White House Opens Path to Foreign-Built Navy Ships
President Donald Trump has directed the United States to consider building limited numbers of Navy ships in foreign shipyards, provided the builders commit to shifting subsequent production to the United States.
The National Security Presidential Memorandum expands the “Finland model” used for the Coast Guard’s Arctic Security Cutters, under which initial vessels are built in Finland, and later ships are constructed domestically. Foreign companies could build up to two ships in each of three classes at their parent shipyards before transferring follow-on work to US facilities.
Eligible classes include surface combatants capable of anti-submarine warfare, surface warfare and convoy escort; Consolidated Cargo Replenishment at Sea tankers; and roll-on, roll-off vessels.
Congressional Approval Remains Uncertain
The administration had already asked Congress to authorize four foreign-built vessels through the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act. It also requested $1.85 billion in reconciliation funding to study foreign construction and potentially purchase an initial vessel from Japan or South Korea.
Congress has proposed restrictions. The House-passed NDAA bars foreign shipyards from constructing warships or combat logistics vessels. The Senate Armed Services Committee’s version also restricts overseas warship construction but permits up to two foreign-built auxiliary ships if their builders invest in the US maritime industrial base for later production.
The White House Office of Management and Budget said the House prohibition would limit the government’s ability to use specialized foreign technology and attract investment into domestic shipyards. Senate Democrats have prevented their chamber’s bill from reaching the floor, citing concerns about defense spending and the conflict with Iran.
US law generally limits construction of armed-forces vessels in foreign yards. A national security waiver could be used, as it was for the icebreaker agreements with Finland.
Design and Systems Integration
Analysts said foreign ships would need to be designed from the outset for US weapons, survivability standards, redundancy requirements and communications systems. Retrofitting those capabilities after construction could create delays and integration problems.
Allied ships already operate with US carrier strike groups, but their connections are not always seamless. Some NATO vessels lack networks such as Cooperative Engagement Capability, which shares missile-defense targeting data. Compatible networks and datalinks could be added, but combat-system differences would be more difficult to resolve.
Spanish, South Korean and Japanese ships use versions of Aegis, though their configurations differ from those aboard US ships. Undersea-warfare systems may also be entirely different. The Navy would additionally have to incorporate foreign hull, mechanical and electrical components into its logistics network.
Testing, Maintenance and Fleet Operations
Foreign-built ships would face decisions over US post-delivery testing and certification, including shock-resistance requirements. Because overseas yards may use different technical standards, the Navy, administration, and Congress would have to determine which US requirements to retain or revise.
Similar design adaptation complicated the Constellation-class frigate program, which was based on an Italian Fincantieri design. Fincantieri Marinette Marine received the initial contract in 2020, but the Navy said in December 2025 that it would end the program after accepting the two ships already under construction following delays, cost increases and design changes.
A class limited to two or three vessels could require costly, unique training, maintenance and spare-parts systems. Analysts recommended securing critical parts in advance. Foreign designs may offer maintainability benefits, but some are built around lower operating rates than the US Navy’s 36-month cycle, under which ships can spend about half their time at sea.

