A DARPA Floaty USV Thingy?
You have my attention
I’ve always been a fan of the incremental progress over the decades of unmanned (can we use that again? “Uncrewed” sounds silly), but their worst enemies continue to be the people who are over-enthusiastic as a result of reading too much military fiction and talked to too few engineers…but we are getting right on the edge of solving some of the big problems fully utilizing them in the surface and subsurface domains:
Engineering and electrical autonomous robustness
Computer and coding to enable full-spectrum autonomy
Replenishment
Communications reach-back redundancy and bandwidth
EMCON, security, local control
Some of the above have been solved in the SCIF or are close. Three more issues: ability to reload at sea, self-scuttle, and “optimally manned” options are either technologically feasible or very close.
To get there, we need to put things in the water and, in essence, play around with them with the goal of iterative improvement.
Looks like we’re getting there.
As reported by Aaron-Matthew Lariosa over at Naval News:
Serco launched the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s No Manning Required Ship program medium unmanned surface vessel prototype, USX-1 Defiant, at its Washington shipyard last month in preparation for a series of trials that aim to bring a cost-effective USV to the U.S. Navy.
From the design’s outset, the 180-foot-long, 240-ton vessel was designed without considering human habitation or protection features. According to DARPA, the NOMARS program “intends to demonstrate significant advantages,” including at-sea reliability, hydrodynamic efficiency, and stealthy features.
Cost and scalability of production are the right focus. Especially in the air, a lot of the “unmanned” systems such as Loyal Wingman etc are almost as expensive as manned platforms.
…the program’s key features include a 90% reliability at sea for a year and an autonomous refueling capability. USVs Mariner and Ranger demonstrated SERCO’s refueling capability in a test last September. Maatta also confirmed that Defiant would undergo two months of sea trials before “a very large and extensive demonstration of the vessel and its capabilities.”
If you don’t find this exciting and ripe with possibility, I’m not sure what I can do for you.
The pic above and immediately below are their medium-sized ship. What could it bring to the fight?
While the USV’s deck was covered by a tarp in photos released by DARPA, Serco’s concept models include one BAE Adaptable Deck Launcher and a container.
Is that an ISO container with containerized missile launchers, or are you just happy to see me? We all know what those are, but what is the Adaptable Deck Launcher (ADL) capable of?
The Adaptable Deck Launching System, or ADL, meets the need for a fixed angle, low elevation, deck-mounted ship defense launching system (SDLS) for near-term application onboard U.S. Navy and allied ships. The ADL is fully compatible with the Evolved SeaSparrow Missile (ESSM), in the Mk 25 Quad Pack Canister, as well as other canisters compatible with the Mk 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS). Launch control can be provided by the Mk 41 VLS electronics suite and other launch control systems.
What can those puppies carry?
Not a lot, but this is a proof of concept in the school of, “Build a little, test a little, learn a lot.” Lots of growth possibilities and Salamander approved.
The Medium USV only has two cells? I’ll take 1 SM-6 and a quad-pack of ESSM…just make sure it can be reloaded at sea…but that isn’t what interests me the most.
Can I drag a towed array sonar on this thing in conjunction with the ISO container on the stern?
If so, you can go ahead and fill those two cells with the Vertical Launched ASROC with a MK-54 torp on the end. Have 4-6 working far ahead of the Strike Group…and now you have my full and undivided attention.
Their larger model?
The company’s Large USV concept, which Maatta described as the Second World War-era destroyer escort of the future, comes equipped with four Adaptable Deck Launchers for a complement of 16 strike-length Mark 41 missile cells.
More. Faster.
Nice overview in the below video by Ryan Maatta, Marine Engineering Manager at Serco and Deputy Program Manager for DARPA's No Manning Required Ship (NOMARS) program at SNA 2025.
We’re capable of building these in very large numbers across Tier-3 shipyards without much improved infrastructure.
Great concept. However. What is the risk of collision at sea if you have no OOD, JOOD, lookouts, DRT operator, CICWO, TAO or a Captain? What happens when a critical $100 part goes out and no EM3 or GSM2 is there to replace it? And no Sounding & Security patrol? I trust no Roomba at sea. Lots of what-if's before I'd like to see this new wave future. I hope they can pull it off.
As potentially useful as this type of thing can be, the one thing that seems largely glossed over is the all important communications needed control these things. EMCON is every bit an issue as it was decades ago. More so as the surveillance platforms in space do it now too.
And then there's jamming. We say encrypted, digital, frequency hopping works. And it seems to be better. But how reliable is it really?
That said, all that is an issue for every platform out there manned or no. Though I suppose you could simply go Skynet and let the Terminators loose.