I just read yet another article extolling the wonders of
unmanned surface vessels for logistics and/or attack.[1][3] This one was singing the praises of the
Leidos Sea Specter slow, low profile boat which Leidos claims can carry a 2-5
ton payload for 1000-2200 nm at 8 kts in sea state 3.[2] The manufacturer’s original concept was for this craft to be
used as a logistics delivery platform. A
recent article suggested it could be used to attack Chinese carrier or surface
groups using a containerized torpedo.
Let's consider a couple of important aspects to this concept.
Speed – This
craft, like most unmanned craft, is appallingly slow; it can’t get anywhere useful in any
tactically relevant time frame. While
the manufacturer claims the craft can sail from Guam to any point in the first
island chain on a single tank of gas, it would, as a relevant example, take 5+
days, best case, to make a 1000 nm journey.
This demonstrates the idiotic nature of a combat use for this
craft. Say a Chinese surface group was
spotted transiting past an island, it would take around a week for the craft to
carry its single containerized torpedo to that point. Of course, the target group would be long
gone. People are making this stuff up
without thinking it through.
Payload – The
payload is very small with severe volumetric limitations which will reduce the
effective payload substantially. The cargo
area is limited in volumetric size to a maximum payload storage area of 29’ x
4’ x 4’ which, essentially, means just small boxes as opposed to any sizable
equipment.
After seeing the tiny cargo area in a manufacturer’s video, it is obvious that the claimed payload of 2-5 tons would only be for bricks stacked in the area with no space. Any realistic cargo, with packaging and space will be far less. One ton might be optimistic.
This is far too small a payload to be logistically
significant for any but, perhaps, a lone coastwatcher on an island
mountain. For example, an infantry
division in combat consumes some 1000 tons of various supplies per day and
that’s probably unrealistically low! An
armored division uses some 600,000 gal (2000 tons) of fuel per day in combat and,
again, that’s probably ridiculously optimistic.
If someone thinks we’re going to resupply Guam or some far
flung, hidden Marine missile shooting outpost using these tiny boats, they’re
sadly mistaken.
After seeing the tiny cargo area in a manufacturer’s video, it is obvious that the claimed payload of 2-5 tons would only be for bricks stacked in the area with no space. Any realistic cargo, with packaging and space will be far less. One ton might be optimistic.
![]() |
Leidos Sea Scepter |
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/04/u-s-marine-corps-trials-unmanned-logistics-concepts-in-the-indo-pacific/
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/07/u-s-navy-pairs-heavyweight-torpedo-with-usv-in-a-new-program-effort/
This is good for transportation over water. Soviet Union R&D into this type for a long time. Its key weakness is wave as it has to fly very close to surface so ground effect works. Soviet's failure largely due to no available fly by wire technology at that time. Test vehicles relied on human to avoid waves. One eventually crashed. Beauty of ground effect is its fuel efficiency - far less than airplane. Also, it can sale as a ship. Perhaps this is most suitable over water transportation around Guam.
ReplyDeletehttps://theaviationist.com/2025/07/06/photo-of-new-chinese-ekranoplan-breaks-cover/
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought under international law, unmanned ships can be boarded/confiscated by anyone.
ReplyDeleteIf my understanding is correct, then if we are not in a shooting war with Iran or China they can board and hijack any unmanned vessels we have floating around in the ocean and we are, under international law, powerless to do much about it.
In the most simplistic terms, you're correct that unmanned vessels can be considered salvage. However, there are aspects of the laws that complicate the issue. The salvageable vessel must be a threat to itself or general navigation which an unmanned vessel isn't although, being unmanned, it's almost, by definition, a threat to navigation.
DeleteThe practical answer is that the precedent has already been established that unmanned vessels belong to whoever can seize them and that there will be no military consequences. Both Iran and China have seized unmanned aerial and subsurface vessels with impunity.
That's just simply stupid. This unmanned-anything craze is turning into a cult... one full of low-brainwave activity. Isn't anyone thinking??
ReplyDeleteChina is heavily pursuing unmanned weapons - UAV, ship, submarine, vehicles, four foot, .... etc. Following is an example of Chinese army drill. If use unmanned weapons is wrong direction, why China is so keen on this? If not, Pentagon now focuses on unmanned weapon has nothing wrong.
Deletehttps://www.defensemirror.com/news/39873/China_Reveals_Robot_Wolves_____Quadrupedal_Drones_to_Fight_alongside_Soldiers
"why China is so keen on this? "
DeleteWhy were so many countries dead set on battleships right up to WWII? Because they were all failing to see the future of naval combat. China is copying the US and failing to see the same things we're failing to see.
Also, China also has a different view of autonomous combat robots. We're concerned with ethics and unintended damage and consequences. China doesn't care so robots would be far more attractive to them.
Yeah, when they show these unmanned narco sub like designs I'm not very inspired, except for the fact that we only interdict between 5-15% of the narco subs (Estimated). They plan for some to get caught and others to get through, but its expensive. Military gear is expensive, but logistics supplies are not until you try and deliver them like this. To me this gets into why are the littoral regiments even as heavy as they are. JLTVs armor is of little use for an unmanned rogue fires launcher. You'd save money and have better capacity and less logistics using a Chevy Silverado as the base vehicle. And why keep all this stuff on these tiny islands when there is all that territorial water around the island you could be hiding in.
ReplyDelete"except for the fact that we only interdict between 5-15% of the narco subs"
DeleteThat's true (if it is?) not because the subs are so stealthy but because we only sporadically and half-heartedly look for them. Also, on a practical war basis, their transport capacity is infinitesimal.
People are always telling me that my ideas are ridiculous and would never work - I could make a whole bunch of money if I was a defense contractor.
ReplyDeleteCould an enemy board one of these slow, unmanned vessels and replace the cargo with explosives and then let the drone continue on it’s mission?
ReplyDeleteI would! How would we even know? Talk about a surprise package.
DeleteWhen I was in the army in the 90's at Fort Campbell, sometimes one of our flight routes was shut down periodically. The nerdy guys were flying remote control airplanes, which we as aircav pilots scoffed at.
ReplyDeleteWell, it turns out that was apparently part of the emerging drone program, so I'm trying not to be too dismissive of this project.
But, wow, it sure looks like the navy thinks this ridiculous thing might have some value?
I can, however, see an application for unmanned supply delivery.
Say that you are doing a WW2 style convoy of supply ships, escorted by the navy from origin to destination, rows of ships.
Would it be possible to have the modern equivalent of Liberty ships that are drones?
It would save a bunch of sailors, but the practical logistics of it seems pretty daunting, particularly keeping the mechanicals running.
Maybe you have maintenance crews that helicopter around the ships, checking on things and moving on to the next one?
I could see that possibly as being valuable, but the solo unmanned supply ship?
Ugh.
Lutefisk
" modern equivalent of Liberty ships that are drones?"
DeleteIf you can guarantee that the convoy sails straight from point A to point B, it might work, neglecting maintenance issues. What happens when the convoy has to scatter/maneuver to avoid a torpedo or change course due to enemy actions or deal with heavy storms or a ship has to conduct damage control (do you just write off any ship that takes any damage?) or ... and the list goes on.