Arleigh Burke-class destroyer

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
300px
USS Arleigh Burke in the Chesapeake Bay in 2013
Class overview
Name: Arleigh Burke class
Operators:  United States Navy
Preceded by: Kidd class
Succeeded by: Zumwalt class
Cost: US$1.843 billion (DDG 114–116, FY2011/12)[1]
Built: 1988–present
Building: 3
Planned: 76[2]
Completed: 66
Active: 62
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile destroyer
Displacement:
  • Fully loaded:
  • Flight I: 8,315 t (8,184 long tons; 9,166 short tons)
  • Flight II: 8,400 t (8,300 long tons; 9,300 short tons)
  • Flight IIA: 9,200 t (9,100 long tons; 10,100 short tons)
  • Flight III: 9,800 t (9,600 long tons; 10,800 short tons)[3]
Length:
  • Flights I and II: 505 ft (154 m)
  • Flight IIA: 509 ft (155 m)
Beam: 66 ft (20 m)
Draft: 30.5 ft (9.3 m)
Installed power: 3 × Allison AG9140 Generators (2,500 kW each, 440 V)
Propulsion:
Speed: In excess of 30 kn (56 km/h; 35 mph)
Range: 4,400 nmi (8,100 km) at 20 kn (37 km/h; 23 mph)
Boats & landing
craft carried:		 2 × rigid hull inflatable boats
Complement:
  • Flight I: 303 total[5]
  • Flight IIA: 23 officers, 300 enlisted[5]
Sensors and
processing systems:
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
Armament:
Aircraft carried:
Aviation facilities:
  • Flights I and II: Flight deck only, but LAMPS III electronics installed on landing deck for coordinated DDG-51/helo ASW operations
  • Flight IIA onwards: Flight deck and enclosed hangars for two MH-60R LAMPS III helicopters

The Arleigh Burke class of guided missile destroyers (DDGs) is the United States Navy's first class of destroyer built around the Aegis Combat System and the SPY-1D multifunction passive electronically scanned array radar. The class is named for Admiral Arleigh Burke, the most famous American destroyer officer of World War II, and later Chief of Naval Operations. The class leader, USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during Admiral Burke's lifetime.

These warships were designed as multimission destroyers[5] to fit the antiaircraft warfare (AAW) role with their powerful Aegis radar and surface-to-air missiles; antisubmarine warfare (ASW), with their towed sonar array, anti-submarine rockets, and ASW helicopter; antisurface warfare (ASuW) with their Harpoon missile launcher; and strategic land strike role with their Tomahawk missiles. With upgrades to their AN/SPY-1 phased radar systems and their associated missile payloads as part of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, the ships of this class have also begun to demonstrate some promise as mobile antiballistic missile and anti-satellite weaponry platforms. Some versions of the class no longer have the towed sonar, or Harpoon missile launcher. Their hull and superstructure were designed to have a reduced radar cross section.[8]

The first ship of the class was commissioned on 4 July 1991. With the decommissioning of the last Spruance-class destroyer, USS Cushing, on 21 September 2005, the Arleigh Burke-class ships became the U.S. Navy's only active destroyers; the class has the longest production run for any post-World War II U.S. Navy surface combatant.[9] Besides the 62 vessels of this class (comprising 21 of Flight I, 7 of Flight II and 34 of Flight IIA) in service by 2016, up to a further 42 (of Flight III) have been envisaged.

With an overall length of 505 to 509 feet (154 to 155 m), displacement ranging from 8,315 to 9,200 tons, and weaponry including over 90 missiles, the Arleigh Burke class are larger and more heavily armed than most previous ships classified as guided missile cruisers.[10]

Characteristics

The USS Cole and two other Arleigh Burke-class vessels docked at Naval Station Norfolk in July 2009.
File:USS Fitzgerald DDG-62.jpg
In this image of USS Fitzgerald, a Flight I ship, note TACTAS (Tactical Towed Array Sonar) in the center of the fantail, lack of helicopter hangars, and design of stacks.
File:USS Mustin (DDG 89) stbd stern view.jpg
In this image of USS Mustin, a Flight IIA ship, note lack of TACTAS in the center of the fantail aft helicopter hangars, Phalanx CIWS mount and different design of exhaust stacks.
File:USS Momsen (DDG 92) stbd bow view.jpg
The starboard side of the USS Momsen, note torpedo tubes mounted on missile deck vs earlier mounted amidships. Also, note superstructure changes to accommodate a Remote Minehunting System (RMS) holding bay.
File:US Navy 070111-N-4515N-509 Guided missile destroyer USS Forest Sherman (DDG 98) test fires its five-inch gun on the bow of the ship during training.jpg
The USS Forrest Sherman in 2007, test firing her new 5"/62 caliber Mark 45 Mod 4 gun, located forward of her 32-cell missile pack module.