View full article

Carrier Systems Ordered Back to Steam
President Donald Trump has signed a National Security Presidential Memorandum directing the Navy to return to steam-powered aircraft catapults and hydraulic aircraft elevators on Ford-class carriers. The order also calls for a fifth public shipyard and a new component repair center intended to reduce submarine maintenance delays.
The carrier provisions apply to ships such as the future Doris Miller, now under construction at HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding. They would replace the class’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS, with traditional steam catapults and use elevator hydraulics similar to those aboard Nimitz-class carriers.
The USS Ford, the first ship in its class, currently uses EMALS to launch aircraft. Trump previewed the policy aboard the aircraft carrier George Washington in October, saying future carriers would use “steam for the catapults” and “hydraulic for the elevators.”
Cost and Schedule Concerns
General Atomics, which builds EMALS, said changing the Doris Miller’s launch system warrants reconsideration because production is nearly halfway complete.
“With nearly 50% of production complete, changing course now would introduce significant cost, schedule, and integration risks,” the company said. It also warned of broader effects on carrier readiness, technological capabilities, workforce stability and the supplier base.
Bryan Clark, director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, said Ford-class carriers use electricity for functions that relied on steam aboard earlier classes, including cooking, heating and water purification, as well as catapults and arresting gear.
Restoring steam lines for the catapults would therefore require an extensive redesign, Clark said. He also noted that the Navy has not purchased a steam catapult in more than 20 years, meaning suppliers may need substantial investment and time to restart production.
Fifth Public Shipyard Proposal
The memorandum directs Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to submit a carrier and submarine readiness plan within 120 days. The proposal must examine expanded use of the private sector and the establishment of an additional public shipyard.
The fifth yard plan must provide enough drydock capacity to support projected growth in the fast-attack submarine fleet over the next two decades. Potential locations are to be near the U.S. Pacific Fleet and may include the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii and U.S. territories.
Site options must consider as many as three new drydocks capable of accommodating every current and projected submarine class. The report must also address construction schedules, resource requirements, and financing options, including public-private partnerships.
Existing Maintenance Network
The United States currently operates four public shipyards in Virginia, Maine, Washington, and Hawaii. Although private yards also maintain military vessels, the public facilities typically conduct major overhauls and modernization work on the Navy’s nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers.
Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said in June that the administration was “pushing hard for an additional public shipyard” to support a growing fleet. He said private maintenance contracts would continue, but argued that sufficient public capacity was necessary to operate at scale.
Workforce and Repair Capacity
Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said in April that the Navy had been examining a fifth public shipyard, while cautioning that construction alone would not resolve maintenance constraints.
“A new yard is expensive, and so is that infrastructure worth it if I can’t get the workforce there?” Caudle said, pointing to questions about recruiting and sustaining enough personnel to operate another facility.
The memorandum’s separate component repair center is also intended to address submarine repair delays, though further details about its location, cost, and timeline were not provided.

View full article

WHO Warehouse Destroyed in Dnipro
A World Health Organization warehouse in Dnipro was destroyed during a Russian attack on Aug. 7, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus confirmed on Aug. 9.
The facility in Ukraine’s fourth-largest city stored emergency medical supplies intended for hospitals and communities near the front line. The destruction sent much of the remaining stock up in smoke.
No information about casualties was provided.
Staff Evacuated Part of Aid Stock
WHO personnel evacuated 130 of approximately 300 pallets of humanitarian aid before the warehouse was struck. The status of the evacuated supplies was not specified.
Ukraine’s Ombudsman Dmytro Lubinets said the attack affected essential medicines meant for hospitals and people living closest to active fighting.
“This is a blow to essential medicines intended for hospitals and people closest to the front line,” Lubinets wrote on Telegram. He described the strike as a “cynical” attack intended to deprive vulnerable people of lifesaving resources.
WHO Calls for Protection of Health Care
Ghebreyesus condemned attacks on medical facilities and supplies, emphasizing that health care remains protected under the rules of war.
“I cannot say loudly enough: attacks on health care MUST STOP,” he wrote on X. “Even wars have rules. One of those is that health must be protected.”
Although WHO confirmed that the warehouse was destroyed during the Russian attack, Ghebreyesus did not identify Russia by name in his statement.
Previous Attacks on Humanitarian Operations
The Dnipro strike follows other attacks affecting United Nations humanitarian work in Ukraine. In May, a UN convoy delivering supplies to civilians in Kherson Oblast was severely damaged in two Russian drone strikes.
WHO has also documented heightened risks faced by ambulance drivers and health transport personnel during Russia’s full-scale war. These workers operate along routes and in communities regularly exposed to attacks.
On July 30, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs explicitly identified Russia when condemning an attack on Ukrainian civilian targets. An EU diplomat said colleagues in Brussels were considering whether that approach could signal a change in how UN organizations publicly attribute such incidents.
Investigations Into Alleged Crimes
Ukrainian authorities continue to investigate alleged violations of international law committed during the war. According to a European Commission webpage last updated in May 2026, Ukraine is investigating more than 200,000 incidents of alleged international crimes.
The commission said the actual number of potential atrocities is believed to be higher. Russian forces have been accused of repeated attacks on civilian targets and numerous war crimes in Ukraine.

