The Autonomous Revolution: Naval Warfare’s Exponential Leap

Introduction

The future isn’t coming—it’s already here, patrolling our oceans with no human hands on the wheel.

Personal Reflection

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

As someone who stood watch on a destroyer’s deck for years, I’d love nothing more than for every young American to feel the salt air, a wooden helm at their fingertips, the roll of the ship beneath their feet and the breathtaking vastness of the sea. That experience shaped my life and the life of many others that I respect and admire.

But sentiment won’t secure the future. The world has changed—and it’s time we face some hard facts.

We’re now witnessing the dawn of a radically new era in warfare. One that demands we embrace and invest in the technologies that will define the next generation of naval power.

From Science Fiction to Sea Trials

Less than a decade ago, the idea of fully autonomous warships seemed like the stuff of sci-fi. Today, the U.S. Navy’s USX-1 Defiant—a 180-foot, 240-ton vessel designed without a single human accommodation—is conducting sea trials off Washington state.

No bunks. No heads. No mess halls. Just a steel-clad, AI-powered war machine optimized purely for mission.

This isn’t incremental change. It’s an exponential leap.

The Compound Effect of Convergent Technologies

What’s driving this revolution isn’t just a single breakthrough. It’s convergence.

AI Decision-Making at Machine Speed

Ships like USS Ranger and Mariner aren’t just autonomous—they’re operational. They’ve logged thousands of miles, fired missiles, and executed missions without direct human control. Real-time, tactical adaptation is already replacing human-triggered decision trees.

Swarm Coordination Beyond Human Capability

With programs like Ghost Fleet Overlord, we’re moving toward fully integrated autonomous networks—surface, subsurface, aerial. Swarms of unmanned systems coordinating at machine speed, executing joint missions across domains.

New Physical Designs, New Possibilities

When you remove the human factor, new design freedom emerges. The NOMARS program optimizes for function over form—rapid payload reconfiguration, longer endurance, fewer constraints. Defiant doesn’t compromise. It adapts.

The Multiplication Factor

Each of these capabilities amplifies the others:

  • AI enables swarm tactics
  • Swarms generate operational data
  • That data trains the next-gen AI
  • Which enables even more sophisticated missions

The cycle is accelerating. Consider DARPA’s Manta Ray, an autonomous glider designed to “hibernate” on the seabed for months. Now picture that working in tandem with unmanned surface vessels like Defiant, and traditional submarines—all coordinating without a single sailor onboard.

The MASC Paradigm: Speed Over Paperwork

The Navy’s new Modular Attack Surface Craft (MASC) program exemplifies this exponential thinking. Instead of designing ships around specific missions, MASC creates standardized platforms that gain capabilities through containerized payloads—like naval smartphones that become powerful through modular “apps.”

With an aggressive 18-month delivery timeline and emphasis on commercial standards over “exquisite” platforms, MASC represents a fundamental shift in how the Navy acquires capability. As Austin Gray, Navy Reserve Intelligence Officer & Co-founder/CSO, Blue Water Autonomy observed: “The way Navy is approaching MASC—procuring fast, iteratively, and with focus on speed over paperwork—should offer us hope that the future of U.S. seapower is not so dim.”

This isn’t just about new ships—it’s about new thinking. MASC vessels can be missile shooters one day, submarine hunters the next, simply by swapping standardized containers. The high-capacity variant could carry 64 missiles—more firepower than many destroyers, at a fraction of the cost.

Beyond the Horizon

In 2016, Sea Hunter launched with basic navigation. By 2021, converted vessels were firing missiles. In 2025, purpose-built unmanned warships are conducting sea trials. By 2026, MASC prototypes will be delivered for fleet operations.

What’s next?

The Pentagon is backing this future with a $179 billion R&D investment focused on AI, drone swarms, and autonomous systems. The revolution isn’t limited to ships—it extends to autonomous aircraft, land vehicles, and space-based platforms.

The Inflection Point

This may be the most transformative shift in warfare since the atomic age.

But unlike nuclear weapons, which stagnated under treaties and deterrence doctrines, autonomous systems evolve constantly—learning, adapting, improving. The next five years will likely deliver breakthroughs we can’t yet fully comprehend.

