U.S. Navy raises Gecko Robotics inspection contract ceiling to $300 million

Gecko Robotics says its inspections can help the Navy repair less and return ships to service faster. The Navy has now raised the company’s contract ceiling from $71 million to $300 million, Fox News reported October 20. That increases the agreement’s purchasing limit; it is not a measure of savings delivered or spending completed.

The increase builds on a five-year contract vehicle announced in March. Under that initial agreement, Gecko was set to begin work on 18 ships in the U.S. Pacific Fleet, including destroyers, amphibious warships and littoral combat ships. Those were the starting assignments, rather than a ship count attached to the new $300 million ceiling.

The operational pressure is straightforward: maintenance delays are keeping ships from deployment while Navy leaders seek to push fleet readiness toward 80%. The inspection work targets the time ships spend being assessed and repaired, with the aim of making more of the existing fleet available for operations.

Finding damage before the shipyard does

Gecko’s wall-climbing robots move across hulls, flight decks, ballast tanks and other difficult-to-reach areas. They collect measurements used to identify corrosion, metal loss and structural problems. The machines supply the physical inspection data; the company’s AI-powered Cantilever software helps turn those readings into information maintenance planners can use to locate necessary repairs.

The goal is to discover problems before a vessel enters a major maintenance period. Finding additional damage after work begins can add repairs and extend a ship’s stay in the yard. Earlier inspection is intended to give crews a clearer picture of the work ahead, rather than leave them to uncover its full extent during maintenance.

The savings case rests on more precise repairs

Gecko says its technology can save up to $8 million in repair costs on a single ship and identify some structural issues up to 50 times faster than traditional inspections. These are company-supplied performance claims. The speed comparison applies to certain structural issues, not to the entire process of inspecting, repairing and returning a warship to service.

CEO Jake Loosararian offered one example of how better measurements could change the work itself. He said robotic inspection narrowed an estimated 1,200 square feet of repairs to about 300 square feet. In that example, the claimed benefit was not simply a faster inspection: a more precise assessment reduced the area designated for repair.

Loosararian also described a workforce benefit: allowing a limited pool of workers to spend more time fixing ships and less time determining what needs fixing. Robotic inspections could reduce dangerous, labor-intensive assessment work as shipyards contend with shortages of skilled labor. That is a proposed use of workers’ time, not a reported staffing reduction.

Beyond identifying existing damage, Gecko wants to use years of inspection data to anticipate failures. Loosararian’s longer-term vision is to have workers, materials and repair plans ready before a ship reaches the pier or yard. That predictive role remains a company goal, distinct from the inspection work underlying the expanded contract.