The U.S. Navy’s SSN(X) Nuclear Attack Submarine Problem

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Key Points: The U.S. Navy is advancing its SSN(X) program, a next-generation attack submarine set for the 2040s, aiming to integrate speed, stealth, payload, and operational resilience inspired by the Seawolf, Virginia, and Columbia-class designs.

-While current Virginia-class submarines (Block III and V) showcase breakthroughs like enhanced firepower, advanced sonar, and stealth coatings, the SSN(X) will emphasize multi-domain networking, enabling real-time data sharing between submarines, drones, and surface vessels.

-However, challenges include production delays, workforce shortages, and maintaining an industrial base. These issues have pushed the SSN(X) timeline from 2035 to 2040, raising questions about sustaining U.S. undersea superiority.

SSN(X): The Future of U.S. Navy Attack Submarines Delayed Until 2040

The US Navy’s Block III and Block V Virginia-class attack submarines are being built with breakthrough technologies to help secure the service’s undersea advantages in an increasingly challenged threat environment.

Yet, the Navy is simultaneously progressing with efforts to engineer yet another breakthrough, next-generation class of attack submarines for the 2040s: SSN(X).  

The initial plan was to ensure the new boats were being developed by 2035; however, according to a 2024 Congressional report, that timeline now seems to have been pushed back to 2040. 

What do we know about the SSN(X) right now? Will costs and time delays kill the program in the future? 

Virginia-Class Submarine Breakthroughs

One thing is clear, the Navy isn’t sleeping on the Virginia-Class submarine, that much is clear. 

Block V Virginia-class submarines are being built with massively increased firepower enabled by an added 80-ft section of missile tubes called the Virginia Payload Modules. 

In addition, both Blocks III and Blocks V are receiving a suite of new systems to include more sensitive antennas for networking and detection and added coating and quieting technologies to enhance the boat’s “stealth” attributes.  

Blocks III and V will also receive a new Large Aperture Bow advanced sonar for acoustic detection, fly-by-wire computer automated navigational systems, and extended “fiber optic” cable to ensure commanders can see incoming threats and sensor data from anywhere within the ship. 

These advances, widely celebrated by the Navy, are considered quite substantial. Many began as experimental prototypes on the USS South Dakota, a Block III Virginia class submarine, and have since been integrated as operational systems across the Navy’s fleet of Block III boats.  

Given this, how might the service succeed in engineering yet another paradigm-changing technological advancement, such as the SSN(X) program? 

Congressional Assessment for SSN(X)

An interesting Congressional Research Service report from earlier this year, “Navy Next-Generation Attack Submarine (SSN[X]) Program: Background and Issues for Congress,” posits that the new boats will incorporate new generations of undersea technologies. 

“The Navy states that the SSN(X) ‘will be designed to counter the growing threat posed by near peer adversary competition for undersea supremacy. It will provide greater speed, increased horizontal [i.e., torpedo-room] payload capacity, improved acoustic superiority and non-acoustic signatures, and higher operational availability,” the report states. 

Along with these general parameters of significance regarding the technologies for the SSN(X) boats, the Navy has a broader, fleet-centric capability vision for the boats intended to incorporate advanced attributes from several cutting-edge submarines. 

“Navy officials have stated that the Navy wants the SSN(X) to incorporate the speed and payload of the Navy’s fast and heavily armed Seawolf (SSN-21) class SSN design, the acoustic quietness and sensors of the Virginia-class design, and the operational availability and service life of the Columbia-class design,” the CRS essay explains. 

Undersea Multi-Domain Networking

Perhaps the largest and most ambitious elements of the Navy’s concept for SSN(X) will likely pertain to networking technologies, as that area is now characterized by fast-moving technological breakthroughs enabling new generations of undersea and multi-domain networking.  

While the Congressional report does not cite examples, it specifically refers to the Navy’s intent to “coordinate” across domains, which would suggest the service develop new generations of cross-domain networking for the ship. 

“SSN(X) will conduct full spectrum undersea warfare and be able to coordinate with a larger contingent of off-hull vehicles, sensors, and friendly forces,” the CRS report states. 

This question of networking and undersea data sharing is likely the most significant area for possible technological breakthroughs. It may be the core foundation of the Navy’s push for an entirely new generation of undersea technologies for SSN(X) by 2040. 

Undersea networking of data has long presented a substantial technological challenge, as RF signals don’t travel well beneath the surface, and wireless systems for undersea are pretty tricky to engineer. Navy submarines have had to surface or “nearly surface” for years to achieve wireless and GPS connectivity across surface, land, and aerial domains. This further exposes the boat to enemy attack or detection. Undersea drones regularly need to collect and store data while on a mission, which can only be downloaded upon return to a host ship. 

Despite these long-standing limitations and the fact that only some extremely low-frequency RF can function undersea, the Navy continues to surge into a new realm of wired and wireless manned and unmanned networking. Submarine-integrated acoustical sensor data can now be wired to surface drones and “gateways” before being translated into surface RF or GPS to enable undersea platforms to send real-time data to surface, air, and land nodes. 

Gateway technologies, which are cutting edge and continuing to emerge quickly in new form factors, essentially “translate” one transport layer to another. In essence, this means a gateway node on the surface can receive acoustic signals and “convert” them to RF for surface transmission.  This translation, which relies upon advanced computer technology, would be designed to enable fast, real-time undersea-to-surface data sharing.  

For example, the Navy is already “hard-wiring” undersea drones to send acoustical sensor data through a cable over long distances to gateway surface nodes in position to send arriving data to surface and air platforms. This kind of connectivity allows submarines to remain submerged at safer stand-off distances, yet enabling undersea drone platforms to gather and “send” time-sensitive data to the surface. 

Even further, both industry and the Navy are working on breakthrough undersea GPS-like connectivity that may enable real-time submarine-to-submarine, submarine-to-drone, and submarine-to-surface connectivity. Undersea mine-hunting drones such as the Navy’s “Barracuda” now operate with a growing ability to wirelessly “detect” mines and then detonate them. 

If the SSN(X) program were to take these challenges on, it would be something truly special. 

Production Struggles for SSN(X) 

Alongside the potential promise of a new generation of submarines by 2040, the Navy is currently encountering ongoing production and development challenges, which may account for why the SSN(X) was delayed from 2035 to 2040. 

The Navy is struggling to sustain a high production op-tempo for its evolving fleet of Virginia-class attack submarines to help offset or mitigate an expected attack submarine deficit emerging as Los Angeles class boats retire. 

Can Virginias be built fast enough? Congressional and Navy efforts are ongoing to increase Virginia-class production by up to two boats per year by securing funding and surging production capacity. 

Added to this complexity, a production delay could idle or deplete a crucially needed industrial base of workers trained with the skills needed to build submarines. The Navy has been working with Electric Boat and HII for many years to “flex” the industrial capacity to accommodate a faster and more extensive submarine construction schedule. 

“The delay of SSN(X) construction start from the mid-2030s to the early 2040s presents a significant challenge to the submarine design industrial base associated with the extended gap between the Columbia class and SSN(X) design programs, which the Navy will manage.” the CRS report says. 

Given this situation, it seems likely that current production struggles are derailing the US Navy timetable ambitions for its SSN(X) boat. 

About the Author: Kris Osborn

Kris Osborn is the Military Affairs Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.