The ships of the Arleigh Burke class are among the largest destroyers built in the United States. Only the Spruance, Kidd (563 feet (172 m)) and Zumwalt classes (600 feet (180 m)) were longer. The larger Ticonderoga-class ships were constructed on Spruance-class hull forms, but are designated as cruisers due to their radically different mission and weapons systems than the Spruance and Kidd-class destroyers. The Arleigh Burke class were designed with a new, large, water-plane area-hull form characterized by a wide flaring bow which significantly improves sea-keeping ability. The hull form is designed to permit high speed in high sea states.[8]

The designers of Arleigh Burke incorporated lessons learned from the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers, the latter which was deemed too expensive to continue building and too difficult to further upgrade. With the Arleigh Burke class, the U.S. Navy also returned to all-steel construction. An earlier generation had combined a steel hull with an innovative superstructure made of lighter aluminum to reduce top weight, but the lighter metal proved vulnerable to cracking. Aluminum is also less fire-resistant than steel;[11] a 1975 fire aboard USS Belknap gutted her aluminum superstructure.[12] Battle damage to Royal Navy ships exacerbated by their aluminum superstructures during the 1982 Falklands War supported the decision to use steel. Another lesson from the Falklands War[13] led the navy to protect the ship's vital spaces with double-spaced steel armor (creating a buffer for modern rockets) and kevlar spall liners.

The Arleigh Burke design incorporates stealth techniques, such as the angled rather than traditional vertical surfaces and the tripod mainmast,[14][15] which make the ship more difficult to detect, in particular by antiship missiles. A Collective Protection System makes the Arleigh Burke class the first U.S. warships designed with an air-filtration system against nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare.[16] Other NBC defenses include a "countermeasure wash down the system".[17]

Their Aegis Combat System differs from a traditional rotating radar that mechanically rotates 360 degrees for each sweep scan of the airspace. Instead, Aegis uses a passive electronically scanned array, which allows continual tracking of targets simultaneous with area scans. The system's computer control also allows centralization of the previously separate tracking and targeting functions. The system is also resistant to electronic countermeasures. Their stand-alone Harpoon antiship missile launchers give them an antiship capability with a range in excess of 64 nautical miles (119 km; 74 mi).[8]

With the retirement of the Tomahawk antiship missile variant, only the Arleigh Burke-class ships before Flight IIA versions are well-equipped for antisurface warfare with Harpoon launchers. Others are not, but are loaded with SM-2 missiles in their vertical launch cells capable of an antiship mode, though they have limited range and damage potential.[18]

"The 5-inch/54 caliber Mark 45 gun, in conjunction with the Mark 34 Gun Weapon System, is an antiship weapon which can also be used for close-in air contacts or to support forces ashore with Naval Gun-Fire Support (NGF), with a range of up to 20 miles (32 km) and capable of firing 20 rounds per minute." The class's RIM-7 Sea Sparrow/RIM-162 ESSM missiles provide point defense against missiles and aircraft while the Standard Missile SM-2 and SM-6 provide area antiaircraft defense; the SM-6 provides over-the-horizon missile defense.[19][20] The Standard Missile 3 and 6 also provide Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD).[20]

The ship has an electronics warfare suite that provides passive detection and decoy countermeasures.[8] The class's Light Airborne Multi-Purpose System (LAMPS) helicopter system improves the ship's capabilities against submarines and surface ships, a helicopter able to serve as a platform to monitor submarines and surface ships, and launch torpedoes and missiles against them, as well as being able to support ground assaults with machine guns and Hellfire antiarmor guided missiles.[21] The helicopters also serve in a utility role, able to perform ship replenishment, search and rescue, medical evacuation, communications relay, and naval gunfire spotting and controlling.

