Charting the Future of Navy Unmanned Operations

Op-Ed: Rethinking Naval Innovations in Unmanned Surface and Undersea Vehicles

The U.S. Navy is at a pivotal moment in reshaping its fleet architecture, embracing unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) and unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) as central components of its future operations. The recent Congressional Research Service reports outline ambitious programs aiming to develop three classes of unmanned systems: the Large Unmanned Surface Vehicle (LUSV), the Medium Unmanned Surface Vehicle (MUSV), and the Extra-Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (XLUUV), sometimes known as Orca. These initiatives reflect an effort to distribute naval capabilities across a greater number of platforms, rather than concentrating them on a few high-value ships. Such a shift marks an exciting yet challenging evolution in naval warfare and maritime operations.

By integrating these advanced unmanned systems, Navy planners and lawmakers are hoping to create a more resilient and flexible force. However, the task of transitioning from traditional manned vessels to a networked fleet of unmanned platforms comes with several tricky parts, such as adapting operational concepts, ensuring reliability of new technologies, and confronting budgetary constraints. In this opinion piece, we take a closer look at the Navy’s evolving strategy, its financial commitments, and the delicate balancing act between fostering innovation while managing risks. Let’s dive in into the details of these developments and assess their potential impacts on future naval operations.

Understanding the Navy’s Strategic Shift

In recent years, the U.S. Navy has moved away from the old paradigm of relying on a few expensive, heavily manned ships toward a structure that favors a distributed fleet architecture. This strategy is built on the notion of “not putting too many eggs in one basket.” Distributing critical combat and surveillance capabilities across several smaller, possibly unmanned or optionally manned platforms not only spreads risk but also enhances mission flexibility.

At its core, this strategic shift arises from the belief that a more spread-out fleet can better absorb shocks and disruptions. Instead of facing the catastrophic loss of a few high-value targets, enemies may find themselves dealing with a multiplicity of platforms with varying capabilities. The new investments in unmanned ship technology embody this philosophy by aiming to produce vessels that are low-cost, high-endurance, and quick to reconfigure for different missions. The transition, however, is not without its nerve-racking challenges, as it compels the Navy to figure a path through unfamiliar operational environments and emerging technologies.

Investing in Large Unmanned Surface Vehicles (LUSVs)

The LUSV program represents one of the Navy’s most ambitious undertakings. Envisioned as ships between 200 to 300 feet long, with a full-load displacement of 1,000 to 2,000 tons, LUSVs are designed to be roughly comparable in size to modern corvettes. Their intended role is multifaceted; they are structured to serve as low-cost, long-endurance vessels that can be outfitted with various modular payloads, such as anti-surface warfare (ASuW) and strike capabilities. The concept includes equipping these ships with a vertical launch system (VLS) that can carry between 16 and 32 missile-launching tubes.

Despite being labeled “unmanned,” some LUSVs may be optionally or lightly manned during the early phases of deployment. This tailored approach allows the Navy to gradually introduce crew members aboard these vessels as operational concepts and enabling technologies are refined. The program’s development is currently progressing through prototype testing, which is critical for understanding the subtle parts—small distinctions—in design specifications and machinery reliability testing. Such rigors promise to ensure that when full production begins, the platforms will be both robust and safe under combat conditions.

Key Characteristics and Planned Procurement of LUSVs

• Length: 200 to 300 feet
• Displacement: 1,000 to 2,000 tons
• Payload Flexibility: Configurable for anti-ship and land-attack missile systems
• Operational Guidance: Optionally or lightly manned during early deployments
• Phased Procurement: First production LUSV scheduled for FY2027

The Navy’s FY2025 budget allocates $54.0 million for research and development related to LUSV technology. The planned procurement schedule is methodically staggered: beginning in FY2027 with the first vessel at an approximate cost of $497.6 million, followed by additional vessels in subsequent fiscal years. This phased approach is designed to reduce risk through delayed, but calculated, production and development, giving the Navy more time to test and refine operational tactics.

Exploring Medium Unmanned Surface Vehicles (MUSVs)

In parallel to the LUSV initiative, the Navy is also pursuing the development of MUSVs. These vehicles, defined as being less than 200 feet in length and displacing under 500 tons, are categorized roughly as patrol crafts. Although smaller than their large-vehicle counterparts, MUSVs are expected to perform specialized roles in intense, near-real-time operational scenarios. Their design emphasizes adaptability and is geared toward supporting missions such as Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Targeting (ISR-T), counter-ISR-T activities, and Information Operations (IO).

