Arleigh Burke-class destroyer

The Arleigh Burke class of guided-missile destroyers (DDGs) is a United States Navy class of destroyer centered around the Aegis Combat System and the SPY-1D multi-function passive electronically scanned array radar. The class is named for Admiral Arleigh Burke, an American destroyer officer in World War II and later Chief of Naval Operations. With an overall length of 505 to 509.5 feet (153.9 to 155.3 m), displacement ranging from 8,300 to 9,700 tons, and weaponry including over 90 missiles, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are larger and more heavily armed than many previous classes of guided-missile cruisers.

USS Arleigh Burke, the lead ship of the class, in 2013
Class overview
NameArleigh Burke class
Builders
Operators United States Navy
Preceded by
Succeeded by
CostUS$1.843 billion per ship (DDG 114–116, FY2011/12)[1]
Built1988–present
In commission1991–present
Planned92
On order9
Building10
Completed73
Active73
Retired0
General characteristics
TypeGuided-missile destroyer
Displacement
  • Fully loaded:
  • Flight I: 8,200 long tons (8,300 t)[2]
  • Flight II: 8,300 long tons (8,400 t)[3]
  • Flight IIA: 9,300 long tons (9,500 t)[4]
  • Flight III: 9,500 long tons (9,700 t)[5]
Length
  • Flights I & II: 505 ft (154 m)[6]
  • Flights IIA & III: 509.5 ft (155.3 m)[6]
Beam66 ft (20 m)[2]
Draft31 ft (9.4 m)[2]
Installed power
  • Flights I–IIA: 3 × Rolls-Royce AG9140 Generators (3,000 kW (4,000 hp) each, 450 V)
  • Flight III: 3 × Rolls-Royce AG9160 Generators (4,000 kW (5,400 hp) each, 4,160 V)[7][8]
Propulsion
SpeedIn excess of 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph)[6]
Range4,400 nmi (8,100 km; 5,100 mi) at 20 kn (37 km/h; 23 mph)[2]
Boats & landing
craft carried		2 × rigid-hull inflatable boats[10]
Complement
  • Flight I: 303 total[11]
  • Flight IIA: 23 officers, 300 enlisted[11]
Sensors and
processing systems
Electronic warfare
& decoys
Armament
Armor130 tons of Kevlar splinter protection around vital areas[15]
Aircraft carried
Aviation facilities
  • Flights I & II: Flight deck only, but LAMPS III electronics installed on landing deck for coordinated DDG-51/helo ASW operations
  • Flights IIA & III: Flight deck and enclosed hangars for two MH-60R LAMPS III helicopters

These warships are multi-mission destroyers able to conduct anti-aircraft warfare (AAW) with Aegis and surface-to-air missiles; tactical land strikes with Tomahawk missiles; anti-submarine warfare (ASW) with towed array sonar, anti-submarine rockets, and ASW helicopters; and anti-surface warfare (ASuW) with Harpoon 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, ships of this class have also demonstrated capability as mobile anti-ballistic missile and anti-satellite platforms.

The lead ship of the class, USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during Admiral Burke's lifetime 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 until the Zumwalt class became active in 2016. The Arleigh Burke class has the longest production run for any U.S. Navy surface combatant. Seventy-three are active as of October 2023, with nineteen more planned to enter service.

Characteristics

Variants

The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer has four variants, referred to as "Flights". Newer Flights incorporate technological advancements.[2]

  • Flight I: DDGs 51–71
  • Flight II: DDGs 72–78
  • Flight IIA: DDGs 79–124 and DDG-127
  • Flight III: DDGs 125–126 and DDG-128 onwards[6]
  • Flight I ship USS Fitzgerald with Tactical Towed Array Sonar (TACTAS) in the center of the fantail, Harpoon missile launchers, distinctive stacks, and no helicopter hangars
    Flight I ship USS Fitzgerald with Tactical Towed Array Sonar (TACTAS) in the center of the fantail, Harpoon missile launchers, distinctive stacks, and no helicopter hangars
  • Flight IIA ship USS Mustin without TACTAS and no Harpoon launchers, but with helicopter hangars and new exhaust stacks design
    Flight IIA ship USS Mustin without TACTAS and no Harpoon launchers, but with helicopter hangars and new exhaust stacks design
  • Flight III ship USS Jack H. Lucas showing the larger AN/SPY-6 arrays, stacked rigid-hull inflatable boats, and slight exhaust stack modifications
    Flight III ship USS Jack H. Lucas showing the larger AN/SPY-6 arrays, stacked rigid-hull inflatable boats, and slight exhaust stack modifications

Structure

The Arleigh Burke-class ships are among the largest destroyers built in the United States;[16] only the Spruance, Kidd (563 ft or 172 m), and Zumwalt classes (600 ft or 180 m) are longer. The Arleigh Burke class was designed with a new large, water-plane area-hull form characterized by a wide flaring bow, which significantly improves seakeeping ability and permits high speed in high sea states.[2] The class's design incorporates stealth techniques, such as the angled (rather than traditional vertical) surfaces and the raked tripod mainmast,[17] which make the ship more difficult to detect by radar.

Its designers incorporated lessons from the Ticonderoga-class cruiser, which the Navy deemed too expensive to continue building and difficult to upgrade further.[18] For these destroyers, the U.S. Navy returned to all-steel construction, except the mast made of aluminum.[19] The Ticonderogas had combined a steel hull with a 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;[20] a 1975 fire aboard USS Belknap gutted her aluminum superstructure.[21] Battle damage to Royal Navy ships exacerbated by their aluminum superstructures during the 1982 Falklands War supported the decision to use steel. Other lessons from the Falklands War led to the Navy's decision to protect the Arleigh Burke class's vital spaces with double-spaced steel layers, which create a buffer against anti-ship missiles (AShMs), and Kevlar spall liners.[22]

Passive defenses

Arleigh Burke destroyers are equipped with AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare (EW) suites that provide electronic support.[2] Vessels with the SLQ-32(V)3 or SLQ-32(V)6 variant have an additional capability to jam targeting and AShM guidance radar.[23]

Mark 36 SRBOC fires a chaff decoy from USS Stout

The destroyers have Mark 36 infrared and chaff decoy launchers, as well as Nulka decoy launchers, for spoofing incoming anti-ship missiles.[24][25] For defeating incoming torpedoes, the class has two Nixie towed countermeasures.[26] The ships' Prairie-Maskers can reduce their radiated noise.[27]

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 (NBC).[28] Other NBC defenses include double air-locked hatches, pressurized compartments, and an external countermeasure washdown system.[29] The class's electronics are hardened against electromagnetic pulses (EMPs).[30] Fire suppression equipment includes water sprinklers in the living quarters and Combat Information Center (CIC).[22] The CIC is below the waterline.[19]

Weapon systems

The Arleigh Burke class are multi-mission ships[11] with numerous combat systems, including anti-aircraft missiles, land attack missiles, ship-to-ship missiles, and an anti-submarine warfare (ASW) system.[22] Missiles are stored in and fired from Mark 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) cells; with 90 cells on Flights I–II and 96 cells starting with Flight IIA,[31] the Arleigh Burkes are more heavily armed than many preceding guided-missile cruiser classes.[16] The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer is equipped with the Aegis Combat System, which combines information from the ship's sensors to display a coherent image of the environment and guides weapons to targets using advanced tracking and fire control.[32]

Their main radar differs from traditional mechanically rotating radars. Instead, Aegis uses the AN/SPY-1D passive electronically scanned array (or the AN/SPY-6 active electronically scanned array on Flight III ships), which allows continual tracking of targets simultaneous to area scans. The system's computer control also allows centralization of the previously separate tracking and targeting functions. The system is resistant to electronic countermeasures.[33][34][35]

