Why the Marines Want 40 Warships (and Why 31 Won't Cut It)

The U.S. Marine Corps has a math problem. Congress says they need at least 31 amphibious warfare ships. Marine leaders say that number is a floor, not a target — and they want closer to 40 if they're going to keep up with what the world is actually demanding of them.

At the Modern Day Marine exhibition on April 29, 2026, Lieutenant General Jay Bargeron, the Marine Corps' deputy commandant for plans, policies, and operations, made the pitch plainly: "It's probably going to be around 40. It could be a little more." He didn't mince words about the current legal minimum either: "31 is not the right number. It's a floor."

Why 31 Ships Isn't Enough

The Marines and Navy share a strategic goal: keep three Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs) deployed around the globe at the same time. That's a lot of presence, and it requires a lot of hulls. The current fleet of 32 amphibious warfare ships sounds close to enough until you look at readiness numbers.

According to testimony Navy Admiral James Kilby gave to the House Armed Services Committee on April 15, only 45% of amphibious ships are "combat surge ready" at any given time. Compare that with 63% for surface ships and 65% for submarines, and the gap is obvious. Less than half of the amphibious fleet is actually ready to fight on short notice.

The Real-World Cost of a Tight Fleet

This isn't a theoretical concern. In February 2022, the 22nd MEU was supposed to deploy to Europe just before Russia invaded Ukraine. Maintenance issues kept the ships in port. The Marines weren't where they needed to be, when they needed to be there.

And demand is only growing. Bargeron pointed out that combatant commanders have been asking for around six MEUs in recent years — double the official 3.0 target. The shortfall isn't a policy preference. It's a request line that's already overflowing.

What an Amphibious Ready Group Actually Looks Like

Each Amphibious Ready Group is built around three kinds of ships:

• Big deck assault ships — these carry Marines, helicopters, and fixed-wing aircraft like the F-35B.
• Amphibious transport docks — like USS John P. Murtha, which recently recovered the Artemis II astronauts after splashdown.
• Dock landing ships — workhorses for moving troops and gear from ship to shore.

Pull any one of those out of the rotation and the whole group loses its punch. That's why readiness rates matter as much as raw fleet size.

The Commandant's Priority

Marine Commandant General Eric Smith has made the three-MEU deployment posture a core priority. The reasoning is straightforward: forward-deployed Marines on warships give the U.S. "lethal response options" while denying adversaries the room to maneuver. They also keep relationships with allies warm in places where partnership matters.

Vice Admiral John Skillman, the Navy's deputy chief of naval operations, agreed that 31 ships isn't the right answer — and admitted the final number is still being worked out. "It's more than 31. We actually don't know the numbers yet," he said.

Bottom Line

The Marines aren't asking for ships because more is always better. They're asking because the legal minimum was set as a floor, not a ceiling, and the floor is already cracking under the weight of real-world demand. Whether Congress writes a check for 40 ships — or pushes for higher readiness on the 32 already in the fleet — the gap between mission and inventory is no longer something Marine leaders are willing to paper over.