link to page 1 
Updated December 9, 2021
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program:
Background and Issues for Congress
Introduction
Figure 1. CG-47 Class Aegis Cruiser
The Navy’s DDG(X) program envisages procuring a class
of next-generation guided-missile destroyers (DDGs) to
replace the Navy’s Ticonderoga (CG-47) class Aegis
cruisers and its older Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis
destroyers. The Navy wants to procure the first DDG(X) in
FY2028. The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget requests
$121.8 million in research and development funding for the
program.
Terminology
Since the 1980s, there has been substantial overlap in the
size and capability of Navy cruisers and destroyers. In part
Source: Cropped version of U.S. Navy photograph showing USS
for this reason, the Navy now refers to its cruisers and
Antietam (CG-54).
destroyers collectively as large surface combatants (LSCs).
Surface Combatant Industrial Base
DDG(X) Program
All LSCs procured for the Navy since FY1985 have been
Program Designation
built at General Dynamics/Bath Iron Works (GD/BIW) of
In the program designation DDG(X), the X means the
Bath, ME, and Huntington Ingalls Industries/Ingalls
precise design for the ship has not yet been determined.
Shipbuilding (HII/Ingalls) of Pascagoula, MS. Lockheed
Martin and Raytheon are major contractors for Navy
Procurement Date for Lead Ship
surface ship combat system equipment. The surface
As mentioned earlier, the Navy wants to procure the first
combatant base also includes hundreds of additional
DDG(X) in FY2028, though the date for procuring the first
component and material supplier firms.
ship has changed before and could change again.
Existing Aegis Cruisers and Destroyers
Procurement of DDG-51s—the type of LSC currently being
The Navy’s
procured by the Navy—would end at about the time that
CG-47s (Figure 1) and DDG-51s are
DDG(X) procurement would begin.
commonly called Aegis cruisers and destroyers because
they are equipped with the Aegis combat system, an
Navy’s General Concept for the Ship
integrated collection of sensors and weapons named for the
The Navy approved the top-level requirements (i.e., major
mythical shield that defended Zeus. The Navy procured 27
required features) for the DDG(X) in December 2020. The
CG-47s between FY1978 and FY1988. The ships entered
Navy envisages the DDG(X) as having
service between 1983 and 1994. The first five, which were
built to an earlier technical standard, were judged by the
a new hull design evolved from the DDG-51 and
Navy to be too expensive to modernize and were removed
Zumwalt (DDG-1000) class destroyer hull designs;
from service in 2004-2005. The Navy’s FY2020 30-year
shipbuilding plan projected that the remaining 22 CG-47s
a next-generation integrated propulsion system (IPS)
would be retired between FY2021 and FY2038.
that incorporates lessons from the DDG-1000 IPS and
the Navy’s new Columbia-class ballistic missile
The first DDG-51 class destroyer was procured in FY1985
submarine;
and entered service in 1991. The Navy’s older DDG-51s,
known as the Flight I/II DDG-51s, have an expected service
initially, combat system equipment similar to that
life of 35 years. The Navy also operates three Zumwalt
installed on the Flight III version of the DDG-51
(DDG-1000) class destroyers that are equipped with a
destroyer—the DDG-51 variant that the Navy is
combat system that is different than the Aegis system. (For
currently procuring; and
more on the DDG-51 and DDG-1000 programs, see CRS
Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer
more weapon capacity than the DDG-51.
Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, by Ronald
O'Rourke.)
Navy officials envision the DDG(X) as being larger than
the 9,700-ton Flight III DDG-51 design, but smaller than
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress
the 16,000-ton DDG-1000 design. The Navy states that the
the number of shipbuilders to be used in building
DDG(X) would
DDG(X)s;
integrate non-developmental systems into a new
the adequacy of the Navy’s plan for maturing new
hull design that incorporates platform flexibility
technologies for the DDG(X);
and the space, weight, power and cooling (SWAP-
C) to meet future combatant force capability/system
the Navy’s plans for maintaining, modernizing, and
requirements that are not achievable without the
operating the 22 CG-47s over the remainder of their
new hull design. The DDG(X) platform will have
service lives; and
the flexibility to rapidly and affordably upgrade to
future warfighting systems when they become
the Navy’s plans for transitioning from procurement of
available as well as have improved range and fuel
DDG-51s to procurement of DDG(X)s, and the potential
efficiency for increased operational flexibility and
impact of this transition on U.S. shipbuilders and
decreased demand on the logistics force. DDG(X)
supplier firms.
will provide an Integrated Power System with
flexibility to enable fielding of high demand electric
FY2022 Funding Request and
weapons, sensor systems and computing resources.
