Cracks in the fleet: U.S. Navy’s Troubled Push to Build Autonomous Drone Boats to Counter China

Software glitches, internal turmoil, leadership shakeups expose challenges in America’s high-stakes maritime drone program

Natalie C. Frank, Ph.D August 20, 2025

Blogspot [CC BY 3.0]

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Pentagon has risked its reputation on building a next-generation fleet of autonomous drone boats in an attempt to counter China’s growing naval power and secure dominance in the Pacific. But a series of recent test failures, internal disagreements, and leadership problems have led to serious doubts about whether the Navy’s ambitious plans are in the least bit ready for deployment.

Last month, during what was supposed to be a routine demonstration off the coast of California, two of the Navy’s most advanced unmanned vessels malfunctioned. According to multiple people familiar with the incident, one drone boat suddenly stalled due to a software glitch. Soon after, a second vessel crashed into the disabled boat, striking its starboard side, sending it into the air, then crashing back into the water.

The accident involved vessels built by Saronic and BlackSea Technologies which are two defense startups competing for the Navy’s expanding drone portfolio. The incident, which has not been previously reported, is just the latest in a series of setbacks threatening to derail the military’s push for maritime autonomy.

Weeks before, there was another mishap with the program. During another test, a BlackSea vessel being towed by a support boat suddenly began to accelerate without warning. The burst of speed capsized the towing vessel, launching its captain into the water. The officer was rescued and declined medical treatment, but the incident further demonstrated the unpredictable nature of the technology.

According to sources. both crashes were caused by a mixture of software malfunctions and human error, particularly communication breakdowns between onboard systems and external control software. The Navy, Saronic, and BlackSea declined to comment on either incident.

The urgency for the development of the Navy drone program is clear. Russia’s war in Ukraine has demonstrated the power of Naval drones. Kyiv has launched small, relatively inexpensive remote-controlled boats, which cost under $250,000, which have had a devastating effect on the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Many of these drones look like stripped-down speedboats, but they carry explosives, sensors, and surveillance gear, making them into highly effective floating weapons.

U.S. defense leaders have been clear about the U.S.'s needs for its own version of this type of craft. Senior military officials, including those at the Pentagon and Indo-Pacific Command, argue that a fleet of autonomous naval drones could be crucial in slowing or stopping a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Taiwan itself has already begun adopting similar maritime drones.

But while Ukraine’s boats are largely remote-controlled, the U.S. Navy is pursuing something far more complex: fully autonomous boats that can operate in coordinated battle groups without direct human oversight. Each unit costs millions of dollars, carries a price tag in the millions, which is significantly more expensive than Ukraine’s expendable drones. The program’s supporters insist that autonomy is essential to scaling operations across the Pacific. But the recent failures show just how far the technology still has to go before it's dependable.

Bryan Clark, an autonomous warfare expert at the Hudson Institute, said that the setbacks the Navy is experiencing demonstrate their need to “adapt its tactics as it better understands what the systems can do and what they can’t do.”

The consequences of the failed tests have already begun. Following the California crash, the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) paused a nearly $20 million software contract with L3Harris, one of the companies supplying the autonomy systems used in the tests.

The Pentagon did not answer questions about whether the pause was directly related to the accidents. A spokesperson said only that the Department of Defense conducts drone tests as part of a “competitive and iterative approach, between operators and industry.”

L3Harris declined to discuss the contract, but its autonomy division chief, Toby Magsig, defended the company’s product: “L3Harris stands behind the safety, integrity and capability of our autonomy command-and-control product.”

Technical setbacks are only part of the problem. The Navy’s main acquisition unit for unmanned surface vessels, the Program Executive Office for Unmanned and Small Combatants (PEO USC), is itself in turmoil.

Two months ago, Rear Admiral Kevin Smith, who led the office, was abruptly fired after the Naval Inspector General substantiated a complaint against him. The Navy cited a “loss of confidence in his leadership” but declined to provide further details.

Currently, according to several people familiar with the matter, PEO USC is under review and could face restructuring or even cancelation. At a tense meeting last month, Deputy Secretary of Defense Steven Feinberg pressed Navy officials on the unit’s progress, questioning the cost-effectiveness of its acquisitions. Attendees described Feinberg as unimpressed.

A spokesperson for the company, Timothy Hawkins, said that PEO USC “stands by its mission,” which includes overseeing maintenance and modernization of unmanned maritime systems.

The troubled tests and leadership problems come as the Pentagon is trying to accelerate its broader drone strategy. In 2023, the Department of Defense initiated the $1 billion Replicator initiative, aimed at rapidly employing thousands of drones across multiple branches. The Navy has already committed at least $160 million to BlackSea, which claims to be producing dozens of its Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft (GARC) boats per month.

Saronic, meanwhile, has raised billions of dollars in venture capital and is marketing its Corsair sea drone, though it has yet to secure a major Naval contract. Procurement records show it has received about $20 million in prototype agreements.

Acting Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jim Kilby, who toured BlackSea’s Baltimore facility in June, emphasized the importance of the program: “These systems will play a critical role in the future of naval warfare by extending fleet reach, improving situational awareness, and increasing combat effectiveness.”

President Trump has also made the program a focus of his national security agenda since returning to office. His administration’s recent “Big Beautiful Bill” allocated nearly $5 billion for maritime autonomous systems, signifying the political weight behind the initiative.

Despite the funding surge, doubt remains high. In April, PEO USC celebrated what it described as “a major step forward in advancing #maritime autonomy” after a successful demonstration of BlackSea’s software. Colin Carroll, then chief of staff to Deputy Secretary Feinberg, publicly questioned the value of the program, warning that it might duplicate other Pentagon efforts. “I have a feeling that there are changes in this program’s future,” he said. Carroll has since left the Pentagon and declined further comment.

One of the bigger problems is that the Navy is attempting to reinvent itself at breakneck speed, bypassing decades of shipbuilding tradition to adopt rapid, software-driven innovation.

T.X. Hammes, an autonomous weapons expert and Atlantic Council fellow, discussed the cultural shift: “You’ve got a system that’s used to building big things, taking years to make a decision, and now suddenly you’re asking them to move fast.”