Attack-submarine capabilityU.S. lead
Quieting, crews, weapons, and allied access remain a high-value U.S. advantage.
02 · Capability assessment
Maritime & undersea
This is a split decision: U.S. undersea quality and alliance access remain powerful, while regional fleet mass, commercial shipbuilding depth, repair throughput, and production timelines make the overall contest roughly even and moving in the wrong direction.
Why this position
- Submarines can create disproportionate denial, but delayed maintenance or construction removes scarce hulls that cannot be replaced quickly.
- The pacing competitor's proximity and shipbuilding scale create a local quantity advantage that global U.S. fleet totals do not erase.
Subcategory drivers
Regional fleet massCompetitor edge
The most demanding scenario occurs near the competitor's bases and inside its land-based coverage.
Shipbuilding and repairCompetitor lead
Persistent schedule, workforce, infrastructure, and coordination problems limit replacement and regeneration.
Uncrewed maritime systemsContested
Promising demonstrations have not yet become a resilient, sustained operational fleet.
Regain the edge
Treat shipbuilding and repair throughput as a combat capability. Create one Navy-wide investment and capacity picture, stabilize multiyear workloads, expand skilled trades and supplier tooling, qualify allied repair nodes, and field crewed–uncrewed maritime packages whose communications and maintenance are exercised in theater.
What to watch
- On-time submarine and surface-ship delivery by class
- Maintenance delay days and deployable hull availability
- Qualified dry-dock, supplier, and allied repair capacity
Evidence behind the call
- Threat assessment · Dec 20252025 Military and Security Developments Involving the PRC↗
- Congressional analysis · Dec 2025China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities↗
- Oversight · Feb 2025Shipbuilding and Repair: Navy Needs a Strategic Industrial-Base Approach↗
- Budget · Jun 2025FY2026 Defense Budget Overview↗