The Arleigh Burke class is a set of multimission ships with numerous combat systems, including a "combination of... an advanced antisubmarine warfare system (ASW), land attack cruise missiles, ship-to-ship missiles, and advanced antiaircraft missiles,"[13] Burkes have the Navy's latest antisubmarine combat system with active sonar, a towed sonar array, and antisubmarine rockets. They support strategic land strikes with their VLS launched Tomahawks.[8] They are able to detect antiship mines at a range of about 1400 meters.[22]

So vital has the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMD) role of the class become that all ships of the class are being updated with BMD capability.[23] Burke production is being restarted in place of additional Zumwalt-class destroyers.[24]

Development

The profile of Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer.

In 1980, the U.S. Navy initiated design studies with seven contractors. By 1983 the number of competitors had been reduced to three: Bath Iron Works, Todd Shipyards, and Ingalls Shipbuilding.[16] On 3 April 1985 Bath Iron Works received a US$321.9 million contract to build the first of class, USS Arleigh Burke.[25] Gibbs & Cox was awarded the contract to be the lead ship design agent.[26] The total cost of the first ship was put at US$1.1 billion, the other US$778 million being for the ship's weapons systems.[25] She was laid down by the Bath Iron Works at Bath, Maine, on 6 December 1988, and launched on 16 September 1989 by Mrs. Arleigh Burke. The Admiral himself was present at her commissioning ceremony on 4 July 1991, held on the waterfront in downtown Norfolk, Virginia.

The "Flight II Arleigh Burke" ships have the following improvement over the original Flight I: incorporation of combat direction finding, SLQ-32V-3, TADIX-B, JTIDS command and control processor, and the capability to launch and control SM-2 Block IV Extended Range Missile.[27]

The "Flight IIA Arleigh Burke" ships have several new features, beginning with the USS Oscar Austin (DDG-79). Among the changes is the addition of two hangars for antisubmarine warfare (ASW) helicopters, and a new, longer Mark 45 Mod 4 5-inch/62-caliber naval gun (installed onto USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81) and later ships). Later Flight IIA ships starting with USS Mustin (DDG-89) have a modified funnel design that buries the funnels within the superstructure as a signature-reduction measure. TACTAS towed array sonar was omitted from Flight IIA ships and they also lack Harpoon missile launchers.[28]

Ships from DDG-68 to DDG-84 have AN/SLQ-32 antennas that resemble V3 configuration similar to those deployed on Ticonderoga-class cruiser, while the remainder has V2 variants externally resembling those deployed on some Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate. V3 has an active electronic countermeasures component while V2 is passive only. AN/SLQ-32 is being upgraded under the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP), the first SEWIP Block 2 upgrades were installed in 2014 with full-rate production scheduled for mid-2015.[28]

A number of Flight IIA ships were constructed without a Phalanx CIWS because of the planned Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile, but later the Navy decided to retrofit all IIA ships to carry at least one Phalanx CIWS by 2013.[29] In March 2017, it was reported that the Navy plans to incorporate Seasaber Increment 1, a 60 kW-class laser weapon, into an unnamed Flight IIA destroyer by the fiscal year of 2020.[30]

USS Pinckney, USS Momsen, USS Chung-Hoon, USS Nitze, USS James E. Williams and USS Bainbridge[31] have superstructure differences to accommodate the Remote Mine-hunting System (RMS). Mk 32 torpedo tubes were moved to the missile deck from amidships as well.

Modernization

The U.S. Navy began a modernization program for the Arleigh Burke class aimed at improving the gun systems on the ships in an effort to address congressional concerns over the retirement of the Iowa-class battleships. This modernization was to include an extension of the range of the 5-inch (127 mm) guns on the flight I Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (USS Arleigh Burke to USS Ross) with extended range guided munitions (ERGMs) that would have given the guns a range of 40 nautical miles (74 km).[32][33][34] However, the ERGM was cancelled in 2008.[35]

