Submarine that Launched 30-Missile Strike Against Iran, and Three Others, To Be Retired Soon
“The cruise missile attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities likely came from one of the gigantic Ohio Class Cruise Missile Submarines (SSGN). Two dozen cruise missiles were fired, but it could fire a hundred more.”
As part of the strike against Iran’s nuclear weapon facilities, an unnamed U.S. submarine launched a 30-missile Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) strike against the Isfahan nuclear weapons site.
No sub named in Pentagon's Iran strike briefing. Here's a US Navy guided-missile (SSGN) submarine going through Suez (2023 image). Can launch up to 154 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs). Gen Dan Caine said: "a US submarine…launched more than two dozen" at Esfahan targets. pic.twitter.com/FgRuVR9RXB
— Warships IFR (@WarshipsIFR) June 23, 2025
From Defense News: Here’s the role an Ohio-class submarine played in the strikes on Iran
At about 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on June 21, a U.S. Navy nuclear-powered submarine launched over two dozen Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles into Iran, striking targeted infrastructure sites in Isfahan.
Shortly after the Tomahawks were fired, fighter aircraft and B-2 Spirit stealth bombers swept over Iran, culminating in the destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities with the force of 14 GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators, known as “bunker busters.”
While the B-2 bombers and bunker-buster bombs are so far dominating discussions of the mission, titled Operation Midnight Hammer, the Ohio-class submarine performed a critical role in it, too.
The specific vessel that fired the missiles has not yet been identified, but Secretary of the Navy John Phelan confirmed to lawmakers in a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing Tuesday that it was an Ohio-class guided-missile submarine that had “performed exceptionally, causing significant damage to Iran’s nuclear capacity.”
It’s no surprise that an “Ohio-class guided-missile submarine,” or “SSGN” was chosen to shoot the TLAMs at Isfahan. First, they are, to use submarine parlance, “ghosts,” virtually undetectable acoustically, or any other way (don’t doubt me). Second, they carry 154, yes, 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Third, they can stay on station, wherever that is, virtually indefinitely (no refueling required, the only logistical issue is food).
As to that last point, while no one without a Top Secret security clearance knows where the SSGN that shot the TLAMs at Isfahan is right now, it could very well be that the sub is still on station with 124 or so Tomahawk missiles ready to launch. The B-2 bombers flew back to Missouri, the SSGN did not and is probably still there.
The cruise missile attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities likely came from one of the gigantic Ohio Class Cruise Missile Submarines (SSGN). Two dozen cruise missiles were fired, but it could fire a hundred more. pic.twitter.com/4pjl2uzlUu
— Hernan Cortes (@CyberPunkCortes) June 22, 2025
Defense News continues:
The Ohio class was originally designed as one of the Navy’s ballistic-missile submarines. Powered by a nuclear reactor, it was also designed to carry and launch ballistic missiles armed with multiple nuclear warheads.
At 560 feet long, the Ohio class can dive to over 800 feet below and maneuver at over 25 knots per hour. It has the capacity to carry 15 officers and around 144 enlisted personnel.
Four Ohio-class submarines were modified into guided-missile submarines, enabling them to launch conventional land attacks and support Special Forces operations. These included the submarines Ohio, Florida, Georgia and the Michigan.
It was a guided-missile submarine that delivered the strikes on Iran.
It is stealth, rather than sheer firepower, that makes an Ohio-class submarine — whether carrying nuclear warheads or guided missiles for land attacks — truly formidable. Designed as a nuclear deterrent and part of the U.S. strategic nuclear triad, the Ohio-class was built for longevity and to evade detection, requiring minimal maintenance stops…
The precision cruise missile can penetrate air defenses to strike targets with nearly hairpin precision from over 1,000 miles away, and can be commanded to change course in flight instantly.
Awesome capability. There’s just one problem.
