Following revelations from families about some U.S. service members aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln struggling with mental health after 250 days without a port visit, sailors, retirees and lawmakers told Military Times that troops were absorbing consequences of longtime flaws within the sea service that have been worsened by the current conflict.

The Navy has struggled for years to meet high operational tempo demands, they said. Deployments are regularly extended, scheduled maintenance is missed and the shipbuilding pace remains glacial, leading to delays in delivery and an undersized fleet.

The issues have spanned multiple presidential administrations but have been compounded by the handling of the Iran war and ensuing military operations, sources said, leading to dire circumstances for some sailors.

Leaders have disputed the descriptions of deteriorating conditions aboard the Lincoln and denied reporting about quality-of-life concerns.

Asked recently by reporters about families’ concerns over the length of the deployment, President Donald Trump dismissed the question, saying that it’s “not nearly long enough.”

Asked about those same concerns, Adm. Daryl Caudle, the service’s chief of naval operations, told Military Times, “Sailors first is not a slogan — it’s a warfighting imperative.”

“The sustained pace of operations in the Middle East has only reinforced that taking care of our sailors and maintaining combat readiness are inseparable,” Caudle said.

‘We need more ships’

Following outcry about conditions aboard the Lincoln, the Navy moved the Nimitz-class carrier USS George Washington from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East, where it arrived Wednesday. The ship is reportedly replacing the Lincoln, which will now steam toward its homeport of San Diego.

The move temporarily leaves the western Pacific without a U.S. aircraft carrier, the presence of which is a key part of the U.S. military’s effort to deter China in the South China Sea and reassure regional allies.

Operational tempo concerns, meanwhile, are nothing new for the service, according to retired Vice Adm. Fozzie Miller, who served as commander of U.S. Fifth Fleet and U.S. Central Command from 2012 to 2015.

Miller joined the Navy in 1979. From his early days in uniform, the service’s goal, he said, was to operate at a level that was neither too harsh for the individual sailor nor too unbearable for the equipment vital to mission success. An adequate number of warships was integral to maintaining that balance.

“We could use more carriers or less [operational] tempo,” Miller said. “It’s one or the other, but we’re a global Navy with global responsibilities, and so if we’re going to fulfill those, we need more ships.”

Rear Adm. Thomas Moore, who led the Navy’s acquisition program and went on to become commander of Naval Sea Systems Command, told Congress in 2013 that the service is “an 11-carrier Navy in a 15-carrier world.”

The demand is unlikely to dwindle, he said.

Thirteen years since Moore’s statement, the Navy is still at 11 carriers. With the USS Nimitz scheduled to retire at the end of next year, that number may soon be 10.

The USS Harry S. Truman and USS Gerald R. Ford are currently sidelined for maintenance after deployments, the latter of which notched a post-Vietnam record 326 days at sea in May after it was extended to support operations in the Middle East. The Nimitz-class USS John C. Stennis is undergoing a years-long overhaul.

The USS Ronald Reagan, also a Nimitz-class, is expected to be deployable by the end of August after a 17-month repair period. The Nimitz-class USS George H.W. Bush is in the Middle East.

“We just don’t have enough aircraft carriers right now in this rotation to sustain all the things we want to do, and I think this is a long-standing problem,” said Steven Wills, a Navy surface warfare officer who retired after 20 years.

In 2014, the Navy began implementing the Optimized Fleet Response Plan, or OFRP, deployment model, which places maintenance, training, evaluations and a single eight-month deployment within a 36-month cycle.

The service says the framework is intended to produce a more comprehensively manned and trained force while providing predictability to deployment schedules for sailors and their families.

In 2016, however, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that heavy operational demands led the Navy to increase ship deployment lengths and reduce or defer ship maintenance.

Those decisions made deployments less predictable, ate into training time, contributed to declining ship conditions and increased the time ships required for much-needed maintenance.