USS The Sullivans (foreground) and other ships conducting a coordinated SM-2MR launch

The Standard Missile SM-2MR/ER and SM-6 provide area air defense, though they may also be used in a secondary ASuW role.[36] The SM-2 uses semi-active radar homing (SARH), meaning that up to three targets may be simultaneously intercepted since the Arleigh Burkes have three AN/SPG-62 fire-control radars for terminal target illumination.[37][11] The SM-6, which provides over-the-horizon defense,[38] and the SM-2 Block IIIC feature a dual-mode seeker with active radar homing (ARH) capability; they do not have to rely on external illumination, so more targets could theoretically be intercepted simultaneously.[39][40]

Flight IIA and III destroyers carry RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSMs),[41][42] which provide medium-range defense against missiles and aircraft and are small enough to be quad-packed into a single Mk 41 VLS cell. ESSM is also capable of targeting other ships. ESSM Block 1 uses SARH, guided similarly to older SM-2s. ESSM Block 2 features a dual-mode seeker with ARH capability, and it was scheduled for Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in 2020.[43]

The SM-3, SM-6, and SM-2ER Block IV provide Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD), the SM-3 being an exoatmospheric interceptor[44] and the latter two having terminal phase anti-ballistic capability.[45][38] So vital has the Aegis BMD role become that all ships of the class are being updated with BMD capability.[46] As of August 2021, there are 42 BMD-capable Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.[47] Flight III ships have been delivered since 2023 with new AN/SPY-6(V)1 radars and improved BMD capabilities; Flight IIA ships are also planned to receive these upgrades with AN/SPY-6(V)4 radar retrofits.[48]

Flights I and II carry two stand-alone Harpoon anti-ship missile launchers for a total of four or eight Harpoons,[49] giving them an anti-ship capability with a range in excess of 64 nautical miles (119 km; 74 mi).[2]

The class can perform tactical land strikes with VLS-launched Tomahawks.[2] With the development of the Tomahawk Block V, all existing Block IV Tomahawks carried will be converted to the Block V. The Tomahawk Block Va version is called the Maritime Strike version, and it provides anti-ship capability in addition to its land attack role. The Block Vb version features the Joint Multi-Effects Warhead System for hitting a wider variety of land targets.[50][51]

USS Preble shooting a Mark 46 torpedo

Arleigh Burke-class ships feature the Navy's latest AN/SQQ-89 ASW combat system, which is integrated with Aegis. It encompasses the AN/SQS-53C bow-mounted sonar and a towed array sonar, though several Flight IIA ships do not have a towed array.[52] The towed array is either the AN/SQR-19 Tactical Towed Array Sonar (TACTAS) or the newer TB-37U Multi-Function Towed Array (MFTA). The ships carry standoff RUM-139 anti-submarine rockets, which have a range of 22 km and deploy the Mark 54 ASW torpedo. For short-range defense against submarines, they have two Mark 32 triple torpedo tubes—one to the port side and one to the starboard side—that can fire the Mark 46, Mark 50, and Mark 54 ASW torpedoes. The ships can detect anti-ship mines at a range of about 1,400 meters.[53][54]

All ships of the class are fitted with at least one Phalanx close-in weapon system (CIWS), which provides point defense against air and surface threats. Eight ships (DDG-51, DDG-64, DDG-71, DDG-75, DDG-78, DDG-80, DDG-84, DDG-117) are equipped with one SeaRAM CIWS to improve their self-defense.[55][56][57][58][59]

Arleigh Burkes can also carry two 25 mm Mk 38 Machine Gun Systems, one on each side of the ship, designed to counter fast surface craft.[60] There are numerous mounts for crew-served weapons like the M2 Browning.[61]

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

Located on the forward deck is the 5-inch (127 mm) Mark 45 gun. Directed by the Mark 34 Gun Weapon System (GWS), it can be used in anti-ship, anti-air, and naval gunfire support (NGFS) roles. It can fire 16–20 rounds per minute and has a range of 13 nautical miles (24 km).[N 3][64] Arleigh Burkes can stow 680 5-inch rounds.[65][62]

USS Kidd (DDG-100) near Naval Base San Diego with front ODIN system

As of 2023, five destroyers (DDG-100, DDG-105, DDG-106, DDG-111, DDG-113) are equipped with the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN), a directed energy weapon that can target unmanned vehicles.[66][67][68] DDG-88 is equipped with the higher-power High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler with Surveillance (HELIOS).[69]

Aircraft
MH-60 Seahawk above USS Bulkeley's flight deck

Flights IIA and III are equipped with two hangars for stowing MH-60 helicopters. Their Light Airborne Multi-Purpose System (LAMPS) helicopter system improves the ship's capabilities by enabling the MH-60 to monitor submarines and surface ships, launch torpedoes and missiles against them, and provide fire support during insertions/extractions with machine guns and Hellfire anti-armor guided missiles. The helicopters also serve in a utility role, able to perform vertical replenishment, search and rescue, medical evacuation, communications relay, and naval gunfire spotting and controlling.[70]

In March 2022, an Arleigh Burke destroyer was deployed with an AAI Aerosonde unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The aircraft is under demonstration for Flight I and II ships, which do not have accommodations for permanently storing helicopters. The Aerosonde has a small enough footprint to be stowed on those destroyers. It can perform missions such as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) at a much lower cost than manned helicopters.[71]

Development

Origins and Flight I

The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) from 1970 to 1974, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, sought to improve the U.S. fleet through modernization at minimal cost. Zumwalt advocated for a "high-low mix" philosophy. He envisioned the high-low mix as constituted by a few high-end, high-cost warships and numerous low-end, low-cost warships. The introduction of the Aegis-equipped Ticonderoga-class cruiser in the early 1980s filled the high end. The Navy started work to develop a lower-cost Aegis-equipped vessel to fill the low end and replace the aging Charles F. Adams destroyers.[72][73][74]

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, Ingalls Shipbuilding, and Todd Shipyards.[28] On 3 April 1985, Bath Iron Works received a US$321.9 million contract to build the first of the class, USS Arleigh Burke.[75] Gibbs & Cox was awarded the contract to be the lead ship design agent.[76] The Navy contracted Ingalls Shipbuilding to build the second ship.[77]

Political restraints led to design restrictions, including the absence of helicopter hangars, a displacement limit of 8,300 tons, and a 50-foot shorter hull than the Ticonderoga's. The designers were forced to make compromises, such as a wide flaring bow. To compensate for the limited length, the originally-planned 80,000 shaft horsepower (shp) LM2500 gas turbines were upgraded to 100,000 shp.[72] No main gun was included in the original design, later amended to include an OTO Melara 76 mm, before finally selecting the 5-inch/54-caliber Mark 45.[15][74] Despite their constraints, the designers benefitted from insight gained from previous classes; for example, they chose an all-steel superstructure to improve survivability.[22]

The total cost of the first ship was $1.1 billion, the other $778 million being for the ship's weapons systems.[75] USS Arleigh Burke 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.[72] Orders for Flight I ships continued through 1995.