The modernization program is designed to provide a comprehensive mid-life upgrade to ensure that the class remains effective. Reduced manning, increased mission effectiveness, and a reduced total cost including construction, maintenance, and operation are the goals of the modernization program. Modernization technologies will be integrated during new construction of DDG-111 and 112, then retrofitted into DDG flight I and II ships during in-service overhaul periods.[36] The first phase will update the hull, mechanical, and electrical systems while the second phase will introduce an open architecture computing environment (OACE). The result will be improved capability in both ballistic missile defense (BMD) and littoral combat.[37][38] By 2018, all Arleigh Burke-class ships homeported in the Western Pacific will have upgraded ASW systems, including the new AN/SQR-20 Multifunction Towed Array.[39]

The Navy is also upgrading the ships' ability to process data. Beginning with USS Spruance, the Navy is installing an internet protocol (IP) based data backbone, which enhances the ship's ability to handle video. Spruance is the first destroyer to be fitted with the Boeing Company's gigabit Ethernet data multiplex system (GEDMS).[40]

In July 2010 BAE Systems announced that it had been awarded a contract to modernize 11 ships.[41] In May 2014 Sam LaGrone reported that 21 of the 28 Flight I/II Arleigh Burke-class ships would not receive a mid-life upgrade that included electronics and Aegis Baseline 9 software for SM-6 compatibility, instead they would retain the basic BMD 3.6.1 software in a $170 million upgrade concentrating on mechanical systems and on some ships, their antisubmarine suite.[42] Seven Flight I ships - DDG 51-53, 57, 61, 65, 69 - will get the full US$270m Baseline 9 upgrade.[42] Deputy of surface warfare Dave McFarland said that this change was due to the budget cuts in the Budget Control Act of 2011.[43]

In 2016, the Navy will begin the outfitting of 34 Flight IIA Arleigh Burke vessels with a hybrid-electric drive (HED) to lower fuel costs. While the four LM-2500 gas turbines of the Arleigh Burkes are most efficient at high speeds, an electric motor is to be attached to the main reduction gear to turn the drive shaft to propel the ship at speeds under 13 knots (24 km/h), such as during ballistic missile defense or maritime security operations. Use of the HED for half the time could extend time on station by 2.5 days before refueling. Two vessels are planned to be outfitted in 2016, with the rest upgraded at a rate of four per year.[44]

Also in 2016, four destroyers patrolling with the U.S. 6th Fleet based in Naval Station Rota, Spain (USS Porter, USS Carney, USS Ross, USS Donald Cook) will get a self-protection upgrade by replacing a Phalanx CIWS with the SeaRAM, a close-range ship defense system that combines the Phalanx sensor dome with an 11-cell RAM launcher, the first time the system has been paired with an Aegis ship.[45]

Production restarted and further development

The class was scheduled to be replaced by Zumwalt-class destroyers beginning in 2020,[46] but an increasing threat from both long- and short-range missiles caused the Navy to restart production of the Arleigh Burke class and consider placing littoral combat mission modules on the new ships.[47][48]

In April 2009 the Navy announced a plan that limited the Zumwalt class to three units while ordering another three Arleigh Burke-class ships from both Bath Iron Works and Ingalls Shipbuilding.[24] In December 2009 Northrop Grumman received a $170.7 million letter contract for DDG-113 long-lead-time materials.[49] Shipbuilding contracts for DDG-113 to DDG-115 were awarded in mid-2011 for US$679.6m–$783.6m;[50] these do not include government-furnished equipment such as weapons and sensors which will take the average cost of the FY2011/12 ships to US$1,842.7m per vessel.[1]

DDG-113 to DDG-115 will be "restart" ships, similar to previous Flight IIA ships, but including modernization features such as Open Architecture Computing Environment. DDG-116 to DDG-121 will be "Technology Insertion" ships with elements of Flight III.[51] Flight III proper will begin with the third ship procured in 2016.[52]

Flight III ships, construction starting in FY2016 in place of the canceled CG(X) program, have various design improvements including radar antennas of mid-diameter increased to 14 feet (4.3 m) from the previous 12 feet (3.7 m).[53] These Air and Missile Defense Radars (AMDR) use digital beamforming, instead of the earlier passive electronically scanned array radars.[54]

