The craft is a very small (12 ft long), unmanned boat that
was developed for monitoring tasks. It
comes in 4-38 ft versions, has a catamaran style hull and flat upper surface,
is battery powered, and is controlled by a line of sight laptop. Operational speed appears to be very slow
(several knots? based on video estimate) presumably due to the battery
power. The boat’s specifications claim up
to 20 kt speed but that is, presumably, a very short time burst as it would
quickly deplete the battery. The boats
are claimed to be capable of swarm-like, formation sailing with multiple units
(no one has yet elucidated a tactically useful swarm behavior but, I digress …). Smaller versions have what appears to be a
permanently mounted FLIR turret and the T12 boat has a 140 lb payload capacity. An interesting capability is the ability to
semi-submerge for reduced signature.
 |
| MANTAS (smaller version) |
The UK purchase was $1.8M for 5x twelve foot units ($360,000
each) with 3 units going to the Royal Navy and 2 units going to the UK Joint
Forces Command (now Strategic Command).
Apparently, in looking for a suitable craft, the UK prioritized low
observability and production readiness.
MANTAS T12 Characteristics:
- Length: 12 ft
- Width: 3ft
- Height: 14 in
- Draft: 7 in
- Craft weight: 210 lbs
- Max payload weight: 140 lbs
- Burst speed: 40 kts
- Cruise speed: 8-20 kts
- Cruising range: 60 nm
- Ocean capable: sea state 4+
The list of claimed mission applications is vast and
patently ludicrous, as most manufacturer claims are.
- Beach surveillance
- Cargo transport, ship to shore / ship to ship (seriously? how much useful cargo can even the 38 ft version carry?)
- HVU escort and interdiction (seriously? how is a tiny, slow boat going to provide effective escort and interdiction for a HVU?)
- Search and rescue (search, maybe, over a very limited area, but rescue? – an unmanned boat can’t rescue anyone)
- Mine countermeasures (now you’re just pretending!)
- Channel bathymetry
- Monitoring residential areas
- Dock inspection
- Harbor/port security
- Environmental monitoring
- SIGINT / EW (the 1 ft altitude of the antennae suggest a very limited effective range)
The legitimate use for such a boat is simple monitoring as
in harbor/port security tasks or examination of dock structures or hull
conditions.
In very limited circumstances it might be useful for
clandestine ISR.
The obvious problems are that the payloads are small which
limits what can be carried and operated.
Generally speaking, the larger the payload capacity, the greater the
potential usefulness of the vessel. The
limitation is exacerbated by the fact that the sensors are just a foot or two
above the surface of the water which drastically limits the field of view and
range of the sensor. The slow operating
speed just makes the other limitations that much worse. Combined slow speed and limited sensor range
means surveillance coverage per unit of time is quite limited but if time is
not a concern it could work.
Unfortunately, in combat, time is always a concern.
Some obvious questions include:
Comm Range – As with any unmanned vehicle, communications is
a potential weakness and comm range, in particular, is a concern. The comm range for this boat is unknown but
is likely quite limited.
Control Range – The control appears to be
line-of-sight. Bear in mind that a
vessel this low to the water has a line of sight, given wave action, that may
be extremely short. Is there really a
benefit to using an unmanned boat when the control vessel has to be almost on
top of it? At that point, presumably,
the control vessel has bigger, more powerful sensors located much higher and
with much greater range.
Data Transmission Security/Stealth – Another unknown is whether
the boat’s data is secure and stealthy (low probability of detection and
interception). Nothing on the vessel
seemed to indicate any kind of advanced, directional comm links. It might be possible to add such gear but
then that cuts into the payload.
In summation, this appears to be niche boat suitable for
non-combat port/harbor monitoring. Given
that, I have to wonder, why the push for unmanned port/harbor monitoring? You still need operators and, without a crew,
the boat’s usefulness is limited to purely optical monitoring. It would seem that simply installing more
cameras around the port/harbor area would accomplish the same thing. Is this just a desire to be part of the ‘unmanned’
fad?
MANTAS Video
Here's the Youtube link in case you can't see the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KJbL4Ngvjk
(1)Naval News website, “UK MoD Procuring 5 MANTAS T12 USVs
for Royal Navy and Joint Forces Command”, Xavier Vavasseur, 28-Jan-2020,
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/01/uk-mod-procuring-5-mantas-t12-usvs-for-royal-navy-and-joint-forces-command/
With all due respect, the drone being rolled out of the trailer doesn't look much bigger than it's two handlers. I'm betting that is a T8 and not a T12.
ReplyDeleteNo, it's clearly not a T12. It just happened to be what I could easily find. I did note in the post that they came in different sizes. I'll edit the picture captions to be generic.
DeleteI watched about half of the video. It's interesting that they based the design on a speedboat.
DeleteThis could be useful domestically for rescue operations after a major storm or flooding. Repeaters could extend is communication range and, hence, its operational range. Aside from locating survivors, it look for ways in and out of the affected areas and help assess the damage.
The Royal Navy does a lot of fisheries enforcement work with Offshore Patrol Vessels. A USV like this *might* be able to quietly get a close look at a fishing vessel while the OPV is pretending to keep its distance.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise this is a toy. Drone use took off after NATO operations in Bosnia showed ground commanders an unprecedented view of the battle. No matter their technical or tactical shortcomings, the bird's eye view was totally worth it.
Maritime USVs haven't done anything notable even in an exercise. There's no bird's eye view here, in fact the veiew is worse than that from a kayak. I think they're just toys. At least the UK isn't wasting too much money on them. Yet.
(Don McCollor)...With the line-of-sight control, I would think without (or even with) a high command platform antenna, data (and control) dropout would be a nightmare in any kind of wave action except a dead calm.
ReplyDeleteIt's innovation for the sake of innovation; but at least it's small innovation and not LCS,DDX, Ford Class size innovation.
ReplyDeleteThe graphic at the end of that article that says what each size is suited to shows the 38 metre one for ship to shore role.
ReplyDeleteThe Royal Australian Navy uses two UAVs. A Scan Eagle to look over the horizon and a cam copter to look at suspicious ships close up. These are useful.
The Australian Army (no royal) has every single soldier, full time, part time (the only operational soldiers on our territory), reserve, and U18 cadets experimenting with drones.
The RN is to be applauded for experimenting.
In a exercise between NSW Police and the RAN a shark came up and killed one and injured the other at Fleet Base East (Sydney). These things are suited to port security and mine hunting outside the ports.
Delete