Peace Through Strength – Community Driven – Membership Supported
Category: Naval Technology
If you are interested in Naval Technology and how it shapes the U.S. Navy and its mission, you will enjoy reading this blog category. Here you will find articles, interviews, stories, and opinions on various topics related to naval technology, such as the latest developments, innovations, challenges, and opportunities. You will also learn about the history and importance of naval technology and how it has enabled the Navy to protect American interests and defend the country. Whether you are a naval professional or a technology enthusiast, you will find something informative and engaging in this blog category.
For years, maritime decline has been treated as a niche issue — something for defense insiders, shipyard executives, or Navy circles to debate quietly. That is beginning to change.
Recently, Senator Todd Young published, in American Affairs Journal a thoughtful piece arguing that rebuilding America’s maritime industrial base is essential to both economic strength and national security. He traced the issue back to the Revolution, through Mahan, and into the present-day competition with China.
That matters.
Not because of who wrote it. But because of what it signals.
Maritime Power Is Back in the Conversation
For decades, America has allowed its commercial fleet to shrink. Shipyards have closed. Skilled labor has aged out. Foreign-flagged vessels now move the overwhelming majority of our trade.
Meanwhile, China designated shipbuilding a strategic industry and built accordingly.
This is not about panic. It is about arithmetic.
Eighty percent of global trade moves by sea. Most of America’s trade does too. If we cannot build, repair, and crew ships at scale, we are strategically exposed — economically and militarily.
The encouraging sign is that leaders are once again speaking openly about maritime strength.
That is progress.
Policy Is Necessary — But Not Sufficient
Legislation like the proposed SHIPS Act is an important step. Tax incentives, regulatory reform, maritime academy modernization — these are serious proposals.
But here is the harder truth:
Industrial revival cannot be sustained by legislation alone.
Shipbuilding capacity requires:
Workforce development Steel production Port modernization Cybersecurity resilience Long-term capital investment And, above all, public understanding
Without public buy-in, even well-crafted policy fades with political cycles.
This Is Not a Coastal Issue
One of the most overlooked truths in this debate is that maritime strength touches every American.
Indiana steel feeds shipyards. Midwestern grain moves to global markets by sea. Energy exports rely on tankers. Supply chains run through ports.
Sea power is not about nostalgia. It is about jobs, commerce, resilience, and deterrence.
When ships deploy longer because the fleet is too small… When maintenance backlogs grow… When sealift capacity shrinks…
Those are not abstract statistics. They are signs of strain in a system Americans depend on every day.
Civic Engagement Is the Missing Ingredient
We can debate fleet numbers. We can debate funding mechanisms. We can debate industrial policy.
But unless Americans understand why this matters — and choose to participate in the conversation — nothing lasting will change.
Rebuilding sea power is not simply a government project. It is a civic project.
It requires voters who ask informed questions. Taxpayers who demand accountability. Educators who teach maritime history and strategy. Industry leaders willing to invest long-term.
America’s maritime strength has always rested on the character and engagement of its people.
That spirit has not disappeared.
The conversation is shifting. That is a good sign.
Now the responsibility shifts to us.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
Protecting America’s Naval Edge Strategic competition, documented technology theft, and military-linked research highlight why protecting America’s technological advantage is essential to maintaining naval superiority.
Abstract
Naval power in the 21st century is shaped as much by technological innovation as by fleet size. Strategic competitors are investing heavily in research, industrial capacity, and military modernization to close the technological gap with the United States. This article analyzes the implications of documented research security concerns, the role of military-linked academic institutions, and the broader strategic environment, and argues that preserving America’s technological advantage requires informed public engagement, policy alignment, and sustained national awareness.
Introduction
For decades, America’s naval superiority rested on more than ships—it rested on technological advantage. That advantage was built in American shipyards, laboratories, universities, and research institutions. Today, that technological edge is being challenged by strategic competitors who have invested heavily in naval expansion, industrial capacity, and military-relevant technologies. Increasingly, naval professionals, policymakers, and national security experts are raising concerns about how technological competition is unfolding—and how little public awareness exists about its implications. Some documented cases involving technology theft, undisclosed foreign military-linked affiliations, and strategic research competition have received only limited public attention. Americans deserve to understand what is happening, why it matters, and what it means for the future strength of the United States Navy.
Naval Power Begins Long Before a Ship Is Built
Every modern U.S. Navy platform depends on breakthroughs in science and engineering:
Nuclear engineering enables submarine propulsion and carrier endurance
Advanced materials determine hull strength, stealth, and survivability
Semiconductors power radar, communications, and weapons systems
Artificial intelligence and autonomy are reshaping the future of naval warfare
The future DDG(X) destroyer, unmanned naval systems, and next-generation submarines will rely heavily on research happening today in American universities, national laboratories, and federally funded programs.
These institutions are essential to national strength.
But the knowledge they produce exists in a world defined by strategic competition.
Documented Cases Show the Risk Is Real
Concerns about research security are not theoretical. Federal investigations and criminal prosecutions have confirmed cases involving the theft of sensitive technology, undisclosed foreign affiliations, and illegal transfer of research with national security implications.