Costs for the Flight III ships increased rapidly as expectations and requirements for the program have grown. In particular, this was due to the changing requirements needed to carry the proposed Air and Missile Defense Radar system required for the ships' ballistic missile defense role.[55] The Government Accountability Office found that the design of the Flight IIIs was based on "a significantly reduced threat environment from other Navy analyses" and that the new ships would be "at best marginally effective". The U.S. Navy disagrees with the GAO findings, claiming the DDG-51 hull is "absolutely" capable of fitting a large enough radar to meet requirements. Installation of the AMDR would require double the power and double the cooling, but there is room to fit what is needed inside the hull.[56]

In spite of the production restart, the U.S. Navy is expected to fall short of its requirement for 94 missile-defense-capable destroyer and cruiser platforms starting in FY 2025 and continuing past the end of the 30-year planning window. While this is a new requirement as of 2011, and the U.S. Navy has never had so many large missile-armed surface combatants, the relative success of the Aegis ballistic missile defense system has shifted this national security requirement onto the U.S. Navy. The shortfall will arise as older platforms that have been refitted to be missile-defense-capable (particularly the cruisers) are retired in bulk before new destroyers are planned to be built.[57]

The U.S. Navy was considering extending the acquisition of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers into the 2040s, according to revised procurement tables sent to Congress, which have the U.S. Navy procuring Flight IV ships from 2032 through 2041.[58] This was canceled to cover the cost of the Ohio Replacement Submarine, with the air defense commander role retained on one cruiser per carrier battle group.[59]

Future replacement

USS Michael Murphy (DDG-112) was originally intended to be the last of the Arleigh Burke class. However, with reduction of the Zumwalt-class production, the U.S. Navy requested new DDG-51-class ships.[60] Long-lead materials contracts were awarded to Northrop Grumman in December 2009 for DDG-113 and in April 2010 for DDG-114.[61] General Dynamics received a long-lead materials contract for DDG-115 in February 2010.[62][63] It is anticipated that in FY2012 or FY2013, the U.S. Navy will commence detailed work for a Flight III design and request 24 ships to be built from 2016 to 2031.[64] In May 2013, a total of 76 Burke-class ships were planned.[65] The Flight III variant is in the design phase as of 2013. In June 2013, the U.S. Navy awarded $6.2 billion in destroyer contracts.[66] Up to 42 Flight III ships may be procured by the U.S. Navy with the first ship entering service in 2023.[67]

In April 2014 the U.S. Navy began the early stages of developing a new destroyer to replace the Arleigh Burke-class called the "Future Surface Combatant". The new class is expected to enter service in the early 2030s and initially serve alongside the 22 Flight III DDGs. No hull design or shape has been speculated yet, although the destroyer class will incorporate emerging technologies like lasers, on-board power-generation systems, increased automation, and next-generation weapons, sensors, and electronics. They will leverage technologies in use on other platforms such as the Zumwalt-class destroyer, Littoral Combat Ship, and Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers.[68]

The Future Surface Combatant may place importance on the Zumwalt-class destroyer's electric drive system that propels the ship while generating 58 megawatts of on-board electrical power, levels required to operate future directed energy weapons. Laser weapon systems are likely to become more prominent to engage threats without using missiles that could potentially cost more than the target it is engaging. Less costly weapon systems may help keep the destroyer class from becoming too expensive. Initial requirements for the Future Surface Combatant will emphasize lethality and survivability, as well as being able to continue to protect aircraft carriers. The ships also have to be modular to allow for inexpensive upgrades of weaponry, electronics, computing, and sensors over time as threats evolve.[69]

Operational history

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

See also: USS Cole bombing

Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Cole was damaged on 12 October 2000 in Aden, Yemen while docked, by an attack in which an apparently shaped charge of 200–300 kg in a boat was placed against the hull and detonated by suicide bombers, killing 17 crew members. The ship was repaired, and returned to duty in 2001.

