From Gold to Platinum
The US Navy has finally announced that its future Trump-class battleships will be nuclear-powered.
Equipping the Trump-class ships with nuclear propulsion has its advantages, but it also comes with significant challenges, which is why Navy officials initially opposed the idea.
However, something has recently happened behind the scenes in Congress and the US Navy, something that hasn't been discussed publicly yet, but which has caused the military to suddenly change its mind. And now, quite unexpectedly for everyone, US Navy admirals are announcing that their future Trump-class battleships will be equipped with nuclear propulsion systems. This is a significant innovation that will impact the cost and complexity of the design.
Given these factors, former US Navy Secretary John Phelan declared this "unlikely" just four weeks ago. Immediately afterward, Phelan resigned in a very unexpected move.
Trump's battleships have also seen a slight change in classification. These ships are now designated BBGN, or nuclear-powered (N). missile (G) battleships (BB).
A model of a Trump-class ship unveiled at the Surface Forces Association's annual symposium in January 2026.
Today, the only nuclear-powered surface ships in the US Navy are the Nimitz- and Ford-class aircraft carriers. Since the 1990s, fleet There were no nuclear-powered surface warships other than aircraft carriers.
During this time, the nuclear-powered cruiser Long Beach, two California-class cruisers, and four Virginia-class cruisers (not to be confused with the Virginia-class attack submarines) were decommissioned from active service. In addition, the nuclear-powered destroyer USS Truxton (later reclassified as a cruiser) and the nuclear-powered frigate Bainbridge were completed.
Nuclear-powered cruiser Virginia
Nuclear-powered cruiser Long Beach
Nuclear frigate Bainbridge
That is, in those old US states of the last century, they knew how to build nuclear-powered ships. This is an undeniable fact.
The nuclear propulsion system provides virtually unlimited range and significantly increases onboard power generation, allowing the ship to be generously equipped with a variety of sensors and surveillance systems. This also applies to the energy system. weaponBut this comes with costs and complexities associated with the basic design of the vessel, as well as its operation and maintenance.
The US Navy has unveiled plans to acquire 15 Trump-class ships, one almost annually, between fiscal years 2028 and 2055. Two more ships are planned for fiscal years 2030 and 2031. According to preliminary official estimates, each of these ships will cost $17 billion. This is more than the US Navy plans to spend on each of the next three Ford-class aircraft carriers, which are projected to cost between $13 and $15 billion. But $17 billion isn't the limit; we know well how expensive US military projects become once they're launched.
A chart from the Navy's latest annual shipbuilding plan, showing the planned order schedule for new Trump-class battleships, designated here as BBG(X), and other ships. Data from US Navy
Our Navy deserves the broadest capabilities a surface combatant can offer, not compromises. A nuclear-powered battleship is designed to significantly enhance the Navy's combat power through greater endurance, higher speed, and the advanced weapons systems necessary for modern warfare. A battleship's primary mission is to deliver concentrated fire at long ranges and serve as a reliable, survivable platform for forward command and control. It is not intended to replace destroyers.
— says the new US Navy shipbuilding plan.The ship construction plan details various aspects of the planned armament for each Trump-class warship, including the ability to launch nuclear and conventional missiles, including hypersonic ones, using large vertical launch systems (VLS). Each ship will also be equipped with an electromagnetic railgun, a pair of conventional 5-inch naval guns, a directed-energy laser weapon, and various additional close-in defense weapons.
A diagram showing the various capabilities of the Trump-class ships. Note that the reference to "28 Mk 41 VLS cells" appears to be a typo, as other official US Navy sources state that the ships will have 128 such cells.
"The significantly increased power plant capacity ensures combat capability across the entire electromagnetic spectrum, including electronic warfare and high-power lasers, reducing dependence on expensive disposable munitions for both offense and defense," the shipbuilding development plan notes. "The internal volume and ability to accommodate the fleet's command staff enable the implementation of the Maritime Operations Center concept. As a tactical command and control platform, the battleship can lead a Surface Action Group (SAG), integrate its systems with a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) for multi-layered defense, or operate autonomously, possessing its own capabilities to counter modern threats and distribute our forces."