From fiscal 2014 through 2019, Navy ships spent more than 33,700 additional days in maintenance beyond intended scheduling, leading to fewer vessels available for training or operations.

An upended supply network

While the Navy has long struggled with carrier availability, current U.S. leadership has created more operational tempo issues through poor planning and insufficient wartime support, according to lawmakers and a sailor who deployed in support of the Iran war.

“Logistics was a complete failure the entire time out there — food, supplies, parts,” said the sailor, who served aboard an Independence-class littoral combat ship and was granted anonymity due to fear of reprisal.

Iranian attacks damaged the Navy’s longstanding logistics hub in Bahrain in February, disrupting the regional supply network supporting ships operating in the Middle East.

The Navy shifted the new logistics hub to Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia, an atoll in the Indian Ocean that sits more than 2,000 miles away from the service’s carrier strike groups in the Middle East.

Diego Garcia’s distance proved to be problematic, the sailor said, with the hub requiring the LCS to place a food order 30 days in advance.

Those orders were nearly impossible, however, with an influx schedule exacerbated by poor planning, the sailor added. Sailors were unable to resupply from the hub, instead grabbing whatever could be salvaged from replenishment-at-sea oilers.

“There’s no excuse for why, if we’re at war, we can’t get an expedited food order,” the sailor said.

Rep. Mike Levin, D-Calif., told Military Times that the logistical issues described by the sailor were due to preparation failures.

“I’ve spoken to a lot of people who’ve been deployed, and you know, the basic problem seems to be that if they were going to use Bahrain as a hub to restock, to get food and to provide rest and all that,” Levin said. “If that was the idea, well, clearly that didn’t work out. After February, March — [the administration] should have thought of that.”

‘People can break, too’

At least two sailors attempted to jump overboard from the USS Abraham Lincoln, families of Lincoln sailors previously told Military Times.

While the individual mental circumstances of the incidents remain unknown, the frantic operational tempo of combat operations inevitably takes a natural toll on service members, according to one sailor who has deployed to the Middle East aboard an aircraft carrier during the current conflict.

“Just like machines, people can break, too,” said the service member, who was granted anonymity for fear of reprisal from leadership. “They need rest.”

Time to rest was not always available. Losing sleep was sometimes part of ensuring safety.

If equipment broke, sailors would, at times, work well beyond normal shifts until it was fixed. In some instances, completion of the task could mean the difference between life and death.

In a 2021 review, the GAO found that just 14% of Navy officers surveyed slept at least seven hours per night during a recent deployment, while 67% reported five hours or less. GAO also found that the Navy routinely assigned fewer sailors to ships than workload studies indicated were needed to safely operate them.

By 2023, surface-fleet sailors were averaging 5.25 hours of sleep every 24 hours, below the Navy’s standard of providing at least 7.5 hours of sleep opportunity. GAO identified crew shortfalls and mattress problems as challenges to managing fatigue.

For its part, the Navy has implemented measures to try to address the issue, including initiating a study involving about 1,600 sailors wearing Oura rings to monitor sleep and other biometric indicators while underway.

But lack of sleep, according to personnel, has been just one detriment experienced during the conflict with Iran. Service members have also faced food shortages onboard the carrier, the sailor said, with quality that fluctuated between bad and horrible.

“It was either undercooked, overcooked or unrecognizable at all,” the sailor said.

As extensions piled on, a decline in morale took on a recognizable tone at the phone center or in conversations at the galleys. Humor darkened even more than usual, and port visits meant less and less.

“These things have been happening on deployments for always,” said Parker Moore, a nuclear reactor operator who served aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln before its recent deployment. “It is bad, but it is always bad.”

During Moore’s time on Lincoln, the stigma surrounding mental health remained prevalent. There were mental health professionals aboard the ship, but if a sailor sought help, the service member could be taken off their job.

“They’re terrified to disappoint the people around them,” Moore said. “If I don’t do my job, there’s only 30 people who can do it, right? So now there’s only 29 people.”

