Turkish long-endurance drone tests anti-submarine task at sea
https://defence-blog.com/turkish-long-endurance-drone-tests-anti-submarine-task-at-sea/Open linkView original on lemmy.caSyndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.cahttps://defence-blog.com/turkish-long-endurance-drone-tests-anti-submarine-task-at-sea/Open linkView original on lemmy.ca
8 replies
With all the progress we're making in the air, people are significantly underestimating the capabilities of drones and autonomous vehicles at sea.
Drones at sea as a replacement for submarines in particular solve many of the issues actually submarines are engineered around. Namely having human bodies on board makes them extremely complicated. Drones don't suffer that issue.
They can be made neutrally buoyant so no or little propulsion is required to maintain a position. Red green NIR lidar is sufficiently advanced you could do some insane targeting which with current systems would be basically entirely undetectable.
I've also wondered about loitering munitions. Think "small drivable sea mine with a solar panel" ; basically, you could have remotely operated sea mines which can themselves do the work necessary to avoid detection or destructive, effectively indefinitely.
Great points though I would add underwater unmanned vehicles can be used to blockade run with logistics if they are already not being used to and it will upend naval power balance in a way that it hasn't been in a long time.
Thats exactly my thought, and I've received significant pushback from lemmy in the past in these regards. But the basic argument is that the US military doctrine has been one selected by military industrial complex consultants to secure the profitability of the military industrial complex contractors, not the security of the US State. I've received waves of downvotes for saying that basically, in the context of cheap drones, the value proposition of an F35 simply isn't there, not least of which for territorial defense.
I think this modern shift in doctrine is just the beginning.
I am specifically talking about this kind of thing for naval logistics, not about whether manned aircraft are relevant.
https://news.usni.org/2026/10/23/collaboration-on-autonomous-undersea-warfare-is-on-track-aukus-officials-say
Well then we might be talking past each other a bit, because I see these as antithetical to the doctrine I recognize as both emergent and which I expect to become more and more dominant over time. Nothing screams not understanding the assignment more than Raytheon, pictured in figure two of that article. US and western national defense industries select for systems that bring them closer to power, not necessarily to support practical defense or war fighting. And the result is that we end up with technology so advanced, single purpose, and over-engineered, its supply lines practically inevitably wrap the globe 3 times.
I am talking about the Hadalus-XL and the category of lowcost flatpack unmanned underwater vehicles that can be mass produced enough to be used for logistics....
The company is irrelevant I am pointing at the idea.
Tell me you don't get it without telling me you don't get it.
I understand other entities can build unmanned underwater vehicles like the Hadalus-XL, the Hadalus-XL just happens to be the one that is public information we can talk about, so yes I understand the point about the military-industrial complex, but it only strengthens my actual point which is that the price can be driven down on these so far (and thus be manufactured by a wide variety of actors) that it will upend the dynamics of naval blockades.
Whatever price point Ratheon builds these at is the absolute highest conceivable cost these could be because, for the criticisms that have already been brought up, these will still be very expensive for being such an affordable design.
Again I am not pointing to Raytheon as the future I am pointing to this category of unmanned vehicle as hugely disruptive to the dynamics of naval blockades.