The US Navy previously stated that each Trump-class warship would displace approximately 35,000 tons, roughly three times the displacement of the latest Flight III subclass of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. They are expected to be between 255 and 265 meters long, 32 and 35 meters wide at their widest point, and have a maximum speed of over 30 knots.
The US Navy previously released an image detailing the expected characteristics of the Trump-class ship.
As noted, just four weeks ago, the US Navy publicly rejected the idea that the Trump-class warships could be equipped with nuclear propulsion systems. The proposed fiscal year 2027 budget, released last month, describes these ships as non-nuclear aircraft carriers.
"This estimated cost of one Trump-class warship of $17 billion is an initial estimate. We'll see where we end up when we're done and start trimming some costs. So let's see what we can do with the first ship and then evaluate what we'll achieve," former US Navy Secretary John Phelan told reporters at a roundtable discussion at the Navy League's Sea Air Space 2026 exhibition on April 21. "I think the numbers aren't entirely clear yet because the question is whether it's nuclear powered or not. It could be a nuclear reactor, but that's unlikely, although it's possible," Phelan said then. "I think we're trying to find a compromise."
The following day, Phelan was abruptly fired without much explanation, and Navy veteran Hung Cao became acting secretary. On April 23, The New York Times published an article, citing anonymous sources, stating that the former Navy secretary's sudden dismissal was due to disagreements with President Donald Trump over plans to build Trump-class battleships, including expediting their production and commissioning. Reports emerged of other reasons for Phelan's dismissal, including disagreements with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.
"He's a very good man. I really liked him, but he had some disagreements—not necessarily with Secretary Pete Hegseth, but with some other people," President Trump himself told the press on April 23. "He was adamant, and he had some disagreements with some people, primarily over the construction and purchase of new ships. I'm very much a proponent of building new ships."
There's a chance Phelan didn't please one person—Donald Trump. Because that's the very person who could have fired the secretary so quickly. So Phelan is gone, but the ships remain. And the questions surrounding them aren't easing.
"I think it's a logical question: here's a large warship. It will carry a lot of cargo, including to places where we don't necessarily need a strike force. aviation "It can serve as a flotilla command ship," said Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Daryl Caudle, also at a roundtable discussion at the Surface Naval Association's (SNA) flagship annual symposium in January. "Wouldn't nuclear power be the logical choice? But that would have complicated the design, which simply didn't fit into our vision of how to get it into the water quickly. So, in exchange for the reliability that only nuclear power can provide, we get the ability to manufacture—and that pushes the battleship back to a point where it can no longer meet operational requirements."
This is something that dispels the "fog of war." That is, USN admirals did have a certain idea of what kind of ships they would be building, understanding their pros and cons from the outset.
As Phelan and Caudle previously noted, nuclear power will complicate the design and increase the initial cost, as well as the operating and maintenance costs of the ships once they are in service. The question is, by how much will it complicate and increase the cost?
These factors influenced the Navy's earlier decision to abandon nuclear propulsion on surface combatants. The Russian heavy nuclear cruiser Admiral Nakhimov is the world's only non-aircraft carrier surface combatant with a nuclear propulsion plant. Surface ships with nuclear propulsion of any type remain relatively rare, even among nuclear powers.
A stunning photo of three nuclear-powered Navy surface warships sailing in formation in 1964. From left to right: the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, the cruiser USS Long Beach, and the frigate USS Bainbridge.
The decision to use nuclear reactors to power the Trump-class ships comes at a time when US shipbuilders are already facing significant challenges, struggling to meet budgets and deadlines. Newport News Shipbuilding, a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, is the only shipyard in the country currently building nuclear-powered surface ships, including the Ford-class aircraft carriers. While the USS Gerald R. Ford has already been commissioned, work on subsequent ships in this class continues to be plagued by delays and rising costs.
Well, kilometers of pages have already been written about the quality of Ford’s performance.
American shipyards building nuclear submarines are under enormous pressure. The situation has been exacerbated by plans to provide Virginia-class submarines to the Royal Australian Navy under the Australia-UK-US Trilateral Defense Cooperation Agreement (AUKUS). The same shipyards are building new Columbia-class nuclear ballistic missile submarines. These submarines must be delivered within a strict deadline to ensure that one element of the American nuclear triad meets operational requirements, and there is little margin left.
