The US Navy has given industry 18 months to produce a new generation of modular, armed and largely autonomous surface ships, betting that quantity, speed and software can offset years of delays and spiralling costs in traditional warship programmes.
A desperate push to regain naval mass
On 28 July 2025, the US Navy issued a blunt request: deliver a new class of combat-ready uncrewed surface vessels in just a year and a half. These ships are not intended as tech demonstrators for defence fairs, but as operational platforms that can plug glaring gaps in a fleet stretched thin against a rapidly expanding Chinese navy.
The context is harsh. The US surface fleet is ageing. Shipbuilding yards are congested. Programmes that were supposed to embody US maritime dominance — Zumwalt destroyers, Littoral Combat Ships and the new Constellation-class frigates — have all slipped years behind schedule and overshot budgets by billions.
The Navy wants to break with the old model of a few exquisite, hyper-complex ships and move toward many simpler, fast-built and heavily adaptable vessels.
This strategic pivot rests on a simple calculus. China is churning out large warships and missile boats at unprecedented speed. The US Navy cannot match that rhythm using only its traditional model of highly bespoke, heavily crewed combatants. So the service wants to shift the centre of gravity: keep its major destroyers and carriers, but surround them with swarms of smaller, cheaper, unmanned ships carrying serious firepower.
From Ghost Fleet experiments to mass production
The 18‑month push did not appear out of thin air. Since 2018, the US Navy has been quietly experimenting with large uncrewed surface vessels under the Ghost Fleet Overlord programme. Commercial ships were stripped, refitted with autonomy packages and sent on long voyages with minimal or no crew.
One of the standout demonstrators, the USV Nomad, sailed more than 8,000 km across the Pacific without anyone on board for most of the journey, proving that large, remotely managed ships can navigate real oceans and complex traffic conditions.
Those trials paved the way for the new effort: the Modular Autonomous Surface Craft, or MASC. Unlike Ghost Fleet, which focused on proving the concept, MASC is about scaling it. The Navy wants a genuine production run of combat-capable vessels, not bespoke prototypes.
Three ship sizes, one big idea: modularity
Instead of defining the ships by tonnage or exact dimensions, the Navy has framed MASC around what each hull can carry in standard containerised modules. The specification outlines three main variants:
➡️ 4 phrases to end a conversation intelligently
➡️ “I’m a hairstylist and here’s my best advice for women over 50 who want short hair”
➡️ That’s typical of a bipolar person”: 6 signs psychologists spot straight away
➡️ I don’t cook potatoes in water anymore: I’ve switched to this aromatic broth
➡️ If your dog gives you its paw, it’s not to play or say hello : animal experts explain the reasons
- Small: space for one TEU container (around 24 tonnes, 75 kW), with a clear rear deck for anti-submarine warfare gear.
- Standard: space for two 40‑foot FEU containers (about 36.3 tonnes each, 75 kW), 2,500 nautical miles range at 25 knots and endurance of 60 days.
- Large: capacity for four FEU containers, tuned for greater speed and endurance.
All three share a common baseline: roughly 60 metres in length, around 500 tonnes displacement and a shallow 3.7‑metre draught suited to littoral waters. Propulsion is deliberately conventional — two diesel engines on shafts — giving a cruise speed near 14 knots and bursts up to 27 knots.
Two of the variants will also be “optionally crewed”, with basic accommodation for up to eight people. That allows operators to put sailors on board when operating in congested waterways, during sensitive port calls, or for missions where human presence is still preferred.
By snapping mission modules in and out like Lego blocks, the Navy hopes to re-role a ship in days, not the years needed for traditional refits.
What these modules can actually do
MASC ships are designed as bare platforms: hull, power, communications, navigation and autonomy systems. Combat punch comes from the modules, many of them based on standard 20‑ or 40‑foot containers. The Navy is eyeing a mix of payloads, including:
- Land-attack or anti-ship cruise missiles, such as Tomahawk and Naval Strike Missile.
- Electronic warfare suites to jam or deceive enemy radars and communications.
- Towed sonar and other undersea surveillance systems for submarine hunting.
- Passive ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) packages for discreet sensing.