In January 2026, a U.S. federal jury convicted a former Google engineer of stealing more than 2,000 confidential artificial intelligence and supercomputing files and transferring them to entities linked to China. These technologies have direct military and intelligence applications.
In 2021, Harvard University professor Charles Lieber was convicted for failing to disclose his financial relationship with China’s Thousand Talents Program while receiving U.S. federal research funding. Federal authorities determined he had concealed foreign financial ties tied to a Chinese state-affiliated university.
U.S. authorities have also prosecuted multiple export control violations and research-related concealment cases involving sensitive technologies, including advanced materials, computing, and engineering fields directly relevant to military capability.
The FBI has warned repeatedly that China operates one of the most extensive technology acquisition efforts in modern history, targeting critical research sectors tied to national defense.
These are documented cases—not speculation.
What the “Seven Sons” Represent
U.S. government reports and independent research institutions have identified a group of Chinese universities known as the “Seven Sons of National Defense” as central to China’s military research and development ecosystem. These institutions maintain deep ties to China’s defense industry and serve as primary training grounds for engineers and scientists supporting naval, aerospace, and weapons development.
China’s Military-Civil Fusion strategy explicitly integrates civilian research with military advancement, accelerating defense capability development.
This structural integration differs fundamentally from the decentralized American system and highlights the importance of protecting the technological advantage that underpins U.S. naval superiority.
Why Americans Are Only Beginning to Hear This Story
Many of these cases involving technology theft, undisclosed affiliations, and research security concerns have been publicly reported—but rarely remain in the national spotlight long enough for Americans to see the broader pattern.
Through our China Watch coverage, Americans for a Stronger Navy has documented the larger strategic picture: rapid Chinese naval expansion, sustained investment in military-relevant technologies, and long-term efforts to close the technological and industrial gap with the United States.
This is not a moment for panic—but it is a moment for awareness.
Naval superiority depends on technological leadership. And technological leadership depends on national awareness.
Congress Recognized the Challenge — But the Debate Continues
In 2025, Congress passed the SAFE Research Act in the House of Representatives to strengthen transparency and accountability in federally funded research involving foreign adversary-linked institutions.
However, the provision was removed from the final National Defense Authorization Act after opposition from major academic organizations.
Organizations raising concerns included:
Association of American Universities (AAU)
Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU)
American Physical Society (APS)
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF)
These organizations warned the legislation could harm scientific collaboration, innovation, and America’s ability to attract global talent.
Their concerns reflect legitimate interests in preserving America’s research leadership.
At the same time, the strategic competition affecting naval power continues to accelerate.
Both realities exist.
Why This Matters to the Future of the U.S. Navy
Naval superiority is no longer determined solely by fleet size.
It depends on maintaining technological leadership in:
Nuclear propulsion
Artificial intelligence
Advanced materials
Autonomous systems
Sensors, communications, and computing
These technologies determine whether future American ships remain dominant—or vulnerable.
Shipbuilding matters. Industrial capacity matters. But technological leadership remains decisive.
If America protects its technological edge, it protects its naval advantage.
If it does not, ship numbers alone will not be enough.
Why Americans Should Care
The U.S. Navy protects global trade, deters conflict, and secures the maritime foundation of the American economy.
Every American depends on maritime security.
But naval strength requires more than ships. It requires public awareness, industrial strength, and national alignment.
Americans cannot support what they do not understand.
That is why awareness matters.
Conclusion: A National Conversation Worth Having
America’s openness has fueled generations of innovation and built the most capable Navy in history.
But strategic competitors have studied our system, invested heavily, and worked deliberately to close the gap.
The question is not whether America should remain open.
The question is whether America will remain aware.
Naval superiority cannot be taken for granted. It must be protected—not just in shipyards, but in laboratories, in policy decisions, and in the national will of the American people.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
Over the years, I’ve watched with pride as the United States Navy continues to answer the call — anywhere, anytime. We remain the most capable blue-water navy on earth. Our carriers project power globally. Our submarines dominate beneath the waves. Our sailors perform with professionalism and discipline that few nations can match.
But there’s a hard truth we need to confront as Americans.
We are running our fleet — and our sailors — very hard.
The USS Gerald R. Ford and the Bigger Pattern
When the USS Gerald R. Ford deploys, it represents American industrial power, advanced engineering, and decades of naval aviation expertise. It is the most technologically advanced aircraft carrier ever built.
And yet, like so many ships before it, it has faced extended deployments, compressed maintenance cycles, and intense operational tempo.
This is not about one ship.
It’s about a pattern.
For more than two decades, global demand for U.S. naval presence has increased — while fleet size has not kept pace. The Navy today operates fewer ships than it did during much of the Cold War, yet it is tasked with deterring conflict in the Western Pacific, reassuring allies in Europe, maintaining stability in the Middle East, countering threats in the Red Sea, and responding to crises in the Caribbean and beyond.
The math is unforgiving.
The Carrier Debate — And the Irony
We often hear arguments that aircraft carriers are obsolete, too vulnerable, or relics of a past era.
Yet when tensions rise, when diplomacy tightens, when regional stability wavers — who gets called?
The carrier.
Because nothing else can:
• Deliver sustained airpower without relying on host nation permission • Generate massive sortie rates from international waters • Provide immediate, sovereign options to a president • Signal deterrence visibly and credibly
Critics focus on vulnerability. Decision-makers focus on options.