View full article

Joint S-300 Effort Targets Late 2026
The United States and Ukraine are working to restore and expand Ukraine’s supply of S-300 air-defense missiles, retired U.S. Army Col. Robert Hamilton said on PBS. The initiative covers refurbishment of existing interceptors and development of a newly manufactured missile compatible with surviving S-300 launchers, radars and fire-control systems.
Initial operational capability is targeted for late 2026. Estimated annual output ranges from about 100 to several hundred missiles, equivalent to roughly eight to 25 rounds per month if production reaches 100–300 annually.
The project is intended to return more of Ukraine’s S-300 infrastructure to sustained service and reduce the use of scarce Patriot interceptors against aircraft, cruise missiles and other targets that older systems can engage.
Patriot Inventories Drive Demand
Hamilton estimated that the United States held about 2,330 Patriot missiles before the conflict with Iran and approximately 800 afterward, a reduction of about 1,530 interceptors. Current U.S. production is about 600 missiles annually, while Germany and Japan also manufacture Patriot missiles under license at lower rates.
A $58 billion expansion is intended to raise annual production to approximately 2,000 missiles. However, the first interceptors associated with that expansion are not expected until early 2029, with contract execution continuing through 2032.
Ukraine has received about 600 Patriot interceptors over 4.5 years of war, according to Hamilton. An S-300-compatible line producing 100–300 missiles annually would not replace Patriot, particularly for ballistic-missile defense, but could preserve higher-tier interceptors for targets such as Iskander-M and Kinzhal missiles.
Refurbishment and New Production
One engineering path involves restoring older S-300 rounds by replacing motors, electronics, seals, guidance components and other life-limited parts. The second would produce a new interceptor that functions with the S-300’s existing mechanical, electrical and command interfaces.
Ukraine has prior experience with this work. Ukrainian industry was repairing 5V55 missiles and testing a domestically produced replacement for the original 48D6 solid-fuel motor by 2020. Ukroboronservice has conducted S-300 repairs and service-life extensions since 2004.
Washington also possesses S-300 equipment acquired for evaluation during the 1990s, including S-300P and S-300V components. That hardware can support interface and compatibility testing without removing Ukrainian combat systems from service.
Missiles and Existing Infrastructure
Much of Ukraine’s prewar S-300PT/PS force used the 5V55 family. The 5V55K has an effective range of about 47 km, while the 5V55R reaches approximately 75 km. The later 48N6 has a nominal range of about 150 km.
Ukraine entered 2022 with roughly 25–30 S-300PT/PS battalions in varying condition. Even an annual output of 300 missiles would therefore remain limited relative to the size of the original force, making concentrated allocation to operational batteries and priority areas more practical than equal distribution.
The program was under development before Hamilton’s disclosure. In September 2024, then-U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the United States, Ukraine and several European companies were developing substitutes for the S-300 surface-to-air missile and R-27 air-to-air missile.
A Layered Air-Defense Structure
The S-300 project forms part of a broader effort to assign different target classes to different systems. Patriot and PAC-3 MSE interceptors remain focused on ballistic missiles and other demanding threats, while SAMP/T adds long-range coverage. France plans to transfer two SAMP/T batteries to Ukraine in 2026.
FrankenSAM projects have also adapted Soviet-origin systems to Western ammunition, including Buk-M1 launchers modified for RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missiles and configurations using AIM-9M Sidewinders. Norway allocated slightly more than NOK 500 million, about $45 million, in December 2025 for S-300 missile procurement while compatible local production is developed.

