Blue Water Autonomy is developing autonomous naval vessels designed for repeatable production and operational deployment, while Precise Power Systems contributes automated fluid delivery and other critical shipboard systems designed to support long-duration unmanned operations. The companies are working together on Blue Water Autonomy’s Liberty Class autonomous vessel and broader efforts to scale autonomous shipbuilding through the existing U.S. industrial base. Pulse 2.0 interviewed Blue Water Autonomy Co-Founder and CSO Austin Gray and Precise Power Systems Director of Business Development Tom Markham to learn more.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): Austin, what problem in naval shipbuilding or maritime operations convinced you a new kind of company needed to exist; and Tom, when did it become clear power systems would be a gating factor for autonomy at sea?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): What convinced us that a new kind of company needed to exist was the gap between the Navy’s operational needs and what the market was actually delivering. There has been no shortage of hype around autonomous vessels, but when you look at real-world conflicts from the Red Sea to the Persian Gulf, these systems still have not been used in the way many people expected. Part of that is the Navy’s natural conservatism, but part of it is that the product has to be robust enough to fit into force architecture and earn trust. This is not a market where a scrappy early product can break in. The Navy needs something closer to a Tesla Model S than a Razor flip phone, and that is the kind of platform we are building.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): For us, it became clear early that power and fluid systems would be a gating factor because real autonomy at sea depends on reliability. If a vessel is going to operate for long periods without a crew onboard, those systems have to be highly automated and designed from the outset for that environment. From the start, this felt like a strong fit because what Blue Water needed aligned closely with what we already do. At our core, we design and build custom fluid delivery systems with a strong focus on automation, so we saw clear potential early on that our capabilities matched the requirements of the program.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): Austin, how would you describe Blue Water’s approach to “software-defined shipbuilding,” and why is it different from traditional defense procurement? Tom, how does that philosophy change how onboard energy and electrical systems must be designed?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): We use software-defined shipbuilding to describe a fundamentally different way of designing and fielding vessels. Instead of treating autonomy, ship systems, and mission requirements as separate workstreams that come together late, we design them as one integrated product from the beginning. Traditional defense procurement often produces long timelines, fragmented development, and highly bespoke platforms. Our approach is to start with a real operational requirement, use proven building blocks, and build toward repeatable production and deployment from day one.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): That philosophy changes how you design onboard systems because you are no longer assuming a crew member will always be there to monitor, adjust, or fix something. The systems have to be dependable, automated, and tightly integrated into the vessel’s broader control architecture from the start. That is where our expertise in automated fluid delivery becomes especially relevant. It was a natural fit. From early conversations, it was clear we could support both development and production needs.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): Many autonomy programs focus on small drones or very large ships – why focus on the “missing middle” class of vessels?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): The “missing middle” is where we see the most practical operational opportunity. Small systems can be valuable, but they fundamentally lack the payload, range, or endurance to operate on ocean-scale battlefields. Very large ships, meanwhile, can be expensive, slow to procure, and harder to scale quickly. This middle class gives you a better balance: enough size for real mission utility, but still simple to build, iterate, and produce in numbers. If autonomy is going to become part of force structure, it has to live in that space between niche drone capability and traditional capital ships.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): Blue Water emphasizes building ships in existing American shipyards – why is that central to your strategy rather than building new facilities?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): The bottleneck in autonomous ships right now is technology development, not more cranes and dry docks. We know that scale comes faster from activating the industrial base that already exists. The U.S. has capitalized shipyards, manufacturers, and suppliers with deep expertise; what has often been missing is a program model that can bring them together around the next generation of maritime systems. Rather than building new facilities from scratch, we would prefer to work with existing American shipyards and manufacturing partners that already know how to build, test, and deliver. That is a faster, more pragmatic path to scale, and it ties autonomous shipbuilding directly to American manufacturing strength.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): How does your partnership help make serial production possible rather than experimental prototypes? What had to change compared to traditional maritime programs?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): A lot of maritime autonomy has lived in the world of prototypes and demonstrations. From the beginning, our goal has been different: build a platform and supplier ecosystem that can support repeat production, not just a one-off test article. That requires thinking about ship design, subsystem integration, and manufacturing readiness as part of the same problem.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): That is where the partnership matters. We are designing and building custom fluid-delivery system modules with automated controls, first for test applications and now for shipboard modules. We also came in with prior experience working on autonomous vessel related programs, which gave us a strong foundation. The alignment was there from day one, both in terms of technical capability and how we approach building and testing these systems. We are focused on developing these modules to support ongoing testing and iteration while also laying the groundwork for production at scale.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): Blue Water recently unveiled the Liberty Class autonomous vessel – what did launching a real ship teach you about building autonomous fleets at scale, and how did it validate your broader manufacturing and partnership approach?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): Liberty Class reinforced that scale starts with real hardware, real shipbuilding partners, and real design tradeoffs. It is one thing to talk abstractly about autonomous fleets; it is another to launch a 220-foot steel vessel designed to endure missions of 2-3 months and cross the Pacific independently, with more than 10,000 nautical miles of range, over 150 metric tons of payload capacity, and a production path at an established American shipyard, Conrad. Building Liberty required us to redesign the ship from the inside out for unmanned operation, including the engine room and core mechanical and electrical systems.
