By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
Tomahawks, torpedoes, over-the-horizon missiles, 5-inch guns and SM-3 interceptors might all integrate onto and arm a single, mobile surface drone warship … capable of merging reconnaissance missions with defensive and offensive weapons operating under human supervision.
As the Navy seeks to accelerate its “drone” explosion, the service continues to contemplate a wide range of weapons applications and operational formations for unmanned systems…..one of which could involve the creation of an armed, maritime “mobile fire base” capable of employing a wide range of sensors, countermeasures and weapons as needed in surface warfare.
“We are clearly well into the evolution of the unmanned across all domains … .air, surface and undersea – unmanned AI and distributed AI is where things are headed,” retired Maj. Gen. David Coffman, former director of Expeditionary Warfare for the Navy, and Warrior Expert Analyst and contributor, explained in a discussion about future Naval warfare.
As a retired Marine Corps commander, leader, strategist and weapons developer, Coffman was clear to emphasize he is not involved in current Navy deliberations about how to arm unmanned systems, but did talk to Warrior in a general conceptual way about the tactical and operational merits of forward positioned armed, unmanned platforms.
“A mobile fire base at sea could be supported by distributed networking capability. As long as I have a radio signal, I can use a cheap unmanned surface vehicle that can move,” Coffman explained.
LUSV as Mobile Fire Base?
To a large degree, the Navy’s concept of a mobile fire base aligns with its current vision for its Large Unmanned Systems Vehicle (LUSV), a large robotic warship intended to support Carrier Strike Groups and Marine Corps Expeditionary Strike Groups with forward reconnaissance, targeting and “attack” under human supervision.. Navy documents describe the LUSV, which is still amid conceptual development and requirements analysis, as an anti-submarine and “strike warfare” platform. The Navy is now asking industry for input on configurations, weapons and sensor technologies for its LUSV.
“LUSVs with integrated payload capability and prototypes employing non-organic payloads will not be capable of autonomous payload engagement or execution of a complete detect-to-engage sequence,” the FY 2024 budget books say, as quoted by USNI. “The vessel will be incapable of payload activation, deactivation, or engagement without the deliberate action of a remote, off-hull human operator in the command and control loop.”
Mobile Fire Base platforms, should they come to exist, would be called “shooters,” as they would be vessels optimized for weapons attack with sufficient computing, targeting and weaponry to tailor attacks to specific targets and operational needs, while humans operate in a command and control capacity.
Warrior Video Appearance: US Attack Submarines Could Save Taiwan
A floating mobile fire base certainly makes tactical sense, and Coffman discussed it in the context of service wide Navy and Marine Corps efforts to better “arm” the surface fleet for large-scale maritime warfare against great power adversaries. “If it floats….it fights,” Coffman gestured.
This thinking related to better “arming” the surface fleet goes back to 2015 and before when the Navy launched its “distributed lethality” concept, a strategy intended to much more fully arm surface warships with short and long-range weapons, layered defenses and targeting systems. This was part of a deliberate “pivot” for the Navy as it transitioned from 15 years of counterterrorism and anti-piracy into preparations for great power, large-scale “blue-water” warfare against a technologically advanced adversary.
Coffman, like many current and former Maritime warfare leaders, is well versed in the sphere of robotics, doctrine and AI-enabled autonomous weaponry. Current Pentagon doctrine specifies that a human must be in the loop regarding decisions about any use of lethal force. This is perhaps why Coffman discussed possibilities such as “optionally-manned” vessels or platforms on which a single person could supervise and perform command and control. Today’s technology does enable high-fidelity command and control, so human decision-makers could potentially authorize or approve identified targets and AI-enable weapons optimization analysis. Solidifying this kind of assured human control, remotely or on-platform, can expedite the possible operational use of armed unmanned vessels, provided they operate on secure, reliable networks.
The tactical advantages are numerous, as armed, forward positioned unmanned vessels could not only save lives by operating in high-threat areas without placing sailors and Marines at risk but could also help maritime warfare formations “disperse” or “disaggregate.” This massively increases potential angles of attack, shortens the sensor-to-shooter curve and can efficiently integrate ISR, targeting and attack into a single platform. A mobile surface fire base could also attack in close proximity to enemy ships, coastline or land targets while minimizing risk, something which could increase precision in targeting and attacks, improve an ability to hit moving targets and greatly increase any potential to “mass fires” in a concentrated area or along a perimeter. Forward positioned armed ships could also operate defensively by merging radar, sensing, threat tracking and interceptor weapons. Perhaps interceptors destroying or jamming enemy ballistic or anti-ship missiles can autonomously track and destroy approaching threats, leveraging speed and using “non-lethal” force to destroy enemy weapons and firepower intended for defensive purposes only. For example, instead of placing a manned Aegis destroyer in a potentially sensitive location to search the sky for enemy missile attacks, perhaps an unmanned platform could do the same thing? This would preserve defensive positioning and optimize field of regard without placing sailors in harm’s way. Such a platform much be able to intercept enemy weapons using AI-enabled defensive interceptors for non-lethal use in position to autonomously defend sensitive areas. While current Pentagon doctrine is not likely to change anytime soon, Pentagon essays do entertain the idea of “out-of-the-loop” autonomy for purely defensive purposes. For instance, if a weapon or interceptor could be fired only against enemy weapons for non-lethal purposes, perhaps AI-enabled or automated weaponry would save lives by destroying incoming enemy missiles in milliseconds without needing human approval? A mobile Naval firebase of this kind could prove invaluable because, unlike fixed or more limited land-based defensive locations and interceptors, a maritime air defense platform could maneuver into an optimal position anytime in response to changing threats.
Kris Osborn is President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