View full article

Fighting Remains Concentrated in Donetsk
As of August 9, 2026, Russia continues to apply its strongest ground pressure around Pokrovsk, Dobropillia, and the Kostiantynivka–Druzhkivka area. Ukrainian reporting recorded more than 200 combat engagements in one day, with the Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka sectors seeing the heaviest fighting.
The Institute for the Study of War assesses that Russia is moving north and northwest around Pokrovsk and Dobropillia, potentially preparing a broader attempt to envelop Ukraine’s remaining fortified belt in Donetsk: Kostiantynivka, Druzhkivka, Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. However, Russia’s current advance remains too slow to threaten the belt’s capture in the near term.
Small-unit infiltration increasingly characterizes combat along the roughly 1,200-kilometer front. Reconnaissance and first-person-view drones make concentrated armored formations vulnerable, leading Russian troops to use small groups to exploit gaps in Ukraine’s thinly staffed defenses.
Russia Targets Logistics and Energy
Russia has increased strikes on roads, bridges, railways and other infrastructure supporting Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, while also using more glide bombs in the area. The campaign appears intended to weaken supply and reinforcement routes before a possible future ground offensive.
An overnight attack into August 8 involved six ballistic missiles and 151 drones, according to Ukrainian authorities. Four people were killed in and around Kyiv, including a three-year-old child and his grandparents.
Ukraine’s limited supply of ballistic-missile interceptors is becoming a major vulnerability. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said allied interceptor deliveries in 2026 had fallen to about one-third of their 2025 level, with Patriot systems particularly affected. Ukraine intercepted 29 of 195 Russian ballistic missiles launched in July, he said.
Ukraine also expects renewed attacks on its power grid during winter. Officials say strikes during the previous winter damaged or destroyed facilities representing about 80% of the country’s generating capacity.
Ukraine Expands Deep Strikes
Ukraine has broadened its long-range campaign against Russian energy, military and transportation infrastructure. Drones struck the Slavneft-Yanos refinery in Yaroslavl, about 250 kilometers northeast of Moscow, causing a large fire after the August 6 attack. Ukraine also confirmed strikes on the Ilsky and Syzran refineries during the August 8 exchange.
Other targets have included fuel facilities, air bases, air-defense systems, command posts, rail infrastructure, warships, tankers and commercial warehouses. ISW assesses that the refinery attacks have reduced Russian processing activity, prompting Moscow to export unusually large volumes of crude oil rather than refine it domestically.
Black Sea Risks Increase
Russia and Ukraine have intensified attacks on ports, tankers, cargo ships and export infrastructure in the Black Sea, disrupting grain and energy shipments while raising shipping and insurance costs.
Russia continues to strike Ukrainian port infrastructure around Odesa and Mykolaiv. Ukraine has targeted Russian oil tankers, terminals and shipping linked to Moscow’s energy trade. Turkey has called for a moratorium on attacks against commercial vessels after ships from third countries were increasingly affected.
North Korean Role Expands
A North Korean missile unit of about 90 personnel is reportedly deploying to Russia’s Voronezh region with up to six launchers and as many as 120 ballistic missiles. At least 40 missiles were reportedly delivered, including two linked to a recent Russian strike.
North Korea has already sent approximately 14,000–15,000 troops, mainly connected to operations around Kursk, while supplying millions of artillery rounds and ballistic missiles. Zelenskyy said Russia may be preparing to receive tens of thousands more North Korean personnel, although their number and role remain uncertain.
Sanctions Advance as War Continues
The U.S. Senate approved a new Russia sanctions bill by an 86–11 vote on August 8. The legislation targets Russian energy revenue, banks, officials, and companies and could penalize countries purchasing large quantities of Russian oil and gas. It now moves to the House.
Neither side appears close to a decisive operational victory or an agreement over territorial demands. Russia retains the ground initiative in Donetsk but is advancing incrementally, while Ukraine is increasingly using long-range strikes to offset disadvantages in manpower and artillery.