In October 2011 it was announced that four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers would be forward-deployed in Europe to support the NATO missile defence system. The ships, to be based at Naval Station Rota, Spain, were named in February 2012, as Ross, Donald Cook, Porter, and Carney.[70] By reducing travel times to station, this forward deployment will allow for six other destroyers to be shifted from the Atlantic in support of the Pivot to East Asia.[71] Russia has threatened to quit the New START treaty over this deployment, calling it a threat to their nuclear deterrent.[72]

Contractors

Ships in class

 Name   Number   Builder   Launched   Commissioned   Home port   Status 
Flight I
Arleigh Burke DDG-51 Bath Iron Works 16 September 1989 4 July 1991 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Barry DDG-52 Ingalls Shipbuilding 8 June 1991 12 December 1992 Yokosuka, Japan Active
John Paul Jones DDG-53 Bath Iron Works 26 October 1991 18 December 1993 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Curtis Wilbur DDG-54 Bath Iron Works 16 May 1992 19 March 1994 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Stout DDG-55 Ingalls Shipbuilding 16 October 1992 13 August 1994 Norfolk, Virginia Active
John S. McCain DDG-56 Bath Iron Works 26 September 1992 2 July 1994 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Mitscher DDG-57 Ingalls Shipbuilding 7 May 1993 10 December 1994 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Laboon DDG-58 Bath Iron Works 20 February 1993 18 March 1995 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Russell DDG-59 Ingalls Shipbuilding 20 October 1993 20 May 1995 San Diego, California Active
Paul Hamilton DDG-60 Bath Iron Works 24 July 1993 27 May 1995 San Diego, California Active
Ramage DDG-61 Ingalls Shipbuilding 11 February 1994 22 July 1995 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Fitzgerald DDG-62 Bath Iron Works 29 January 1994 14 October 1995 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Stethem DDG-63 Ingalls Shipbuilding 17 July 1994 21 October 1995 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Carney DDG-64 Bath Iron Works 23 July 1994 13 April 1996 Naval Station Rota, Spain Active
Benfold DDG-65 Ingalls Shipbuilding 9 November 1994 30 March 1996 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Gonzalez DDG-66 Bath Iron Works 18 February 1995 12 October 1996 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Cole DDG-67 Ingalls Shipbuilding 10 February 1995 8 June 1996 Norfolk, Virginia Active
The Sullivans DDG-68 Bath Iron Works 12 August 1995 19 April 1997 Mayport, Florida Active
Milius DDG-69 Ingalls Shipbuilding 1 August 1995 23 November 1996 San Diego, California Active
Hopper DDG-70 Bath Iron Works 6 January 1996 6 September 1997 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Ross DDG-71 Ingalls Shipbuilding 22 March 1996 28 June 1997 Rota, Spain Active
Flight II
Mahan DDG-72 Bath Iron Works 29 June 1996 14 February 1998 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Decatur DDG-73 Bath Iron Works 10 November 1996 29 August 1998 San Diego, California Active
McFaul DDG-74 Ingalls Shipbuilding 18 January 1997 25 April 1998 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Donald Cook DDG-75 Bath Iron Works 3 May 1997 4 December 1998 Rota, Spain Active
Higgins DDG-76 Bath Iron Works 4 October 1997 24 April 1999 San Diego, California Active
O'Kane DDG-77 Bath Iron Works 28 March 1998 23 October 1999 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Porter DDG-78 Ingalls Shipbuilding 12 November 1997 20 March 1999 Rota, Spain Active
Flight IIA: 5"/54 variant
Oscar Austin DDG-79 Bath Iron Works 7 November 1998 19 August 2000 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Roosevelt DDG-80 Ingalls Shipbuilding 10 January 1999 14 October 2000 Mayport, Florida Active
Flight IIA: 5"/62 variant
Winston S. Churchill DDG-81 Bath Iron Works 17 April 1999 10 March 2001 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Lassen DDG-82 Ingalls Shipbuilding 16 October 1999 21 April 2001 Mayport, Florida Active
Howard DDG-83 Bath Iron Works 20 November 1999 20 October 2001 San Diego, California Active
