The Register Home Page

back to article The Navy's autonomous carrier-based refueling drone has finally flown

The US Navy’s current carrier-based refueling aircraft may soon be getting help, as Boeing has completed the first flight of its autonomous tanker drone designed for carrier operations. Boeing announced on Monday that it had successfully flown the MQ-25A Stingray for the first time. According to the aviation firm, the Stingray …

  1. martinusher Silver badge

    Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

    Given the world we live in today the life expectancy of this device is likely to be in the order of hours.

    One of the many problems caused by starting a war is that your adversary goes from guessing what you're going to do and what tools you can use to knowing exactly what you've got and how you intend to use it. We've been rather smug in thinking that a combination of stealth and blitzkrieg tactics will always give us the edge and we've been reluctant to test it up to now (witness the noise made when Turkey wanted to buy Russian S-400 air defense systems). Iran has now rather foolishly exposed our strengths and weaknesses -- Iran has always been a (primarily Israeli) vanity project but by going all-in we've provided ample opportunities for 'adversaries' to get some hands on experience with weapons systems like the F-35. Expect their effectiveness to diminish so anything built with that level of technology is likely to be easily as vulnerable.

    1. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

      Explain what you mean by “us” and “we”?

      Are you part of the military currently being humiliated by Iran?

      1. MiguelC Silver badge

        Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

        The US military are the only part of this sorry war that have not been humiliated by Iran. Political figures, on the other hand....

        1. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

          The US military is being humiliated yet again. Just like other things that politicians have asked it to do in the past. Go in all shock and awe then find themselves in a mess they can't bomb their way out of.

          1. collinsl Silver badge

            Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

            The military execute the orders of the civilian leadership of the USA. I'm sure lots of the senior people thought this was an awful plan, they had a good idea of what Iran could/would do, they vocalised that up the chain of command, and no one in the civilian leadership took a blind bit of notice of them.

            From a tactical point of view the US Military has done very well in this war - Iran's capabilities have been significantly degraded on almost all fronts, and destroyed on others. Some capabilities remain however, such as fast boats which can lay mines, shoulder-launched missiles which can hit ships (either fired from land or from the previously mentioned boats), and approximately a million armed reservists with sufficient drive and equipment to pose a risk to any invading force (needing lots of resources to defeat these individuals to avoid mass US casualties fighting them at close ranges). The US armed forces would have been aware of all of this and will have plans in place to target those capabilities if required in the future.

            The strategic picture, however, is down to the civilian leadership and is a total and absolute mess of the highest order. Iran is still largely unchanged as a country, the governmental systems from before are still in place, the new leadership is likely more hardline than the old leadership, they're now infuriated and want revenge on the US for starting the war, and they have made the strategic picture of the Strait of Hormuz worse for the entire world. The Iranian population is still being violently suppressed, and it looks like Trump doesn't care enough to do anything about it despite previous promises, so the population will now end up hating the USA for breaking that promise to them to have total regime change.

      2. herman Silver badge

        Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

        What rock have you been hiding under? Iran has no Navy, no Air Force, their top leaders were eliminated on day one. If that is how Iran humiliates others then we should not stop them.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

          > What rock have you been hiding under? Iran has no Navy, no Air Force, their top leaders were eliminated on day one. If that is how Iran humiliates others then we should not stop them.

          And yet the Strait of Hormuz is closed to shipping except Russian oligarch's super yachts.

          1. herman Silver badge

            Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

            Other tankers have passed also. You just don't want to acknowledge it since it spoils your preconceived story.

        2. dmesg Bronze badge

          Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

          That's what Hegseth and Trump say. But then they would, wouldn't they?

          I give more credence to the authors of a recent article in the Atlantic: "Pentagon leaders’ positive portrayals present an incomplete picture at best, people familiar with intelligence assessments told us. According to those internal estimates, Iran retains two-thirds of its air force, the bulk of its missile-launching capability, and most of its small, fast boats, which can lay mines and harass traffic in the Strait of Hormuz."[1]

          That same article gives voice to concerns over the serious draw down of key US munitions.

