Four giant missile subs that can launch more than 600 Tomahawks are set to retire before their replacements arrive in equal force, shrinking America’s undersea punch when rivals are testing U.S. resolve.
Story Highlights
- Four Ohio-class guided-missile subs retire by 2028, each credited with 154 Tomahawks.
- Replacement Virginia-class boats carry about 40 Tomahawks with the new payload module.
- Analysts warn of a near-term “capability gap” in undersea strike capacity.
- The Navy plans a phased transition, but timelines and math do not yet match up.
What is changing in the submarine fleet and when
U.S. Navy plans retire all four Ohio-class guided-missile submarines between 2026 and 2028. Reports name USS Ohio and USS Florida first, followed by USS Michigan and USS Georgia later in the window. Each submarine was converted to carry up to 154 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles in 22 large tubes. These boats became unique “missile trucks” with heavy strike loads in one hull. Retiring all four reduces a concentrated share of undersea firepower within a short period.
The Navy’s replacement path centers on the Virginia-class attack submarines with the Virginia Payload Module. That new section adds four large-diameter bays that raise Tomahawk capacity to about 40 per boat, far less than 154 on an Ohio SSGN. Open-source coverage says many Virginia Payload Module boats would be needed to match a single Ohio’s magazine depth, and more than a dozen to match all four. Production speed and crew training will shape how fast that capacity shows up in the fleet.
Why the numbers point to a near-term gap
Independent analysts argue the change creates a “capability gap” because the retiring boats pack so many missiles into very few hulls. One analysis says the four SSGNs make up a major slice of the submarine force’s vertical launch capacity, so losing them at once cuts “magazine depth” during a tense global period. Another report estimates the Navy would need around twenty-two Virginia Payload Module subs to recover the same payload mass, underscoring the scale of the loss.
Supporters of the plan point to a phased retirement and a clear replacement path. The schedule spreads the drawdown across 2026 to 2028, which avoids an overnight cliff. The Navy’s move to the Virginia Payload Module shows intent to disperse firepower across more boats and newer tech. But even with a good plan on paper, the replacement boats carry fewer missiles per hull, and the build-and-certify timeline is tight. That math makes a temporary shortfall more likely than not.
Strategic stakes and what this means for deterrence
Undersea strike capacity matters because submarines can hide, move close, and hit early. When a crisis breaks, a single Ohio SSGN can unleash a large wave of cruise missiles without warning. That shock power aims to stop a fight before it spreads. Reducing that surge load may push more of the job to surface ships and bombers. Those forces can hit hard, but they can be easier to track or slower to deploy than a lurking submarine.
For readers who worry Washington plans big changes without straight answers, this story will feel familiar. Leaders promise future benefits while accepting near-term risk. The sources here are mostly open reporting and commentary, not detailed Navy budget tables. That limits clarity on exact counts and delivery dates. What is firm is the schedule to retire four high-capacity boats and the lower-per-hull load on replacements. The result is a foreseeable dip that both parties should debate in the open.
What to watch next
Watch the delivery pace of Block V Virginia submarines with the payload module. Track how many are commissioned, deployed, and combat-certified each year. Look for updates on Tomahawk inventory and new variants that may extend range or increase salvo effects per missile. Follow whether other platforms, like destroyers, pick up more tasking to cover the gap. Finally, press for official numbers that map retirements, arrivals, and real load-outs, not just brochure totals.
Sources:
19fortyfive.com, en.wikipedia.org, indiandefencereview.com