That is the carrier irony.
We debate their relevance in peacetime — and depend on them in crisis.
The Real Issue: Capacity, Not Capability
The U.S. Navy is still the strongest in the world.
But strength without depth creates strain.
Extended deployments affect more than headlines. They impact:
• Sailor fatigue and family stability • Training cycles • Shipyard scheduling • Long-term readiness
When maintenance gets compressed, the effects don’t show up immediately. They show up later — in availability gaps, repair delays, and cascading readiness challenges across the fleet.
This is not alarmism.
It is operational reality.
Why Americans Should Care
Most Americans assume we have a massive Navy that can surge indefinitely.
They see a carrier sent to a region and feel reassured.
They do not see the maintenance backlogs, the stretched crews, or the industrial bottlenecks behind the scenes.
Sea power underwrites global commerce. Roughly 90 percent of global trade moves by sea. Energy flows, supply chains, and strategic chokepoints all depend on maritime stability.
When the Navy is stretched thin, that stability becomes more fragile.
This isn’t about war. It’s about deterrence, economic security, and preventing conflict before it starts.
The Path Forward
The answer is not to bash carriers.
The answer is not to overuse them either.
The answer is depth:
• More ships • Stable deployment cycles • Stronger shipbuilding capacity • Investment in maintenance infrastructure • Support for the sailors and families who carry the burden
America’s Navy belongs to the American people. And if we expect it to remain the strongest in the world, we must understand what it actually takes to sustain that strength.
We can be proud of our Navy.
But pride alone does not build ships.
Public understanding does.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
The future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) has begun shipbuilder sea trials.
That sentence sounds technical. Routine. Almost boring.
It is anything but.
I still remember the first time I saw USS Enterprise (CVN-65).
Not in a book. Not in a documentary. But in person — a city of steel at sea that didn’t just float… it projected presence. You didn’t need anyone to explain what it meant. You felt it.
Eight reactors. A flat deck that seemed to stretch to the horizon. Sailors moving with purpose. Aircraft launching into the sky like it was routine business for a nation that understood the oceans mattered.
Enterprise wasn’t just a ship. She was a statement.
She told the world that the United States knew how to build big things, maintain them, crew them, and keep them forward where they mattered most.
That memory came rushing back this week as the future USS John F. Kennedy began sea trials.
Different era. Different technology. Same message trying to break through the noise:
America still knows how to build ships like this.
But here’s the part that concerns me.
When I saw Enterprise, there was no question we had the industrial base, the shipyards, the workforce, and the national will to keep ships like her coming. Today, every new carrier feels like a minor miracle of coordination, learning curves, delays, and hard-won progress.
Sea trials for Kennedy are more than a shipbuilder milestone. They’re a reminder of what we used to do routinely — and what we now must work very hard to preserve.
And that’s why this moment matters far more than most Americans realize..
For the first time, America’s next nuclear-powered aircraft carrier is operating in open water, testing the systems that will carry U.S. power, deterrence, and stability across the world’s oceans for the next 50 years.
This is not just a shipyard milestone. This is a strategic milestone for the United States.
What Sea Trials Really Mean
Sea trials are where theory meets reality.
This is where:
the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System is proven at sea
the Advanced Arresting Gear is tested in real conditions
the new SPY-6 radar begins to show what modern naval sensing looks like
and lessons learned from USS Gerald R. Ford are put into practice
This is the Navy and the shipyard proving that American industrial capability still works.
But There’s A Catch Most People Miss
USS John F. Kennedy won’t join the fleet until 2027.
In that time:
USS Nimitz retires this spring
USS Harry S. Truman begins a long overhaul
USS John C. Stennis is already over a year behind schedule in overhaul
That means for the next two years, the Navy will be operating with fewer carriers than planned during a period when China is expanding its fleet, its shipyards, and its maritime presence at record speed.
This is the readiness gap Americans don’t see.
Why Americans Should Care
Aircraft carriers are not symbols. They are mobile sovereign territory.
They protect:
global trade routes
allies in Europe, the Middle East, and the Pacific
undersea cables and energy lanes
the economic system Americans rely on every day
When carriers are in overhaul and replacements are delayed, coverage shrinks. And when coverage shrinks, deterrence weakens.
Implications for the Navy
The Navy is doing what it can with what it has. Shipbuilders are learning from past mistakes and improving delivery.
But the industrial timeline is unforgiving. You cannot rush nuclear carriers. You cannot surge shipyards overnight. You cannot rebuild lost capacity in a crisis.
This is why shipbuilding, maintenance, and industrial capacity are national security issues — not procurement trivia.
Implications for Our Allies
Allies don’t measure American commitment by speeches. They measure it by hulls at sea.
Sea trials for John F. Kennedy signal that more hulls are coming. But the gap between now and 2027 is where risk lives.
The Bigger Picture
This story isn’t about one carrier.
It’s about whether America remembers how to build, maintain, and sustain the fleet that keeps the world’s oceans stable.
That’s why this matters.