Flight II

The Flight II iteration of the class was introduced in FY1992.[2] The incorporation of the AN/SRS-1A(V) Combat Direction Finding enhanced detection of signals.[78] The TADIX-B, JTIDS Command and Control Processor, and Link 16 improved communication with other assets.[79] The SLQ-32 EW suite was upgraded to (V)3, and the SPS-67(V)3 surface search radar was upgraded to (V)5.[80] Flight II also gained the capability to launch and control the SM-2ER Block IV.[81] An expansion of fuel capacity slightly increased the displacement.[19]

Flight IIA
Profile of Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer

The Flight IIA design was first procured in FY1994.[82] Among the additions are two hangars and support facilities for ASW helicopters, Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC),[81] the Kingfisher mine detection system, and five blast-resistant bulkheads.[31] To accommodate the hangars, the length was increased to 509.5 ft (155.3 m), and the rear-facing SPY-1D arrays are mounted one deck (eight feet) higher to prevent a blind spot.[83] Flight IIA also replaced retractable missile loading cranes on the forward and aft VLS with a total of six additional cells. The propellers are of a different design to reduce cavitation.[84] New fiber optics helped minimize weight gain and improve reliability.[85] Systems omitted from Flight IIA include the Harpoon missile launchers[N 4] and, starting with USS McCampbell (DDG-85), the forward Phalanx CIWS.[86] Flight IIA ships were initially built without the AN/SQR-19 TACTAS,[52] though later units were subsequently installed with TACTAS.[83]

Starting with USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81), the longer 5-inch/62-caliber (127 mm) Mark 45 Mod 4 gun was installed.[31] Later Flight IIA ships starting with USS Mason (DDG-87) use the BridgeMaster E as their navigation radar instead of the AN/SPS-73(V)12.[87] Subsequent Flight IIA ships employ additional signature-reduction measures: the hangars of DDG-86 onwards are made of composite materials, and the exhaust funnels of DDG-89 onwards are buried within the superstructure.[31] The use of the improved SPY-1D(V) radar, starting with USS Pinckney (DDG-91), enhances the ships' ability to filter out clutter and resist electronic attack.[88]

USS Momsen, 2006, with torpedo tubes mounted on aft missile deck rather than earlier amidships mounting, superstructure changes to accommodate an AN/WLD-1 holding bay, and lacking CIWS

Several Flight IIA ships were constructed without any Phalanx CIWS because of the planned Evolved SeaSparrow Missile; the Navy had initially decided that ESSM made Phalanx redundant.[31] However, the Navy later changed its mind and decided to retrofit all IIA ships to carry at least one Phalanx CIWS by 2013.[86]

DDGs 91–96 (USS Pinckney, USS Momsen, USS Chung-Hoon, USS Nitze, USS James E. Williams, and USS Bainbridge) were built with superstructure differences to accommodate the AN/WLD-1 Remote Minehunting System (RMS).[89] However, only Pinckney, Momsen, and Bainbridge were installed with the system before the RMS program was canceled.[26]

Modernization

To help address congressional concerns over the retirement of the Iowa-class battleship, the Navy began a program to field the Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) for the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer in 1996.[90] The ERGM was to extend the class's 5-inch Mark 45 gun range to 63 nautical miles (117 km). It necessitated a modification of the gun; the 62-caliber Mark 45 Mod 4 was created and installed on DDG-81 and onwards in anticipation of the ERGM.[91][31] However, the ERGM was canceled in 2008.[92]

The current modernization program is designed to provide a comprehensive mid-life upgrade to ensure that the class remains effective. Modernization of existing ships helps to provide commonality with production ships. The program's goals are reduced manning, increased mission effectiveness, and reduced total cost—including construction, maintenance, and operation.[93] Modernization technologies were integrated on DDGs 111 and 112 during their construction and retrofitted into Flight I and II ships.[94] The first phase updates the hull, mechanical, and electrical systems, while the second phase introduces an Open Architecture Computing Environment (OACE). The result will be improved capability in both BMD and littoral combat.[N 5][95][96] By 2018, all Arleigh Burke-class ships homeported in the Western Pacific will have upgraded ASW systems, including the new TB-37U Multi-Function Towed Array (MFTA).[97][98]

Combat Information Center aboard USS John S. McCain

The Navy is also upgrading the ships' ability to process data; beginning with USS Spruance (DDG-111), the Navy is installing an Internet Protocol-based data backbone to enhance the ships' ability to handle video. Spruance is also the first destroyer to be fitted with the Boeing Company's Gigabit Ethernet Data Multiplex System (GEDMS).[99]

In July 2010, BAE Systems announced it had been awarded a contract to modernize 11 ships.[100] In May 2014, USNI News reported that 21 of the 28 Flight I/II Arleigh Burke-class destroyers 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 anti-submarine suite.[101][102] Seven Flight I ships—DDG 51–53, 57, 61, 65, 69—received the full $270 million Baseline 9 upgrade.[101] Deputy of surface warfare Dave McFarland said that this change was due to the budget cuts in the Budget Control Act of 2011.[103]

In 2016, the Navy announced it would begin outfitting 34 Flight IIA Arleigh Burke vessels with a hybrid-electric drive (HED) to lower fuel costs. The four LM2500 gas turbines of the Arleigh Burkes are most efficient at high speeds; an electric motor was to be attached to the main reduction gear to turn the drive shaft and propel the ship at speeds under 13 knots (24 km/h), such as during BMD or maritime security operations. Use of the HED for half the time could extend time on station by 2.5 days before refueling.[104] In March 2018, the Navy announced the HED would be installed on USS Truxtun (DDG-103) to test the technology, but upgrades of further destroyers would be halted due to budget priorities.[105]

USS Cole (left) and two other Arleigh Burke-class destroyers docked at Naval Station Norfolk in July 2009

Also in 2016, four destroyers of the U.S. 6th Fleet based in Naval Station Rota, Spain (USS Carney, USS Ross, USS Donald Cook, and USS Porter) received self-protection upgrades, replacing one of their two Phalanx CIWS with a SeaRAM CIWS, which combines the Phalanx sensor dome with an 11-cell RIM-116 launcher. This was the first time the system was paired with an Aegis ship.[106] Another four ships (USS Arleigh Burke, USS Roosevelt, USS Bulkeley, and USS Paul Ignatius) have since been forward-deployed to Rota and also received a SeaRAM.[56][57][58][59]

The AN/SLQ-32 EW suite used by the class is currently being upgraded under the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP). The SEWIP Block 2 (AN/SLQ-32(V)6) features improved electronic support capability, and it was first installed on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in 2014.[107] As of 2022, it is in full-rate production for installation on the latest Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and for retrofit on existing ones, replacing their existing (V)2 and (V)3 equipment.[108][109] The SEWIP Block 3 (AN/SLQ-32(V)7) will improve ships' electronic attack capability.[108]

In February 2018, Lockheed Martin received a contract to deliver its High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler with Surveillance (HELIOS) system for installation onto an Arleigh Burke destroyer. HELIOS is a "60+ kW"-class laser, scalable to 120 kW, that can "dazzle" or destroy small boats and UAVs up to 8.0 km (5 mi) away.[110][111] It would be the first laser weapon put on a warship.[112][113] In November 2019, USS Dewey (DDG-105) had the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN) system installed, which was publicly revealed in February 2020. ODIN differs from the XN-1 LaWS previously mounted on USS Ponce in that ODIN functions as a dazzler, which blinds or destroys optical sensors on drones rather than fully shooting down the aircraft.[114][115] HELIOS underwent land-based testing from August 2021 to March 2022.[116][117] It was delivered to the Navy in August 2022 and installed on USS Preble (DDG-88). Preble is expected to begin at-sea testing of the HELIOS in FY2023.[69]