Unlike the LUSV program which has an immediate path toward procurement, MUSVs remain in the prototype and conceptual phase. According to budget submissions, no operational MUSVs are expected to be procured from FY2025 through FY2029. The Navy plans to continue prototyping efforts with existing hardware from FY2019, with formal requirements expected to be defined through a Capability Development Document (CDD). This methodical pace underlines the Navy’s cautious approach, aiming to mitigate risks and ensure that every fine point—the nitty-gritty of platform capabilities and roles—is fully understood before committing substantial funds.

Challenges and Planning for MUSVs

• Role Definition: Focusing on ISR-T, counter-ISR-T, and IO missions
• Size and Displacement: Less than 200 feet and under 500 tons
• R&D Phase: Ongoing prototyping to drive future requirements
• Procurement Timeline: Delayed to allow transition to an ACAT program

By taking the time to carefully work through the small distinctions and subtle parts of MUSV design, the Navy is acknowledging that a rushed deployment without thorough testing could be off-putting from an operational standpoint. Budget decisions being deferred reflect a responsible, measured approach that aims to balance innovation with the risks inherent in deploying any new technology into active service.

The Role of Extra-Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicles (XLUUVs)

Placed on the cutting edge of underwater warfare technology are the XLUUVs, sometimes referred to by their code name, Orca. These underwater vehicles are designed to be about the size of a subway car and are intended to undertake covert missions, including the deployment of specialized mine systems. One such application is the planned deployment of the Hammerhead mine, which would be tethered to the seafloor and armed with an antisubmarine torpedo. The lineage for these systems harkens back to Cold War innovations like the CAPTOR mine, albeit with modern technological enhancements.

The program has already seen significant milestones, having procured five “operationally relevant prototype” XLUUVs in FY2019 alongside an additional test and training asset. The FY2025 budget further advances this initiative by programming the procurement of additional XLUUVs over the next fiscal years. However, this ambitious schedule has been affected by contractor and supplier challenges, leading to delays in the testing and delivery phases. Such setbacks are typical when dealing with the tricky parts of integrating novel technology into a century-old maritime tradition.

Procurement Roadmap and Budget Details for XLUUVs

Fiscal Year	Procured Unit	Estimated Cost (in Millions)
FY2026	1	$113.3
FY2027	1	$115.6
FY2028	1	$117.9
FY2029	1	$120.4

These budget figures underline the Navy’s commitment to evolving its undersea warfare capabilities while acknowledging that the path forward is laden with challenges. As contractors and suppliers work to iron out the twists and turns associated with schedule delays, the hope is that ongoing risk reduction testing will eventually allow the Navy to steadily increase production and integration of these undersea platforms.

Budgetary Allocations and Fiscal Planning in Naval Modernization

The financial contours of these programs are as critical as the underlying technology. The FY2025 budget submission for unmanned naval systems reveals a detailed investment strategy, allocating funds across research and development segments that are intended to cover enabling capabilities as well. The planned budget includes:

• $54.0 million for LUSV R&D
• $101.8 million for MUSV R&D
• $92.9 million for enabling capabilities for both LUSV/MUSV
• $21.5 million for the XLUUV R&D program
• $68.2 million for core UUV technologies including but not limited to XLUUV

These allocations are designed not only to develop the platforms themselves but also to support the fine points of integration such as payload compatibility, communication systems, and remote control platforms. Although these investments appear considerable, they reflect a broader strategic vision where each dollar spent is meant to spread risk across a distributed fleet architecture. It underscores the Navy’s determination to stay ahead in a rapidly evolving area, despite encountering some overwhelming hurdles along the way.

Balancing Innovation and Risk in Naval Procurement

Introducing unmanned systems into the traditional structure of a naval force involves managing a wide range of daunting tasks. The process of certifying new unmanned vessels incorporates a series of risk reduction tests aimed at ensuring that these vehicles can reliably operate under combat conditions. For instance, the delay in initiating LUSV procurement—moved from FY2025 to FY2027—was a deliberate decision by the Navy to reduce risks linked to concurrently developing requirements, resolving design specifications, and verifying machinery reliability. This two-year postponement is intended to provide additional time to sort out tangled issues that could compromise overall fleet readiness if not adequately addressed.

The iterative nature of modern military procurement means that each step forward demands careful evaluation. It is important to view these delays not as setbacks but as necessary pauses that allow the Navy to figure a path through the confusing bits of technological innovation, budget negotiations, and interdepartmental coordination. By taking a measured approach, the Navy is positioning itself to better handle the slight differences in how unmanned systems might be integrated with existing manned vessel operations, thereby ensuring robust and resilient future operations.