Following the report on mental health issues aboard Lincoln, the Navy said it had not observed an increase in suicidal ideation or suicide attempts. The service did note, however, that additional counselors and resources were being sent to the crew.

Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, visited Lincoln on Saturday and issued a statement claiming that the ship had the lowest number of mental health cases among the Navy’s 11 active aircraft carriers.

Lack of transparency

The Pentagon under the Trump administration has become increasingly tight-lipped over the information it provides to Congress.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth released a memo in October 2025 informing Defense Department personnel, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that authorization was required for any communication to leaders on Capitol Hill.

Hegseth also dodged several questions from lawmakers during a July Senate hearing on the Iran War.

When Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., asked the Pentagon leader whether previous statements about Iran’s military being “destroyed” and “made combat ineffective” were true, Hegseth declined to answer.

Hegseth has also not held a Pentagon press briefing about the Iran war for more than 100 days, with the last coming on May 5.

To alleviate concerns over short-term problems with current military operations like those aboard the Lincoln, Congress must be able to carry out oversight, lawmakers said.

Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., told Military Times that the Pentagon should be sharing information that would allow political leaders to assess whether the president and defense secretary were deploying assets in the most mission-effective way.

Invoking the War Powers Resolution would allow lawmakers to hold the current administration accountable, some Democrats have argued.

The resolution requires the executive branch to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying military forces and allows lawmakers to enforce the removal of military forces within 60 to 90 days unless Congress has declared war or authorized military force.

Levin supports that approach, he said, and asked that his Republican colleagues stand up and ask tough questions.

Republican members of the House and Senate armed services committees did not respond to Military Times’ requests for comment.

“I think back to George W. Bush,” Levin said. “I disagreed wholeheartedly with Iraq, but you think about the steps that he took. You think about … Secretary Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney, others — their consistent engagement.”

For the LCS sailor, planning deficiencies are already rearing their head.

Though the ship did assist with the Navy’s blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, turning away more than a dozen vessels, it will now be sidelined longer than scheduled because of deferred repairs.

It is one example, the sailor said, of there being no long-term plan for ship rotations.

“‘We’re gonna keep you out here,” the sailor said of the impression made on them, “until your ship can’t operate or function anymore.’”

Firestorm Labs manufactured more than 1,000 parts and 12 of its proprietary 3D-printable first-person view Squall drones aboard the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Essex as it transited toward RIMPAC 2026 in Hawaii, according to a release.

“Every part xCell printed on deck is one that doesn’t need to be flown or shipped across contested waters — cutting the fuel, aircraft hours, and personnel it takes to keep a ship operational,” a social media release said. “Repairs that once meant days or weeks waiting on a resupply run can now happen in hours, on station.”

Firestorm Labs created the xCell as a factory-in-a-box that can be deployed aboard U.S. Navy vessels to churn out unmanned aerial systems and spare parts for expeditionary warfare.

As waves as high as 12 feet crashed against the ship, service members assembled drones that were later flown as adversary aircraft during a counter-drone exercise at RIMPAC 2026 in Hawaii.

The service members also helped print mechanical test components that assessed the efficacy of the 3D printer used for drone production and fabricated military repair parts that crew members of the USS Essex needed.

The Defense Department, and Navy in particular, is laser-focused on building out modular payload capabilities that can deliver mission-ready assets for the service.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle announced the “containerized capability campaign plan” in March at the McAleese Defense Programs conference.

Caudle outlined a vision in which transportable containers housing defense capabilities such as drones and weapons can be deployed to any region in the world.

In May, the Pentagon announced framework agreements with defense companies Anduril, CoAspire, Leidos and Zone 5 to acquire more than 10,000 containerized missiles over three years beginning in 2027.

The move signaled the launch of the “Low‑Cost Containerized Munitions (LCCM) program.”

The Defense Department is granting a collective $76.6 billion to General Dynamics Electric Boat for five Columbia-class submarines and to both General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries-Newport News Shipbuilding for nine Virginia-class submarines to be built in the coming years.