It also validated our broader approach: use a proven hull with the Damen Stan Patrol 6009 hull, adapt it for autonomy, work with established manufacturing partners like Precise Power, and build toward repeat production. That is how you move from concept to capability.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): For us, it validated the importance of building systems that can transition from prototype support to shipboard applications. There is a big difference between contributing to a test module and contributing to a real vessel program, and that progression is what makes the opportunity meaningful. We were able to build on past defense program experience and apply those learnings directly here, which gave us confidence that this could grow into something much larger over time. We are actively working to expand our production capacity and adding many skilled trades to support key customers like BWA long-term.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): How does working with partners such as Precise Power change what your vessels are capable of operationally or economically?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): Operationally, it helps make long-duration autonomy real. These vessels are only as capable as the systems inside them, and partners like Precise Power bring specialized expertise that directly affects endurance, reliability, and mission readiness. That is especially important in a market where trust has to be earned through performance.
Economically, the benefit is just as important. Working with specialized U.S. manufacturers allows us to combine deep domain expertise with a more scalable production model, rather than reinventing every subsystem in-house.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): Economically, for us, it also creates a path to repeatability. Our expertise made this a natural extension of our work, and the goal is not to build a bespoke subsystem for a single prototype. It is to support Blue Water in a way that can scale across future vessels and programs. As the partnership grows, we are prepared to invest in facilities and personnel to support that demand.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): What does your collaboration signal about the broader industrial base required to field autonomous fleets at scale in the U.S.?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): It signals that the future fleet will not be built by a single company or in a single place. It will require a broader American industrial base that includes shipyards, specialized manufacturers, and suppliers with expertise that may come from adjacent defense or industrial sectors. Our collaboration is a good example of that model in practice: Blue Water is bringing together established shipbuilding capacity with manufacturers like Precise Power that can deliver critical subsystems and automation expertise. That is how you move from a promising technology concept to a real national capability.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): Looking ahead, how do you see autonomous ships reshaping naval force structure over the next decade, and what role will energy and sustainment infrastructure play in that shift?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): Over the next decade, autonomous ships have the potential to give the Navy more distributed capacity, more flexibility, and more affordable ways to extend presence. But that shift will only happen if the systems are credible enough to be trusted. The biggest barrier is not a lack of interest in autonomy; it is the need for platforms resilient enough to fit cleanly into real operational concepts.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): That is why the supporting infrastructure matters just as much as the autonomy software. Power, fluid systems, reliability, sustainment, and supplier capacity all shape whether these vessels can move from interesting technology to operational fleet assets. If those pieces are designed for scale from the beginning, the adoption curve looks very different.
Pulse 2.0 (Amit): What are the most important milestones your teams are working toward over the next 12–24 months?
Blue Water Autonomy (Austin): For Blue Water, the focus is on execution: Blue Water will compete for individual task orders covering survey missions across the Indian and Pacific oceans under our current Naval Oceanographic Office (NAVOCEANO) contract, delivering Liberty Class, continuing the transition from testing and prototype-stage work into repeatable production, and proving that autonomous ships can be built in a way that is credible, repeatable, and useful to the fleet.
Precise Power Systems (Tom): For Precise Power, the next milestone is deepening the partnership from project support into a long-term supplier relationship. The opportunity here is significant, and we see real potential to grow alongside Blue Water as the programs expand. Our focus is on building these modules in a way that supports testing today while positioning us to meet production needs over the long term.