View full article

Direct Strikes Pause as Maritime Attacks Continue
As of August 9, 2026, large-scale direct strikes between the United States and Iran have slowed, but fighting and disruption continue around two major shipping routes.
The last publicly confirmed major U.S. strike package occurred July 29, when U.S. Central Command said it targeted dozens of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps command centers, missile and drone facilities, coastal defenses and maritime capabilities. The strikes followed an Iranian ballistic missile launch against U.S. forces; CENTCOM said the missiles were intercepted.
President Donald Trump announced another halt to strikes on August 1 while intermediaries pursued a provisional diplomatic arrangement. No comparable U.S. bombing campaign has since been announced, but the pause has not produced a broader settlement.
Vessel Struck in Strait of Hormuz
The United Arab Emirates said Iran fired a missile on August 8 at a vessel affiliated with state-owned ADNOC while it transited the Strait of Hormuz. No injuries were reported, and authorities said the situation aboard the vessel was brought under control.
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations separately reported that a ship in the area was hit by an unidentified projectile and caught fire. The fire was extinguished without reported environmental damage. Iran did not immediately respond to the UAE’s accusation.
ADNOC said 15 of its vessels have been attacked by missiles or drones since the war began, including three during the past week. The attacks have killed one crew member and wounded 20 others.
Iran Sets Conditions for Reopening Hormuz
Iran and Oman say they are close to an agreement establishing a new shipping route through the strait, and Washington has expressed optimism that an arrangement could be announced. Iranian officials, however, say an agreement with Oman alone would not reopen Hormuz.
Iran’s reported demands include compensation for wartime damage, removal of U.S. sanctions and the blockade of Iranian ports, release of frozen Iranian assets, an end to U.S. threats, and an end to military operations against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and the Palestinian territories.
The IRGC said August 8 that the strait would reopen only if Washington accepted Iran’s conditions. Reuters reported that one version of the proposed Iran-Oman arrangement would also give Tehran some authority over vessels entering the Persian Gulf. The United States has opposed allowing Iran to control international access through the waterway.
Iran has imposed tolls on tankers and fired on vessels attempting to transit without its approval. The dispute therefore concerns both reopening the strait and determining the rules under which ships may use it.
Commercial Traffic Remains Disrupted
At least 70 ships remain trapped inside the Persian Gulf, including 29 tankers, according to an August 7 USNI report. Another 65 vessels that entered during a June ceasefire period have not departed.
Traffic increased during the latest reporting week, but Lloyd’s List Intelligence said a single week of data did not demonstrate that shipowners considered the crisis over. Transit levels remain well below prewar norms.
The United States and Iran are enforcing competing maritime restrictions. CENTCOM said it had permitted more than 30 humanitarian vessels to pass during the U.S. blockade while turning away 53 ships, disabling two and boarding two others.
U.S. Forces Remain Positioned Nearby
The United States has maintained a large regional force despite the pause in airstrikes. As of an August 3 fleet assessment, the USS Abraham Lincoln and USS George H.W. Bush carrier strike groups were operating in the Arabian Sea. The Lincoln was supporting Operation Epic Fury.
The USS Boxer Amphibious Ready Group and the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit were also in the area, alongside independently deployed destroyers and cruisers. CENTCOM said July 29 that more than 50,000 U.S. service members were deployed across the Middle East.