“This historic investment underscores the department’s continued commitment to undersea superiority and the recapitalization of our nuclear triad,” said Vice Adm. Robert Gaucher, director of submarine programs. “By securing the continuous production of both the Columbia and Virginia classes, we ensure we will continue to deliver the world’s most lethal, survivable and resilient combat platform.”

The contract includes $29.5 billion for Columbia-class Build II submarines, $42.1 billion for Virginia-class Block VI submarines and $5 billion for investments in nuclear shipbuilding programs and shipbuilding infrastructure for both shipbuilders.

The Navy currently has seven Columbia-class submarines under contract, 26 active Virginia-class submarines and 23 more Virginia-class submarines in the pipeline for future construction, the service said.

The Navy has made its newest submarine class a top priority over the last several years.

The Columbia-class has big shoes to fill: the boats are being built to replace Ohio-class submarines as they phase out of service.

The latter continues to play a big part in underwater military operations. An Ohio-class submarine participated in military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities during Operation Midnight Hammer on June 22, 2025.

The Columbia-class is expected to surpass the missile payload and stealth capabilities of the Ohio-class, as well as harness the Trident II D5 Strategic Weapons System and hypersonic missiles.

While construction began on the Columbia-class in 2020, the Virginia class has been around for some time, with the launch of its lead boat in 2003.

Virginia-class submarines, which were designed to replace Los Angeles-class submarines, can host special operation forces undergoing long deployments onboard in a reconfigurable torpedo room.

Despite Columbia-class fabrication beginning six years ago, the program has faced delays.

The lead submarine in its class was originally slated for a 2027 delivery but has since been pushed back to 2028 after delivery postponement involving steam turbines and the submarine’s bow and stern, according to USNI News.

Government watchdogs initially predicted a rocky construction timeline for the newest addition to the silent service.

A U.S. Government Accountability Office report from January 2023 expressed concern that the building process would encounter hiccups because the submarine’s contractor, General Dynamics Electric Boat, hadn’t conducted a “schedule risk analysis.”

The latter practice, which is recommended by the GAO and is part of the Defense Department’s guidelines for large acquisition programs, helps set expectations for a program’s completion.

The Navy’s fiscal 2027 budget request for $378 billion includes money for the purchase of one Columbia-class submarine and two Virginia-class submarines.

Blue Water Autonomy and Saildrone allege they were kicked out of contention for the Navy’s Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel Family of Systems program after the Navy failed to comply with its own requirements, among other errors.

Blue Water Autonomy said the decision was based on “overly restrictive evaluation criteria, a misreading of Blue Water’s proposal, and irrational conclusions that are inconsistent with the [Request for Prototype Proposals] and statutory requirements,” according to a complaint filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

A significant portion of both companies’ legal documents were redacted, and the specifics of what the Navy found lacking in each of their MUSV proposals was not immediately clear.

The Navy said it could not comment on pending litigation.

The service launched the MUSV program and opened solicitations for the new class of boat on March 26, after canceling the Modular Attack Surface Craft program.

The latter, announced on July 28, 2025, solicited the development of USVs that were capable of carrying large containerized payloads that could accommodate a similar weight to the Navy’s anti-ballistic missile system, the Mark 70 Mod 1 Payload Delivery System.

The MASC program was dedicated to a specific mission and specific ask from the fleet, whereas the MUSV program addresses a larger batch of requirements and mission types.

This was the reasoning behind the shuttering of the MASC program, according to Rebecca Gassler, portfolio acquisition executive for the U.S. Navy’s robotic and autonomous systems.

The MUSV solicitation, which ended on April 17, analyzed a company’s business plan, manufacturing plan, test plan and technical design.

Chosen companies and their MUSVs were then instructed to prepare for an on-water test with a surrogate vessel that would be conducted at the end of the fiscal year.