          Consider also who is winning the war, whatever damage has occurred to either side. Do winners beg for negotiations to reopen? Threaten imminent massive destruction ... to force the opponent into reopening negotiations? Then back down and proclaim a unilateral cease fire ... so negotiations can reopen?

          [1] "The Pentagon May Not Be Telling Trump the Full Picture About the War". https://www.theatlantic.com/national-security/2026/04/iran-war-vance-hegseth-trump/686905/

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

            dmesg

            "Pentagon leaders’ positive portrayals present an incomplete picture at best, people familiar with intelligence assessments told us. According to those internal estimates, Iran retains two-thirds of its air force, the bulk of its missile-launching capability, and most of its small, fast boats, which can lay mines and harass traffic in the Strait of Hormuz."[1]

            The truth is probably somewhere in between. Intelligence assessments are made to be pessimistic, and I bet the word in the actual documents is "may retain" not does retain. Because with extensive use of bunkers and decoys - it's very hard to do battle damage estimates.

            However the massive drop-off in Iran's capability to launch offensive missile attacks in both its one-day missile barrages on Israel, its war with Israel and then this war strongly suggest that they have massive problems with launchers. Even if they've got large stocks of missiles left, which is impossible to know as an interested onlooker, they've lost quite a lot of launch capability - and every time they try to use it, it gets degraded further. Also, having large stocks of SAMs aren't particularly useful if you don't have the radars to operate them, the ability to coordinate your air-defence network, the launchers - and if any of this stuff goes out into the open it gets destroyed. Israel haven't lost a single aircraft in two wars with Iran. One Kuwaiti pilot has shot down more US aircraft in this war than Iran did.

            I just don't buy that Iran has a huge amount of capability left. Except they do still have the small boats and probably a lot of anti-ship missiles - so getting through the Strait is going to take a lot of force. And maintaining that force in field possibly for years - at a much higher rate of threat than Western navies had to deal with in the Tanker War, back in the 80s.

            However the US and Israel have clearly got some very good sources in Iran, as proved by their success in wiping out large numbers of the leadership. So I admit I'm prepared to be proved wrong. But critics are just as capable of cherry-picking their data as the Trump government do. And just because this war was politically stupid - and Trump clearly has no idea how to fix what he's broken - doesn't mean that Iran are having any kind of success here. Or that their leadership are any less stupid. The surviving ones at any rate...

            After all, people like to mock Trump (rightly) for this clusterfuck. But the closure of the Strait is doing massive damage to everyone. Iran included. Their regime has destroyed their economy and massively damaged their society, and that was before they got themselves into a shooting war with Israel and then the US. And remember, they basically started the one last year. That was a war of choice for them. Which went disastrously. And if they can't sell their oil, due to the US counter-blockade, then they can't pay their security forces to oppress their angry population. That could lead to anything from no-effect to a civil war, via an internal coup or a popular uprising - with them hanging from lampposts.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

      I don't think it's that black and white.

      The current man-flown flying fuel bladders also have defensive capabilities, so I suspect this craft to also carry some defensive mechanisms - it could even carry its own defence drones as payload and a gaggle of electronic warfare kit. I'm more concerned that it's made by Boeing..

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

        Maybe they'll rebadge it as a submarine/kamikaze drone?

    3. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

      Given the world we live in today the life expectancy of this device is likely to be in the order of hours.

      One of the main uses of tankers for CATOBAR carrier ops is to give people in the landing pattern extra fuel, so that they don't have to divert to a land base if they're low on fuel - or if someone's messed up their landing they can tank and have another go. In extreme cases it's to stop them having to eject into the sea - when the carrier is too far from land for there to be a viable alternate. You also need them up in case there's a crash on deck, to keep the birds in the air fuelled until the crew can get the decks cleared. Usually the last plane to land will be the tanker bird - and it's an expensive use of a high-maintenance fighter that would be better done by a cheaper, lower-maintenance airframe.

      Thus, normal operations will not require the MQ25 to be more than a couple of miles from the carrier, in a well-defended, multi-layered, bubble of protection. They should be fine.