Challenges in Unmanned Navy Procurement

One of the most talked-about issues in modern naval planning is the inherent set of problems that come with integrating unmanned systems into traditionally manned fleets. The Navy is grappling with several tricky parts, including:

• Contractor and Supplier Hurdles: Recent delays in testing and delivery underscore the nerve-racking nature of coordinating with multiple industry players.
• Technical Transition: Adapting current maritime doctrines to account for optionally manned or fully unmanned operations introduces numerous subtle parts requiring extensive research and testing.
• Budget Uncertainties: Even though the funds are allocated, the precise costs of scaling up production remain somewhat unpredictable due to changing market dynamics and technological evolutions.
• Integration with Legacy Systems: Ensuring that new unmanned platforms can operate seamlessly with existing ships and command structures poses its own set of complicated pieces.

Addressing these issues calls for a robust evaluation framework that continuously monitors performance and operational outcomes. The Navy is aware that these challenges are not merely technical, but also ideological, as the introduction of unmanned assets can shift strategic thinking about maritime warfare. Stakeholders on Capitol Hill and within the defense community continue to discuss how best to steer through the maze of operational adjustments while keeping costs under control.

The Evolving Role of Technology in Future Naval Warfare

The rapid advancement in unmanned technology has already reshaped other areas of military operations, and the Navy is no exception. Emerging technologies such as AI-driven control systems, advanced sensor packages, and secure communication networks are increasingly becoming integrated into these unmanned systems. These devices are not just meant to replace human input but to augment overall mission capabilities in fast-paced, unpredictable scenarios.

As the Navy experiments with integrating these capabilities into LUSVs, MUSVs, and XLUUVs, it must grapple with the challenge of ensuring that software interoperability and hardware resilience remain robust. The interplay of these factors introduces additional twists and turns into an already complicated equation. New areas of research focus on ensuring that each platform can operate independently and coordinate seamlessly with other assets within a distributed fleet—ultimately contributing to a cohesive fight against adversaries in any theater of war.

Future Prospects and Tactical Advantages

• Enhanced Persistence: Unmanned platforms are designed for long-duration missions, particularly in monitoring or surveillance roles where endurance is essential.
• Operational Flexibility: Modular payload systems allow these vessels to switch roles quickly, adapting to various mission requirements while maintaining low costs.
• Minimized Human Risk: By relegating dangerous tasks to unmanned systems, the Navy can reduce casualties during high-risk operations.
• Integration with Network-Centric Warfare: Advanced communication and sensor systems will enable these unmanned vessels to feed critical information into broader operational networks.

While these advantages are promising, the operational integration of AI and advanced sensor systems creates its own set of challenges. Understanding the nitty-gritty—small distinctions—of how these systems interact with human operators and existing command structures will be essential in unlocking their full potential. The process also requires trust among military leaders, who must be convinced that these new systems are both reliable and capable of functioning within the broader framework of U.S. national defense.

Weighing the Pros and Cons of an Unmanned Future

As with any significant shift in military strategy, the move toward unmanned naval systems has its supporters and detractors. Advocates argue that a distributed fleet of unmanned systems could become a key factor in ensuring maritime security, adapting rapidly to changes in the global security environment, and protecting American interests at sea. The ability to reconfigure a vessel’s payloads quickly means that the Navy can pivot from anti-surface warfare to reconnaissance or strike roles on short notice. This operational adaptability, if successfully implemented, could serve as a game-changer in future conflicts.

Critics, on the other hand, are wary of entrusting too many critical functions to new and relatively untested technologies. The challenges of integrating unmanned systems with legacy platforms, securing remote communications, and training personnel in new operational protocols have raised concerns about the potential vulnerabilities in such high-tech initiatives. Additionally, there is an ongoing debate over whether the cost savings—at least on paper—justify the complexities associated with introducing these systems. Critics also cite the nerve-racking pace of current global technological advancements, arguing that delays in deployment may leave the Navy trailing behind international competitors.

Despite these differing perspectives, one point of consensus remains: the transition to unmanned systems is inevitable. As more international navies invest in similar technologies, the pressure to innovate domestically will only intensify. Whether viewed as a leap forward or a cautious step into unknown waters, it is clear that the Navy’s current path is designed to meet the challenges of a rapidly evolving threat environment.

