The oceans are filling up and growing more strategically important, and the U.S. Navy has a decision: can it continue to dominate the waves, or risk falling behind in the next generation of submarine combat? The Navy’s answer is the SSN(X) program, a design-and-build initiative to produce the next-generation nuclear-powered attack submarine. Yet with every monumental step forward, the path is uncertain, with challenges reaching from engineering to industry to strategy.
To observe the importance of SSN(X) is to look at the past of the American submarine. For decades, the Los Angeles-class was standard, with its speed, silence, and missile capability. The Seawolf-class came along next, designed for deep-ocean deployment with long-endurance capabilities and large weaponry.
The Virginia-class came next, constructed for coastal battle and special operations support, with innovations like photonics masts and modular payload systems. Each subsequent class addressed changing mission requirements, extending the limits of submarine technology and capability.
The Navy sees SSN(X) as the most technologically sophisticated attack submarine to date. It will retain Seawolf’s firepower and speed, Virginia’s sensors and stealth capability, and Columbia-class endurance and availability. The last ship in the class will be larger than any attack submarine in the fleet today, with more space for weapons, maximum stealth operating capacity, and full integration with unmanned underwater vehicles and advanced sensor webs.
That goal is costly. The initial goal of having the first SSN(X) operational in 2035 had slipped with delays, now brought back to around 2040. Partially responsible is the pressure on the industrial base: shipyards and contractors are already maxed out constructing Columbia-class subs while still making Virginia-class. Anything less than expert labor or key parts would lead to bottlenecks impacting not only SSN(X) but the entire fleet.
Cost is another problem. The Navy puts each SSN(X) at $5.6 billion, although some independent experts estimate that the real price tag is closer to $7.2 billion, almost twice that of a Virginia-class with a payload module. As there are so many expensive programs vying for money, lawmakers will need to make difficult decisions when they are planning national priorities.
Technologically, SSN(X) will make extensive use of digital engineering, artificial intelligence, and advanced analytics. It’s intended to counter manned and unmanned threats, fight in highly contested oceans, and maintain secure communications across domains. Undersea networking poses a specific challenge, as radio waves don’t travel very well underwater.
The Navy is creating gateway systems that will convert acoustic signals into actionable intelligence for ships, aircraft, and command centers. Submarines will be able to share real-time information with other platforms if the initiative proves successful, transforming the coordination of underwater operations.
Allied partnerships also influence the future of the program. The U.S., U.K., and Australia AUKUS initiative gives an example of building allied submarine capacity and innovative technology sharing. Australia will be equipped with Virginia-class submarines and assist in co-designing a new nuclear-powered ship, SSN-AUKUS, with contributions from the U.S. and U.K. The partnership is generating investment in shipyards and training facilities, which could be shared with SSN(X), too.
Meanwhile, nuclear propulsion technology is also not simple to share. Though it strengthens strategic relationships, it does generate non-proliferation issues and must be pursued with utmost diplomatic prudence so as not to heighten tensions.
Finally, SSN(X) is a risky venture designed to keep America ahead below the waves. Success will depend on funding, industrial challenges, and smart use of allied collaboration. The fight over domination of the waves has already begun, and the new submarine that emerges will not just be another war vessel—it could shape undersea warfare for decades to come.