      Admittedly, offensive use of tankers is going to be a lot harder. The US Air Force are talking about buying some horrendously expensive stealth tankers, in order for them to be survivable in the Pacific. I suspect the idea of increasing operational range by as much as 500 miles is a pipe dream - unless it's for a very small strike package. But extending range by allowing the strike group to form up in an organised manner - and getting it all tanked within a few miles of the carrier should be perfectly possible. Even with 200km range air-to-air missiles - you require not only a launch platform that can survive to within 200 km of a carrier group - on the boundaries of its SAM envelope (and well within it's air-interdiction range) - but that can also get a radar lock on a target 200km away - despite jamming.

      None of this is cut-and-dried or obvious at all. And simplistic answers are extremely likely to be wrong.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

        So we're developing autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles for the relatively safe role of orbiting around a carrier as a flying Buc-ees to support sending expensively trained, and presumably valued, fleshy meat bags into a dangerous combat situation ?

        did somebody have the PowerPoint slides in the wrong order ?

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Combination refuelling drone and gunnery practice target?

          You automate the easy stuff, before you try the hard stuff.

  2. elsergiovolador Silver badge

    Screw

    Once in the skies, the Stingray undertook a predetermined mission that validated flight controls, navigation, and safe integration with the ground control station, but it doesn't appear that there were any tests of its ability to autonomously refuel naval aircraft as part of the test.

    It needs more flights to validate whether Loctite has been used.

  3. Korev Silver badge
    Pirate

    "The Navy's autonomous carrier-based refueling drone has finally flown"

    Swapping "The" to "US" would have made the headline a lot clearer or even to "Merkin"

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      But there's this bubble, you see...

      All the defaultists live there.

    2. MJI

      Confused

      "That is nothing to do with the Royal Navy"

      1. QuickLuck

        Re: Confused

        B'ah ! Logged in to say the same thing. As a UK publication, I thought this was about the Royal Navy. The automatic US assumption of some articles is getting a wee but annoying - tis the sort of thing that annoy's non-USAians about USAians

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: Confused

          Hopefully the carrier isn't named after a US state that prohibits pumping your own refined petroleum product

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: Confused

            US carriers are mostly named for Presidents. There's an admiral in there (Nimitz) and they're currently building another Enterprise (because the last but one Enterprise was so awesome in the Pacific War).

            States get submarines now there are no battleships - so no gas to pump. They're all nuclear.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Confused

              US carriers are mostly named for Presidents

              Hey, maybe the plan is to repurpose Trump Baby balloons!

              :)

  4. Dizzy Dwarf

    Stingray? Looks more like TB2

    1. Paul Herber Silver badge
      1. Ken Shabby Silver badge
        Megaphone

        “Anything can happen in the next half hour!"

      2. Albert Coates Bronze badge

        Piloted by Joe 90.

  5. An_Old_Dog Silver badge

    Complexity is Not a Plus

    "The MQ-25A is the most complex autonomous system ever developed for the carrier environment..."

    They say this as if complexity in and of itself is a good thing. It is not.

    1. Ken G Silver badge

      Re: Complexity is Not a Plus

      I know what you mean but they could probably swap the word "required" in for "developed".

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Thought experiment

    I can't find information on this devices' MTOW but if it's in the sub 15t range then it could be launched by a reasonably sized EMALS/EMCAT system, as in one that doesn't need a nuclear power plant. Put some of those on a Mistral/Juan Carlos class helicarrier and add some Bayraktar Kızılelma supersonic fighter drones and you could have an AI killer robot long range carrier task force at budget cost.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Thought experiment

      But you can't make rousing patriotic films about buff young drones in tight shorts playing volleyball in order to attract sailors

    2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      Re: Thought experiment

      AI killer robot long range carrier task force at budget cost

      Hey! I've got a cool name - they could call it 'Brutix"!

      And the bigger ones could be a Dominix..

  7. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge

    Why not Reaper?

    They should have looked into getting General Atomics to develop this off the Reaper design.

    The Reaper is proven technology, already able to deploy and recover to a Carrier.

    Just need a bigger airframe and powerplant .

    The really new bit is the refuelling kit and technology for that.

    1. herman Silver badge

      Re: Why not Reaper?

      Well, all big passenger planes can take-off, fly and land autonomously. The pilots are just there for backup.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon