The maritime domain has become a battleground for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), with drones increasingly used for reconnaissance, strikes, and disruptions against naval assets. In 2025, conflicts like those in the Red Sea have highlighted the vulnerability of ships to low-cost, swarming drones launched by non-state actors, prompting navies worldwide to accelerate counter-drone capabilities. Naval counter-drone systems, or maritime C-UAS, integrate detection, tracking, and neutralization technologies tailored for the unique challenges of sea environments, such as vast open spaces, harsh weather, and ship mobility. From the U.S. Navy’s deployment of interceptors like Coyote to international collaborations, these defenses aim to restore superiority in contested waters. This article examines the emerging drone threats at sea, key defensive technologies, recent deployments, and ongoing challenges, underscoring the evolution of naval warfare in the drone era.
I. The Rising Threat of Drones in Maritime Environments
Drones have revolutionized naval operations, but their proliferation poses escalating risks to maritime security, enabling asymmetric attacks that challenge traditional defenses. In 2025, Houthi rebels in Yemen have launched over 100 drone attacks on shipping lanes in the Red Sea, targeting U.S. Navy vessels and commercial ships, often in swarms that overwhelm radar and missile systems. These one-way attack drones, costing as little as $20,000, exploit the open ocean’s vastness, flying low to evade detection and striking with precision explosives or surveillance payloads.
The threat extends beyond state actors: non-state groups use commercial off-the-shelf drones for piracy, smuggling, or espionage, as seen in incidents near the Strait of Hormuz. Maritime drones can loiter for hours, providing real-time intelligence or coordinating with surface vessels, complicating defense for fleets like the U.S. Navy’s carrier strike groups. Environmental factors amplify vulnerabilities—waves, salt spray, and fog degrade sensor performance, while ship motion requires stabilized systems. The U.S. military’s 2025 reports note a 50% rise in drone incursions, with swarms of 10-50 UAVs capable of saturating defenses, as evidenced by Houthi tactics that force costly engagements with million-dollar missiles.
Global navies face similar issues: China’s use of drone “motherships” like Jiu Tian for swarm deployments signals potential in Pacific conflicts, while Russia’s sea drones in the Black Sea demonstrate hybrid threats. These developments underscore the need for layered, cost-effective countermeasures to protect vessels, maintain sea lanes, and ensure operational freedom, driving investments in naval C-UAS to counter the asymmetric advantage drones provide to adversaries.
II. Key Technologies in Naval Counter-Drone Systems
Naval counter-drone systems employ a suite of integrated technologies to detect, track, and neutralize aerial threats, adapted for the maritime environment’s demands. Detection begins with radar and RF sensors mounted on ships, such as the U.S. Navy’s AN/SPS-73 radar upgraded for small UAV tracking, capable of spotting drones at ranges up to 10 km amid sea clutter. Electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) cameras, like those in Leonardo DRS’s systems, provide visual confirmation in low-light or foggy conditions, essential for distinguishing drones from birds or debris.
Neutralization relies on kinetic and non-kinetic effectors. The Coyote Block 2 loitering munition, deployed on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in 2025, acts as a reusable interceptor, launching from ships to engage drones at extended ranges with explosive or kinetic payloads. High-energy lasers (HELs), such as the Navy’s LaWS or the emerging 400 kW SONGBOW, offer speed-of-light engagement, burning through drone structures with low per-shot costs, ideal for swarm defense without depleting ammunition. High-power microwaves (HPM), like those from Epirus, emit pulses to fry drone electronics over wide areas, providing non-lethal options for maritime fleets.
Integration is key: platforms like the U.S. Navy’s DE M-SHORAD combine sensors with effectors on Stryker vehicles adapted for shipboard use, while autonomous maritime drones from Saronic enhance fleet protection by scouting and intercepting threats. These technologies address sea-specific challenges, such as platform stability and corrosion resistance, ensuring reliable operation in dynamic naval environments.
III. Recent Deployments and Developments
In 2025, navies have accelerated counter-drone deployments amid rising threats, with the U.S. Navy leading through initiatives like the Replicator program, which aims to field thousands of autonomous drones but also informs defensive strategies. The Navy has rushed Coyote interceptors onto Arleigh Burke destroyers in the Red Sea, where they counter Houthi drones, with Roadrunner-M variants providing recoverable, reusable options to reduce costs. Epirus delivered counter-drone swarm capabilities to the Navy in April 2025, using HPM for electronic warfare missions, enhancing protection for carrier groups.
The Marine Corps has fielded handheld counter-drone devices for deploying units, allowing small teams on ships to neutralize threats at close range. Internationally, the inaugural Counter UAS Maritime Conference in October 2025 will showcase global advancements, focusing on integrating C-UAS with naval fleets. Lockheed Martin’s counter-UAS solutions, including MORFIUS HPM, have been adapted for maritime use, providing layered defenses against drones and missiles.
Developments include the Navy’s purchase of Saronic’s autonomous surface vessels (ASVs) for counter-drone roles, valued at up to $1 billion, enhancing fleet reconnaissance and interception. Leonardo DRS’s mission equipment packages offer flexible, ship-based C-UAS, proven in exercises for fleet protection. These efforts reflect a shift toward unmanned and directed energy systems, addressing the drone threat’s asymmetry in ongoing operations.
IV. Challenges and Future Prospects
Naval counter-drone systems face substantial challenges, including integration with legacy platforms, environmental resilience, and cost asymmetries. Ship motion and saltwater corrosion degrade sensors, requiring rugged designs, as noted in U.S. Navy reports on Replicator program delays due to software issues. Swarms overwhelm single effectors, demanding AI-driven battle management to prioritize threats, a gap highlighted in Heritage Foundation analyses. High costs—Coyote interceptors at $100,000 each—strain budgets against cheap drones, prompting calls for scalable solutions.
Regulatory and ethical hurdles persist: international laws limit jamming in peacetime, complicating civilian maritime defense. Future prospects are optimistic, with the Navy’s SONGBOW 400 kW laser targeting drones by 2027, and unmanned systems reshaping Marine Corps tactics in the Pacific. Advancements in autonomous ASVs and HPM will enable distributed defenses, while conferences foster global collaboration. By addressing these challenges through innovation and policy, navies can enhance resilience against aerial intruders.
Conclusion
Counter-drones at sea are transforming naval defense, providing essential tools to counter the growing drone threat in maritime environments. From advanced interceptors like Coyote to directed energy systems, these technologies offer layered protection for fleets worldwide. Recent deployments in the Red Sea and Pacific underscore their urgency, while challenges like integration and costs drive ongoing innovation. As drones evolve, investing in scalable, autonomous C-UAS will be crucial for maintaining sea control. Ultimately, these defenses not only safeguard vessels but also ensure global maritime security in an era defined by unmanned warfare.