In FY2019, the Navy started a program to procure the Mod 4 variant of the Mark 38 Machine Gun System[118] to address "unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and high speed maneuverable unmanned surface vehicle (USV) threats."[119] Mod 4 will incorporate the 30 mm Mk44 Bushmaster II instead of the 25 mm M242 Bushmaster of previous variants,[120] intended to improve accuracy, increase lethality, and increase effective range. The Mk 38 Mod 4 was scheduled to achieve IOC on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in FY2022,[119] and it will be fielded on Flights IIA and III.[121]

In October 2020, National Security Advisor Robert C. O'Brien said that all three Flights of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer would field the Common-Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) missile developed under the Conventional Prompt Strike program. However, the C-HGB is expected to be around 3 ft (0.91 m) wide, making it too large to fit in Mk 41 VLS tubes or on deck launchers. Installing them on Arleigh Burke destroyers would require removing some Mk 41 cells to accommodate the larger weapon, an expensive and time-consuming process.[122][123] There is criticism of this idea: the oldest Flight I ships would need a service life extension to justify refit costs that would only prolong their service lives a short time when they are already more expensive to operate, and the newest Flight III ships that are optimized for BMD would be given a new, complex mission requiring a major refit shortly after introduction.[124]

In December 2021, the Navy awarded Raytheon a $237 million contract for integration and production support to upgrade Flight IIA ships from AN/SPY-1D to AN/SPY-6(V)4. This upgrade would provide capabilities similar to Flight III ships, such as integrated air and missile defense with the ability to track multiple ballistic missile or air targets. Due to the smaller superstructure of the Flight IIA ships compared to Flight III ships, the radar implementation will be scaled down from the Flight III AN/SPY-6(V)1 version with fewer (24 vs. 37) radar module assemblies (RMAs).[N 6][126]

Production restarted
A destroyer of the Zumwalt class, the next after the Arleigh Burke class. Only 3 ships out of 32 planned Zumwalts were built.

USS Michael Murphy (DDG-112) was originally intended to be the last of the Arleigh Burke class. The class was scheduled to be replaced by Zumwalt-class destroyers beginning in 2020.[127] However, an increasing threat from both long- and short-range missiles caused the Navy to restart production of the Arleigh Burke class[128] in place of the Zumwalt class and consider placing littoral combat mission modules on the new ships.[129][130][131] The U.S. Navy has been producing Arleigh Burke-class destroyers for longer than any other surface combatant class in the Navy's history.[132]

In April 2009, the Navy announced a plan limiting the Zumwalt class to three units while ordering another three Arleigh Burke-class ships from both Bath Iron Works and Ingalls Shipbuilding.[131] In December 2009, Northrop Grumman received a $170.7 million letter contract for USS John Finn (DDG-113) long-lead-time materials.[133] Shipbuilding contracts for DDG-113 to DDG-115 were awarded in mid-2011 for $679.6 million–$783.6 million;[134] these do not include government-furnished equipment such as weapons and sensors, which will take the average cost of the FY2011/12 ships to $1.843 billion per vessel.[1]

DDG-113 to DDG-115 are "restart" ships, similar to previous Flight IIA ships, but including modernization features such as Open Architecture Computing Environment and the TB-37U MFTA, which is being backfit onto previous Flight IIA ships.[135]

Flight IIA Technology Insertion

DDG-116 to DDG-124 and DDG-127 will be "Technology Insertion" ships with elements of Flight III.[136][137] For example, USS Delbert D. Black (DDG-119) and onwards have the AN/SPQ-9B instead of the AN/SPS-67, a feature of Flight III.[138] Flight III proper began with the third ship procured in 2016,[139] USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG-125).[140]

In spite of the production restart, the U.S. Navy is expected to fall short of its requirement for 94 destroyer or cruiser platforms capable of missile defense starting in FY2025 and continuing past the end of the 30-year planning window. While this was 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 BMD System has shifted this national security requirement onto the U.S. Navy. The shortfall will arise as older BMD-capable Ticonderoga-class cruisers are retired in bulk before new destroyers are planned to be built.[141]

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, with the procurement of Flight IV ships from 2032 through 2041.[142] This was canceled to cover the cost of the Columbia-class submarines, with the air defense commander role retained on one cruiser per carrier strike group.[143]

In April 2022, the Navy proposed a procurement plan for nine ships, with an option for a tenth, to build two ships a year from 2023 to 2027. Some lawmakers pushed to add a third ship to be built in 2023, bringing the total of the proposed deal to eleven ships. This would follow the Navy's two-ship per year procurement from 2018 to 2022.[144]

Flight III
USS Jack H. Lucas, the first Flight III destroyer, after her launch on 4 June 2021

In place of the canceled CG(X) program, the U.S. Navy began detailed design work on a DDG-51 Flight III design in FY2013.[145] The Navy planned to procure 24 Flight III ships from FY2016 to FY2031.[146] In June 2013, it awarded $6.2 billion in destroyer contracts.[147] Costs for the Flight III ships increased as requirements for the program grew, particularly related to the planned Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) needed for the BMD role.[148] An AMDR with a mid-diameter of 22 feet (6.7 m) was proposed for CG(X), while the DDG-51 Flight III design could carry an AMDR with a mid-diameter of only 14 feet (4.3 m).[149] The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the design would be "at best marginally effective" because of the "now-shrunken radar". The U.S. Navy disagreed with the GAO findings, stating that the DDG-51 hull was "absolutely" capable of fitting a large enough radar to meet requirements.[150]

The Flight III's AN/SPY-6 AMDR with a mid-diameter of 14 feet (4.3 m) uses an active electronically scanned array with digital beamforming, compared to the previous passive electronically scanned array AN/SPY-1D with a mid-diameter of 12 feet (3.7 m).[149][151][152] According to Raytheon, the contractor for the SPY-6, the 37-RMA SPY-6(V)1 offers a 15 dB improved sensitivity over SPY-1.[N 7][154] The Flight III's AMDR is integrated with Aegis Baseline 10.[155] The new radar also requires more power; the three-megawatt, 450 V AG9140 generators were upgraded to four-megawatt, 4,160 V AG9160 generators.[7][8] Additionally, the air conditioning plants were upgraded to increase the ships' cooling capacity.[156] The area near where the two rigid-hull inflatable boats (RHIBs) are stored was enclosed to accommodate additional crew, so the RHIBs are stacked.[157] Other modifications include replacement of the Halon-based fire suppression system with a water mist system and strengthening of the hull to support the design's additional weight.[156]

14 Flight III ships have been ordered,[158] and Flight III IOC is planned for 2024.[159] The U.S. Navy may procure up to 42 Flight III ships for an overall total of 117 ships of the class.[160]

Replacement
Main article: DDG(X)
DDG(X) concept from Program Executive Office Ships (PEO Ships) as presented in the 2022 Surface Navy Association symposium. The first ship of this class is planned to enter service around the year 2030.