A key piece of the puzzle is the Mk 70 Expeditionary Launcher from Lockheed Martin. This is a vertical launch system packed into a 40‑foot container, already tested in 2021 on the experimental USV Ranger, firing an SM‑6 missile. Each Mk 70 module carries four vertical launch cells, with a roof that slides open to let the missile rise and fire.
| Module type | Typical payload | Potential mission |
|---|---|---|
| Strike module (Mk 70) | Tomahawk, SM‑6, NSM | Long‑range precision attack, anti‑ship warfare |
| EW module | Jammers, decoys | Confusing enemy sensors, shielding friendly forces |
| ASW module | Towed sonar, buoys | Tracking and deterring submarines |
| ISR module | Electro‑optic, RF sensors | Persistent surveillance and targeting data |
The underlying idea is to scatter serious weapons and sensors across dozens of relatively cheap hulls. That forces an adversary to hunt and track far more targets and avoids putting all the Navy’s eggs in a handful of multi‑billion‑dollar baskets like cruisers and destroyers.
A fast‑track acquisition gamble
To meet the brutal schedule, the Navy plans to rely on an unconventional contracting tool: Other Transaction Authority, or OTA. This legal framework sits outside the normal US defence procurement rules and is designed to attract non-traditional suppliers, speed up deals and sidestep some of the paperwork that typically bogs down programmes.
That opens the door for commercial shipyards, maritime tech start-ups and civilian integrators to compete alongside the usual defence giants. In theory, the Navy could leverage existing commercial hull designs, such as offshore support vessels or fast cargo ships, and adapt them rather than starting from a clean sheet.
The timetable is tight and highly specific:
- End of 2025: Industry submits proposals and initial designs.
- Early 2026: Selection of winning teams and contracts signed.
- Late 2026 / early 2027: First MASC ships launched and conducting trials.
The Navy is effectively asking industry to move from concept drawings to an operational, armed warship in roughly the time it normally takes just to finalise requirements.
Strategic stakes: China, Europe and the future of navies
If the plan works even partially, the US Navy could wield dozens of armed autonomous surface ships within three years. Those vessels could patrol contested waters, shadow Chinese task groups or stand guard near choke points without putting crews at risk.
In a crisis, commanders might send a wave of MASC ships forward as the “first line”, soaking up missiles and probing enemy defences, while manned destroyers and carriers stay further back. That shifts the risk calculus: losing an unmanned ship built on commercial lines is politically and financially less painful than losing a destroyer with hundreds of sailors on board.
Other navies are watching closely. European fleets, already facing tight budgets, must now weigh whether to keep building fewer large, gold‑plated frigates, or add ranks of smaller, semi-disposable autonomous craft. Middle‑power nations such as South Korea, Japan and Australia are likely to study MASC carefully to judge whether similar concepts could stretch their own limited shipbuilding capacity.
How this changes naval combat in practice
If MASC takes off, sea warfare could start to look more like land-based drone warfare. Instead of a few high‑value ships manoeuvring cautiously, there could be constant flows of uncrewed vessels pushing into dangerous waters, acting as scouts, decoys or missile trucks.
Commanders might layer their forces roughly like this:
- Manned capital ships at the rear, protected and used for command and high‑end tasks.
- Crewed escorts closer to the contested zone, backed by helicopters and crewed aircraft.
- Swarm-like groups of MASC ships at the front, often operating in mixed roles: some sensing, some jamming, some carrying strike missiles.
Software will sit at the centre of this approach. Autonomy packages will need to steer ships safely, avoid collisions, comply with maritime law in peacetime and handle cyber threats. In combat, they will have to execute pre-planned behaviours while keeping a human in the loop for lethal decisions.
Key concepts and potential risks
Two technical notions underpin the whole programme:
- Autonomy: the ability of a system to plan and execute tasks with limited or no human intervention, based on sensors, rules and algorithms.
- Modularity: the practice of designing ships and weapons in “plug‑and‑play” blocks that can be swapped without major structural changes.
Both come with trade-offs. Highly modular designs can end up carrying more weight than a purpose‑built ship for the same mission, affecting performance. Autonomy makes systems faster and cheaper to operate, but increases vulnerability to hacking, spoofed GPS signals and unexpected behaviour in complex environments.
There is also a legal and ethical dimension. Maritime law assumes a “master” and crew responsible for actions at sea. Regulators and lawyers will need to clarify who is accountable if an uncrewed warship collides with a merchant vessel, misidentifies a target or causes environmental damage.
On the flip side, MASC vessels could reduce risk to sailors, allow more persistent presence in remote areas and make it harder for rivals to paralyse US operations with a single lucky strike. They might also serve as flexible testbeds for new sensors and missiles, letting the Navy trial technology at sea far more rapidly than on traditional ships.
If the 18‑month countdown ends with operational ships afloat, naval planners worldwide will face a stark question: is the age of the few, exquisite warships starting to give way to fleets built on software, containers and robot crews?
Originally posted 2026-03-03 02:51:50.