We’re not just upgrading platforms. We’re creating entire ecosystems of autonomous coordination that outpace human decision-making and redefine how wars are fought—and deterred.

Welcome to U.S. Navy 3.0—a new era defined not by bigger ships, but by smarter ones.

We’ve discussed this evolution before: Navy 1.0 was sail and steel; Navy 2.0 brought nuclear power and carrier dominance. Navy 3.0 marks a transformational leap driven by artificial intelligence, autonomy, and multi-domain integration. It’s not just about replacing crewed vessels with unmanned ones—it’s about rethinking naval power from the keel up. From swarming tactics to predictive logistics and machine-speed decision-making, Navy 3.0 is our opportunity to regain the edge in a world where adversaries are building faster, cheaper, and without rules.

The Legacy Challenge

This transformation faces significant resistance. Naval culture, built around centuries of seamanship and command tradition, doesn’t easily embrace unmanned systems. The defense industrial base, optimized for billion-dollar platforms with decades-long production cycles, struggles with MASC’s 18-month timelines and commercial standards.

But operational necessity is forcing evolution. When China builds ships faster than we can afford traditional platforms, alternatives become imperatives. The question isn’t whether to change—it’s whether we can change fast enough.

The Future Is Now

This isn’t a concept. It’s not theory. It’s happening:

  • Autonomous vessels are already patrolling the Pacific
  • Underwater gliders are proving months-long endurance
  • Unmanned surface warships are rewriting the rules of naval architecture
  • Containerized missile systems are operational
  • MASC solicitations are active with near-term delivery requirements

The revolution is not ahead of us. It’s around us.

And we’ve only just left the pier.

Why Americans Should Care

Autonomous warfare isn’t just a military story—it’s a national security imperative. Adversaries like China are racing to seize the advantage in unmanned systems. Falling behind means more than losing battles—it risks losing deterrence, freedom of navigation, and geopolitical influence.

The economic implications are equally significant. Navy 3.0’s emphasis on commercial standards and distributed production could revitalize American shipbuilding, creating jobs while strengthening national security.

Implications for the Navy

To remain dominant, the U.S. Navy must rethink everything: shipbuilding timelines, training paradigms, procurement processes, and alliances. Naval power in this new era will favor speed, adaptability, and distributed lethality.

Officer career paths built around commanding ships must evolve to managing autonomous swarms. Training programs must balance traditional seamanship with algorithmic warfare. Most critically, the Navy must maintain its warrior ethos while embracing radical technological change.

A Final Word

Let’s not confuse nostalgia with readiness. The romance of the sea will always have a place in our hearts—but it won’t protect our shores.

The wooden helm and salt air that shaped naval officers for generations remain valuable experiences. But future naval leaders will find meaning in different challenges: commanding autonomous fleets, coordinating multi-domain operations, and outthinking adversaries at machine speed.

If we want peace, we must master this new domain.

It’s time to embrace it. It’s time to invest. It’s time to lead.

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.

Quantum Navigation: Lockheed Martin’s QuINS and the Future of U.S. Naval Operations

Introduction

The U.S. military is on the verge of a breakthrough in navigation technology, one that could redefine how forces operate in GPS-denied environments. Lockheed Martin, in collaboration with the Department of Defense’s Innovation Unit (DIU), is developing the Quantum Inertial Navigation System (QuINS)—a system that could eliminate reliance on GPS and provide unparalleled accuracy for military operations.

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

For centuries, ocean navigation has evolved through a series of technological breakthroughs that have shaped maritime dominance. In ancient times, sailors relied on celestial navigation, using the stars, sun, and moon to determine their position. The invention of the magnetic compass in the 12th century revolutionized seafaring, allowing ships to travel more confidently across open waters. By the 18th century, the development of the marine chronometer enabled precise longitude calculations, reducing the risk of navigational errors. The 20th century brought radio navigation and inertial navigation systems (INS), allowing submarines and warships to navigate underwater without visual cues. The arrival of GPS in the late 20th century ushered in an era of pinpoint accuracy, integrating satellite technology into global commerce and defense. Now, with adversaries actively working to jam or spoof GPS, navigation is once again at a crossroads. The emergence of quantum navigation systems (QuINS) represents the next leap—providing resilient, GPS-independent positioning to ensure the Navy remains effective even in contested environments. This latest advancement is not just a technological shift; it is part of a centuries-long progression in mastering the seas.

