BAE Systems is collaborating with Cellula Robotics on the forthcoming launch of its Extra Large Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (XLAUV) named Herne.

Scheduled for a technology demonstration next year, the vehicle will take to the waters in the latter half of 2024, with trials set on the south coast of England.

Recent incidents highlighting the strategic importance of sub-sea security underscore the potential value of autonomous platforms like Herne. Such vehicles could offer the military the ability to monitor vast underwater areas without human crew constraints, delivering surveillance in a more cost-effective manner.

BAE Systems envisions the Herne as a flexible platform, adaptable for various operations, including anti-submarine warfare, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and electronic warfare.

Commenting on the development, Scott Jamieson, Managing Director of Maritime Services at BAE Systems, stated, “This will be the first time any UK company will have tested its advanced autonomous capabilities in this area and I am excited to be working with Cellula Robotics.” He further emphasised the goal of providing a system that is “faster, more capable, more flexible, [and] cheaper for customers”.

Eric Jackson, President at Cellula Robotics Ltd, highlighted the vital role autonomous platforms have in ensuring the security of underwater domains. Reflecting on recent sub-sea disturbances, Jackson reiterated the significance of protecting underwater infrastructure. “We are thrilled to collaborate with BAE Systems and look forward to the demonstration, setting the course for a future of enhanced underwater security and intelligence,” he said.

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison

48 COMMENTS

  1. It’s good that we are getting these options for effective large scale surveillance of all our undersea infrastructure. It means the manned capabilities can be focused more on the effector end of the process.

  2. Sorry but this stuff really floats my boat (no pun intended), basically this is a small unmanned submarine packed with sensors and powered by lithium batteries or even some small form of AIP. No sound, no crew so nothing to betray it’s presence.
    Pre programmed search area, threat analysis and surveillance.
    Yep interesting times we live in.

      • To be honest other than possibly being used for ASW I’ve never seen the sense in using a Frigate as a Mothership for anything other than guns, missiles and helicopters. It is just a nonsense idea, when the job can be done by far cheaper ships than an irreplaceable frigate.

        But given the scant details available this has MROSS written all over it. A small fleet of 3 / 4 relatively cheap, RFA crewed, robust, reliable, flexible, OTS, offshore type support vessels. All operating a few if these each can cover a hell of a lot of sea.
        If you ever look at a map of where our undersea assets are they are in logical geographic areas and not too far apart.

        • And of course T31’s inability, apart from the hello, to persecute sub surface targets should the need arise? Don’t get me wrong, we need T31’s yesterday and T32’s are a mystery at the moment.
          🤔👌

        • Hi ABC,

          I could see a scenario where a number of these AV’s are put into an area as a sensor blockade (a.g. GIUK Gap) or around vulnerable offshore infrastructure. They could be ‘placed’ by a mixed force of MROSS and / or T31 depending on the threat levels in the area of interest.

          The UV’s would in effect provide a senor network greatly improving detection chances and the ability to build an accurate underwater battlespace picture using data fusion across multiple senors. The T31 could then launch its Wildcat based on information recieved from the AV’s and attack the target. The helicopter would ‘simply’ need to fly to a drop point and release the weapon. That’s how the RN used to do operate the old Wasp as the Wasp could not carry detection equipment – it didn’t have the payload capability. Given the range of the Wildcat, the T31 would be able to keep its distance…

          Escorting carriers and convoys would be a more difficult task as these AV’s clearly do not have the range or speed capabilities yet, but the autonomous tech could be fitted into a much bigger hull if needed – we can build 6,000 to 8,000 ton subs after all (not suggestions we’d need to build AV’s that big mind).

          Cheers CR

          • Perhaps pair w/ a T-26 and/or an Astute, especially if there are multiple contacts/bogeys? The choices for nefarious sub commander(s) would be stark: flee, surrender or fight and die. 🤔😳

          • Specifically for the GIUK Gap or offshore infrastructure scenarios. Probably another generation (or two) of tech required before incorporation w/in CSG. Hmmm… precisely one of the AUKUS Pillar 2 programmes. Interesting…🤔😳😉

          • Isn’t SOSUS and the newer DRAPES doing that already? Wouldn’t the UK be better off putting some of those type of devices in the area where subsea cables are vulnerable. It must be a waste of money developing autonomous drones that have to be sent out specifically to check/detect for Russian/Chinese subs when a permanent installation is there 247/365.

            The US system, DRAPES, like SOSUS, will be a fixed passive listening system with a new communications capability to transmit its data. Mobile systems like HERNE have the advantage of being able to get closer to possible contacts and follow them, but can only be in one place at a time, and must eventually return to port. Fixed systems like SOSUS, and now DRAPES, have the advantage of providing permanent coverage over target areas and then “cueing” a mobile sensor capability, like a ship or aircraft, to zero in on a submarine it detects.

          • Hi ExMarine,

            I was using the GIUK Gap as an example there are many other choke points around the world that cannot be covered by US / NATO systems. I should have been clearer in my post.

            There is also the possibility the the Russians would be able to ‘interfere’ with DRAPES in time of war – not sure how deep DRAPES is but modern ROV’s can get do to the Hood / Bismark so beyond technical capabilities to go hunting for fixed systems (I assume DRAPES is fixed..?). Obviously, the position of the data cables for those systems would be a closely guard secret, but given enough time and money it would probably be possible to find them so these kind of AV systems could be useful for plugging any gaps that appear in the prepostioned networks.

            It is also likely that these types of AV will be armed in the future as I think Western reticence will be over come as Putin et al ramp up the pressure, quite possibly sooner than we might imagine.

            However, as you point out SOSUS / DRAPES could be used to cue mobile sensor / effectors as well. Given recent posts that have highlighted the current advantage enjoyed by submarines over surface units (especially if the latter are running at speed, e.g. CSG) I think there will be a need for a range of technologies to be deployed to meet the threat as they all have their own strengths and weeknesses.

            If the West can resist the gold plating (a big assumption…) then AV’s should provide a much cheaper option compared to a SSN. So you would hope that the more of them could be procured and deployed in sufficent numbers to allow continous at sea patrols.

            These things could also be used to sanitize the approaches to UK ports, something that is currently undetaken by SSN’s around the Clyde when they are available…

            Cheers CR

          • Only up to a point it seems mate,

            There was a post with a link to a youtube video recently on here. The link was to a former USN submariner’s youtube channel. He was talking about an exercise he was involved in, in which his sub was ‘attacking’ a USN / NATO CSG. They made two runs on the CSG and wiped it out both times. In the end the Admiral in command ordered them to give away their position so the escorts could at least practice localising and attacking the subs.

            He reconned the only asset the surface force had that was a real threat was the helicopters…

            I’m no ASW expert, but everything I have read suggests that hunting a sub that doesn’t want to be found takes time, effort and a lot of skill so unlikely that escorts could stay away from any High Value Asset for long enough.

            AV’s offer the possibility of cheap(ish) force multipliers that could increase the reach and coverage of the limited number of NATO escorts.

            Cheers CR

          • If it doesn’t want to be found it’s hard to find. Even hearing something still needs to be investigated and tracked from multiple positions to triangulate where it is.
            Then subs can hide around noisy vessels etc. Hiding in water layers. What a nightmare

  3. “Extra large underwater drone” I didn’t realise Diane Abbott has outsourced her useless carcass in a new employment venture! Well she is shit as a politician so let her try this!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here