Blue Water Autonomy was initially chosen by the Navy to participate in the Modular Attack Surface Craft program before the MUSV program was rolled out.

The company was already underway in developing its Liberty vessel for the MASC program when it ended, having sunk money into production.

But before Blue Water Autonomy could participate in the on-water test with a surrogate vessel to demonstrate its viability as a partner for future MUSVs, they say they were barred from continuing in the MUSV program competition.

The Navy announced on June 1 that it had selected seven companies to participate in at-sea testing.

Those companies included Sea Machines, Leidos, Saronic Technologies, Galliano Marine Services, PacMar Technologies, Birdon and Huntington Ingalls Industries.

Blue Water Autonomy was not on the list.

The company said the Navy’s decision to remove it from consideration for the MUSV request for prototype proposal was “capricious” and not “in accordance with statute or regulation.”

The complaint asked that the Navy halt the testing and funding for the MUSV program until “prejudicial errors” were remedied and Blue Water Autonomy was allowed reentry into the program in an effort to win the bid for the MUSV contract.

Saildrone was also excluded from participating in the program after initially taking part.

The company argues that it was more than deserving of being in the mix for the MUSV program, as it operates the world’s largest fleet of contractor-owned, contractor-operator USVs which have completed upwards of 2.5 million nautical miles since 2012, according to a complaint filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

“Our fully compliant MUSV submission to the US Navy should have qualified for advancing to the next round, in which we would participate in sea trials and develop a prototype at our own cost,” a Saildrone spokesperson said. “We support the Navy’s mission and believe there has been a misunderstanding in the evaluation of our bid.”

Saildrone has deployed more than 70 vessels across the globe, including for the Navy and U.S. Coast Guard, the complaint said.

The company said it learned it was disqualified from continuing to compete in the MUSV program from a news article and was offered no explanation in an email follow-up with the U.S. government as to why it wasn’t given an opportunity to continue.

Eventually, Saildrone says they were provided a “fundamentally flawed evaluation.”

“Because advancement to the on-water test event imposes no material financial obligation on the government, reevaluating Saildrone’s proposal consistent with the solicitation and advancing Saildrone furthers the public interest at no meaningful cost,” the complaint said.

Saildrone asked to be reinstated in the competition and allowed to compete in the on-water test.

The fiscal 2027 Navy budget calls for the procurement 63 unmanned vessels.

President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act contains $2.1 billion for medium unmanned surface vessels, a Navy official told Military Times in March.

The strikes targeted missile launch sites and Iranian boats that were in the process of laying mines, according to Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, a U.S. Central Command spokesperson.

“U.S. Central Command continues to defend our forces while using restraint during the ongoing ceasefire,” Hawkins said.

The ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran began on April 12, though it has been tested it several times in recent weeks as the U.S. has fired on Iranian-flagged oil tankers and launched retaliatory military strikes against Iran.

U.S. forces destroyed six Iranian small boats on May 4 after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps dispatched them toward Navy vessels escorting ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

On May 7, the U.S. fired at Iranian missile and drone launch sites, command-and-control locations, and intelligence and surveillance hubs after “unprovoked” Iranian attacks on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers USS Truxtun, USS Rafael Peralta and USS Mason.

A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet from USS George H.W. Bush launched “precision munitions” at the smokestacks of two Iranian-flagged unladen oil tankers on May 8 as they transited toward an Iranian port in violation of the U.S. Navy blockade.

Iran reportedly accused the U.S. of violating the ceasefire after the Monday self-defense strikes.

The Trump administration is currently working to engineer a peace deal that would include a 60-day ceasefire extension, a stop to military activity and a commitment from Iran to end its nuclear program.

President Trump announced on Truth Social on Monday his preferred process for the destruction of Iran’s nuclear materials.

