Australia is quietly fielding one of the most disruptive naval technologies in the Indo-Pacific, a fleet of extra‑large underwater drones designed to stalk contested sea lanes without a sailor on board. Marketed under the ominous name Ghost Shark, these unmanned submarines promise to give Canberra a way to harass, monitor, and potentially strike hostile forces at a fraction of the cost of crewed boats. For a Chinese navy focused on aircraft carriers, destroyers, and traditional submarines, the emergence of a cheap, stealthy underwater swarm is a problem that arrived faster, and more quietly, than expected.
Rather than waiting for its future nuclear-powered submarines to arrive, Australia is betting that artificial intelligence, autonomy, and rapid prototyping can deliver an asymmetric edge right now. The result is a program that blends Silicon Valley speed with classic undersea warfare, creating a stealth threat that is hard to detect, harder to predict, and designed from the start with China’s growing presence in the region in mind.
The Indo-Pacific chessboard tilts underwater
The strategic logic behind Ghost Shark starts with geography. Australia sits at the southern anchor of the Indo-Pacific, straddling vital sea lanes that connect the Indian and Pacific Oceans and frame access to the South China Sea. As China expands its naval footprint and pushes more vessels through these chokepoints, Canberra faces the challenge of monitoring vast stretches of ocean without the budget or population of a superpower. Uncrewed submarines offer a way to stretch limited resources, keeping persistent eyes and ears under the surface where satellites and patrol aircraft cannot reach.
In that context, the decision to invest in a new underwater “army” of drones is less a technological vanity project and more a strategic necessity. In a detailed deep‑dive segment, presenter Kash Dhavan framed Australia’s billion‑dollar Ghost Shark effort as a response to a regional environment where traditional deterrence is under strain and where undersea surveillance and strike options are becoming central to power projection, a point underscored in the analysis of Australia’s underwater army.
What makes Ghost Shark different from a conventional submarine
Ghost Shark is not simply a smaller version of a crewed submarine, it is an entirely different category of platform. Described as an extra‑large underwater drone, it is built to operate autonomously for extended periods, carrying sensors or weapons without the life‑support systems, crew quarters, or safety redundancies that drive up the size and cost of traditional boats. That stripped‑down design allows Australia to think in terms of fleets rather than single exquisite assets, trading some individual capability for numbers, persistence, and expendability.
Earlier coverage of Australia’s unmanned submarine fleet highlighted how the Ghost Shark program is explicitly framed as an “Unmanned Submarine Fleet” intended to “Counter China,” with the concept built around autonomy and artificial intelligence rather than human crews. Analysts noted that Australia is going “big on unproven autonomous technology” in this space, a calculated risk that reflects both the urgency of the regional threat and the potential payoff if the technology matures, as set out in reporting on Ghost Shark as an unmanned submarine fleet.
From concept to fleet: how fast Australia is moving
Speed is one of the most striking aspects of the Ghost Shark story. Rather than following a decades‑long procurement cycle, Australia has pushed the program from concept to operational planning in just a few years, compressing design, prototyping, and testing into an unusually tight timeline. That pace reflects a sense in Canberra that the regional balance is shifting now, not in some distant future, and that waiting for perfect technology is less attractive than fielding a good enough capability quickly.
According to detailed reporting on the rollout, the first Ghost Shark vessels, described as large submarine drones, are scheduled to enter service with the Australian navy in January, a milestone that moves the project from experimental curiosity to operational asset. The same reporting makes clear that these initial units are only the start of a broader fleet, with the first wave intended to validate concepts of operation and integration with existing forces, as outlined in coverage of Australia readying unmanned submarines.
The Anduril factor and a $1.7 billion bet on autonomy
Behind the sleek renderings and dramatic videos sits a major industrial and financial commitment. The Royal Australian Navy has awarded United States defence firm Anduril a contract to develop and manufacture a fleet of Ghost Shark extra‑large underwater drones, effectively outsourcing a key slice of its undersea innovation to a company that made its name on autonomous systems and software‑driven defence products. That choice signals a deliberate shift away from traditional shipbuilding primes toward firms that treat hardware as a vehicle for rapidly updated code.
Reporting on the deal puts the value of the Ghost Shark underwater drone program at 1.7 billion dollars, a figure that underlines how central Canberra believes this capability will be to its future posture. The same coverage notes that the first vehicle is scheduled to enter service in January, tying the financial commitment directly to near‑term operational outcomes rather than distant promises, a linkage detailed in analysis of Anduril’s Ghost Shark contract.
Why China’s navy is worried about an AI submarine
From Beijing’s perspective, the emergence of an autonomous Australian submarine that can lurk unseen for long periods is a serious complication. China has invested heavily in anti‑access and area‑denial systems, from long‑range missiles to dense sensor networks, designed to keep adversary ships and aircraft at arm’s length. Uncrewed underwater vehicles cut across that strategy by slipping beneath many of those defences, forcing the People’s Liberation Army Navy to consider a threat that is harder to track, harder to deter, and potentially cheaper to replace if lost.