From Business Insider: Strikes on Iran showed the need for stealthy submarines that can launch a whole lot of missiles. The US Navy is about to lose that:
The Navy plans to decommission two of its Ohio-class SSGNs in 2026 and the other two in 2028, replacing them with Virginia-class Block V submarines. These won’t be dedicated cruise missile submarines, but they will boast greater firepower than earlier Virginias.
Military leaders and experts have expressed concerns about the replacement plan and the loss of missile capacity.
“The US will experience a big drop in its capacity for stealthy missile attacks,” Clark said. The Block V Virginia-class attack submarines will each be able to carry up to 40 Tomahawk missiles, far less than the Ohio SSGNs, a concern as the US attempts to turn its focus to higher-end threats and potential conflicts.
This means Navy officials will have to deploy four or more Virginia-class attack subs to fire as many long-range missiles, reducing the number of attack subs for other missions they are specially built for: surveillance and ship-killing.
Additionally, the Ohio-class SSGNs have two crews of about 150 sailors that rotate the sub back and forth, allowing it to maximize its deployed time. Over two decades of operations, these subs have earned reputations as workhorses.
Another problem is that the Block V submarines are facing years-long delays and rising costs due to persistent US Navy shipbuilding problems that could leave a capability gap.
A Navy review last year estimated the delay to contract delivery for Virginia Block Vs at approximately 24 months. Other top-priority programs, like the Constellation-class frigate, Virginia Block IV submarines, and Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines, are also behind schedule.
The Trump administration has made fixing the shipbuilding problems contributing to these delays a top priority, standing up an office in the White House dedicated to shipbuilding.
Recent congressional hearings have examined a number of problems, some dating back decades to the end of the Cold War. Issues like competitive pay for shipbuilders, workforce and labor problems, and training and shipbuilding capacity woes have repeatedly caused programs to run behind.
With the Virginia-class Block Vs delayed, retiring the Ohio-class submarines could limit the stealthy cruise-missile strike capabilities of the Navy’s submarine force.
“Unless the Navy delays the Ohio retirements, the Navy’s submarine-launched missile capacity will not return to today’s levels until the mid-2030s,” Clark said, when the Virginia Block Vs are expected to be completed.
And even when the Block Vs are delivered, they won’t bring the same firepower.
Ah well, enjoy it while you’ve got it, I guess.
Mad props to the B-2 pilots.
But don't forget there are 150 sailors on an SSGN somewhere in the ocean that took out the other 2 sites & no one saw them at all.
They've been there for months & probably will be there for more, ready to launch if called. pic.twitter.com/wtkc3vKOt6— Mike Clancey (@clancey_mike) June 22, 2025
President Trump on Truth Social:
"…if anyone thinks our 'hardware' was great over the weekend, far and away the strongest and best equipment we have, 20 years advanced over the pack, is our Nuclear Submarines." pic.twitter.com/KIbLSaa87j
— Taylor Popielarz (@TaylorPopielarz) June 23, 2025
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Very interesting and timely information! Thank you for informing us about these matters. I’ve been waiting for payback against these idiots since 1979.
Another project level problem with the Virginia’s is Brandon promised Brandon some of them is a deal including the UK, As things now stand this may very well increase the procurement schedule for our subs. Not good considering the rate at which China is build subs. It will make a difference if Australia is control a number of Virginias rather than is. We should extract ourselves from the deal and delay retirement of the guided missile Ohios unless the reason for their retirement is nuclear power related.
UK has two functional boomers on patrol. The UK leases the nuclear warheads from the US as they have no capability to service them. Yep…Rent a Nuke…. not rent to buy. Once upon a time the British Navy was THE navy for centuries. While two boomers can really deliver a bang, just a ghost of a shell. Sad.
I, for one, am glad that a muslim-lite country like the UK DOESN’T have the navy it had.
Good point. Can we take back our nukes from the UK. While we are at it we should withdrawn them from the airbase in Turkey. Maybe withdraw all of them from Europe.
We should also tell Russia they get a free pass to invade Spain since Spain won’t pay their 5% and prefer to be freeloaders.