That’s why Americans should care.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
While we focus on ship counts, readiness percentages, and hull maintenance, there’s another critical battle being fought in Navy Medicine laboratories that directly impacts our fleet’s combat power: the fight against antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
The Naval Medical Research Command (NMRC) just completed a six-year research program that could revolutionize how we protect our sailors and Marines from one of the most insidious threats they face—bacterial infections that laugh at our best antibiotics.
The Invisible Enemy
Here’s the reality: our warfighters aren’t just exposed to enemy fire. They face bacteria through combat injuries, deployments to overseas locations, and the close-quarters environment of shipboard life. And increasingly, these bacteria are resistant to the antibiotics we’ve relied on for decades.
Four bacterial villains are the focus: Acinetobacter baumannii (nicknamed “Iraqibacter” from the early Iraq war days), Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus. All can cause fevers, fatigue, swelling—and in severe cases, death.
When a sailor or Marine is fighting a multidrug-resistant infection, they’re not mission-ready. They’re not protecting their shipmates. They’re fighting for their life.
The Navy’s Secret Weapon: Bacteriophages
Navy Medicine Research & Development has a solution that sounds like science fiction but is brilliantly simple: use viruses that naturally hunt and kill bacteria.
Bacteriophages—or phages—are viruses that target specific bacteria with surgical precision. Unlike antibiotics that carpet-bomb your body’s bacterial ecosystem (killing both good and bad bacteria), phages are smart weapons. They go after only the harmful bacteria you want eliminated.
Over six years of focused research funded by Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDRMP), NMRC has developed approximately 2,500 phage cocktails. Think of these as personalized medicine—specific combinations designed to attack specific bacterial threats.
From Wastewater to Warfighter
The collection process is global and fascinating. Navy researchers harvest phages from wastewater—bogs, sewers, rivers—across multiple continents. These microscopic hunters are everywhere. In fact, if you strung together all the phages on Earth, they could wrap around the Milky Way Galaxy three times.
Each collected phage goes through rigorous purification and characterization. As Dr. Biswajit Biswas, chief of NMRC’s Bacteriophage Science Division, explains: “We collect these phages, purify them and grow them in large quantities. Then, we extract DNA, sequence its genome and analyze the phage very carefully to understand if it carries any toxins, since we cannot push something in the human systems if the phage carries toxins.”
This is meticulous work. This is Navy excellence.
Proof of Concept: The Tom Patterson Story
In 2015, NMRC achieved something historic. Dr. Tom Patterson fell critically ill from Acinetobacter baumannii, slipped into a coma, and remained ill through multiple treatments. Nothing worked. Until he was administered an NMRC-developed phage cocktail intravenously.
He survived.
As Dr. Biswas notes: “It should be understood that before Tom Patterson’s case, nobody used phage to treat systemic bacterial infection in the United States.”
NMRC didn’t just save a life. They opened a door.
Why This Matters for Naval Readiness
Commander Mark Simons, director of NMRC’s Infectious Diseases Directorate, gets straight to the point: “Navy and Marine Corps warfighters are often first to the fight as expeditionary units, and thus will experience early casualties in a potentially prolonged-care setting. This will require novel antimicrobial countermeasures to be used early and throughout the continuum of care to treat antibiotic-resistant infections which are rising globally and highly prevalent in developing countries and high-conflict regions.”
Read that again. First to the fight.Early casualties.Prolonged-care settings.
When we deploy our carriers to the Indo-Pacific, when we send Marines into contested environments, when we operate in regions where medical evacuation isn’t guaranteed—our people need every medical advantage we can give them.
A sailor fighting a superbug infection can’t stand watch. A Marine with a resistant wound infection can’t complete the mission. Medical readiness is operational readiness.
Joint Innovation at Its Best
This research demonstrates something we don’t celebrate enough: when Navy Medicine and Army Medicine researchers work together with focused priorities, incredible things happen. NMRC collaborated seamlessly with Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) and the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory.
WRAIR’s Forward Labs collected phages in Thailand, Kenya, and Georgia. Naval Medical Research Unit (NAMRU) SOUTH provided phage isolates from South America. This global network, coordinated across services, created a phage library that will serve warfighters for years to come.
This is how you build combat advantage.
Next Mission: FDA Approval
NMRC’s next objective is clear: Investigational New Drug applications with the FDA to move the most promising cocktails into phase one safety and immune response studies.
“Navy Medicine R&D is a leader in bacteriophage research so that we can bring this promising technology to clinicians and corpsman to improve battlefield survival for Sailors and Marines,” Commander Simons states.
That’s the goal. Not publications. Not academic prestige. Battlefield survival..
The Bigger Picture
We talk often about the “hollow Navy” of the 1970s—rusting ships, deferred maintenance, degraded readiness. But readiness isn’t just hull numbers and operating budgets. It’s whether our people can fight and survive when called upon.
This bacteriophage research represents the same commitment to readiness that we demand in ship maintenance, training, and logistics. It’s the Navy refusing to accept that warfighters should die from infections we could prevent or treat.
It’s innovation driven by mission necessity.
It’s medical capability that directly enables combat power.
It’s the kind of work that happens when national will, proper funding, and talented professionals align toward a clear objective: keeping our sailors and Marines ready, healthy, and lethal.