View full article

Three States Sign Collective-Defence Pact
Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan signed the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement on August 7, 2026, establishing a trilateral commitment to treat an armed attack against any member as an attack against all three.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif concluded the agreement at the Makkah Al-Mukarramah Summit for Joint Defence at Al-Safa Palace in Mecca.
A joint statement said the pact is intended to strengthen collective deterrence and enhance “all aspects of defence cooperation” among the countries. It did not specify the forces, equipment or other military support each state would be required to provide in response to an attack.
Scope and Existing Commitments
A Turkish official described the agreement as defensive and not directed at a particular country. The official also said it remains open to other regional states and does not replace existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements involving the signatories.
The pact expands upon the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement signed by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan on September 17, 2025. That earlier accord formalized a long-running military relationship in which Pakistan has provided training and technical assistance to Saudi forces.
Reports differ on the nuclear implications of the arrangements. The Saudi-Pakistani agreement has been characterized as placing Riyadh under Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella, but defence analyst Mansoor Ahmed of the Australian National University said Pakistan’s nuclear posture remains focused on India and that the trilateral pact is unlikely to extend its nuclear deterrent to the other parties.
Agreement Follows Regional Attacks
The signing took place during a wider conflict involving Iran, Israel and the United States that began after US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets on February 28, 2026. Iran and allied forces, including Houthi fighters in Yemen and Shiite militias in Iraq, subsequently carried out missile and drone attacks against Saudi Arabia and other regional states.
Hours before the agreement was signed, a senior Saudi official said the kingdom was preparing for possible attacks by Iran-backed forces in Yemen and Iraq, citing intelligence gathered domestically and from regional allies and the United States.
Pakistan has also participated in diplomatic efforts concerning the Iran conflict. Turkey, a NATO member, has been less directly exposed to the fighting but shares concerns about the security and economic effects of broader regional instability.
Established Defence Relationships
The three countries had expanded bilateral military and industrial cooperation before forming the new grouping. Turkey and Pakistan have exchanged warships and training aircraft, while Saudi Arabia agreed in 2023 to buy Turkish-made drones in what Ankara then described as its largest defence export contract.
By mid-2026, Pakistan had reportedly deployed several thousand troops, fighter aircraft, drones and an air-defence system to Saudi Arabia. Pakistan also opened discussions with Kuwait in July on a broader security arrangement.
Ahmed said the pact could provide a framework combining the established defence industries of Pakistan and Turkey with potential Saudi financial and technological investment. He argued that it is better understood as a regional security and defence-cooperation framework than as an alliance directly comparable with NATO.
Implementation Remains Unspecified
The joint statement emphasized historical ties, Islamic solidarity and shared strategic interests but provided no detailed command structure, deployment plan or automatic military-response mechanism.
Michael Kugelman of the Atlantic Council described the pact as a logical result of deepening security ties and said its focus on regional burden-sharing could be welcomed in Washington. H. A. Hellyer of the Royal United Services Institute cautioned that the signing alone does not establish how quickly or fully the collective-defence provision would be implemented during a crisis.
Turkey has previously sought to include Egypt in a broader regional defence arrangement, but no expansion beyond the three signatories has been announced.

View full article

CBO Projects $275 Billion Cost
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Navy’s planned fleet of 15 nuclear-powered Trump-class battleships would cost $275 billion. The lead ship, USS Defiant, would cost about $23.4 billion, while the remaining 14 vessels would average approximately $18 billion each.
The estimate assumes the first ship is ordered in 2028 and all 15 are purchased through 2056 at the rate outlined in the Navy’s shipbuilding plan. CBO described its projections as “highly uncertain,” noting that they rely on preliminary assessments of the ship’s design and the broader acquisition program.
A conventionally powered lead ship would cost an estimated $21.3 billion, with a 15-ship conventional fleet totaling about $243 billion. The nuclear-powered program would therefore cost approximately 13 percent more to build. Nuclear propulsion could reduce operating expenses by eliminating conventional fuel purchases, but CBO said it lacked enough information to calculate those savings.
Funding and Construction Schedule
The Navy is seeking approximately $1 billion in advance procurement funding and $837 million for research and development in its fiscal 2027 budget request. Budget documents indicate plans to request about $17 billion in procurement funding for the first ship in fiscal 2028 and roughly $13 billion in 2030 for the second.
Construction of the lead ship was expected to begin in 2028, with delivery projected for 2036. The program was announced by President Donald Trump in December 2025 as part of the administration’s “Golden Fleet” initiative. While the initial announcement called for two ships followed by a 10-ship fleet and potentially 20 to 25 vessels, the current CBO estimate is based on the Navy’s 15-ship plan.
CBO assumes one shipyard would conduct final assembly while other yards build portions or sections. Navy officials have indicated that Newport News Shipbuilding is the most likely location because of the ship’s nuclear propulsion.
Size and Nuclear Propulsion
At an estimated 35,000 tons, the Trump class would be roughly three and a half times the size of an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and would become the world’s largest surface combatant. Navy budget documents provide a broader projected full-load displacement of 35,000 to 41,000 tons.
CBO said increasing displacement to 41,000 tons would raise the lead ship’s cost by 16 percent. The Navy has confirmed that the class will be nuclear-powered, using the same reactor design as the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier.
The House Armed Services Committee has directed the Navy to provide an acquisition report by March 2027, including plans to mitigate possible effects on Ford-class carrier construction.
Planned Weapons and Capabilities
The ships are intended to carry the nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile, known as SLCM-N. CBO said the number aboard would probably be small but remains unknown. Its inclusion would give the ship more firepower than any Navy vessel other than the 14 Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines.
Other planned systems include Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic missiles, Mark 41 vertical-launch cells, 5-inch guns, railguns, laser weapons and short-range defensive launchers. Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao said in May 2026 that the ship would have 200 vertical-launch cells. Plans also call for an enclosed hangar supporting helicopters, V-22 Ospreys and future crewed or uncrewed vertical-lift aircraft.
Program Background and Uncertainty
The Trump class, also designated BBG(X) or BBGN, emerged from the Navy’s work on a successor to the DDG(X) large surface combatant. Officials concluded that the DDG(X) hull was too small to accommodate the desired combination of hypersonic missiles and a gun mount.
The Navy has not operated a battleship since USS Missouri retired in 1992. The Trump class would differ from historical battleships by relying primarily on guided missiles rather than heavy armor and large-caliber guns, leading some analysts to question its classification. Analysts have also raised concerns about funding, development costs, shipyard capacity, and the skilled workforce needed for the unprecedented design.

View full article

Uncrowned Gaming has rolled out an updated version of the information boxes displayed at the bottom of its news articles, improving both their appearance and their usefulness for readers.
The redesigned boxes continue to provide quick access to key information about the subject of an article, but they now support three distinct formats: The Game, The Platform, and The Community.

Game-specific articles can display the title, release year, studio, relevant community forum, and direct links to supported storefronts. These links now use cleaner, standardized icons and can point readers directly to services such as Steam, PlayStation, Xbox, the App Store, Google Play, Epic Games Store, GOG, and Nintendo.

Platform-focused news can instead use The Platform, allowing articles about PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo, PC gaming, mobile gaming, virtual reality, cloud gaming, and major storefronts or launchers to provide more relevant information. Depending on the selected platform, these boxes may include links to current consoles, launcher downloads, stores, major cloud-gaming services, or prominent VR headsets.

When an article does not require a dedicated game or platform box, The Community now takes its place. Rather than leaving an empty space at the bottom of the article, the community box invites readers to continue the discussion on the Uncrowned Gaming forums.
The updated system also replaces many externally hosted image icons with Font Awesome icons, creating a more consistent design while making the boxes easier to maintain and expand.
These changes are part of Uncrowned Gaming’s continued effort to make its news coverage more useful, connected, and human. Readers can move directly from an article to the game, platform, storefront, or community most relevant to the story without needing to search for those destinations separately and without getting sent to landing pages or other nonsense many outlets use to capture clicks.
Read on Uncrowned Empire