In April 2014, the U.S. Navy began the development of 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 Flight III DDGs. The destroyer class will incorporate emerging technologies like lasers, onboard power-generation systems, increased automation, and next-generation weapons, sensors, and electronics. They will leverage technologies from other platforms, such as the Zumwalt-class destroyer, littoral combat ships, and the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier.[161]

The Future Surface Combatant may place importance on the Zumwalt-class destroyer's electric drive system that provides propulsion while generating 58 megawatts of electrical power, levels required to operate future directed energy weapons. Initial requirements for the Future Surface Combatant will emphasize lethality and survivability. The ships must also be modular to allow for inexpensive upgrades of weaponry, electronics, computing, and sensors over time as threats evolve.[161] The Future Surface Combatant has evolved into the Large Surface Combatant, which became the DDG(X).[162]

Operational history
USS Milius launches a TLAM toward Iraq, first days of the Iraq War in 2003

The class saw its first combat action through Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) strikes against Iraq.[163] Over 3 and 4 September 1996, USS Laboon and USS Russell launched 13 and eight TLAMs, respectively, as part of Operation Desert Strike.[164] In December 1998, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers again performed TLAM strikes as part of Operation Desert Fox.[165] Eleven Arleigh Burkes supported carrier strike groups engaged in Operation Iraqi Freedom, which included TLAM launches against ground targets during the operation's opening stages in 2003.[30][166]

In October 2011, the Navy announced that four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers would be forward-deployed in Europe to support the NATO missile defense system. The ships, to be based at Naval Station Rota, Spain, were named in February 2012 as Ross, Donald Cook, Porter, and Carney.[167] By reducing travel times to station, this forward deployment allows for six other destroyers to be shifted from the Atlantic in support of the Pivot to East Asia.[168] Russia threatened to quit the New START treaty over this deployment, calling it a threat to their nuclear deterrent.[169] In 2018, CNO Admiral John Richardson criticized the policy of keeping six highly mobile BMD platforms "in a little tiny box, defending land", a role that he believed could be performed equally well at less cost by shore-based systems.[170]

In October 2016, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers Mason and Nitze were deployed to the coast of Yemen after a UAE auxiliary ship was struck in an attack for which Houthi rebels claimed responsibility.[171] On 9 October, while in the Red Sea, Mason detected two anti-ship missiles headed toward herself and nearby USS Ponce fired from Houthi-controlled territory. Mason launched two SM-2s, one ESSM, and a Nulka decoy. One AShM was confirmed to have struck the water on its own, and it is unknown if the second missile was intercepted or hit the water on its own.[172] On 12 October, in the Bab el-Mandeb strait, Mason again detected an inbound anti-ship missile, which was intercepted at a range of 8 miles (13 km) by an SM-2.[173][174] On 13 October, Nitze conducted TLAM strikes destroying three Houthi radar sites used in the previous attacks.[175] Back in the Red Sea, Mason experienced a third attack on 15 October with five AShMs. She fired SM-2s and decoys, destroying or neutralizing four missiles. Nitze neutralized the fifth missile with a radar decoy.[174][176]

On 7 April 2017, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers Ross and Porter conducted a TLAM strike against Shayrat Airfield, Syria, in response to Syrian President Bashar Assad's chemical attack on his people three days prior.[177] The ships fired a total of 59 Tomahawk missiles.[178] On 14 April 2018, Laboon and Higgins conducted another TLAM strike against Syria. They fired seven and 23 TLAMs, respectively. The strike targeted chemical weapon sites as part of a continued effort against Assad's use of chemical warfare.[179] The Arleigh Burke-class destroyers Donald Cook and Winston S. Churchill took positions in the Mediterranean prior to the 2018 strike to mislead defending forces.[180]

Accidents and major incidents

USS Cole bombing
Main article: USS Cole bombing
USS Cole being towed from the port city of Aden after the bombing. Blast damage to the hull is visible mid-ship.

USS Cole was damaged on 12 October 2000 in Aden, Yemen, while docked by an attack in which a 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.[181]

USS Porter and MV Otowasan collision

See also: USS Porter (DDG-78) § 2012 collision

On 12 August 2012, USS Porter collided with the oil tanker MV Otowasan near the Strait of Hormuz; there were no injuries. The U.S. Navy removed Porter's commanding officer from duty. Repairs took two months at a cost of $700,000.[182]

USS Fitzgerald and MV ACX Crystal collision
Main article: USS Fitzgerald and MV ACX Crystal collision

On 17 June 2017, USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) collided with the MV ACX Crystal cargo ship near Yokosuka, Japan. Seven sailors drowned. Following an investigation, the ship's commanding officer, executive officer, and Command Master Chief Petty Officer were relieved of their duties. In addition, close to a dozen sailors were given non-judicial punishment for losing situational awareness. Repairs were originally to be completed by the summer of 2019. However, initial repairs were made by February 2020. After the subsequent sea trials, she was brought in for additional repairs. The ship departed for her home port in June 2020.[183]

USS John S. McCain and Alnic MC collision
Main article: USS John S. McCain and Alnic MC collision

On 21 August 2017, USS John S. McCain collided with the container ship Alnic MC. The collision injured 48 sailors and killed 10, whose bodies were all recovered by 27 August. The cause of the collision was determined to be poor communication between the two ships and the bridge crew lacking situational awareness. In the aftermath, the ship's top leadership, including the commanding officer, executive officer, and Command Master Chief Petty Officer, were removed from command. In addition, top leadership of the U.S. Seventh Fleet, including the commander, Vice Admiral Joseph Aucoin, were relieved of their duties due to a loss of confidence in their ability to command. Other commanders who were relieved included Rear Admiral Charles Williams, commander of Task Force 70, and Captain Jeffrey Bennett, commodore of Destroyer Squadron 15. This was the third incident involving a U.S. Navy ship in 2017, with a repair cost of over $100 million.[184]

Contractors

Ships in class
Main article: List of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers

Derivatives

Destroyer classes based on the Arleigh Burke have been adopted by the following naval forces:[185][186]

The 2009 film Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen features USS Preble.[190]

The 2012 film Battleship features USS John Paul Jones, USS Benfold, and USS Sampson.[191]

The 2013 film Captain Phillips features USS Truxtun, which stood in for the ship from the true event, USS Bainbridge.[192]

The 2014 television series The Last Ship, loosely based on the 1988 novel of the same name, is set on the fictional USS Nathan James.[193] Its hull designation in the book is DDG-80, but it was changed to DDG-151 for the television series to avoid confusion with the real-life USS Roosevelt, which did not exist when the book was written. USS Halsey (DDG-97), a Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, stood in for Nathan James during filming.[194]

See also

Notes
  1. As of 2023, ODIN is deployed on five ships of the class.
  2. As of 2023, SeaRAM is deployed on eight ships of the class.
  3. The 5-inch/62-caliber Mark 45 Mod 4 can fire a munition called the Cargo Round, which gives the Mod 4 a range of over 20 nautical miles (37 km).[62][63]
  4. According to Polmar, the Harpoon launchers were removed to save weight.[26] According to Wertheim, the Harpoon launchers were removed to save costs.[31]
  5. Littoral combat refers to naval operations near shores.
  6. A radar module assembly (RMA) is a self-contained 2'x2'x2' radar box. The AN/SPY-6 is a scalable system made up of RMAs, meaning that varying numbers of RMAs can be combined to create different variants of the SPY-6 based on size.[125]
  7. Decibels (dB) can be used as a measure of a radar's dynamic range, or sensitivity.[153] An increase in sensitivity of 15 dB enables the detection of objects "half the size at twice the distance."[154]