What This Teaches Us
For 250 years, Navy Medicine has delivered healthcare to warfighters “on, below, and above the sea and ashore.” This bacteriophage research continues that legacy with 21st-century tools.
But it also demonstrates something broader about naval strength: readiness is a system. Every piece matters. From hull coatings that prevent rust to phage cocktails that prevent death from resistant bacteria, it all connects.
When we advocate for a stronger Navy, we’re advocating for all of it. The ships, yes. But also the medicine, the logistics, the training, the innovation, the global partnerships that make American naval power possible.
NMRC and its partner commands have shown what’s possible when the mission is clear and the resources are provided. They’ve built a library of 2,500 phage cocktails, established processes that could save countless lives, and positioned the U.S. military to lead in a crucial medical technology.
That’s not just good science. That’s good strategy.
That’s a stronger Navy.
FREDERICK, Md. (April 11, 2025) Researchers with Biological Defense Research Directorate (BDRD), pose for a group photo after conducting bacteriophage therapy research to combat multidrug resistant bacteria that could impact warfighter readiness. Phages are viruses that target and kill antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Navy Medicine Research & Development (NMR&D) is engaged in bacteriophage therapy research to protect the warfighter from these threats, keeping U.S. forces ready and lethal. NMRC, headquarters of NMR&D, is engaged in a broad spectrum of activity from basic science in the laboratory to field studies in austere and remote areas of the world to investigations in operational environments. In support of Navy, Marine Corps and joint U.S. warfighter health, readiness and lethality, researchers study infectious diseases, biological warfare detection and defense, combat casualty care, environmental health concerns, aerospace and undersea medicine, operational mission support and epidemiology. For 250 years, Navy Medicine, represented by more than 44,000 highly-trained military and civilian healthcare professionals, has delivered quality healthcare and enduring expeditionary medical support to the warfighter on, below, and above the sea and ashore.
Americans for a Stronger Navy advocates for the transparent reporting, proper resourcing, and strategic innovation necessary to maintain U.S. naval superiority. Medical readiness is operational readiness. Support the sailors and Marines who stand the watch.
USS Zumwalt has returned to sea after one of the most radical ship conversions in modern naval history. Its guns are gone. In their place: the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) hypersonic weapon system. On the surface, this looks like a story about cutting-edge weapons and futuristic warfare. But the deeper story is about something far more important for Americans to understand: how naval power is evolving from platforms to systems—and how design decisions, industrial capacity, and national alignment determine whether innovation becomes usable combat power.
This is not just a story about a destroyer. It is a story about whether the United States can adapt fast enough to a changing era of warfare.
What Actually Happened
After entering the yard in 2023, Zumwalt was taken out of the water, structurally modified on land, stripped of its twin 155mm Advanced Gun Systems, and rebuilt to host large-diameter launch infrastructure for hypersonic missiles. Builder’s sea trials in January 2026 validated propulsion, power generation, hull integrity, and ship systems after this extraordinary redesign.
This was not a maintenance period. This was a repurposing of a warship’s entire combat identity.
The Navy took a class originally built for precision naval gunfire support and turned it into the first surface ship designed to deliver hypersonic strike.
That decision tells us a lot.
Why This Matters Beyond the Headlines
Hypersonic weapons are impressive. Speeds above Mach 5. Maneuverability. Minimal warning time. Ability to penetrate advanced defenses.
But the more important question is this:
What does it take to put a weapon like this to sea?
The answer is uncomfortable.
It required removing the original mission. It required structural redesign. It required years in the yard. It required extraordinary industrial effort. It required a ship with unusual power capacity and internal space.
In other words:
You can’t just bolt hypersonics onto any ship.
You need design margin. You need electrical power. You need internal volume. You need shipyards capable of radical modification. You need a Navy and an industrial base that can adapt.
That is the real story.
A Ship as a System, Not a Platform
For years, Americans have been taught to think of naval strength as “how many ships we have.”
Zumwalt shows the flaw in that thinking.
Naval power is not a hull count. It is whether your ships can evolve when the fight changes.
This ship was able to change because of how it was originally designed:
Integrated electric propulsion
Excess power generation
Internal growth space
Signature management for survivability
Most of our fleet does not have that kind of design margin.
And that is where this story becomes national.
The Hidden Constraint No One Talks About
Hypersonic missiles are huge.
The launchers are huge.
Magazine depth is limited.
This is not a “volume of fire” weapon. It is a high-impact, precision, strategic signaling weapon.
Which means the value of Zumwalt is not how many missiles it carries.
The value is what it does to an adversary’s planning.
A mobile, hard-to-target, forward-deployed ship that can strike time-sensitive targets with almost no warning from unpredictable sea locations forces an adversary to defend everything.
That is naval maneuver used as a weapon.
And that is a concept most Americans have never been taught.
What Others Will Focus On
Many analysts will talk about:
The cost of the Zumwalt program
The failure of the original gun system
Whether hypersonics belong at sea
Magazine limitations
Strategic signaling risks
All valid discussions.
But they miss the bigger lesson.
The question is not whether Zumwalt was worth it.
The question is whether we are designing today’s ships so they can adapt tomorrow.
Because wars between major powers are not decided by what we start with.
They are decided by what we can modify, replace, and evolve after the fighting begins.