We don’t share any nukes with Britain. We did with their Army but that ended in the 80’s.
Don’t worry. We can just send the self-destruct signal. Two birds with one stone.
This is for “brightlights.”
The RAF is buying nuclear-capable F-35s. The UK will arm them with US nukes because it doesn’t have any of its own that can be delivered by that particular aircraft. The nukes will remain under the control of the US.
Actually that’s wrong. The British nuke were designed, built, and owned by them. There were warheads shared with the British Army units in German for 155mm & 203mm artillery and Lance missiles but that was ended back in the late 80’s.
They bought and paid for enough Trident missiles for full loadouts by all for of the SSBNs with spares. The spares are kept in a common pool stored at the Kings Bay Naval Base in Georgia.
The knobs are too hard for women to turn, on the old ones.
funny….but sadly plausible…..🙄
Death from below.
trojan horse it to iran
It would be great to keep them in service. But, there are service life limitations that are most easily measured in dive cycles. I’m not sure what the expected dive cycle life of that sub class is (or even if it’s not classified). But, just like airplanes that have fixed lifespans because of the toll pressurization/depressurization takes on the metallurgy of the air frame and skin of the plane, the compression hull of sub is similarly taxed and weakened with every dive cycle. Those first Ohio-class subs launched in the early 80s, initially w/a 30-year service life which was extended by another decade. They may not be able to extend it further…because of physics.
That is very interesting. Thanks. I knew Russia’s titanium subs have that problem but I wasn’t aware our steel subs did. It makes perfect sense.
I’m just pleased that there was enough opsec that CNN couldn’t broadcast the sub’s name and homeport. Because you know they would have if the could.
Well there are only a couple of home ports for subs. I think 2, one on each coast. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
I read somewhere that it was the USS Georgia that fire the tomahawks. Not sure if that was correct or not. Could have been a guess.
My mistake. There are 10 bases according to wikipedia which as we all know is never wrong.
Pentagon should have released a psyop memo stating the sub was home ported in New York City….. maybe Iran could disrupt the mayoral election…..
Out of sight, out of mind. An average person (yours truly) would not normally have any connections to these behemoths.. and here we are with our own submariner, and his fascinating insight, and personally, I now have a tennis friend that served on one. Thank you James, for you service and these articles, and thanks to my friend C, for his service.
The submarine force of the US Navy is vastly under appreciated. While I understand the DoD desire to have versatile platforms the recent examples ain’t all that great. Maybe building out 4 new Ohio Class subs without letting the contractors/designers run wild with ‘improvements’ would be the better COA. These are an awesome platform with unmatched capability. Especially as part of the nuke force triad.
They are building out the new Columbia subs to replace the Ohio missile subs. I suppose they could build out a Ohio or two as an arsenal sub to replace these 4 that will be retired. Unfortunately our ship building capability is greatly diminished so I;m not sure we could do it.
You’re 200% right about the current build snafus. New frigate class late and overweight. Zumwalt’s well over budget, truncated in numbers, and with guns that won’t be used and need to be replaced. Then there is the littoral class which is considered a disaster and are be retired only a few years into their deployment. Finally they have fallen behind in their sub building schedule. It’s a shame really.
I wonder how much of an old Ohio class sub could be cannabalized to build a new one on the cheap. Build a new hull, likely a new reactor and propulsion system, but just swap out anything that’s still serviceable.
I’m not sure there is much that can be cannibalized. In any case the problem is the lack of build sites (only 2 at present) and the numbers of trained workers. The trained workers has become a real issue and is probably effecting the building of all navy ships. Abandoning building merchant ship and close shipyards has definitely had an effect downstream.
The serviceable part may be the reason for replacing them. The Ohio Class subs were first commissioned in 1981. E-3 AWACS planes built that year had iron core memory and were booted with 9 track tapes. So, unless they have had electronic upgrades, like the E-3 has had, they are sailing museum pieces.
Maybe we can buy/borrow couple chicom subs to fill in the gap??😂