Bulkeley DDG-84 Ingalls Shipbuilding 21 June 2000 8 December 2001 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Flight IIA: 5"/62, one 20mm CIWS variant[29]
McCampbell DDG-85 Bath Iron Works 2 July 2000 17 August 2002 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Shoup DDG-86 Ingalls Shipbuilding 22 November 2000 22 June 2002 Everett, Washington Active
Mason DDG-87 Bath Iron Works 23 June 2001 12 April 2003 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Preble DDG-88 Ingalls Shipbuilding 1 June 2001 9 November 2002 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Mustin DDG-89 Ingalls Shipbuilding 12 December 2001 26 July 2003 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Chafee DDG-90 Bath Iron Works 2 November 2002 18 October 2003 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Pinckney DDG-91 Ingalls Shipbuilding 26 June 2002 29 May 2004 San Diego, California Active
Momsen DDG-92 Bath Iron Works 19 July 2003 28 August 2004 Everett, Washington Active
Chung-Hoon DDG-93 Ingalls Shipbuilding 15 December 2002 18 September 2004 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Nitze DDG-94 Bath Iron Works 3 April 2004 5 March 2005 Norfolk, Virginia Active
James E. Williams DDG-95 Ingalls Shipbuilding 25 June 2003 11 December 2004 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Bainbridge DDG-96 Bath Iron Works 13 November 2004 12 November 2005 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Halsey DDG-97 Ingalls Shipbuilding 9 January 2004 30 July 2005 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Forrest Sherman DDG-98 Ingalls Shipbuilding 2 October 2004 28 January 2006 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Farragut DDG-99 Bath Iron Works 23 July 2005 10 June 2006 Mayport, Florida Active
Kidd DDG-100 Ingalls Shipbuilding 22 January 2005 9 June 2007 Everett, Washington Active
Gridley DDG-101 Bath Iron Works 28 December 2005 10 February 2007 Everett, Washington Active
Sampson DDG-102 Bath Iron Works 16 September 2006 3 November 2007 Everett, Washington Active
Truxtun DDG-103 Ingalls Shipbuilding 2 June 2007 25 April 2009 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Sterett DDG-104 Bath Iron Works 19 May 2007 9 August 2008 San Diego, California Active
Dewey DDG-105 Ingalls Shipbuilding 26 January 2008 6 March 2010 San Diego, California Active
Stockdale DDG-106 Bath Iron Works 10 May 2008 18 April 2009 San Diego, California Active
Gravely DDG-107 Ingalls Shipbuilding 30 March 2009 20 November 2010 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Wayne E. Meyer DDG-108 Bath Iron Works 18 October 2008 10 October 2009 San Diego, California Active
Jason Dunham DDG-109 Bath Iron Works 1 August 2009 13 November 2010 Norfolk, Virginia Active
William P. Lawrence DDG-110 Ingalls Shipbuilding 15 December 2009 4 June 2011 San Diego, California Active
Spruance DDG-111 Bath Iron Works 6 June 2010 1 October 2011 San Diego, California Active
Michael Murphy DDG-112 Bath Iron Works 7 May 2011 6 October 2012 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Flight IIA: Restart
John Finn DDG-113 Ingalls Shipbuilding 28 March 2015[73] scheduled in 2017 Delivered[74]
Ralph Johnson DDG-114 Ingalls Shipbuilding 12 December 2015 24 March 2018 Everett, Washington Active
Rafael Peralta DDG-115 Bath Iron Works 1 November 2015[75] scheduled in 2017[76] Delivered[77][78][76]
Flight IIA: Technology Insertion
Thomas Hudner DDG-116 Bath Iron Works 1 April 2017 scheduled in 2018 Launched[79]
Paul Ignatius DDG-117 Ingalls Shipbuilding 12 November 2016 scheduled in 2018 Launched[80]
Daniel Inouye DDG-118 Bath Iron Works Keel Laid[81]
Delbert D. Black DDG-119 Ingalls Shipbuilding scheduled in 2018[82] Keel Laid[83]
Carl M. Levin[84] DDG-120 Bath Iron Works Contract awarded (MYP)
Frank E. Petersen Jr.[85] DDG-121 Ingalls Shipbuilding scheduled in 2020[86] Keel Laid[87]
John Basilone[88] DDG-122 Bath Iron Works scheduled in 2022 Contract awarded (MYP)
Lenah H. Sutcliffe Higbee[89] DDG-123 Ingalls Shipbuilding Keel Laid[90]
Flight III
Harvey C. Barnum Jr.[84] DDG-124 Bath Iron Works Contract awarded (MYP)
Jack H. Lucas[91] DDG-125 Ingalls Shipbuilding Contract awarded (MYP)
Louis H. Wilson Jr.[91] DDG-126 Bath Iron Works Contract awarded (MYP)