“The Enriched Uranium (Nuclear Dust!) will either be immediately turned over to the United States to be brought home and destroyed or, preferably, in conjunction and coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran, destroyed in place or, at another acceptable location, with the Atomic Energy Commission, or its equivalent, being witness to this process and event,” Trump said.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle announced during a House Armed Services Committee hearing that the USS Gerald R. Ford will arrive at its homeport of Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia, this weekend after more than 320 days at sea.

“We’re going to give our heroes a welcome back on Saturday and it’s just an extraordinary ship, extraordinary crew, an extraordinary strike group,” Caudle said. “And the sailors, I could not be more proud of.”

The Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group most recently operated in the Middle East in support of U.S. Central Command and Operation Epic Fury against Iran. Before that, the ship participated in operations for Operation Southern Spear and Operation Absolute Resolve in the Caribbean Sea.

Personnel from Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group’s Carrier Air Wing 8 returned to their home stations on Monday.

The Ford began its most recent deployment on June 24, 2025, when it left Virginia for a regularly scheduled deployment to the U.S. European Command area of responsibility.

The carrier broke the record for longest post-Vietnam War deployment on April 15, when it surpassed the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln’s 2020 deployment of 295 days.

The carrier USS Nimitz was at sea for a record 341 days in 2020 and 2021, but part of that deployment saw the ship stationed ashore while it dealt with quarantine periods to prevent the spread of COVID-19. The carrier was forward-deployed in support of American security interests for only 263 days when factoring in isolating periods, according to USNI News.

The USS Midway still holds the record for longest carrier deployment, having spent 332 days at sea during the Vietnam War.

The Ford’s extended deployment, meanwhile, was not without its hiccups.

On March 12, the Ford experienced a non-combat fire in its main laundry room, injuring two sailors and sending another off the ship for further medical evaluation.

More than 600 service members lost access to their racks after some berthing compartments were tainted by the flames, according to The New York Times. Sailors reportedly slept on floors and tables in the aftermath of the fire, which took 30 hours to put out.

Reuters reported that about 100 sleeping berths were affected by the fire, which resulted in nearly 200 sailors needing treatment for smoke-related injuries.

The Ford arrived in Souda Bay, Greece, on March 23 for maintenance, then traveled to Split, Croatia, for further repairs before returning to sea on April 2.

The carrier also faced hefty plumbing issues that affected nearly 650 toilets on board.

Ford personnel have called for assistance with the poorly performing toilets 42 times since 2023, with 32 calls coming in 2025 alone, NPR reported.

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle spoke about the fiscal 2027 Defense Department budget request at a House Armed Services Committee hearing attended by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith.

The hearing comes several days after the Navy released a shipbuilding plan that codified the possibility of the service looking to foreign partners for help.

“I will echo some of my Democrat colleagues: As many ships as we can build in the United States, we want to build them,” said retired U.S. Navy SEAL Rep. Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis. “I understand that we have to go outside of our lines of communications right now because we just have lost the capacity, but I firmly believe that our American men and women, our tradesmen and women, are the best in the world.”

Van Orden added that filling current Navy production gaps through overseas means was acceptable, so long as the onus was equally placed on reviving the maritime industrial base in the U.S.

Cao told lawmakers that the service needed 540,000 jobs to build the ships in the Navy pipeline. He also stated that a youth movement in the U.S. was needed to bring the workforce up to where it needed to be to address demand.

The acting secretary said the Navy was not investing in foreign shipbuilding, but rather exploring whether foreign models would work for the U.S. fleet, especially with some foreign shipbuilders churning out one to two destroyers a year.

The Navy’s shipbuilding plan said that the service would “evaluate overseas options and whether allied and partner shipbuilding can supplement domestic production if U.S. industry cannot meet required timelines.”

The sea service wants to spend $2.3 billion over the next five years to purchase five tankers for fuel support, built “potentially” and “initially” at overseas shipyards, the plan says.

This includes two auxiliary ships and the “flexibility for fabrication of some combatant modules overseas.”