Quantum Navigation: Lockheed Martin’s QuINS and the Future of U.S. Naval Operations

For the U.S. Navy, this innovation has the potential to enhance fleet operations, submarine navigation, and autonomous system deployment, ensuring our naval forces remain dominant even when adversaries attempt to disrupt traditional navigation systems.

What is QuINS?

Unlike conventional navigation systems that rely on GPS satellites, QuINS uses quantum sensing technology to determine a platform’s position, velocity, and orientation purely through internal measurements. This represents a paradigm shift in navigation, ensuring that even in GPS-jammed or denied environments, ships, submarines, and aircraft can accurately determine their location.

Quantum sensors operate by leveraging the fundamental properties of atoms to detect motion with extreme precision. By measuring changes in an object’s motion through quantum mechanics, these systems can maintain accurate positioning without needing an external reference like a satellite signal.

Dr. Valerie Browning, Vice President of Research & Technology at Lockheed Martin, emphasized that the company’s goal is to take quantum navigation from the laboratory to real-world applications, ensuring that national security needs are met before adversaries gain an upper hand.

Why Americans Should Care

Most Americans take GPS for granted—it’s in our cars, phones, and even financial transactions. But what happens when that system is compromised? Adversaries like China and Russia are developing ways to jam or spoof GPS signals, which could have devastating consequences for both military and civilian infrastructure.

Quantum navigation offers a solution that could protect not just the military, but also essential industries like transportation, logistics, and emergency services. A stronger U.S. Navy with independent navigation capabilities means a more secure supply chain, fewer vulnerabilities in cyber warfare, and a nation less reliant on easily targeted satellites.

Why This Matters to the U.S. Navy

The Navy operates in some of the most complex and contested environments in the world. From the South China Sea to the Arctic, ensuring reliable navigation is crucial. Here’s how QuINS could reshape naval operations.

Resilient Submarine and Fleet Navigation

  • Silent Service Advantage: U.S. Navy submarines operate without GPS while submerged, relying on traditional inertial navigation systems (INS). Quantum INS could significantly improve accuracy over long distances, reducing position drift and enhancing mission effectiveness.
  • Surface Fleet Operations: GPS jamming has become a strategic threat. China and Russia have demonstrated their ability to spoof or jam satellite signals, making reliable navigation alternatives essential for carrier strike groups, destroyers, and logistical vessels.

Empowering Autonomous and Uncrewed Systems

  • The Navy is expanding its fleet of uncrewed surface and underwater vehicles (USVs/UUVs) to operate in contested waters.
  • Without the need for GPS, these assets could navigate undetected, perform reconnaissance missions, and even execute long-range operations with minimal risk of signal interference.
  • Future AI-driven maritime warfare could integrate quantum navigation to create autonomous fleets that operate independently of satellite-based positioning systems.

Strengthening Cyber Resilience and Electronic Warfare

  • Adversaries are developing anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons and cyber tools to disrupt GPS-reliant military forces.
  • With QuINS, U.S. naval forces will have a self-contained, tamper-proof navigation system, significantly reducing vulnerabilities in a cyber-contested environment.

Implications for Our Allies

The U.S. is not the only nation facing threats to navigation systems. Allies operating in the Indo-Pacific, Arctic, and Middle East also rely on GPS for operations. If QuINS proves successful, it could be integrated into joint naval operations, ensuring that allied fleets can maintain cohesive strategies without fearing GPS disruptions.

Partners in AUKUS (Australia, U.K., and U.S.) could benefit significantly from this technology, particularly as Australia seeks to modernize its naval fleet with nuclear-powered submarines under the agreement.

Final Thoughts: A Transformational Shift in Naval Warfare

Quantum navigation has long been viewed as a theoretical future capability, but Lockheed Martin’s QuINS project is bringing that future closer to reality. If successful, this technology will mark a historic leap in military navigation, much like the transition from celestial navigation to GPS decades ago.

For the U.S. Navy, investing in quantum sensing, AI, and autonomous warfare is not just about staying ahead—it’s about ensuring dominance in an era where adversaries are actively working to erode America’s technological and strategic advantages.