References

Citations
  1. O'Rourke, Ronald (19 April 2011). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service. RL32109. Archived from the original on 30 November 2012. Retrieved 23 October 2011. 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$2.922b (FY2011)= US$3.500b, (p25) and DDG-116 cost US$48m (FY2011) + US$1.981b (FY2012)= US$2.029b, (p12) making an average for the three ships of US$1.847b. DDG-113 cost US$2.235b. (p6)
  2. "DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 3 August 2015. Retrieved 1 August 2015.
  3. "Transforming the Navy's Surface Combatant Force" (PDF). Congressional Budget Office. March 2003. p. 4. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 December 2016. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  4. O'Rourke, Ronald (26 February 2010). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 3. RL32109. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 19 March 2023.
  5. O'Rourke, Ronald. "Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service. p. 1. Archived from the original on 17 October 2022. Retrieved 7 February 2023.
  6. "Destroyers (DDG 51)". Fact Files. United States Navy. Archived from the original on 3 November 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2022.
  7. "ARLEIGH BURKE DESTROYERS: Delaying Procurement of DDG 51 Flight III Ships Would Allow Time to Increase Design Knowledge" (PDF). Government Accountability Office. 4 August 2016. p. 26. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 March 2023. Retrieved 28 February 2023.
  8. "Celebrating 50 years of Delivering Marine Gas Turbine Generators". www.rolls-royce.com. Archived from the original on 20 February 2023. Retrieved 28 February 2023.
  9. "LM2500 Gas Turbine Engine". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 18 September 2021. Retrieved 7 December 2016.
  10. "170128-N-HB733-228". U.S. Naval Forces Central Command. 29 January 2017. Archived from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  11. "U.S. Navy Destroyer (Ship Class - DDG)". www.surfpac.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  12. "Mk46 MOD 1 Optical Sight System". Kollmorgen. Archived from the original on 30 November 2022. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  13. Rockwell, David (12 July 2017). "The Kollmorgen/L-3 KEO Legacy". Teal Group. Archived from the original on 29 May 2023. Retrieved 29 May 2023.
  14. Hart, Jackie (17 December 2023). "Decoy Launch System Installed Aboard USS Ramage". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 28 April 2016. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  15. Polmar 2013, p. 145
  16. "Photo Release -- Northrop Grumman-Built William P. Lawrence Christened; Legacy of Former POW Honored". Northrop Grumman. 17 April 2010. Archived from the original on 28 October 2020. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  17. Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p. 592
  18. Tomajczyk, Stephen (2001). Modern U.S. Navy Destroyers. Zenith Imprint. p. 60. ISBN 9781610607339.
  19. Saunders 2009, p. 924
  20. "Navy Reverting To Steel in Shipbuilding After Cracks in Aluminum". The New York Times. Associated Press. 11 August 1987. Archived from the original on 26 May 2017. Retrieved 5 February 2017.
  21. "Section F.7: Aluminum in warship construction". hazegray.org. 30 March 2000. Archived from the original on 8 April 2014. Retrieved 21 November 2009.
  22. "The Arleigh Burke: Linchpin of the Navy". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 27 October 2021. Retrieved 27 October 2015.
  23. "AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare (EW) system". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 15 November 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  24. "Defense Acquisitions: Comprehensive Strategy Needed to Improve Ship Cruise Missile Defense" (PDF). Government Accountability Office. 11 July 2000. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 February 2023. Retrieved 23 January 2023.
  25. Wertheim 2005, p. 913
  26. Polmar 2013, p. 142
  27. Wertheim 2005, p. 948
  28. Biddle, Wayne (28 February 1984). "The dust has settled on the Air Force's Great Engine". The New York Times.
  29. "DVIDS – Images – Countermeasure washdown system test". DVIDS. Archived from the original on 17 October 2015. Retrieved 27 October 2015.
  30. Tucker, Spencer, ed. (2010). The Encyclopedia of Middle East Wars: The United States in the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq Conflicts. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO. p. 376. ISBN 9781851099474.
  31. Wertheim 2005, p. 946
  32. "AEGIS Weapon System". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  33. "AN/SPY-1 Radar". Missile Threat. Archived from the original on 6 August 2022. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
  34. Wilkinson Jr., John (2001). "APL's Contributions to Aegis Programs: An Overview" (PDF). The APL Technical Digest. Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory. 22 (4): 425. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 March 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  35. Polmar 2013, p. 127
  36. LaGrone, Sam (7 March 2016). "Navy Sinks Former Frigate USS Reuben James in Test of New Supersonic Anti-Surface Missile". USNI News. Archived from the original on 4 February 2017. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  37. "Fire Controlman, Volume 2–Fire-Control Radar Fundamentals" (PDF). Naval Education and Training Professional Development Center. October 2000. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 October 2014. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  38. Freedberg Jr., Sydney (4 August 2015). "SM-6 Can Now Kill Both Cruise and Ballistic Missiles". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 9 November 2016. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  39. "Standard Missile-6 (SM-6)". Missile Threat. Archived from the original on 30 August 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  40. Scott, Richard (6 November 2020). "Canada approved for SM-2 Block IIIC missile purchase". Janes. Archived from the original on 6 November 2020. Retrieved 23 January 2023.
  41. Hammond, Sara (30 April 2004). "Raytheon Awarded Full Rate Production Contract for Evolved SEASPARROW Missile". Raytheon News Release Archive. Archived from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  42. "DDG 51 Flight III Destroyer/Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR)/Aegis Combat System" (PDF). Director, Operational Test and Evaluation. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 February 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  43. "Evolved Seasparrow Missile Block 1 (ESSM) (RIM 162D)". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 11 July 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  44. "Standard Missile-3 (SM-3)". Missile Threat. Archived from the original on 1 September 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  45. "Standard Missile-2 Block IV". Missile Threat. Archived from the original on 31 August 2022. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
  46. O'Rourke, Ronald. "Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service. Archived from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 15 March 2023.
  47. "Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense". Missile Threat. Archived from the original on 24 July 2017. Retrieved 30 November 2022.
  48. Katz, Justin (11 January 2022). "Raytheon to start backfitting destroyers with SPY-6 radar". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 11 April 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  49. Wertheim 2005, p. 947
  50. Grady, John (22 January 2020). "Entire Navy Tomahawk Missile Arsenal Will Upgrade To Block V". USNI News. Archived from the original on 23 January 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  51. Archus, Dorian (26 March 2021). "Raytheon delivers 1st Tomahawk Block V missiles to U.S. Navy". Naval Post. Archived from the original on 15 February 2023. Retrieved 14 February 2023.
  52. "Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Budget Estimates" (PDF). Department of the Navy. p. 2-21. Archived (PDF) from the original on 5 February 2023. Retrieved 4 February 2023.
  53. "Selected Acquisition Report (SAR): DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51)" (PDF). Washington Headquarters Services. p. 13. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 December 2021. Retrieved 5 February 2023.
  54. "AN/SQQ-89(V) Undersea Warfare / Anti-Submarine Warfare Combat System". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 11 July 2022. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
  55. "Navy Integrating SeaRAM on Rota-Based DDGs; First Installation Complete In November". USNI News. 15 September 2015. Archived from the original on 31 August 2022. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
  56. "USS Arleigh Burke heads for new European homeport with new kit". Defense Brief. 27 March 2021. Archived from the original on 21 February 2023. Retrieved 14 February 2023.
  57. "USS ROOSEVELT (DDG 80)". www.surflant.usff.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 18 November 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  58. "History". www.surflant.usff.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 17 November 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  59. "220927-N-GF955-1004". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 17 November 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  60. "MK 38 - 25 mm Machine Gun System". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 15 November 2022. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
