I'm curious as to whether manned ships will continue to prevail in the age of drones.
Wire up a cheap boat with explosives and it can sink an expensive naval vessel. The Ukrainians are using this to massively great effect right now against the Russians.
What if instead of building one new aircraft carrier, you build an autonomous submersible capable of launching drones with variable payloads?
Or instead of a destroyer, build a drone ship that can launch missiles?
Or an entirely new class of ship that simply swarms enemy defenses and is laden with explosives? Mass-produced autonomous jet skis with explosive payloads. But faster.
> Wire up a cheap boat with explosives and it can sink an expensive naval vessel.
This has been pretty obvious since the Millennium Challenge 21 years ago, when they just called them suicide attacks. Nobody seems to have cared then and not much has changed.
I think the issue is pretty tightly limited to boats/sea drones, though. If you're even a few feet under the surface then sonar can see you. If you're a few feet above the surface then radar gets you. Both options die a mile away.
I also think Russia is probably not very representative of the overall threat, too. I don't think their navy is running particularly better than their army. I don't know that other navies can do much besides trying to spot ships and blow them up with guns (do top-attack missiles work?) but whether or not they're good at it they'll definitely be much better than Russia. Until there's some sign that countries are actually investing in sea drones I don't think anything will be done, and I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of small top-attack rocket makes it a non-issue.
> autonomous submersible
autonomous and submersible don't go very well together. Radio contact underwater is terrible. It's not like drones fly themselves; we haven't figure out the whole autonomous thing.
> capable of launching drones with variable payloads?
Landing a plane on a ship is actually really hard and requires constant maintenance, even for VTOL. Even for helicopters. Smaller the ship, harder it is to land.
> build a drone ship that can launch missiles?
But like, why? Why not have people on it? Ships are not big because of the people on it. People can treat casualties, repel boarding, land on the ground etc. Ships are also constantly being maintained and repaired. Waves and salt are a real bitch.
If you make a ship without people it'll cost almost the same, be almost the same size, be very hard to repair and be much less capable.
Simply looking at costs and complexity "on paper" from an engineering / accounting perspective doesn't really capture all the differences between humans and machines, especially considering civilian morale.
The US military lost <2.5k in Afghanistan over two decades, and that generated enough war weariness for us to quit.
The current American public and political system simply isn't willing to tolerate large numbers of casualties. So it makes a whole lot of sense to take people out of the equation.
Wire up a cheap boat with explosives and it can sink an expensive naval vessel. The Ukrainians are using this to massively great effect right now against the Russians.
What if instead of building one new aircraft carrier, you build an autonomous submersible capable of launching drones with variable payloads?
Or instead of a destroyer, build a drone ship that can launch missiles?
Or an entirely new class of ship that simply swarms enemy defenses and is laden with explosives? Mass-produced autonomous jet skis with explosive payloads. But faster.