One detailed breakdown of the platform described how Australia’s “ghost charge” drone submarine has “just arrived” and framed it explicitly as “a problem for China,” highlighting the way its artificial intelligence and stealth profile could leave Chinese naval planners “in the dark” about where it is and what it is doing. That analysis stressed that the future of warfare at sea is increasingly about data, autonomy, and distributed systems rather than single high‑value targets, a shift captured in commentary on Australia’s AI submarine leaving China’s navy in the dark.
Inside the “ghost” playbook: how the drones might be used
Operationally, Ghost Shark is designed to be more than a passive sensor node. The platform can be configured for intelligence gathering, mine laying, or direct attack, depending on the payloads it carries and the mission profiles it is given. In practice, that means Australia could use these drones to shadow foreign submarines, map undersea terrain, or position weapons along key transit routes, all while keeping human crews far from harm. The psychological effect of not knowing how many such drones are in the water, or where they might be, is itself a form of deterrence.
Analysts who have examined the program describe a future in which, “in the depths of the ocean, a new predator stirs, not a submarine with sailors aboard, but a machine, silent, unseen and beyond human endurance,” language that captures the shift from crewed to robotic undersea warfare. That framing underscores how Ghost Shark is intended to operate as a persistent, machine‑driven hunter in contested waters, a role explored in depth in assessments of how Ghost Shark drone subs change China vs Australia dynamics.
Secrecy, numbers, and the Marles doctrine of ambiguity
One of the most telling choices around Ghost Shark is how little the Australian government has said about the size of the planned fleet. Defence Minister Richard Marles has publicly declined to specify how many Ghost Sharks will be built, a deliberate ambiguity that complicates any Chinese effort to model the threat. If Beijing does not know whether it is facing a handful of drones or dozens, it must plan for the worst case, potentially diverting resources to anti‑submarine warfare and undersea surveillance that might otherwise be spent elsewhere.
In remarks outlining the program, Marles said the Australian navy would be provided with a fleet of Ghost Sharks but “would not say precisely how many” would be constructed, framing the investment as a response to oceans that are becoming “increasingly congested and contested.” That choice to highlight the strategic environment while keeping the exact numbers classified is a hallmark of modern deterrence, and it is captured in reporting on Australia’s underwater attack drones dubbed Ghost Sharks.
From YouTube explainers to real‑world doctrine
Ghost Shark has also become a minor media phenomenon, with defence commentators and open‑source analysts using online platforms to unpack what is known about the program. In one widely viewed segment, host Kash Dhavan walked viewers through Australia’s “underwater army,” explaining how the billion‑dollar Ghost Shark initiative fits into a broader shift toward autonomous systems and how it might interact with other assets like crewed submarines and maritime patrol aircraft. That kind of public analysis helps shape regional perceptions, signalling to both allies and competitors that Australia is serious about undersea innovation.
Other explainers have zeroed in on the way Australia is positioning Ghost Shark as a direct counter to China, with one video explicitly titled around an “Unmanned Submarine Fleet to Counter China” and another focusing on how Australia has “unveiled a major step in strengthening its naval firepower” by rolling out a “ghost Shark drone” fleet. Those narratives, which stress both the technological leap and the strategic target, are reflected in coverage of Australia’s ‘ghost Shark Drone’ fleet and in broader discussions of the program’s role in the regional balance.
The risks and limits of a stealth revolution
For all the excitement around Ghost Shark, there are real risks and constraints that deserve attention. Autonomy at sea is still a developing field, and operating large uncrewed submarines in busy waterways raises questions about safety, reliability, and escalation. A malfunctioning drone could stray into another state’s territorial waters, or an ambiguous incident involving an unmarked underwater vehicle could trigger a crisis if misinterpreted as an act of sabotage. Australia is effectively testing not just a new platform but a new set of norms for how autonomous systems behave below the surface.
There is also the question of whether the technology will live up to its billing under combat conditions. Some analysts have noted that Australia is going “big on unproven autonomous technology,” a phrase that captures both the ambition and the uncertainty of the Ghost Shark bet. If the software that drives these drones cannot cope with the complexity of real‑world operations, or if adversaries find ways to jam, spoof, or capture them, the strategic payoff could be smaller than hoped, a concern that sits in the background of the more enthusiastic coverage of new undersea predators and similar analyses.
Why this stealth threat matters beyond Australia and China
Even if Ghost Shark remains relatively small in number, its impact will ripple beyond the immediate Australia‑China rivalry. Other middle powers are watching closely to see whether a country with limited resources can use autonomous underwater systems to punch above its weight in contested seas. If the program proves effective, it could accelerate a broader shift toward uncrewed undersea fleets, prompting navies from Japan to India to explore similar concepts and forcing major powers to invest more heavily in counter‑drone capabilities beneath the waves.
For the United States and its allies, Australia’s experiment offers a live test case in how to integrate AI‑driven platforms into existing command structures and alliance planning. For China, it is a reminder that the most disruptive threats do not always come from aircraft carriers or hypersonic missiles, but from quieter innovations that change the geometry of a battlefield. In that sense, the Ghost Shark program is less about a single weapon and more about a new way of thinking about undersea power, one that arrived in the Indo‑Pacific with far less fanfare than a carrier launch, but with the potential to reshape the strategic depths all the same.
More from MorningOverview