  61. "180627-N-GR120-0643". allhands.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 31 August 2022. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
  62. DiGiulian, Tony. "5"/62 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mod 4". NavWeaps. Archived from the original on 20 March 2023. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
  63. "Mk 45 Mod 4 Naval Gun System". BAE Systems. Archived from the original on 26 February 2023. Retrieved 24 May 2023.
  64. "MK 45 - 5-inch 54/62 Caliber Guns". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 10 December 2022. Retrieved 24 May 2023.
  65. DiGiulian, Tony. "5"/54 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mods 0 - 2". NavWeaps. Archived from the original on 20 March 2023. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
  66. O'Rourke, Brian (1 July 2022). "Now Arriving: High-Power Laser Competition". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 13 August 2023. Retrieved 13 August 2023.
  67. "USS John Finn (DDG 113) Commemorates Navy Chief Petty Officer, Last Living Medal of Honor Recipient from the Attack on Pearl Harbor". DVIDS. 27 December 2022. Archived from the original on 28 December 2022. Retrieved 13 August 2023.
  68. "USS Kidd (DDG 100)". www.navysite.de. Retrieved 13 August 2023.
  69. Trevithick, Joseph (23 August 2022). "Here's Our First Look At A HELIOS Laser-Armed Navy Destroyer". The Drive. Archived from the original on 30 August 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  70. "SH-60 LAMPS MK III Seahawk". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 8 December 2022. Retrieved 27 October 2015.
  71. Eckstein, Megan (6 April 2022). "Textron drone deploys on US Navy destroyer as contractor-operated ISR node". Defense News.
  72. Stillwell, Paul (1 August 2010). "Designing the Arleigh Burke's Hull". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 26 January 2023. Retrieved 25 January 2023.
  73. Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, pp. 550–551
  74. Friedman 1982, pp. 388–389
  75. "Maine shipbuilder gets Navy contract for a new destroyer". The New York Times. 3 April 1985.
  76. "History of Gibbs & Cox". Gibbs & Cox. January 2011. Archived from the original on 9 January 2011. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
  77. "USS BARRY (DDG 52)". Naval Vessel Register. Archived from the original on 29 October 2020. Retrieved 25 January 2023.
  78. "AN/SRS-1A(V) Combat Direction Finding". irp.fas.org. Archived from the original on 21 February 2023. Retrieved 28 January 2023.
  79. "COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS, COMPUTERS, AND INTELLIGENCE (C4I)". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 21 February 2023. Retrieved 28 January 2023.
  80. "AN/SPS-67(V) Radar Set". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 1 September 2022. Retrieved 1 September 2022.
  81. "DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51)" (PDF). Washington Headquarters Services. p. 7. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  82. O'Rourke, Ronald (26 February 2010). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 2. RL32109. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 19 March 2023.
  83. Polmar 2013, pp. 141–142
  84. Wertheim 2005, p. 945
  85. Saunders 2009, p. 925
  86. Ewing 2008
  87. "Northrop Grumman to Supply Radars for New U.S. Navy Destroyers". Northrop Grumman Newsroom. Archived from the original on 4 September 2022. Retrieved 4 September 2022.
  88. Vision, Presence, Power: A Program Guide to the U.S. Navy (2004 ed.). United States Department of the Navy. 2004. p. 86.
  89. "DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2011 BUDGET ESTIMATES" (PDF). Department of the Navy. p. 198. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  90. "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007" (PDF). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Publishing Office. 5 May 2006. pp. 193–194. Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 July 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  91. "MK 45 5-inch / 54-caliber (lightweight) gun; MK 45-5-inch / 62-caliber (MOD 4 ERGM) gun". man.fas.org. Archived from the original on 15 October 2021. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  92. Torres, Rene. "Raising the Iowa: Reactivating the Iowa Class Battleships to Fill the Current Naval Surface Fire Support Vacancy" (PDF). Marine Corps Combat Development Command. p. 9. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 November 2021. Retrieved 21 January 2023.
  93. Petty, Dan. "United States Navy Fact File: Destroyers – DDG". United States Navy. Archived from the original on 17 December 2014. Retrieved 27 October 2015.
  94. Seapower 2019 Almanac. Arlington, VA: Navy League of the United States. 2019. p. 20.
  95. 2007 Program Guide to the U.S. Navy, Sea Power for a New Era. United States Department of the Navy. 2007. p. 74.
  96. "DRS Technologies Wins Contract to Continue its Support for Arleigh Burke-class Guided Missile Destroyers Modernization Program". Navy Recognition. 4 December 2013. Archived from the original on 17 June 2016. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  97. Keller, John. "Lockheed Martin to build anti-submarine warfare (ASW) towed-array sonar systems for surface warships". militaryaerospace.com. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 19 February 2018.
  98. Greenert, Jonathan (18 September 2013). "Statement Before The House Armed Services Committee On Planning For Sequestration In FY 2014 And Perspectives Of The Military Services On The Strategic Choices And Management Review" (PDF). US House of Representatives. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2013. Retrieved 21 September 2013.
  99. "Boeing: Boeing Deploys Gigabit Ethernet Data Multiplex System on USS Spruance". Boeing.mediaroom.com. 24 October 2011. Archived from the original on 25 December 2011. Retrieved 27 December 2011.
  100. "BAE to Modernize Up to 11 Norfolk-based Destroyers". Defense Industry Daily. Archived from the original on 7 August 2010. Retrieved 3 August 2010.
  101. LaGrone, Sam (27 May 2014). "Navy Quietly Downscales Destroyer Upgrades". USNI News. U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 18 June 2017. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  102. LaGrone, Sam (3 June 2014). "Navy Altered Destroyer Upgrades Due to Budget Pressure, Demand for Ships". USNI News. Archived from the original on 18 November 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  103. LaGrone, Sam (3 June 2014). "Navy Altered Destroyer Upgrades Due to Budget Pressure, Demand for Ships". USNI News. U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 7 June 2014. Retrieved 3 June 2014.
  104. LaGrone, Sam (23 September 2015). "Navy Set to Install Hybrid Electric Drives in Destroyer Fleet Staring [sic] Next Year". USNI News. U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 5 September 2016. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  105. Larter, David (8 March 2018). "US Navy canceling program to turn gas-guzzling destroyers into hybrids". Defense News. Archived from the original on 9 March 2018. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  106. Eckstein, Megan (15 September 2015). "Navy Integrating SeaRAM on Rota-Based DDGs; First Installation Complete in November". usni.org. U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 8 October 2016. Retrieved 20 November 2016.
  107. "CNO's Position Report: 2014" (PDF). US Navy. 4 November 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 January 2015. Retrieved 26 November 2014.
  108. "SEWIP / AN/SLQ-32(V) Electronic Warfare System Overview & Program Status" (PDF). Program Executive Office Integrated Warfare Systems. 13 January 2022. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 November 2022. Retrieved 30 November 2022.
  109. "Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Budget Estimates" (PDF). Department of the Navy. pp. 1–50, 1–155, 1–176. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 November 2022. Retrieved 30 November 2022.
  110. Katz, Justin (18 August 2022). "Lockheed delivers high-energy laser four years in the making to US Navy". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 25 March 2023.
  111. Meredith, Roaten (19 October 2022). "Navy Destroyer Adds HELIOS Laser to Arsenal". www.nationaldefensemagazine.org. Archived from the original on 23 October 2022.
  112. Navy Buys Lasers to 'Dazzle' Drones, Take Out Small Boats Archived 5 March 2018 at the Wayback Machine. Military.com. 3 March 2018
  113. Freedberg Jr., Sydney (1 March 2018). "First Combat Laser For Navy Warship: Lockheed HELIOS". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 25 March 2023. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  114. Seck, Hope (21 February 2020). "The Navy Has Installed the First Drone-Stopping Laser on a Destroyer". Military.com. Archived from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  115. Szondy, David (22 February 2020). "US Navy deploys first anti-drone laser dazzler weapon". New Atlas. Archived from the original on 23 February 2020.
