The US Navy has announced that the new DDG(X) destroyers will have a greater weapons loadout than the Arleigh Burke class, and will incorporate a directed energy weapon (laser). The US Navy has requested $133.5 million in funding for the DDG(X) design through 2026. The DDG(X) will be a successor to the Arleigh Burke-class Flight III destroyers, which will remain in service until approximately 2060. The DDG(X) will have more and more capable sensors, increased survivability, increased efficiency, and reduced operating costs. The ships will incorporate the Integrated Power System (IPS), the use of which means more efficient energy management and a reduced footprint in the cost of supporting the ship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In summary, the DDG(X) will incorporate all the lessons learned from previous US Navy ship designs (frigates and destroyers), both at the design level and at the program development and shipbuilding level, so as to avoid the technical failures and cost overruns of the past. In essence, the DDG(X) will combine the proven combat systems of the \u201cArleigh Burke\u201d, plus any new systems that arise during the evolution of technology, in a new hull. In this way, the US Navy estimates that it will zero out the SWAP-C (Size, Weight And Power-Cost) function, thus reducing the overall cost of building and using\/supporting the new ships. Also, the new design will incorporate new technologies from the outset in a more efficient and ergonomic way, always aiming for improved performance and characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In terms of flexibility, the new ships should be designed with 5% more free space, for future upgrades. Also, the propulsion and energy management system should withstand a 10% increase in the ship’s weight, in the event of a future upgrade. Similarly, the ship’s energy system should withstand a 20% increase in energy consumption. In terms of survivability, the US Navy’s goal is particularly ambitious and calls for a reduction in the acoustic, infrared and magnetic footprint of the DDG(X) by 50% compared to the “Arleigh Burke” Flight III. In terms of the ship’s capabilities, it will have the same class of weapons systems as the “Arleigh Burke” Flight III, namely anti-aircraft missiles, anti-ship missiles and anti-land targets, but with a longer range and in greater quantity. They will also incorporate two RAM close-in missile systems of 21 cells each, laser weapons and hypersonic missile launchers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to the current schedule, the first new DDG(X) will be built in 2028 (the desired year of construction). Its displacement will be more than 9,700 tons but less than the 15,700 of the \u201cZumwalt\u201d. It is not known how many new DDG(X) the US Navy will build, but the number is specified between 11 and 22 ships. The 11 ships are considered the minimum to accompany the 11 aircraft carriers in service, that is, one ship per Aircraft Carrier Group, while the 22 ships are the minimum number that will allow the replacement of all the \u201cTiconderoga\u201d. If the US Navy now wants to replace the “Arleigh Burkes” of the original versions, it will have to build more, given that the 21 “Arleigh Burkes” Flight I entered service in the period 1991-1997 and will have to be replaced in the period 2026-2032.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The US Navy has announced that the new DDG(X) destroyers will have a greater weapons loadout than the Arleigh Burke class, and will incorporate…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1808],"tags":[2158,4772,3852,2654,2152],"class_list":["post-25253","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-defense-space","tag-arleigh-burke","tag-arleigh-burke-flight-iii","tag-ddgx","tag-destroyers","tag-us-navy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25253","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=25253"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25253\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25255,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25253\/revisions\/25255"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=25253"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=25253"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=25253"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}