Why Americans Should Care
This story is about far more than a destroyer.
It is about:
Shipyard capacity
Industrial skill
Design philosophy
Electrical power margins in ships
Flexibility in fleet architecture
The ability to change missions without building a new class of ship
That is national strength.
That is governance.
That is whether budgets, priorities, and industry are aligned with the realities of modern warfare.
Most Americans think innovation happens in labs.
Zumwalt shows that innovation must be built into the steel of ships years before it is needed.
Implications for the Navy
The Navy now has proof that:
Large-scale mission conversion is possible
Integrated electric ships have enormous future value
Hypersonic strike can be distributed across surface platforms
Ship design margin is not a luxury—it is a warfighting requirement
The remaining two Zumwalts will follow.
But the real question is whether future ship classes are being designed with this lesson in mind.
Implications for Our Allies
Allies watching this are learning something important:
The U.S. Navy is not just adding new weapons.
It is learning how to adapt existing platforms into new roles.
That flexibility is a form of deterrence.
Because it signals that the fleet they see today is not the fleet they will face tomorrow.
The Governance Lesson Hiding in Plain Sight
This did not happen because of a single weapon.
This happened because: National will → budgets Budgets → priorities Priorities → ship design Ship design → adaptability Adaptability → readiness
That chain is what turns technology into combat power.
Break that chain anywhere, and innovation stays on paper.
The Bigger Takeaway
USS Zumwalt is no longer a story about a controversial ship.
It is now a case study in how naval power must be built for change.
And that is a lesson Americans need to understand if we want a Navy that can fight—and adapt—in the decades ahead.
Because the future of naval warfare will not be decided by what ships were built to do.
It will be decided by what they can become.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
As the founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, my mission is to advocate for the naval power our nation needs to secure its interests, project influence, and deter aggression in an increasingly complex world. For too long, discussions about naval strength have focused almost exclusively on traditional, crewed warships. While these mighty vessels remain the backbone of our fleet, a silent revolution is underway—one that promises to redefine naval warfare as we know it.
More Than Just Boats: The Brains Behind the Brawn
What makes these vessels so transformative isn’t just their ability to operate without a crew, but the sophisticated artificial intelligence that empowers them. Both the Sea Hunter and Seahawk were designed and built by Leidos, and they are powered by an advanced software ecosystem called LAVA (Leidos Autonomous Vessel Architecture).
Self-Correction & Resilience: If a system fails or damage occurs, LAVA can reconfigure its mission in real-time. It’s like having a captain who can rewrite the playbook mid-battle without human intervention.
Intelligent Navigation: LAVA constantly processes data from radar, lidar, AIS, and cameras to execute collision avoidance maneuvers in full compliance with international “Rules of the Road” (COLREGS).
Modular Versatility: The same “brain” can be installed across a wide range of vessels, from high-speed interceptors to specialized sub-hunters.
A Fleet of Ghost Ships: The Strategic Advantages
Persistence & Endurance: Without a crew, these ships can operate for extended periods without the need for rotation or resupply.
Reduced Risk to Personnel: Deploying unmanned vessels for dangerous missions like anti-submarine warfare (ASW) preserves our most valuable asset: our sailors.
Cost-Effectiveness: Long-term operational costs are significantly lower than traditional warships, offering an affordable way to expand global presence.
Scalability & Swarming: LAVA enables “swarms” of USVs to coordinate and search vast ocean areas for threats simultaneously.
Looking Ahead: The Future is Unmanned
The US Navy’s commitment is clear. With an expansion from just four small USVs to hundreds projected within a single year, the shift is undeniable. The Seahawk and Sea Hunter have already logged over 140,000 autonomous nautical miles—more than five times the Earth’s circumference.
For Americans for a Stronger Navy, this represents a crucial step forward. Investing in these innovative, autonomous systems ensures that our Navy remains at the forefront of global naval power, ready to face the challenges of tomorrow’s maritime domain with unparalleled strength.
Join the Mission for a Modern Fleet
The transition to an autonomous-integrated fleet is a generational shift that requires steady advocacy and public support. At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we are dedicated to ensuring our sailors have the most advanced technology on the planet to keep our seas free and our nation secure.
Support our efforts today:
Stay Informed: Subscribe to our newsletter for deep dives into naval tech like LAVA and the Ghost Fleet.
Spread the Word: Share this article with your network to highlight the innovation happening in our shipyards.
Advocate: Join our community of maritime supporters and help us champion the 21st-century fleet.
A major announcement this week marks a breakthrough in naval innovation. Blue Water Autonomy, a Boston-based defense startup, confirmed on November 5 that it has successfully tested its long-range autonomous ship technology on the waters off Massachusetts — a first for U.S. industry.
The company shared new images and data from sea trials, demonstrating that its medium-sized drone warship systems can operate reliably in open-ocean conditions, a critical milestone as the Navy looks to expand its reach in the Pacific. A full-scale 150-foot prototype is planned for 2026, advancing the goal of deploying uncrewed ships capable of long-range operations alongside traditional fleets.