At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we recognize the importance of peace through strength. Advancements like QuINS ensure that our sailors and warfighters have the best tools available, not just for today’s conflicts, but for the unpredictable battles of tomorrow.

What Do You Think?

Should the Navy move faster in adopting quantum navigation to replace GPS-dependent systems? Share your thoughts in the comments below or join the discussion at StrongerNavy.org.

America’s Navy Needs a Course Correction—The Pentagon’s ‘D’ Grade is a National Security Failure

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

The latest National Security Innovation Base Summit gave the Pentagon a D grade for modernization. A D—not just in shipbuilding, but across the board in weapons innovation, procurement, and efficiency. This isn’t just a bureaucratic failure; it’s a direct threat to America’s national security.

My friend and shipmate from the ‘70s, Captain David Lennon, USNR (Retired), sent me this Fox News article, saying, “This echoes what you and I have been saying.” He’s right. We’ve been warning for years that America’s defense strategy is moving too slowly to keep up with global threats

The Pentagon’s Outdated Approach to Modern Warfare

According to House Armed Services Committee Vice Chair Rob Wittman, the Pentagon operates like the Ford Motor Company in the 1950s—slow, bureaucratic, and resistant to change.

“The Pentagon is the Ford Motor Company of the 1950s. I mean, the way they operate—slow, stoic. ‘Let’s spend years to write a requirement, then let’s spend years to go to a program or record, let’s spend years to acquire.’ By the time we acquire something, guess what? The threat’s way ahead of us.” – Rep. Wittman

That’s the fundamental problem—our enemies aren’t waiting for us to figure things out. China is churning out warships at breakneck speed, modernizing its naval capabilities, and outpacing us in cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. Meanwhile, the U.S. is stuck in a procurement cycle that takes decades.

Captain Lennon put it bluntly:

“America once built a navy that could fight and win a world war. Today, we struggle to maintain 295 deployable ships while our adversaries launch vessels at breakneck speed. This is not just a shipbuilding problem—it’s a national security crisis.”

Shipbuilding: A Slow-Motion Disaster

The U.S. Navy currently has 295 deployable ships. The plan calls for 390 by 2054, but at this rate, we won’t even keep up with ship retirements.

The Maritime Security Program, which maintains a fleet of privately owned, military-useful ships, is down to just 60 vessels. If a major conflict broke out in the Pacific tomorrow, we wouldn’t have the sealift capability to respond effectively.

And while China expands its navy at an alarming rate, the U.S. struggles with:

    • Delayed procurement cycles that take years just to approve new ships.

    • Budget cuts and shifting priorities that prevent consistent progress.

    • Shipyard bottlenecks due to a weakened industrial base.

Cyber Warfare: The Unseen Battlefield

Another major concern raised in the Fox News report is China’s superiority in cybersecurity. Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA) stated:

“China specifically is better at cybersecurity than we are. It only takes one or two incursions that we don’t see coming or that we aren’t responsive to, to make an enormous difference here.”

Captain Lennon underscored this growing threat:

“China and Russia don’t just challenge us at sea—they challenge us in cyberspace, in supply chains, and in economic warfare. The Navy can’t just be stronger; it has to be smarter, faster, and ready for an entirely new battlespace.”

The Pentagon’s inability to keep pace in cybersecurity makes America vulnerable. China is hacking into critical infrastructure, stealing defense blueprints, and gaining access to classified information. The next war may not begin with missiles—it may start with an attack on our power grid, financial systems, or military networks.

A White House Office of Shipbuilding? What Comes Next?

The Fox News report also revealed that President Trump is taking a direct interest in shipbuilding. His nominee for Navy Secretary, John Phelan, stated that Trump regularly texts him late at night, asking about the state of the fleet.

Trump announced the creation of a White House Office of Shipbuilding, promising to revitalize ship production. While this sounds promising, the real test will be whether it cuts through the bureaucracy and actually delivers results.

Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO) described how slow innovation is killing our ability to compete:

“We’re operating off of an innovation cycle right now that, you know, used to be a decade, and it used to be five years. Then it used to be three years, and now it’s a year or less innovation cycle. In Ukraine, they’re actually operating off of week-long innovation cycles.”

Where Do We Go From Here?

