The U.S. Navy is expected to provide its first formal guidance on the initial design schedule for the BBG(X) guided-missile battleship—informally dubbed the “Trump-class”—within the next 30 to 60 days, according to Chris Kastner, CEO of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), the Navy’s primary shipbuilding partner. The announcement will mark the first concrete timing update since President Donald Trump unveiled the program in December 2025 as part of his “Golden Fleet” concept, which aims to revive the U.S. Navy’s surface combatant fleet with larger, more heavily armed warships.
Speaking at a defense industry briefing on January 8, Kastner confirmed that the Navy is in the process of defining the design schedule and integrating the BBG(X) into its broader shipbuilding strategy. “The Navy is actively working to clarify how the Trump-class will progress through design, construction, and eventual commissioning,” Kastner said. “This is a significant milestone, as it will establish the first formal timeline since the program’s initial announcement.”
The BBG(X) program, officially announced on December 22, 2025, initially envisions the construction of two lead ships, with a longer-term objective ranging between 10 and 25 hulls. The lead vessel, planned to be named USS Defiant (BBG-1), is slated for a design phase lasting roughly from 2026 to 2031–2032, followed by construction in the early 2030s, a launch in the mid-to-late 2030s, and commissioning near the end of the decade or around 2040. Exact dates remain undefined, as the Navy continues to refine the vessel’s design and capabilities.
The Trump-class program is seen as both a complement and a potential replacement for the Navy’s DDG(X) destroyer and the recently canceled Constellation-class FF(X) frigates. By leveraging design work and power system developments from the DDG(X) program, the Navy hopes to accelerate the BBG(X)’s development and reduce technical risk. If completed, these battleships would be the first new U.S. Navy battleships since the Iowa-class, which were retired in 1992.
According to current Navy planning parameters, the Trump-class is projected to measure between 256 and 268 meters (840–880 feet) in length, with a beam of 32 to 35 meters (105–115 feet). Full-load displacement is expected to exceed 35,000 tonnes. Crew size is projected at 650–850 personnel—significantly larger than modern Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (300–380 crew) and Ticonderoga-class cruisers (approximately 330), but far below the Iowa-class, which required 2,700 personnel during World War II and roughly 1,800 after modernization in the 1980s.
Propulsion is expected to rely on a conventional integrated power system combining gas turbines and diesel generators to achieve speeds above 30 knots (55 km/h), while also supplying electrical power for advanced sensors, weapons, and shipboard systems.
The Trump-class is intended to carry a formidable array of offensive weapons. The main missile battery is expected to feature 128 Mk 41 vertical launch system cells distributed across the bow and stern, augmented by a dedicated 12-cell launcher for Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) hypersonic missiles—previously tested on Zumwalt-class destroyers. The Navy has also indicated that the BBG(X) could deploy the SLCM-N, a nuclear-capable sea-launched cruise missile, giving the surface fleet a strategic nuclear strike capability.
For context, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers carry 96 vertical launch cells, while Ticonderoga-class cruisers carry 122, highlighting the Trump-class’s potentially superior missile capacity.
Gun systems will include two Mk 45 127 mm naval guns and a planned 32-megajoule electromagnetic railgun, though the latter remains conditional based on technical feasibility. Close-in defense will rely on two RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers, four Mk 38 30 mm cannons, and multiple directed-energy systems including 300–600 kilowatt lasers and Optical Dazzling Interdictor systems to counter drones and other threats. The layered approach reflects the Navy’s intent to combine kinetic and non-kinetic defenses against missiles, aircraft, and unmanned systems.
Sensor and command systems are designed to support fleet-level operations. The Trump-class may incorporate the AN/SPY-6 air and missile defense radar and the AN/SLQ-32(V)7 electronic warfare suite. Integration with fleet command-and-control networks would enable the battleship to serve as a flagship for surface action groups, carrier strike groups, or independent operations.
Aviation facilities are planned at the stern, including a flight deck and enclosed hangar capable of operating MH-60 Seahawk helicopters, CMV-22B Ospreys, Bell MV-75 tiltrotors, and future vertical-lift aircraft such as the Bell V-247 Vigilant. Both crewed and uncrewed platforms would provide long-range surveillance, targeting, logistics, and coordination support, significantly extending the battleship’s operational reach.
The U.S. Navy plans to lead the Trump-class design effort over an estimated six-year (72-month) design phase, working closely with major U.S. shipbuilders, including Huntington Ingalls Industries and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works. Specialized naval architects will provide additional support for structural, systems integration, and survivability studies.
The procurement of the lead ship, USS Defiant (BBG-1), could occur in the early 2030s, with service entry projected for the late 2030s or around 2040, following construction, trials, and commissioning. Cost estimates range from $10 billion per later unit to as much as $15 billion for the first ship—a figure approaching or surpassing that of a Ford-class aircraft carrier, which generally costs over $10 billion per hull.
For comparison, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers cost roughly $2–2.5 billion each, the Constellation-class frigates were expected at $1.1–1.4 billion per hull, and Zumwalt-class destroyers averaged $7.5 billion per ship. The projected Trump-class cost also significantly exceeds the Ticonderoga-class cruisers, historically $1 billion per ship in the 1990s, and the anticipated DDG(X) destroyer cost of $3.3–4.4 billion per unit.
The Trump-class battleship represents a deliberate shift in U.S. naval strategy, emphasizing large, heavily armed surface combatants capable of striking at long ranges, defending high-value units, and projecting power independently or within a fleet formation. Analysts suggest that the class could serve as both a deterrent and a flexible strike platform, capable of integrating conventional and nuclear capabilities in a single hull.
The program also reflects the Navy’s ongoing efforts to balance innovation with risk management. By building upon DDG(X) and other existing design efforts, the Navy aims to reduce development time while introducing next-generation weapons, sensors, and command capabilities. The battleship’s integration of hypersonic, conventional, and nuclear strike systems alongside advanced air defense and unmanned systems positions it as a potential linchpin of 21st-century naval operations.
Over the coming weeks, the Navy’s clarification of requirements and design schedule will be pivotal. Officials will determine whether the Trump-class will evolve from existing destroyer and cruiser design efforts or require a clean-sheet approach. The outcome will influence not only the program’s timeline and cost, but also its role within the broader Golden Fleet strategy and the future surface fleet architecture.
If approved and executed according to current projections, the Trump-class would not only mark a return of the battleship to the U.S. Navy after more than three decades, but also signal a broader commitment to enhancing firepower, survivability, and multi-domain operational capabilities in the Indo-Pacific and global maritime theaters.
As Kastner emphasized, “This program represents a unique opportunity to redefine naval surface combatants for a new era. The next 30 to 60 days will clarify the Navy’s vision and set the path forward for what could become one of the most powerful classes of warships in modern history.”