Why It Matters
China’s shipyards continue to outproduce America’s by wide margins, while U.S. shipbuilding struggles with delays, labor shortages, and cost overruns. Blue Water Autonomy’s success offers a glimpse of what’s possible when innovation meets urgency. These modular vessels are designed to carry sensors, radars, and missile payloads across more than 6,000 nautical miles, from California to Taiwan and back — a range that redefines how the U.S. could project power across the Indo-Pacific.
Implications for the Navy
The Navy’s future battle force calls for 381 crewed ships and 134 uncrewed vessels, but reaching those numbers requires new approaches. By designing ships that can be mass-produced quickly at smaller shipyards, Blue Water Autonomy’s model could help offset the strain on America’s overstretched industrial base. With a Navy contract already in hand and potential full-scale production in Louisiana shipyards next year, the company’s success represents a tangible step toward restoring U.S. maritime advantage through technology and industrial reform.
Why Americans Should Care
Every advancement in autonomy brings the same truth into sharper focus: deterrence is cheaper than war. Building smarter, more flexible fleets keeps sailors safe, strengthens deterrence, and ensures America remains a global maritime leader. Blue Water Autonomy’s announcement isn’t just about a new vessel — it’s about rebuilding the capacity and confidence of a nation that must once again lead at sea.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
by Bill Cullifer, founder Americans for a Stronger Navy
As America marks the Navy’s 250th birthday, Captain Brent Sadler, USN (Ret.) recent essay reminds us this milestone is not just a moment to celebrate—it’s a call to action. From two ships in 1775 to the world’s most powerful fleet, the Navy has carried our flag, defended our freedom, and guarded the arteries of global commerce. But as Sadler rightly warns, the next few years will not be smooth sailing.
A Fleet Stretched Thin
Today, over a third of our fleet is more than 20 years old. Shipbuilding delays and maintenance backlogs are pushing the limits of readiness. Our sailors, the heart of the fleet, continue to perform with unmatched skill and resolve—but they are doing so aboard aging platforms. China is fast closing the gap, and they are not waiting for us.
Lessons Written in Blood
History teaches that there are no cheap shortcuts to sea power. Survivability and lethality come from hard-earned experience, superior training, and a robust industrial base. Sadler recalls the typhoon of 1944 that claimed three destroyers and hundreds of lives—a stark reminder that nature and conflict alike punish complacency. Competence, leadership, and technical mastery remain our sailors’ greatest weapons.
For the Skeptics: China’s Long Game Is Already Underway
To those who still doubt that China poses more than a distant “threat,” here is a sharper look at how Beijing is already laying the foundations of a rival maritime order—and why ignoring it is perilous.
“Unrestricted Warfare” and Strategic Pluralism
Chinese strategists have long argued that war is no longer limited to the battlefield. Unrestricted Warfare (1999) openly promoted using economic, cyber, legal, and informational tools to weaken stronger powers—a doctrine now reflected in Beijing’s global behavior.
Dual-Use Shipbuilding and External Support
China’s commercial and naval shipyards work side-by-side, leveraging subsidies and state control to produce more hulls than the rest of the world combined. These facilities give Beijing the ability to surge production during crisis—something the U.S. industrial base cannot yet match.
The “Great Underwater Wall” and Maritime Surveillance
Beijing is constructing a vast undersea sensor network across the South China Sea—an integrated web of hydrophones, drones, and seabed nodes designed to detect U.S. and allied submarines. It’s surveillance on a scale the world has never seen.
“Cabbage” Tactics and Incremental Control
China surrounds disputed islands layer by layer—fishing boats, coast-guard cutters, and finally warships—gradually converting “gray zones” into permanent possessions without firing a shot.
The “String of Pearls” Strategy
Ports and logistics hubs from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic give China reach far beyond its shores. Each node tightens its grip over the world’s vital maritime choke points.
Global Projection and Signaling
China’s navy now sails the Tasman Sea, the Gulf of Oman, and beyond—exercising in waters where it once had no business. These deployments make one thing clear: China’s maritime ambitions are global, not regional.
Don’t Take My Word For It — Listen to the Experts
Over the past 24 months, Americans for a Stronger Navy has been mapping a story few citizens have ever been shown: how China’s campaign against the United States unfolded, who knew what and when, and what it will take to pull back from the brink. We didn’t start with opinions—we started with evidence. Here’s what the experts have been saying for years, and how their warnings fit together.
Strategic Intent and Military Buildup
Admiral James Lyons Jr., former commander of the Pacific Fleet, said what few in Washington wanted to hear as early as 2013: “We’re in our second Cold War with another communist totalitarian regime.” He warned that China has “built the navy specifically to go against the United States Navy” and that their anti-ship ballistic missiles are “not geared to go against the Bangladesh navy.” When a fleet commander speaks that bluntly on national television, that’s not politics—that’s professional judgment.
Brigadier General Douglas P. Wickert has shown how far that judgment has proven correct. In the Gobi Desert, China has built full-scale mock-ups of Taiwan’s Taichung International Airport and a “one-for-one silhouette of the Ford-class aircraft carrier” for target practice. They are not hiding their intentions. They are practicing to sink our ships and invade our allies.