Cao also said that U.S. workers, under the new shipbuilding plan, would be traveling abroad to learn shipbuilding techniques from foreign partners to increase efficiency and speed back home.

The sentiment didn’t sit right with some.

“I don’t think you would want to go to a yard of American workers and tell them that you think they need to go overseas to learn their craft,” said Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, a Marine Corps veteran.

Leading U.S. Navy ship manufacturer Bath Iron Works would be forced to lay off workers as soon as next year if a “weak demand signal” for American shipbuilding was approved by Congress, according to Golden.

Republican lawmakers weren’t necessarily opposed to building ships overseas, provided that U.S. resources were still relied upon.

Retired Marine Corps pilot Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., said he wanted to ensure that assembling vessels abroad meant bringing technology and work ethic back to the U.S. to reinvigorate what previously made it a world leader in shipbuilding.

“China’s outproducing us about 200 to one and has about 50 times more ports,” McCormick said. “That’s a problem.”

Retired Navy SEAL Rep. Morgan Luttrell, R-Texas, expressed concern over whether foreign-built ships would utilize integral construction materials made in America.

“I would hate to see the steel that we use on our ships and subs come from another country, if we have the capability inside of the United States,” Luttrell said.

While Luttrell echoed the desire to fabricate Navy vessels in America, Caudle stressed the importance of expanding the aperture of shipbuilding to address the need for ships amid threats from adversaries.

“That will … require some foreign shipyards to actually help me do that, to … deliver the actual ships I need in a time frame when that’s important,” Caudle said.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle warned members of Congress at a budget hearing for the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense about the service’s impending budget crunch, amid the current rate of operations in the Middle East.

“I will have to start making decisions to change training, operations, certification events, those type of things we do to generate our force, in the July timeframe and their current expenditure,” Caudle said.

That money would have to come from a supplemental funding request, which the Trump administration has not yet submitted to Congress.

The Iran war has cost the U.S. approximately $29 billion so far, according to the Pentagon’s acting comptroller, Jules Hurst III, who spoke Tuesday at a Capitol Hill hearing.

The price was $25 billion two weeks ago, he said, but had increased due to “updated repair and replacement of equipment costs” and the “general operational costs” of maintaining military presence in the Middle East.

Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., told CBS’ “Face the Nation” that the U.S. has significantly depleted its stockpile of munitions during the Iran war, including Tomahawk missiles, Army Tactical Missile Systems, SM-3 interceptors, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems, or THAADs, and Patriot missiles.

The fiscal 2027 Defense Department budget request is $1.5 trillion. Of that, $377.5 billion is allotted for the U.S. Navy, representing a 23% increase from the year before.

U.S. and Iran are currently in the midst of a ceasefire that began in early April.

Though the suspension of hostilities was tested last week when the countries exchanged fire, the Trump administration said it is working to reach an agreement with Iran that would end the war.

President Donald Trump, however, cast Tehran’s most recent peace proposal as “garbage” and Iran warned of a “lesson-teaching response” if the U.S. resumed military operations.

The confirmation of potential outsourcing comes after President Donald Trump reportedly rejected previous Navy Secretary John Phelan’s suggestion to build Trump-class battleships abroad to meet the president’s desired delivery of 2028.

“Building and maintaining ships in America is central to the president’s vision and strengthens the nation’s industrial base,” the budget document said. “While American shipbuilding remains the priority, the Navy will evaluate overseas options and whether allied and partner shipbuilding can supplement domestic production if U.S. industry cannot meet required timelines.”

Phelan told reporters at the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space symposium in April that the Navy was going to study the possibility of building warships outside the U.S.

He cited labor shortages in the U.S. as a catalyst for the potential move.

He was fired one day later, with the Trump administration citing a needed change in leadership.

But over the coming days, reports surfaced that a brewing fissure between Trump and Phelan came to a head after Trump bristled at Phelan’s idea to build Navy battleships abroad, a sentiment that flew in the face of Trump’s previous promise to build his namesake ship class in the U.S.