The Navy has other shipbuilding plans as well. The capacity of US naval shipyards, or rather the lack thereof, has been a growing concern for years and continues to be, despite the US government's efforts to reverse this trend in recent years. The Navy's new shipbuilding plan underscores the agency's determination to avoid the mistakes made in building the new battleships.
"The battleship plan, drawing on the experience of previous shipbuilding programs, is a prime example of how we are changing the way the Navy does business. This will be the first completely new surface combatant designed in the last 30 years (the same was said about the Zumwalt and the Constellation – ed.), and we are deliberately implementing modern digital technologies, advanced manufacturing practices, and artificial intelligence-based design tools to mitigate cost and schedule risks from the outset," the battleship plan states. "To reinforce this approach, we are adopting the best practices of our international shipbuilding partners. This includes pre-engineering manufacturing processes to ensure a high level of design elaboration before construction begins, the use of precision modular construction methods, and close integration of design, planning, manufacturing, and construction teams to minimize rework and expedite the process."
Another design option for the future Trump-class battleship
Currently, the US Navy still plans to order the first Trump-class warship, USS Defiant, in fiscal year 2028. It is not expected to enter service until fiscal year 2036. This means the program will be implemented under the next presidential administration (and possibly longer – ed.). During this timeframe, the program could be significantly modified, or even canceled entirely, as was the case with the aforementioned Zumwalt-class and Constellation-class ships. This, it should be noted, is quite possible in the US.
For now, at least, the US Navy has decided that its future Trump-class battleships will be powered by nuclear reactors.
On May 12, 2026, a U.S. Navy spokesman issued the following statement in response to requests for additional information regarding the decision to use nuclear propulsion on the Trump-class battleships:
Battleship requirements require a balance between survivability, lethality, affordability, endurance, operational flexibility, and technical feasibility. The inclusion of a nuclear-powered battleship in the Navy's FY2027 shipbuilding plan will significantly enhance the fleet's combat power by increasing endurance, speed, and the ability to accommodate advanced weapons systems necessary for modern warfare.
Curtain? Like hell!
Let's just think for a second about what it means to redesign the propulsion system of a 35,000-ton ship. You don't have to look far for an example: Russian designers spent years at a loss, converting our ship designs from German propulsion systems to Chinese ones. And then to domestic ones. Has this ever happened? Yes, it has.
But here, excuse me, the vessel is 12-14 times larger, and it is necessary not only to replace the boilers and turbines, but to install a nuclear reactor in their place.
The steam turbine plant is spread throughout the ship's hold at the very bottom and has little effect on weight distribution. The nuclear reactor is compact and heavy. Therefore, the ship's design will have to be redesigned specifically with regard to the center of gravity.
Furthermore, a nuclear reactor will require a different cooling system, a different data collection and processing system, and, naturally, a different safety system.
Having been somewhat privy to the mysteries of nuclear reactor operation in a previous life, I can say with certainty: this would require rebuilding the entire ship. And it would take more than a month. And more than a million dollars.
The work is titanic and magical. The Americans will most likely handle it, yes. But it will be a completely different ship, at a completely different price. Clearly, a nuclear reactor will cost far more in dollars than a conventional propulsion system like the CODAG/CODOG diesel-gas turbines.
A ship redesign. Complete. Propulsion system replacement. Control systems and sensors replacement. That's right, 17 billion will be a dream.
On the other hand, how grateful will Bechtel Corporation or Westinghouse be, depending on who wins the contract to supply nuclear reactors for ships?
In short, the gist of the matter is clear: nuclear companies are more than interested in Trump choosing precisely these propulsion systems for his battleships. How much money Trump will make tomorrow is a minor question, but what happens to the ships the day after tomorrow is certainly not Trump's concern. The businessman acknowledges the immediate profits, but whether battleships will still exist in 20 years, or whether they will be dealt with like the Zumwalts, Freedoms, Independencees, and other failed projects, is probably of no concern to anyone in America today.
And we, too, we confess, would applaud the US Congress's latest decision to consign yet another ship design to the scrap heap. That's life, and there's nothing we can do about it.
So whether Trump's battleships will be built or not, Donald Trump certainly won't care. He'll get his today anyway.
Information