This isn’t just a military problem—it’s an economic and strategic problem that affects every American. If we fail to modernize, we risk losing control of key shipping lanes, economic stability, and military deterrence.

Captain Lennon and I both agree:

“Our nation faces an inflection point. Will we modernize our Navy to meet the challenges ahead, or will we let slow processes and outdated thinking leave us vulnerable? The choice is ours—but the clock is ticking.”

This is Why I’m Launching Our Educational Series

This conversation is exactly why I’m launching the China, Russia, and America: Navigating Global Rivalries and Naval Challenges series.

This 23-episode educational initiative will break down how history, economics, and military strategy shape today’s global threats—and why America must rally behind its Navy.

    • We’ll dive deeper into shipbuilding, looking at past successes and today’s failures.

    • We’ll unpack cybersecurity threats, explaining why China and Russia view cyber warfare as a battlefield as real as the Pacific or the South China Sea.

    • We’ll break down public policy, exposing how red tape and slow procurement cripple our defense efforts.

This series isn’t just about the Navy—it’s about why the Navy matters to you.

We need Americans engaged in this conversation because without public support, we won’t get the changes we need.

Captain Lennon and I will continue speaking out, but we need more voices in this fight.

Join Us. Stay Informed. Take Action.

Follow along at StrongerNavy.org as we roll out this critical series. It’s time to wake up America—before it’s too late.


Introducing Our Three-Part Series: Shaping the Future of Aerial Combat

Are Spaceships in the U.S. Navy’s future?
Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

F-35 vs. Drones in U.S. Defense Strategy

Why This Matters to All Americans

As technology evolves and global security challenges intensify, the conversation about the future of aerial combat grows increasingly critical. At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we believe this debate is not just for defense experts and policymakers—it’s a conversation that impacts every American. The decisions we make today about our military capabilities will shape the safety, security, and strategic posture of the United States for decades to come.

The stakes are monumental. From the taxpayer dollars funding advanced fighter programs to the geopolitical implications of maintaining air superiority, this is a topic that demands both transparency and public engagement. That’s why we’re launching a comprehensive three-part series to explore this issue from every angle.

What We Plan to Cover

Part 1: The Debate Over the F-35 Program

  • We will present the current arguments surrounding the F-35 program, including Elon Musk’s critiques of manned fighter jets, Lockheed Martin’s defense of the aircraft, and the U.S. Navy’s position on its strategic importance. This installment will provide a clear and balanced view of the differing perspectives.

Part 2: Behind the Scenes of Defense Planning

  • This segment will peel back the layers of what goes into planning programs like the F-35. From research and development to operational strategies, we’ll dive into the complexity of balancing current needs with future threats. This part will highlight the challenges faced by military planners and strategists, giving Americans a deeper appreciation of the decisions at hand.

Part 3: The Future of Aerial Combat and Public Involvement

  • In our final piece, we’ll explore how advancements in technology and evolving geopolitical dynamics will shape the future of aerial combat. This installment will conclude with a call to action, inviting the American public to engage with this issue and weigh in on the path forward.

Why This Topic Is Significant

The F-35 program has been a cornerstone of U.S. airpower, but it is also a lightning rod for criticism. High costs, technical challenges, and emerging alternatives like drone swarms have sparked intense debate. At the same time, the world is witnessing rapid advancements in hypersonics, artificial intelligence, and unmanned systems—technologies that could redefine the very nature of warfare.

This is about more than aircraft. It’s about maintaining America’s technological edge, ensuring national security, and spending taxpayer dollars responsibly. The choices we make today will determine whether the U.S. remains a global leader in military innovation or cedes ground to competitors like China and Russia.

Why Americans Should Care

At its heart, this is a conversation about priorities. Should the U.S. continue investing in programs like the F-35, or pivot to emerging technologies? How can we ensure our military remains strong while being fiscally responsible? These are questions that affect every American, and they deserve thoughtful, informed discussion.

We encourage you to follow this series, engage with the content, and share your thoughts. As citizens, we have a vital role to play in shaping the future of our nation’s defense. Together, we can ensure that America’s Navy remains not only stronger but also smarter and more efficient.

Stay tuned for Part 1 of our series, where we dive into the debate over the F-35 program and explore the arguments from all sides. Let’s navigate this complex topic together.