The scale of China’s buildup is staggering. As Sadler and others have documented: “They have 230 times the shipbuilding capacity of the United States in terms of shipyard infrastructure and potential output. Just one shipyard in China last year alone, in 2024, built more tonnage of ships than the U.S. did since the end of World War II.” One shipyard outproduced our entire nation’s post-WWII shipbuilding in a single year. That’s not competition—that’s a wake-up call.
A Time for Revival
The path forward demands both vision and accountability. We need new ships—but also a paradigm shift in how America thinks about sea power, alliance networks, and industrial mobilization. Unmanned systems, resilient architectures, and faster acquisition must be part of the solution. So must shipyard revitalization, recruitment, and public understanding.
Why Americans Should Care
A strong Navy isn’t about seeking conflict—it’s about preventing it. The sea connects our economy, allies, and security. Every container safely delivered, every undersea cable protected, every freedom-of-navigation operation maintained depends on a Navy that’s ready, credible, and resilient. The choices we make now will determine whether we can deter China in 2027 and beyond—or whether others will write the next chapter of maritime history for us.
Charting the Next 250 Years
As we honor our Navy’s proud history, we must also rally around its future. That means bringing Americans into the conversation—not just policymakers and admirals, but citizens, veterans, and industry alike. Our sailors deserve ships that match their courage and leaders who match their commitment.
Sadler’s message is clear: vigilance and strength are the surest remedies against any adversary’s ambitions.
That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late. Let’s roll.
The U.S. Navy has quietly achieved a significant milestone in maritime defense with the operational deployment of cutting-edge counter-drone systems aboard the USS Bainbridge. Recent photographs taken on July 27, 2025, during NATO’s Neptune Strike exercise in the Ionian Sea, show the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer equipped with new Raytheon Coyote interceptor launchers—marking the first confirmed installation of these advanced systems on a U.S. Navy destroyer.
A Strategic Response to Evolving Threats
This development represents more than just a technological upgrade; it’s a direct response to the changing nature of maritime warfare. The Navy’s decision to equip destroyers with Coyote and Anduril Roadrunner-M counter-drone systems stems from harsh lessons learned in recent conflicts, particularly the Red Sea operations against Houthi drone attacks.
The cost-effectiveness issue has been stark: Navy ships were using multimillion-dollar Standard Missiles to intercept drones costing mere thousands of dollars. As one defense analyst noted, this created an unsustainable economic equation that threatened to drain naval missile magazines against relatively inexpensive threats.
Technical Capabilities and Advantages
The Coyote system brings several key advantages to naval defense:
Loitering Capability: Unlike traditional missiles that follow a direct intercept path, Coyote interceptors can loiter in designated areas, providing persistent coverage and the ability to engage multiple threats dynamically.
Cost-Effective Defense: Each Coyote interceptor costs significantly less than traditional surface-to-air missiles, making them ideal for countering low-cost drone swarms.
Flexible Deployment: The system’s ability to be launched from standard sonobuoy canisters provides installation flexibility across various naval platforms.
The companion Roadrunner-M system offers additional capabilities, including the revolutionary ability to return to base for reuse if not deployed against a target—a feature that further improves cost-effectiveness.
Operational Context and Deployment
The USS Bainbridge is one of three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers currently assigned to the Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, alongside the USS Winston S. Churchill and USS Mitscher. This strike group represents a testing ground for these new defensive capabilities, with the Churchill serving as the air defense commander—a role increasingly important as the Navy’s aging Ticonderoga-class cruisers are phased out.
The timing of this deployment is significant. The photograph was taken during a helicopter, board, search, and seizure drill as part of NATO exercises, demonstrating that these systems are being tested in realistic, multilateral maritime scenarios.
Broader Strategic Implications
This development signals several important shifts in U.S. naval strategy:
Magazine Depth Enhancement: These systems provide destroyers with additional interceptor capacity without consuming precious missile magazine space reserved for larger threats.
Scalable Defense Architecture: The ability to deploy both expendable (Coyote) and reusable (Roadrunner) interceptors provides commanders with flexible response options based on threat assessment.
Rapid Fielding Priority: The Navy’s decision to rush these systems to operational deployment indicates the urgency with which they view the drone threat
Technology Partners and Innovation
The partnership between established defense contractors and newer companies is noteworthy. While Raytheon provides the proven Coyote platform with its track record in hurricane research and military applications, Anduril Industries brings innovation with the Roadrunner series, representing a new generation of autonomous air defense systems.
Anduril’s Roadrunner platform introduces concepts like vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) capability and high-G maneuverability, features that could revolutionize ship-based air defense by enabling interceptors to engage threats from multiple vectors.
Looking Forward
The USS Bainbridge installation represents just the beginning of what appears to be a broader transformation of naval air defense. With the Army already planning to purchase thousands of Coyote interceptors and the Navy moving to equip multiple destroyer platforms, we’re witnessing the emergence of a new defensive paradigm.
This evolution reflects the reality of modern naval warfare, where traditional high-end threats coexist with asymmetric challenges from inexpensive but numerous drone platforms. The success of these systems in operational deployment will likely influence similar adaptations across allied navies facing comparable threats.
As maritime operations continue to evolve, the integration of these counter-drone systems aboard frontline destroyers like the Bainbridge marks a critical adaptation—one that balances technological sophistication with economic sustainability in an era of emerging threats.
