Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) as Both Game Changers and Game Extenders

Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) as Both Game Changers and Game Extenders
Anti-Surface Warfare (ASuW) variant of ULAQ combat USV (Credit: Meteksan)
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and the significant results achieved by the Houthis in the Red Sea using Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) have increasingly brought the effectiveness of USVs in naval warfare to the forefront.
Share

Sponsored content

This article is written by Mr. Hasan Özyurt, (R) Rear Admiral, currently working at Meteksan Defense Inc. as Management Consultant

The Turkish company; Meteksan Defense, contribute to this field through its work on integrating the ULAQ Unmanned Surface Vehicle (AUSV) family and new kamikaze USV, ULAQ KAMA, into naval operations. If the initial tactical studies on USVs can be seen as describing the trees, we now believe it is time to describe the forest. In other words, we must examine the role of contribution of USV forces in conventional naval operations from a broader, operational perspective and develop ideas for the future structure of naval forces.

Bryan Clark and Dan Patt’s work, “Hedging Bets: Rethinking Force Design for a Post-Dominance Era,” discusses the use of unmanned systems in the initial defensive reactions against a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan. They argue that this approach could buy time and keep U.S. conventional forces out of high-risk scenarios. Similarly, Turkish Navy’s Rear Admiral Gökçen Fırat’s article, “Are USVs Game Changers or Game Extenders?” offers valuable insights into the role of unmanned systems in future force structures. The ideas presented in these studies align closely with the vision and goals which Meteksan Defence have previously outlined as to make the ULAQ USV a reliable and sustainable part of the Navy, rapidly integrating capabilities that can support and enhance the operational needs of naval forces. This initial goal has been to complement and work alongside manned platforms1. In this article, however, we will explore how a USV like ULAQ can assume a game-changing role within a naval force, in line with the broader vision.

By “Game,” We Mean Warfare

The term “game” in “game changer” refers to warfare. Naval warfare is a set of military operations designed to achieve strategic objectives through the use of force. Therefore, any assessment of USV’s potential to change the game must be based on its strategic and operational value.

Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) as Both Game Changers and Game Extenders
The kamikaze version of the ULAQ family, dubbed ULAQ KAMA (Credit: Meteksan)

Conventional Naval Platforms Are Highly Valuable

Naval forces are traditionally built around manned, multi-purpose platforms such as cruisers, destroyers, and frigates. These vessels are designed to execute a variety of missions based on their size, range, and sensor and weapon capabilities. Larger ships carry more advanced systems, allowing them to engage in anti-submarine warfare, air defense, and surface warfare, among others.

The size of a platform also dictates its construction time, procurement costs, and operational crew requirements. Even smaller ships like fast attack craft require significant personnel and financial resources. These factors make conventional platforms highly valuable, and their loss can severely impact operations.

Because these platforms are so critical, options that involve unacceptable risks are typically excluded from consideration during the initial phase of naval operational planning.

Risks in Narrow Seas

A generic map showing an option of using USVs in narrow seas (Credit: Hasan Özyurt, Meteksan)

In narrow seas, where opposing forces operate within each other’s sensor and weapon range (Figure 3), a conflict can escalate quickly, leading to significant losses within the first hour. Such risks can be exacerbated by one side’s advantages in reconnaissance, geography, or the ability to protect its forces. A side suffering greater losses may face operational setbacks or a weakened resolve to continue the fight.

To mitigate the risk of force loss, the first solution that comes to mind is keeping valuable assets outside the enemy’s sensor and weapon range. However, this leads to a loss of contact with the enemy, ceding control of the operational area and resulting in mission failure. Once the enemy has freely spread throughout the area, attempting to re-enter can lead to even greater losses. In short, the risk of force loss creates a difficult dilemma.

More Platforms, Longer-Range Sensors, and Weapons?

It might seem that the solution to that dilemma lies in acquiring more platforms, longer-range sensors, and weapons. However, even if the costs of procurement and operation are borne, simply having more conventional platforms does not always guarantee success in warfare. In confined operational areas, unless the enemy’s advantages are neutralized, more platforms may simply provide more targets for the adversary.

Longer-range sensors are essential for tracking enemy movements and targeting weapons accurately. However, even advanced radar systems on conventional platforms have limitations, particularly in detecting targets beyond the horizon. Moreover, long-range missiles require precise target data, and terrain can reduce their effectiveness.

Can USVs Be a Solution?

To minimize risk while asserting control over an adversary, a set of advanced capabilities is required. While Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have provided partial solutions by offering long-range reconnaissance, they do not eliminate the need for conventional surface units to operate in high-risk areas.

Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) as Both Game Changers and Game Extenders
Another use option of the USVs in narrow waters (Credit: Hasan Özyurt, Meteksan)

Unmanned Surface Vessels (USVs) offer a solution to the dilemma of maintaining a presence in the field while minimizing the risk of losing valuable assets, thanks to their advantages in cost, scalability, risk tolerance, and survivability. Acting as both sensor and weapon platforms (and in the case of kamikaze USVs, the weapon itself), USVs can be deployed in large numbers to support conventional forces. This support can be a game changer, especially in high-risk scenarios. During the critical phases of combat or when hostilities are imminent, USVs can engage enemy forces within sensor-weapon range (Figure 4), drawing initial fire while engaging targets or relaying target information to conventional platforms. When supported by UAVs with advanced sensor and weapon systems, USVs become even more effective. In such a scenario, the outcome of the conflict may be determined by conventional forces that manage to stay safe, thanks to USVs mitigating the chaos and heavy fire of the early stages of engagement.

In addition to reconnaissance and surface warfare-capable USVs, expendable Kamikaze USVs (KUSVs) like ULAQ KAMA can restrict the enemy’s freedom of movement in the operational area. In conventional scenarios, enemy forces often take advantage of terrain for concealment. However, the introduction of weapons like ULAQ KAMA forces them to stay outside its range. A prime example is a navy that had to relocate its naval assets to more easterly bases and ports in the Black Sea to avoid further losses from relentless KUSV attacks.

The New Dimension USVs Add to Decision Matrices

When planning a mission, operational planners assess the situation, the enemy’s capabilities, and the strengths of friendly forces, among other factors. Based on these evaluations, they determine the courses of action to be taken. These options are evaluated for their suitability, feasibility in terms of time and space, and the level of acceptable risk. Typically, there are only a few viable options that pass these criteria, meaning that choices in a crisis are often limited. As the crisis unfolds, the range of options narrows further.

However, as illustrated in Table 1, the use of USVs in naval operations can expand the range of options available to conventional forces (Figure 5). A clear example of this is the ongoing conflict in the Black Sea, where, despite Ukraine’s severely weakened conventional naval forces—rendered ineffective early in the fighting—the use of Kamikaze USVs (KUSVs) has significantly restricted the operational freedom of opposing naval forces, leading to some operational success for Ukraine.

– Conduct reconnaissance and surveillance in high-risk areas with USVs
– Provide targeting information to long-range weapon systems using
– USVsRestrict the adversary’s freedom of movement in the operational area with KUSVs
– Target the adversary’s ports, bases and forward operating bases using USVs and KUSVs
– Keep the adversary out of certain regions of the area of operations for a specified period
Table 1 Sample Operational Options Provided by USVs in Naval Operations

USVs can also help prevent the uncontrolled escalation of a crisis. In tight operational environments where opposing ships keep each other within weapons range, commanders face immense pressure to protect their units. In such tense situations, fatal misunderstandings are possible. One side might interpret an action as a “hostile act,” triggering defensive reactions and potentially escalating the crisis into open conflict. However, with USVs, the stress of self-defense is significantly reduced. Being removed from the direct danger allows for more rational decision-making. Moreover, the loss of an unmanned platform is less likely to serve as a justification for further escalation in most cases.

Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) as Both Game Changers and Game Extenders
Enlargement of Viable Options Set with the Integration of USVs into a Conventional Force

Shaping the Enemy’s Decisions

USVs introduce uncertainty for the enemy. Realizing that they cannot neutralize conventional forces without risking their own assets, the adversary may be forced into less desirable courses of action.

The Lifespan of a Weapon System’s Asymmetry

Currently, USVs and KUSVs hold an asymmetric advantage over conventional platforms, their sensors, and weapon systems. However, like all weapon systems, this asymmetry will have a limited lifespan (Figure 6). To fully capitalize on the game-changing effects of USVs, KUSVs, and other unmanned systems, they should be integrated into forces along with the necessary concepts and doctrines while the asymmetry window remains open. As unmanned technology advances and becomes more accessible, the threat posed by these systems to friendly conventional forces will also increase. Therefore, it is essential to develop defensive capabilities against systems like USVs and KUSVs—in other words, to establish symmetry against them. We will explore this multifaceted and expansive topic in our future work.

Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) as Both Game Changers and Game Extenders
The Progression of Asymmetry Level of a Weapon System Over Time

Conclusion

While the need for conventional forces in naval operations remains, we must also recognize that the increasing presence of unmanned technology in the battlespace is raising the risks faced by conventional assets. Force structures that integrate USVs to support conventional forces in high-risk scenarios seem to offer opportunities to shape outcomes with less risk. The strategic impact of USVs in the Black Sea demonstrated their potential in naval warfare as a game changer.

We are witnessing the impact of Türkiye’s timely and strategic steps in applying unmanned technologies to the maritime domain. It is significant that the partnership between Meteksan Defence and Ares Shipyard, which pioneered this field, achieved a global first by successfully launching a guided missile from a USV. It is encouraging to see the Turkish Navy, the Presidency of Defence Industries, and major Turkish defense technology companies making concerted efforts in this direction. In line with these efforts, the ULAQ USV will soon be delivered to the Turkish Navy, equipped with the capabilities to meet the expectations placed upon it.

Tags

Advertisement

Advertisement