requirement. Electronic warfare can defeat the simplest drones, while hardening their controls increases their cost. Fibre-optic control is possible in some settings, but hundreds of miles of cable would impose a substantial weight burden on a drone operating at sea. The proposed completion therefore favours gas turbines and existing single 5-inch mounts. No missile-cell count is supplied, while the wider gun discussion asks how to defeat numerous inexpensive attackers economically.