Congressional Action
The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget requests $121.8
(Source: Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY)
million in research and development funding for the
2022 Budget Estimates, Navy, Justification Book,
program, including $79.7 million in Project 0411 (DDG[X]
Volume 2 of 5, Research, Development, Test &
Concept Development) within Program Element (PE)
Evaluation, Navy, May 2021, p. 479.)
0603564N (Ship Preliminary Design & Feasibility Studies),
which is line 47 in the Navy’s FY2022 research and
Potential Procurement Quantities
development account, and $42.1 million for “DDG(X)
The Navy has not specified the total number of DDG(X)s it
Power & Propulsion Risk Mitigation & Demonstration,”
wants to procure. Procuring 11 would provide one DDG(X)
which forms part of Project 2471 (Integrated Power
for each of the Navy’s 11 large aircraft carriers. Procuring
Systems [IPS]) within PE 0603573N (Advanced Surface
22 would provide one-for-one replacements for the 22 CG-
Machinery Systems), which is line 49 in the Navy’s
47s. Procuring additional DDG(X)s to replace the Navy’s
FY2022 research and development account.
older DDG-51s would result in a larger total procurement
quantity.
The joint explanatory statement for the HASC-SASC-
negotiated proposal for the FY2022 National Defense
Potential Unit Procurement Cost
Authorization Act (S. 1605) that was released on December
The first DDG(X) would be considerably more expensive to
7, 2021, recommends approving the Navy’s research and
procure than follow-on DDG(X)s because its procurement
development funding requests for the DDG(X) program.
cost would incorporate most or all of the detailed design
Section 221 of S. 1605 directs the Navy to commence a
and nonrecurring engineering (DD/NRE) costs for the class.
land-based test program for the DDG(X) engineering plant
(It is a traditional Navy budgeting practice for the
during the program’s detailed design period and prior to the
procurement cost of the lead ship in a class to incorporate
construction start date of the lead ship.
most or all of the DD/NRE costs for the class.)
The House Appropriations Committee’s report (H.Rept.
In constant FY2019 dollars, the Navy wants the first
117-88 of July 15, 2021) on the FY2022 DOD
DDG(X) to have a procurement cost of $3.5 billion to $4.0
Appropriations Act (H.R. 4432), recommended reducing
billion, and for the 10th ship in the class to have a
line 47 by $55.488 million for “DDG(X) design and
procurement cost of $2.1 billion to $2.5 billion. An April
analysis excess to need,” and reducing line 49 by $19.050
2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on a long-
million for “DDG(X) power and propulsion risk mitigation
range shipbuilding document released by the Navy on
and demonstration excess to need.” (Page 266) The Senate
December 9, 2020, estimates the average procurement cost
Appropriations Committee, in the explanatory statement it
of the DDG(X) at $2.9 billion in constant FY2021 dollars.
released on October 18, 2021, for the FY2022 DOD
By way of comparison, the current procurement cost of the
Appropriations Act (S. XXXX), recommended reducing
Flight III DDG-51 is about $2.0 billion.
line 47 by $71.17 million for “Project 0411 Design and
analysis and program management growth early to need.”
Issues for Congress
(PDF page 175 of 254) Discussing this recommended
Issues for Congress regarding the DDG(X) program include
reduction, the explanatory statement states that “the Navy
the following:
has not clearly explained the rationale for transitioning to a
new class of” LSCs, and that “the Committee does not have
whether the Navy has accurately identified the
confidence in the Navy’s ability to manage the acquisition
DDG(X)’s required operational capabilities and
and contracting for a new class of LSC at this time.” (PDF
estimated procurement cost;
pages 178-179 of 253).
the DDG(X) program’s potential total procurement
Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs
quantity and annual procurement rate;
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 permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11679 · VERSION 18 · UPDATED