link to page 1 
Updated June 1, 2021
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program:
Background and Issues for Congress
Introduction
first ship has changed before and could change again.
The Navy’s DDG(X) program envisages procuring a class
Procurement of Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class
of next-generation guided-missile destroyers (DDGs) to
destroyers—the type of large surface combatant currently
replace the Navy’s aging Ticonderoga (CG-47) class Aegis
being procured by the Navy—would end at about the time
cruisers. The Navy wants to procure the first DDG(X)
that DDG(X) procurement would begin. The Navy’s
around FY2028. The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget
FY2021 budget submission suggested that the final DDG-
requests $121.8 million in research and development
51 would be procured around FY2027.
funding for the program. The issue for Congress is whether
to approve, reject, or modify the Navy’s FY2022 funding
Figure 1. CG-47 Class Aegis Cruiser
request and emerging acquisition strategy for the program.
Terminology
Since the 1980s, there has been substantial overlap in the
size and capability of Navy cruisers and destroyers. In part
for this reason, the Navy now refers to its cruisers and
destroyers collectively as large surface combatants (LSCs).
Surface Combatant Industrial Base
All LSCs procured for the Navy since FY1985 have been
built at General Dynamics/Bath Iron Works (GD/BIW) of
Bath, ME, and Huntington Ingalls Industries/Ingalls
Source: Cropped version of U.S. Navy photograph showing USS
Shipbuilding (HII/Ingalls) of Pascagoula, MS. Lockheed
Antietam (CG-54).
Martin and Raytheon are major contractors for Navy
surface ship combat system equipment. The surface
Navy’s General Concept for the Ship
combatant base also includes hundreds of additional
The Navy approved the top-level requirements (i.e., major
component and material supplier firms.
required features) for the DDG(X) in December 2020. The
Navy envisages the DDG(X) as using
Existing CG-47 Class Aegis Cruisers
The Navy procured a total of 27 Ticonderoga (CG-47) class
a new hull design evolved from the DDG-51 and
cruisers (Figure 1) between FY1978 and FY1988. The
Zumwalt (DDG-1000) class destroyer hull designs;
ships entered service between 1983 and 1994. They are
commonly called Aegis cruisers because they are equipped
a next-generation integrated propulsion system (IPS)
with the Aegis combat system, an integrated collection of
that incorporates lessons from the DDG-1000 IPS and
sensors and weapons named for the mythical shield that
the Navy’s new Columbia-class ballistic missile
defended Zeus. The first five CG-47s, which were built to
submarine; and
an earlier technical standard, were judged by the Navy to be
too expensive to modernize and were removed from service
initially, combat system equipment similar to that
in 2004-2005. The Navy’s FY2020 30-year shipbuilding
installed on the Flight III version of the DDG-51
plan projected that the remaining 22 CG-47s would reach
destroyer—the DDG-51 variant that the Navy is
the ends of their service lives and be retired between
currently procuring.
FY2021 and FY2038.
(For more on the DDG-51 and DDG-1000 programs, see
DDG(X) Program
CRS Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000
Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress,
Program Designation
by Ronald O'Rourke.)
In the program designation DDG(X), the X means the
precise design for the ship has not yet been determined. The
Navy officials envision the DDG(X) as being larger than
DDG(X) program was previously known as the Future
the 9,700-ton Flight III DDG-51 design, but smaller than
Large Surface Combatant program.
the 15,700-ton DDG-1000 design. The mid-point between
those two figures is 12,700 tons, though the DDG(X)’s
Procurement Date for Lead Ship
displacement could turn out to be higher or lower than that.
As mentioned earlier, the Navy wants to procure the first
The Navy states that the DDG(X) would
DDG(X) around FY2028, though the date for procuring the
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress
integrate non-developmental systems into a new
Program Funding
hull design that incorporates platform flexibility
The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget requests $121.8
and the space, weight, power and cooling (SWAP-
million in research and development funding for the
C) to meet future combatant force capability/system
program, including $79.7 million in Project 0411 (DDG[X]
requirements that are not achievable without the
Concept Development) within Program Element (PE)
new hull design. The DDG(X) platform will have
0603564N (Ship Preliminary Design & Feasibility Studies),
the flexibility to rapidly and affordably upgrade to
which is line 47 in the Navy’s FY2022 research and
future warfighting systems when they become
development account, and $42.1 million for “DDG(X)
available as well as have improved range and fuel
Power & Propulsion Risk Mitigation & Demonstration,”
efficiency for increased operational flexibility and
which forms part of Project 2471 (Integrated Power
Systems [IPS]) within PE 0603573N (Advanced Surface
decreased demand on the logistics force. DDG(X)
Machinery Systems), which is line 49 in the Navy’s
will provide an Integrated Power System with
FY2022 research and development account.
flexibility to enable fielding of high demand electric
weapons, sensor systems and computing resources.
Issues for Congress
(Source: Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY)
Issues for Congress regarding the DDG(X) program include
2022 Budget Estimates, Navy, Justification Book,
the following:
Volume 2 of 5, Research, Development, Test &
Evaluation, Navy, May 2021, p. 479.)
whether the Navy has accurately identified the required
operational capabilities for the DDG(X) and accurately
Potential Procurement Quantities
estimated the ship’s procurement cost;
The Navy has not specified the total number of DDG(X)s
that it wants to procure. Procuring 11 would provide one
the potential total procurement quantity and annual
DDG(X) for each of the Navy’s 11 large aircraft carriers.
procurement rate for the DDG(X) program;
Procuring 22 would provide one-for-one replacements for
the 22 CG-47s. Keeping the DDG(X) design in production
the number of builders to be used in building DDG(X)s;
so as to additionally replace at least some of the Navy’s
older DDG-51s as those ships start to retire in the 2030s
the adequacy of the Navy’s plan for maturing new
could result in a larger total procurement quantity. These
technologies that are to be incorporated into the
numbers, as well as the Navy’s FY2020 30-year
DDG(X);
shipbuilding plan, suggest a potential DDG(X) annual
procurement rate of one to two ships per year.
the Navy’s plans for maintaining, modernizing, and
operating the 22 CG-47s over the remainder of their
Potential Unit Procurement Cost
service lives; and
An April 2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report
on a 30-year Navy shipbuilding document submitted by the
the Navy’s plans for transitioning from procurement of
Trump Administration on December 9, 2020, states that in
DDG-51s to procurement of DDG(X)s, and the potential
constant FY2021 dollars, the DDG(X)’s average unit
impact of this transition on U.S. shipbuilders and
procurement cost is estimated at $2.4 billion by the Navy
supplier firms.
and $2.9 billion by CBO, compared with $1.9 billion for the
Congressional Action for FY2022
Flight III DDG-51. The first DDG(X) would be
The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget was submitted to
considerably more expensive than follow-on DDG(X)s
because its procurement cost would incorporate the detailed
Congress on May 28, 2021.
design and nonrecurring engineering (DD/NRE) costs for
the class.
Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs
IF11679
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permissio n of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11679 · VERSION 10 · UPDATED