America's Battleship Strategy: How Major Defense Contractors Stand to Gain from New Naval Ambitions

A Multi-Billion Dollar Opportunity Emerges

The U.S. military-industrial complex is bracing for a significant shift. With the announcement of a new battleship program centered around the Trump-class design, several major defense contractors are positioning themselves for what could be one of the most lucrative ship-building initiatives in decades. The cornerstone of this battleship strategy is the USS Defiant (BBG 1), projected to cost between $9 billion and $14 billion for the first vessel alone.

This development follows a broader reshuffling of Navy procurement priorities. The cancellation of the problematic Constellation-class frigate contract with Italy’s Fincantieri has opened the door for American shipbuilders. Huntington Ingalls Industries (NYSE: HII) has already secured a major win by obtaining the new frigate contract, a decision that sent its stock soaring 82% by year-end.

The USS Defiant: Specifications and Combat Capabilities

The Trump-class battleship represents a fundamental rethinking of modern naval warfare. Unlike WWII-era battleships that relied on massive 16-inch guns, the Defiant will function as a guided-missile platform. Stretching between 840 and 880 feet in length with a displacement exceeding 35,000 tons, it will triple the size of an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer while maintaining speeds of 30 knots or greater.

The armament suite is ambitious and technically demanding. The vessel will carry 12 Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic missiles—a capability that remains in development—alongside 128 air-defense and cruise missiles in MK-41 vertical launch cells. For close-range engagement, it will feature electromagnetic railguns (also still experimental), high-powered laser cannons, and conventional 5-inch guns. Additional defensive systems include laser point-defense weapons, anti-aircraft missile launchers, and counter-unmanned aerial systems.

This layered approach to firepower illustrates why the battleship strategy requires contributions from across the entire defense industrial base.

The Defense Contractor Battle

The complexity of the Defiant project virtually guarantees a distributed approach to construction. Multiple specialized contractors will vie for different subsystems and components.

Railgun Development: The Navy abandoned railgun research in 2021 under the previous administration, but this program appears poised for resurrection. BAE Systems (OTC: BAES.Y) and General Atomics led the initial experimental work and are likely candidates for revival of this initiative.

Directed Energy Weapons: Laser cannon development has already involved most major defense primes. Boeing (NYSE: BA), Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC), and RTX (NYSE: RTX) have all produced prototypes, and laser systems are already undergoing testing on active warships.

Hull Construction: This represents the largest contract opportunity. America’s two premier military shipbuilders—Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics (NYSE: GD)—are the primary contenders. Given that Huntington has secured the frigate program, Department of Defense policy favoring balanced distribution suggests General Dynamics may receive the battleship contract. Alternatively, both firms could be awarded contracts to construct multiple vessels simultaneously.

Timeline and Cost Implications

Military analysts at Jane’s estimate the first Trump-class vessel could cost as much as $14 billion, comparable to a Ford-class aircraft carrier. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) offers a more conservative $9 billion projection, assuming economies of scale develop over the production run.

Both figures represent substantial revenue opportunities for contractors. However, the timeline warrants caution. Design work alone will consume “many years,” with construction following thereafter. The first operational battleship likely won’t launch before the early to mid-2030s. Lengthy development cycles historically create budget pressure, and cost overruns could attract significant scrutiny from budget-conscious oversight bodies.

Investment Implications

The battleship strategy promises to distribute tens of billions of dollars across the defense industrial base over the coming decade. For investors seeking exposure to this opportunity, the relevant questions center on execution risk, timeline credibility, and which contractor emerges as primary integrator.

Huntington Ingalls’ recent momentum reflects confidence in the company’s ability to win substantial Navy contracts. However, General Dynamics’ historical relationship with major warship programs and current position suggest it may ultimately secure the flagship battleship contract. Meanwhile, specialized contractors like BAE Systems and the major systems integrators stand to capture meaningful revenue streams from advanced weapons development.

The eventual winner will depend not just on technical capability but on how effectively the battleship strategy unfolds over the remainder of the decade.