The realm of submarine capabilities remains a critical, albeit often unseen, aspect of global military strength. For decades, the United States has enjoyed undisputed dominance in this underwater domain. However, as China’s global influence expands, its naval modernization, particularly its submarine fleet, warrants close examination, especially when juxtaposed against the established might of the United States. While “size” can be interpreted in various ways – geographical, economic, or military – in the context of naval power, it translates to fleet size, technological sophistication, and strategic reach. This article delves into a detailed comparison of the submarine forces of China and the United States, exploring the nuances of their current capabilities and future trajectories.
The United States currently operates a formidable fleet of 66 nuclear-powered submarines. These are not just numerous but also technologically advanced, granting them unparalleled range, stealth, and offensive capabilities compared to diesel-electric submarines. In contrast, China possesses a smaller nuclear submarine fleet, estimated at 12, alongside a larger number of diesel-electric submarines. The qualitative difference between nuclear and diesel-electric submarines is significant. Nuclear submarines, like those predominantly operated by the U.S., can remain submerged for months, limited only by crew endurance, and travel vast distances at high speeds. Diesel-electric submarines, while quieter in certain scenarios, require surfacing or snorkeling to recharge batteries, significantly limiting their range and operational tempo.
A visual representation of a US Navy nuclear submarine highlighting its advanced and powerful capabilities.
Furthermore, the offensive firepower of these submarine fleets differs substantially. U.S. submarines boast a combined 1,168 Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells. VLS cells allow for the launch of a variety of missiles, including cruise missiles for land attack and anti-ship missiles, providing a versatile and potent offensive punch. Currently, China’s submarine fleet lacks confirmed VLS cells, although projections from various defense experts suggest their introduction in the near future. The inclusion of VLS technology would mark a significant leap in China’s submarine offensive capabilities, allowing for a broader range of missions and enhanced power projection.
Despite the current disparity, it’s crucial to acknowledge China’s rapid advancements in submarine technology and production. While the United States benefits from a substantial head start in submarine development and deployment, China is not standing still. Reports indicate a rapid improvement in China’s submarine technology and a growing submarine production capacity. A 2023 Department of Defense report projects China to expand its submarine force to 80 units by 2035. This ambitious growth, even if a significant portion remains diesel-electric, signifies a considerable commitment to bolstering their underwater naval power. This expansion also includes advancements in Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) capabilities within the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). China is actively developing its ASW doctrine and assets, although current assessments suggest this area lags behind their surface warfare advancements.
An illustration depicting the projected growth of the Chinese submarine fleet, emphasizing its rapid expansion and modernization efforts.
Maintaining its submarine advantage is of paramount importance to the United States. Strategic analyses and open-source wargaming scenarios consistently highlight the decisive role U.S. submarines could play in potential conflicts, particularly in a scenario involving China. However, the U.S. submarine industrial base is facing its own challenges. Shipyards are currently strained to meet the production demands of even two Virginia-class submarines annually, the rate needed to maintain the current fleet size. Efforts to increase production capacity are hampered by factors such as rising material costs and labor shortages. This strain is evident in the U.S. Navy’s Fiscal Year 2025 Unfunded Priorities List, where a significant portion of requested funds is allocated to bolstering the submarine industrial base.
A visual representation of the challenges facing the US submarine industrial base, including production strains and workforce limitations.
While the trends indicate a narrowing gap in submarine capabilities, it’s essential to avoid simplistic conclusions about future dominance. Warfare is inherently complex, and numerous factors beyond hardware influence the outcome. The U.S. Navy possesses significantly more combat experience and time at sea compared to the PLAN. Furthermore, the U.S. benefits from a long-standing blue-water naval tradition, robust alliances, economic strength, and soft power – elements not directly quantifiable in a hardware comparison but crucial in the broader strategic context.
However, the trajectory of China’s naval expansion, particularly in the submarine domain, presents a significant challenge to the United States’ long-held maritime dominance. China’s growing naval power enables it to project influence in the Pacific in ways that can potentially challenge U.S. allies and regional stability. Sustaining its underwater advantage requires the United States to address the challenges facing its submarine industrial base and continue to innovate in submarine technology and ASW capabilities. The future balance of naval power will depend on how both nations navigate these challenges and leverage their respective strengths in this critical domain of underwater warfare.