Assessing Risks and Addressing Operational Concerns

Every strategic shift carries inherent risks that must be managed through careful planning and oversight. In deploying unmanned naval systems, decision-makers face a host of issues that are full of problems and loaded with tension—from technical glitches and software vulnerabilities to the broader tactical implications of having unmanned vehicles in key operational roles. The Navy’s decision to delay procurement in certain segments reflects an awareness of these challenges, allowing additional time for refining concepts and tackling confusing bits before committing entirely to full-scale production.

The approach is deliberately cautious, preferring a strategy of iterative improvements over a rapid, untested roll-out. This measured pace can help prevent costly mistakes that might arise from rushing the integration of these new platforms. In such a context, continuous risk assessment and periodic reviews of technological performance are super important as tools to safeguard national security interests. It is this commitment to a careful, evolving process that has helped shape the current state of unmanned naval warfare in the United States.

Looking Ahead: The Future of Maritime Defense

Looking forward, the continuous innovation in unmanned vehicle technology is set to redefine the landscape of naval warfare. As the U.S. Navy experiments with varied platforms—ranging from large, optionally manned vessels to small, agile patrol crafts and covert undersea vehicles—the future fleet is likely to be one of integration and adaptability. Key considerations for the coming years will include:

• Further integration of unmanned systems with existing manned operations
• Enhanced R&D efforts to reduce technical hurdles and streamline testing processes
• Strategic use of modular payloads to allow rapid mission reconfiguration
• Continuous training and doctrinal updates for naval personnel tasked with managing hybrid fleets

The ability to pivot rapidly in response to shifting operational demands could offer a decisive edge in future conflicts. It will require a concerted effort to manage the little details of each technology while ensuring robust synergy between different systems. Although the path is replete with nerve-racking challenges and occasional setbacks, the accumulated benefits of a distributed fleet could be super important in establishing a resilient, future-ready Navy.

Conclusion: Embracing a New Era of Naval Innovation

In conclusion, the Navy’s journey in adopting unmanned surface and undersea vehicles symbolizes not only a shift in tactics but also a fundamental transformation of naval strategy. By investing in LUSVs, MUSVs, and XLUUVs, the Navy aims to build a distributed, adaptable fleet capable of facing today’s uncertainties as well as the unpredictable rigors of tomorrow’s warfare. This bold move is replete with tricky parts—from technical delays and contractor issues to the balancing of budgetary constraints and tactical innovation—but it is also filled with tremendous potential.

Decision-makers are required to take a closer look at every facet—ranging from the tiny details in hardware integration to the overarching strategy of distributed capabilities. While the road forward is full of problems and, at times, intimidating challenges, the enduring rationale behind these developments is clear: to create a versatile, resilient naval force that can cope with the changing dynamics of global conflict.

As public debate continues and as technologies mature, the evolution of unmanned naval platforms will remain a subject of intense scrutiny and discussion among policymakers, military strategists, and industry experts alike. The balance between cost, capability, and risk in these programs will profoundly impact future military engagements and the geopolitical balance on the high seas. In this context, it is critical to appreciate both the promise and the pitfalls. The Navy’s measured pace—recognizing the nerve-racking need to figure a path through multiple operational twists and turns—represents not a retreat from innovation, but a calculated move toward a resilient future in maritime defense.

Ultimately, whether one views these changes as a revolutionary leap or a cautious stepping stone, the ongoing transformation undertaken by the Navy is destined to reshape our understanding of naval warfare. As unmanned systems continue to evolve and as budgetary commitments solidify, the distribution of naval power across a wider range of platforms may well define the next chapter in the nation’s defense strategy. Only time will reveal how these tactical innovations, woven with both clever technological advancements and the inherent risks of transformation, will integrate into a cohesive operational doctrine that serves both national security and strategic imperatives.

In embracing a future defined by integration, flexibility, and judicious risk management, the Navy is taking decisive steps that reflect broader trends in global security. With careful oversight and continued innovation, the evolving fleet design could serve as a robust platform for not only defending national interests but also projecting strategic power across contested maritime spaces. Thus, the ongoing discussion surrounding these unmanned systems remains as relevant as ever, imbued with both promise and caution as the U.S. navigates the challenging transition into new realms of naval capability.

Originally Post From https://news.usni.org/2025/03/27/report-to-congresson-navy-large-unmanned-surface-and-undersea-vehicles

Read more about this topic at
The Navy needs a 180-degree pivot: Embracing autonomy ...
Naval Autonomy