link to page 1 
Updated February 3, 2022
Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program:
Background and Issues for Congress
Introduction
DDG(X) Program
The Navy’s DDG(X) program envisages procuring a class
of next-generation guided-missile destroyers (DDGs) to
Program Designation
replace the Navy’s Ticonderoga (CG-47) class Aegis
In the program designation DDG(X), the X means the
cruisers and its older Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis
precise design for the ship has not yet been determined.
destroyers. The Navy wants to procure the first DDG(X) in
FY2028. The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget requests
Procurement Date for Lead Ship
$121.8 million in research and development funding for the
As mentioned earlier, the Navy wants to procure the first
program.
DDG(X) in FY2028, though the date for procuring the first
ship has changed before and could change again.
Terminology
Procurement of DDG-51s—the type of LSC currently being
Since the 1980s, there has been substantial overlap in the
procured by the Navy—would end sometime after
size and capability of Navy cruisers and destroyers. In part
procurement of DDG(X)s begins.
for this reason, the Navy now refers to its cruisers and
destroyers collectively as large surface combatants (LSCs).
Figure 1. Navy Rendering of Notional DDG(X) Design
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
Shipbuilding (HII/Ingalls) of Pascagoula, MS. Lockheed
Martin and Raytheon are major contractors for Navy
surface ship combat system equipment. The surface
combatant base also includes hundreds of additional
component and material supplier firms.
Existing Aegis Cruisers and Destroyers
The Navy’s CG-47s and DDG-51s are commonly called
Aegis cruisers and destroyers because they are equipped
with the Aegis combat system, an integrated collection of
Source: Il ustration accompanying Sam LaGrone, “Navy Unveils
sensors and weapons named for the mythical shield that
Next-Generation DDG(X) Warship Concept with Hypersonic
defended Zeus. The Navy procured 27 CG-47s between
Missiles, Lasers,” USNI News, January 12, 2022. The article credits the
FY1978 and FY1988. The ships entered service between
il ustration to the U.S. Navy.
1983 and 1994. The first five, which were built to an earlier
technical standard, were judged by the Navy to be too
Navy’s General Concept for the Ship
expensive to modernize and were removed from service in
Figure 1 shows a Navy rendering of a notional DDG(X)
2004-2005. The Navy’s FY2020 30-year shipbuilding plan
design concept. The Navy approved the DDG(X)’s top-
projected that the remaining 22 CG-47s would be retired
level requirements (i.e., its major required features) in
between FY2021 and FY2038.
December 2020. The Navy envisages the DDG(X) as
having
The first DDG-51 was procured in FY1985 and entered
service in 1991. The Navy’s older DDG-51s, known as the
an integrated propulsion system (IPS) that incorporates
Flight I/II DDG-51s, have an expected service life of 35
lessons from the DDG-1000 IPS and the Navy’s new
years. The version of the DDG-51 that the Navy is currently
Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine;
procuring is called the Flight III version. The Navy also has
three Zumwalt (DDG-1000) class destroyers that were
initially, combat system equipment similar to that
procured in FY2007-FY2009 and are equipped with a
installed on the Flight III DDG-51; and
combat system that is different than the Aegis system. (For
more on the DDG-51 and DDG-1000 programs, see CRS
more weapon capacity than the Flight III DDG-51.
Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer
Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, by Ronald
Navy officials envision the DDG(X) as being larger than
O'Rourke.)
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 15,700-ton DDG-1000 design. A DDG(X) design
the number of shipbuilders to be used in building
midway in displacement between the DDG-51 and DDG-
DDG(X)s;
1000 designs would displace about 12,700 tons, but the
DDG(X)’s displacement could turn out to be less than or
the Navy’s plan for maturing new technologies for the
more than 12,700 tons. The Navy states that the DDG(X)
DDG(X);
would
the Navy’s plan for transitioning from DDG-51
integrate non-developmental systems into a new
procurement to DDG(X) procurement, and the potential
hull design that incorporates platform flexibility
impact of that transition on shipbuilders and supplier
and the space, weight, power and cooling (SWAP-
firms.