Phelan’s comments at SAS undercut the Trump administration’s messaging about revitalizing the American maritime industrial base by investing in U.S. shipyards, according to Hunter Stires, maritime strategist for previous Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro.

The fiscal 2027 shipbuilding plan, meanwhile, raises the possibility of turning overseas to build auxiliary ships, or ships that can provide fuel and ammunition to U.S. Navy combatant ships.

Specifically, the Navy would like to invest $450 million in obtaining one consolidated cargo replenishment at sea, or CONSOL, tanker in fiscal 2027. CONSOL references a commercial tanker chartered by Military Sealift Command that refuels a U.S. Navy ship while underway.

The Navy also aims to spend $2.3 billion over the next five years to purchase five tankers for fuel support, built “potentially” and “initially” at overseas shipyards.

The sea service is asking Congress for approval to build two auxiliary ships and the “flexibility for fabrication of some combatant modules overseas,” the shipbuilding plan says.

The budget also negates another of Phelan’s previous comments regarding the fiscal 2027 Defense Department budget request. The Navy announced that Golden Fleet-era battleships will be nuclear powered, despite Phelan saying at the Sea-Air-Space exposition that the presence of nuclear power aboard the future vessels was “unlikely.”

Overall, the service aims to increase its number of ships dramatically, according to the plan.

There are currently over 290 battle force ships, though the number, according to Navy requirements by law, is 355, the document stated. The service intends to have 395 vessels in fiscal 2027 and 450 vessels by the end of fiscal 2031.

The shipbuilding plan emphasizes three primary points the service views as key to asserting maritime supremacy: ending backlogs by rewarding industry partners that prioritize speed; making good on the Golden Fleet promise by building a high-low mix of advanced combatants, cost-effective ships and unmanned systems; and reinvigorating the maritime industrial base by creating jobs and attracting private investment.

The Navy plans to address the latter issue by increasing reliance on distributed shipbuilding sites, or sites away from a main shipbuilding yard.

Currently, only 10% of shipbuilding is taking place at distributed sites. The service wants to increase that number to 50% to increase flexibility, reduce reliance on legacy shipyards and accelerate delivery.

President Donald Trump’s proposed $1.5 trillion fiscal 2027 defense budget calls for a $65.8 billion investment in shipbuilding, including funding for 34 manned ships and five unmanned platforms.

A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet from USS George H.W. Bush launched “precision munitions” at the smokestacks of M/T Sea Star III and M/T Sevda, disabling the vessels before they could reach an Iranian port on the Gulf of Oman, according to U.S. Central Command.

“U.S. forces in the Middle East remain committed to full enforcement of the blockade of vessels entering or leaving Iran,” said Adm. Brad Cooper, the commander of CENTCOM.

The U.S. military has turned away 50 commercial vessels operating in the strait since the U.S. Navy blockade began on April 12.

Friday’s confrontation capped a tumultuous week in the waterway.

On Monday, the U.S. destroyed six Iranian small boats, as well as cruise missiles and drones, that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched against ships under U.S. escort through the strait. The escort was part of the U.S.’s short-lived Project Freedom, a military operation to escort commercial ships that has since been paused.

U.S. forces also intercepted the Iranian-flagged unladen oil tanker, M/T Hasna, in the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday as it made its way toward an Iranian port.

A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet from the USS Abraham Lincoln fired on the vessel after issuing several warnings, disabling the tanker.

And on Thursday, the U.S. conducted strikes against Iranian military facilities after Iran launched missiles, drones and small boats at three U.S. Navy vessels transiting the strait.

Despite continued military conflict around the Strait, President Donald Trump downplayed concerns about potential escalation, telling ABC News on Thursday that U.S. strikes against Iranian targets were just a “love tap” and that the four-week-old ceasefire was still in effect.

The U.S. and Iran remain in discussions over an agreement that would reportedly end the Iran war and shut down the country’s nuclear program.