Implications for Industry as the U.S. Navy Determines Which Fleet It Will Field

As the U.S. Navy examines options for what mix of crewed and uncrewed systems will populate the Navy-After-Next, industry would be well-served to watch these developments carefully as companies work to review and balance their manufacturing capabilities, and ideally, be prepared to build the mix of vessels needed by the Navy.

By way of background, a decade and a half ago The Center for Naval Analyses published a report called Tipping Point. The purpose of the report was to offer alternative operational concepts for the Navy as it worked to meet its global responsibilities.

The authors’ high concept was that the U.S. Navy was attempting to be all things to all people globally, and as the number of Navy ships declined, the service was “thin-slicing,” that is, trying to do more-and-more with less-and-less. This analysis suggested that decisions needed to be made regarding operational concepts. Briefly, there were five suggested alternatives for the “Global Navy:” a two-hub option a one-hub option, a shaping option, a surge option, and a shrinking status quo option.

Column space does not allow for a detailed analysis of this study, but here is a link to the report:

https://www.cna.org/reports/2010/D0022262.A3.pdf.

The Tipping Point report was an important assessment as it analyzed the pros and cons of deploying the US Navy fleet in different ways.

Today, the U.S. Navy is conducting another analysis, not about how the fleet should be deployed, but rather, and more importantly, the composition of the fleet.

These are four options for fleet composition that have gained purchase within the Navy. They are:

• The U.S. Navy’s current shipbuilding plan as reported by the Congressional Research Service. This includes 381 crewed ships and a number of uncrewed surface vessels.

• The second option that has gained traction is called the “hybrid fleet.” This concept was unveiled by then-Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Michael Gilday, and endorsed by his successors. This envisions a Navy of 350 crewed ships and 150 uncrewed surface vessels.

• The next option is called the “hedge fleet.” This envisions a forward-deployed force of robotic autonomous systems and crewed ships to be employed quickly in any crisis. One of the best-known concepts for employing the hedge fleet would be the much-discussed Taiwan Street-focused “hellscape” project designed to disable a Chinese amphibious invasion of Taiwan.

• The final option is the U.S. Navy‘s “golden fleet,” a recent initiative announced by President Trump in late 2025 to rapidly expand and modernize the fleet. This plan focuses heavily on battleships alongside frigates and uncrewed surface vessels. While the news reporting regarding the golden fleet centers primarily on large ships, knowledgeable observers have suggested that the small- and medium-sized uncrewed surface vessels armed with long range strike and missile defense systems will be the most strategically impactful in the near term.

One feature that ties these four options together is the emergence of uncrewed surface vessels as vital assets in the Navy’s plans for a future fleet.

I say “future” advisedly because the Navy is not treating this as a futuristic endeavor, but as a “now” imperative. Indeed, the U.S. Navy tends to deploy uncrewed surface vessels with crewed surface forces this year. As announced at the Surface Navy Association 38th national symposium in January 2026, the Seahawk and Sea Hunter medium-sized USVs will deploy this year. These uncrewed surface vessels are no longer considered “experimental,” but rather as fleet assets. The Seahawk will be part of a Navy carrier strike group.

The implications for the maritime industry should be clear. While it is expensive, and even risky, to “tool up” to produce new maritime vessels, it is impossible to miss the Navy’s commitment to field substantial numbers of large- and medium-sized uncrewed surface vessels.

An important consideration for industry is that over the past decade-plus the Navy and Marine Corps have conducted a substantial number of exercises, experiments, and demonstrations where industry has brought capable uncrewed surface vessel prototypes and put them in the hands of Sailors and Marines.

As just one example of this testing that has gone on for years, MARTAC, a U.S. uncrewed surface vessel corporation, has been invited to bring its MANTAS T12, Muskie M18, and Devil Ray T24 and T38 USV vessels to a wide range of exercises, experiments, and demonstrations.

These have included the COMPACFLT-led Integrated Battle Problem series of exercises, the Integrated Maritime Exercise series held under the auspices of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/Commander Task Force 59 in the Arabian Gulf, NATO exercises BALTOPS, REPMUS, and the follow-on Dynamic Messenger, Australian Defence Force Exercise Autonomous Warrior, and many others too numerous to list here.

As the maritime industry moves forward to produce capable uncrewed surface vessels to meet the Navy’s current and anticipated needs, companies would be well-served to participate in as many exercises, experiments, and demonstrations as possible. This will enable them to “wring out” their USVs as MARTAC has done in order to gain fleet feedback to produce uncrewed surface vessels that will meet the Navy’s needs.

Note: This article was first published in Oceans Robotic Planet and is republished with the author’s permission.