C) to meet future combatant force capability/system
requirements that are not achievable without the
For further discussion of the final issue above, see CRS
new hull design. The DDG(X) platform will have
Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer
the flexibility to rapidly and affordably upgrade to
Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, by Ronald
future warfighting systems when they become
O'Rourke.
available as well as have improved range and fuel
efficiency for increased operational flexibility and
FY2022 Funding Request and
decreased demand on the logistics force. DDG(X)
Congressional Action
will provide an Integrated Power System with
The Navy’s proposed FY2022 budget requests $121.8
flexibility to enable fielding of high demand electric
million in research and development funding for the
weapons, sensor systems and computing resources.
program, including $79.7 million in Project 0411 (DDG[X]
Concept Development) within Program Element (PE)
(Source: Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY)
0603564N (Ship Preliminary Design & Feasibility Studies),
2022 Budget Estimates, Navy, Justification Book,
which is line 47 in the Navy’s FY2022 research and
Volume 2 of 5, Research, Development, Test &
development account, and $42.1 million for “DDG(X)
Evaluation, Navy, May 2021, p. 479.)
Power & Propulsion Risk Mitigation & Demonstration,”
which forms part of Project 2471 (Integrated Power
Potential Procurement Quantities
Systems [IPS]) within PE 0603573N (Advanced Surface
The Navy has not specified how many DDG(X)s it wants to
Machinery Systems), which is line 49 in the Navy’s
procure. Procuring 11 would provide one for each of the
FY2022 research and development account.
Navy’s 11 aircraft carriers. Procuring 22 would provide
one-for-one replacements for the 22 CG-47s. Procuring
The joint explanatory statement for the FY2022 National
additional DDG(X)s to replace older DDG-51s would result
Defense Authorization Act (S. 1605/P.L. 117-81 of
in a larger total procurement quantity.
December 27, 2022) recommends approving the Navy’s
research and development funding requests for the DDG(X)
Potential Unit Procurement Cost
program. Section 221 directs the Navy to commence a land-
The first DDG(X) would be considerably more expensive to
based test program for the DDG(X) engineering plant
procure than follow-on DDG(X)s because its procurement
during the program’s detailed design period and prior to the
cost would incorporate most or all of the detailed design
construction start date of the lead ship.
and nonrecurring engineering (DD/NRE) costs for the class.
(It is a traditional Navy budgeting practice for the
The House Appropriations Committee’s report (H.Rept.
procurement cost of the lead ship in a class to incorporate
117-88 of July 15, 2021) on the FY2022 DOD
most or all of the DD/NRE costs for the class.)
Appropriations Act (H.R. 4432) recommended reducing
line 47 by $55.488 million for “DDG(X) design and
In constant FY2019 dollars, the Navy wants the first
analysis excess to need,” and reducing line 49 by $19.050
DDG(X) to have a procurement cost of $3.5 billion to $4.0
million for “DDG(X) power and propulsion risk mitigation
billion, and for the 10th ship in the class to have a
and demonstration excess to need.” (Page 266) The Senate
procurement cost of $2.1 billion to $2.5 billion. An April
Appropriations Committee, in the explanatory statement it
2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates
released on October 18, 2021, for the FY2022 DOD
the average procurement cost of the DDG(X) at $2.9 billion
Appropriations Act (S. XXXX), recommended reducing
in constant FY2021 dollars. By way of comparison, the
line 47 by $71.17 million for “Project 0411 Design and
Flight III DDG-51’s current procurement is about $2.0
analysis and program management growth early to need.”
billion.
(PDF page 175 of 254) The explanatory statement states
that “the Navy has not clearly explained the rationale for
Issues for Congress
transitioning to a new class of” LSCs, and that “the
Issues for Congress regarding the DDG(X) program include
Committee does not have confidence in the Navy’s ability
the following:
to manage the acquisition and contracting for a new class of
LSC at this time.” (PDF pages 178-179 of 253).
whether the Navy has accurately identified the
DDG(X)’s required operational capabilities and
Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs
estimated procurement cost;
IF11679
the DDG(X) program’s potential total procurement
quantity and annual procurement rate;
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 20 · UPDATED