The Virginia-class submarine is becoming a headache for the US Navy

Summary and key points: The U.S. Navy’s Virginia-class submarine program is $17 billion over budget and, with only two new submarines scheduled to be built each year, the Navy is struggling to meet growing demand. Shipyard delays, compounded by America’s failing defense industrial base, are hampering timely deployments and raising concerns about America’s preparedness for future conflicts.

-Critics argue that Virginia-class submarines, which are critical to countering China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, are a better investment than expensive Ford-class aircraft carriers.

-Immediate action is needed to modernize the shipyard’s infrastructure and address procurement inefficiencies, as the undermanned U.S. submarine fleet will be critical in any potential conflict with a similar fleet.

Navy’s Virginia-class submarine nightmare gets serious

The U.S. Navy has a problem. It absolutely needs submarines, given the threats its forces face. Yet there is a dangerous shortage of submarines the Navy has available to meet current demand.

Things like the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) Agreement were designed to share the burden, increase the capabilities of all three countries, and accelerate the creation of an interoperable nuclear submarine force.

However, it increasingly seems that AUKUS is more ambitious than pragmatic.

A recent announcement between the leaders of the three countries focused more on the need to combat man-made climate change than on how the three navies would achieve their ambitious goals of jointly and rapidly expanding their submarine capabilities.

And now the best part.

A total disaster (with one side of a dishonest argument)

The Navy’s Virginia-class submarine, intended to replace the ubiquitous Los Angeles-class attack submarines, has cost a whopping $17 billion more than budgeted.

Moreover, the shattered U.S. defense industry—particularly its rotten shipyards—is unlikely to be able to meet the Navy’s peacetime demand for Virginia-class submarines at all.

Aircraft carrier fans have been quick to point out that the vastly increased budget of the Virginia-class submarines now exceeds the cost of a single Ford-class carrier.

But it is deceptive that this number is mentioned.

For example, the entire program to develop Virginia-class submarines is running $17 billion over budget. While that’s nothing to scoff at, individual units of the new Ford-class aircraft carrier cost about $13 billion each. The Navy’s entire carrier program is significantly more expensive than the projected cost overruns of the Virginia-class attack submarine program. For example, the Ford-class program alone is expected to cost taxpayers a total of $120 billion.

Furthermore, there is a good chance that U.S. carriers will be brought down by China’s robust anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities at the outset of a hostile confrontation. This is very different from the experience that U.S. submarines will have in a conflict. These units will be the primary power projection platforms for the Navy in a conflict with China.

So, frankly, the Virginia-class submarine is still a better investment than the Navy’s vanity project of building an aircraft carrier.

Solve the problem now

But the Navy needs to figure out how to reduce this cost overrun. It needs to prioritize a more timely development and deployment schedule for these new submarines. It should probably look at pulling some of its older Los Angeles-class attack submarines out of mothballs and updating them to bolster its dwindling fleet.

All estimates indicate that the new Virginia-class submarines will come online twice a year (if we’re lucky), with about 22 of these boats already in service. That’s far too long for far too few submarines, and far too expensive.

America’s enemies are now preparing for war. The Navy will find that it needs large numbers of submarines on the front lines of any confrontation with a rival, defended by a robust A2/AD architecture.

Congress will also need to demand immediate changes to the way the United States procures major weapons platforms like submarines. The country needs to urgently overhaul its defense industrial base, with a specific focus on improving its failing shipyards.

There is simply no excuse for such an important program as the Virginia-class submarine to be in jeopardy because of delays caused by failing infrastructure in our shipyards. Only Congress, working with the Pentagon and its supporting defense contractors, can change this.

One thing is certain: the Navy will not fare well in a war with a comparable fleet if it does not have a robust and capable submarine fleet.

Author’s Experience and Expertise: Brandon J. Weichert

Brandon J. Weichert, a National Interest national security analyst, is a former congressional staffer and geopolitical analyst who contributes to The Washington Times, the Asia Times, and The-Pipeline. He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His next book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine, will be published October 22 by Encounter Books. You can follow Weichert on Twitter @WeTheBrandon.

All images are Creative Commons or Shutterstock.

From the vault

Russia in Panic: Why the US Navy Hasn’t Recommissioned the Iowa-Class Battleships

Battleship vs. Cruiser: Iowa Class vs. Russian Kirov Class (Who Wins?)