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. Since 1 and 2 ships are procured in alternate years and the "1 in a year" ships cost more, the fairest estimate of unit price comes from averaging three ships across two years. US$50-300m is spent on long lead-time items in the year before the main procurement of each ship. DDG-114 and DDG-115 together cost US$577.2m (FY2010) + US$2,922.2m (FY2011) = US$3,499.4m,(p25) and DDG-116 cost US$48m (FY2011) + US$1,980.7m (FY2012) = US$2,028.7m,(p12) making an average for the three ships of US$1,847.2m. DDG-113 cost US$2,234.4m.(p6)
  2. ↑ [1][dead link]
  3. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  4. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  6. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  7. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  9. ↑ After 2-plus decades, Navy destroyer breaks record[permanent dead link]
  10. ↑ "Northrop Grumman-Built William P. Lawrence Christened; Legacy of Former POW Honored". Northrop Grumman, 17 April 2010.
  11. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  12. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  14. ↑ Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p. 592
  15. ↑ Baker 1998, p. 1020
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  17. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  18. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  19. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  21. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  22. ↑ "Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) DDG 51"
  23. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. Archived 11 August 2014 at the Wayback Machine
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Contractors Agree on Deal to Build Stealth Destroyer. Navy Times, 8 April 2009.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  26. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  27. ↑ Flight II
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 Analyst: DDGs without CIWS vulnerable. Navy Times. 16 September 2008.
  30. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  31. ↑ DN-SD-07-24674 (up to DDG-96)[dead link]
  32. ↑ Taken from the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, pages 67–68 Archived 2 November 2006 at the Wayback Machine
  33. ↑ Taken from the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, p. 193 Archived 25 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine
  34. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  35. ↑ Navy ends ERGM funding Navy Times[dead link]
  36. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  37. ↑ DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class Aegis Guided-Missile Destroyer Modernization[permanent dead link]
  38. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  39. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  40. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  41. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  43. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  44. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  45. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  46. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  47. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  48. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  49. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. Contract N00024-10-C-2308.
  50. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  51. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. Presentation summarising the restart program.
  52. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  53. ↑ RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress. CRS, 26 February 2010.
  54. ↑ GAO-10-388SP, "Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs". GAO, 30 March 2010
  55. ↑ Fabey, Michael. "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms." Aviation Week, 10 June 2011.
  56. ↑ Freedberg, Sydney J. Jr. "Navy Bets On Arleigh Burkes To Sail Until 2072; 40 Years Afloat For Some." 5 October 2012.
  57. ↑ O'Rourke, Ronald. "CRS-RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress." Congressional Research Service, 2 March 2012.
  58. ↑ "US proposes Flight IV Arleigh Burke and life extension for command ships". Jane's Information Group, 14 June 2011.
  59. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  60. ↑ RL32109, Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress Archived 24 January 2009 at the Wayback Machine. Congressional Research Service, 23 December 2009.
  61. ↑ "Northrop Grumman awarded $114M contract; Navy orders 30th DDG 51 ship", www.gulflive.com, 24 April 2010.
  62. ↑ "General Dynamics wins over $900 mln in Navy deals", Reuters, 26 February 2010.
  63. ↑ "BIW to purchase DDG 115 material", UPI.com, 2 March 2010.
  64. ↑ CRS RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress 14 June 2010[permanent dead link]
  65. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  66. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  67. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  68. ↑ Navy Makes Plans for New Destroyer for 2030s - Military.com, 9 April 2014
  69. ↑ Navy Makes Plans for New Destroyer for 2030s - Military.com, 9 April 2014
  70. ↑ Navy, Navy Names Forward Deployed Ships to Rota, Spain
  71. ↑ "NavWeek: Keeping Asian Waters Pacific."
  72. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  73. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  74. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  75. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  76. ↑ 76.0 76.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  77. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  78. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  79. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  80. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  81. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  82. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  83. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  84. ↑ 84.0 84.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  85. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  86. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  87. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  88. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  89. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  90. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  91. ↑ 91.0 91.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

References

  • Baker, A.D. The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 1998–1999. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1998. ISBN 1-55750-111-4.
  • Gardiner, Robert and Chumbley, Stephen. Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1947–1995. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1995. ISBN 1-55750-132-7.

Further reading

  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. Describes the construction of Donald Cook (DDG-75) at Bath Iron Works.

External links

Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer&oldid=725577047"