  116. "Lockheed Martin's HELIOS Shipboard Laser Being Tested at Wallops Island". Seapower. 1 August 2021. Archived from the original on 30 August 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  117. Burgess, Richard (31 March 2022). "HELIOS Laser Weapon System Delivered for Installation on USS Preble". Seapower. Archived from the original on 30 August 2022. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  118. "Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget Estimates" (PDF). Department of the Navy. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 November 2022. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  119. "Rapid Prototyping, Experimentation & Dem". www.stratvocate.com. Department of Defense. Archived from the original on 10 December 2022. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  120. Ong, Peter (21 April 2022). "USGC's Polar Security Cutters to Receive Mark 38 Mod 4 Guns". Naval News. Archived from the original on 22 May 2022. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  121. "Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Budget Estimates" (PDF). Department of the Navy. p. 499. Archived (PDF) from the original on 31 January 2023. Retrieved 30 January 2023.
  122. Larter, David (21 October 2020). "All US Navy destroyers will get hypersonic missiles, says Trump's national security adviser". Defense News. Archived from the original on 23 October 2020.
  123. LaGrone, Sam; Shelbourne, Mallory (22 October 2020). "Path to Install Hypersonic Weapons on Arleigh Burke Destroyers Unclear". USNI News. Archived from the original on 27 October 2020.
  124. McLeary, Paul (22 October 2020). "Signaling China, White House Floats Putting Hypersonic Missiles On Destroyers". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 25 March 2023.
  125. "U.S. Navy's SPY-6 Family of Radars". Raytheon Missiles & Defense. Archived from the original on 8 February 2023. Retrieved 15 February 2023.
  126. Katz, Justin (11 January 2022). "Raytheon to start backfitting destroyers with SPY-6 radar". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 11 April 2022. Retrieved 14 April 2022.
  127. "Resource Implications of the Navy's 2008 Shipbuilding Plan: Letter to the Honorable Roscoe Bartlett" (PDF). Congressional Budget Office. 16 December 2005. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 November 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  128. O'Rourke, Ronald. "Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 1. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 July 2021. Retrieved 16 March 2023.
  129. Cavas, Christopher (4 August 2008). "Missile Threat Helped Drive DDG Cut". Defense News. Retrieved 27 December 2011.
  130. Shalal-Esa, Andrea (17 January 2010). "Navy's future linked to flexible weapons: chief". Reuters. Archived from the original on 16 March 2010. Retrieved 27 October 2015.
  131. Drew, Christopher (8 April 2009). "Contractors Agree on Deal to Build Stealth Destroyer". Navy Times. Archived from the original on 23 October 2017.
  132. Sharp, David (5 January 2010). "After 2-plus decades, Arleigh Burke-class destroyer breaks record". Foster's Daily Democrat. Archived from the original on 21 January 2023. Retrieved 21 January 2023.
  133. "Contracts for Wednesday, December 02, 2009". Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), U.S. Department of Defense. 2 December 2009. Archived from the original on 1 March 2010. Retrieved 23 October 2011. Contract N00024-10-C-2308.
  134. "DDG 51 Class Ship Construction Contract Awards Announced". Naval Sea Systems Command Office of Corporate Communication. 26 September 2011. Archived from the original on 28 March 2018. Retrieved 23 October 2011.
  135. "Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget Estimates" (PDF). Department of the Navy. pp. 12, 16. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 January 2022. Retrieved 8 February 2023.
  136. Vavasseur, Xavier (2 October 2021). "USS Carl Levin (DDG 120) Christened at Bath Iron Works". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 24 May 2023. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
  137. Vavasseur, Xavier (9 April 2020). "HII Begins Fabrication Of DDG 51 Flight III Destroyer Ted Stevens". Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance. Archived from the original on 18 May 2022. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
  138. "Northrop Grumman to Supply AN/SPQ-9B Radars for Three U.S.Navy Vessels". Northrop Grumman Newsroom. Archived from the original on 1 September 2022. Retrieved 1 September 2022.
  139. LaGrone, Sam (1 May 2016). "Bath Iron Works Will Build First Flight III Arleigh Burke DDG". USNI News. U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 2 May 2016. Retrieved 1 May 2016.
  140. LaGrone, Sam (28 June 2017). "Huntington Ingalls Industries Awarded First Flight III Arleigh Burke Destroyer". USNI News. Archived from the original on 23 January 2023. Retrieved 23 January 2023.
  141. O'Rourke, Ronald (2 March 2012). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service. RL32109. Archived from the original on 6 November 2012.
  142. LaGrone, Sam (14 June 2011). "US proposes Flight IV Arleigh Burke and life extension for command ships". Defense & Security Intelligence & Analysis: IHS Jane's. Archived from the original on 14 September 2012. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  143. LaGrone, Sam (14 July 2014). "Navy Cancelled New Destroyer Flight Due to Ohio Replacement Submarine Costs". USNI News. U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 15 July 2014. Retrieved 14 July 2014.
  144. Shelbourne, Mallory (25 April 2022). "Navy Puts Forth 9-ship Multi-Year Deal for Arleigh Burke Destroyers". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 24 May 2022. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
  145. "Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer Flight III". Worldwide Naval Projections Report. AMI International. p. 3. Archived from the original on 23 May 2023. Retrieved 22 May 2023.
  146. O'Rourke, Ronald (14 June 2010). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 1. RL32109. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 August 2014.
  147. "Contract View". Archived from the original on 14 July 2015. Retrieved 27 October 2015.
  148. Fabey, Michael (10 June 2011). "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Requirements Growth Raises Alarms". Aviation Week. Archived from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  149. O'Rourke, Ronald (14 June 2010). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 9. RL32109. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 August 2014.
  150. Freedberg Jr., Sydney (5 October 2012). "Navy Bets On Arleigh Burkes To Sail Until 2072; 40 Years Afloat For Some". Breaking Defense. Archived from the original on 21 August 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  151. "Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs" (PDF). Government Accountability Office. 30 March 2010. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 January 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  152. "Shielded from Oversight: The Disastrous US Approach to Strategic Missile Defense" (PDF). Union of Concerned Scientists. July 2016. p. 7. Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 December 2022. Retrieved 22 May 2023.
  153. "RECEIVER SENSITIVITY / NOISE" (PDF). University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa - Department of Physics & Astronomy. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 July 2022. Retrieved 15 February 2023.
  154. "Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) / AN/SPY-6". Missile Threat. Archived from the original on 15 January 2023. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  155. Biehn, Andrew. "AEGIS Baseline 10 and SPY-6 Integration & Path to Navy Operational Architecture (NOA)" (PDF). Naval Sea Systems Command. Archived (PDF) from the original on 5 August 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2023.
  156. Miller, Seth (12 January 2022). "DDG 51 Program Update" (PDF). Naval Sea Systems Command. p. 5. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 November 2022. Retrieved 22 May 2023.
  157. "SNA 2017: Huntington Ingalls Industries Unveils Scale Model of DDG 51 Flight III Design". Navy Recognition. 21 January 2017. Archived from the original on 1 December 2022. Retrieved 22 May 2023.
  158. O'Rourke, Ronald (21 December 2022). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. RL32109. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  159. "DDG 51 ARLEIGH BURKE CLASS GUIDED MISSILE DESTROYER (DDG 51): December 2021 Selected Acquisition Report (SAR)" (PDF). Washington Headquarters Services. p. 6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 September 2023. Retrieved 7 October 2023.
  160. McCullough, Bernard (29 January 2013). "Now Hear This - The Right Destroyer at the Right Time". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 18 March 2023.
  161. Osborn, Kris (9 April 2014). "Navy Makes Plans for New Destroyer for 2030s". Military.com. Archived from the original on 13 April 2014. Retrieved 9 April 2014.
  162. Eckstein, Megan (4 June 2021). "US Navy creates DDG(X) program office after years of delays for large combatant replacement". DefenseNews. Archived from the original on 5 June 2021. Retrieved 19 February 2022.
  163. "History". www.surflant.usff.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 2 March 2023. Retrieved 2 March 2023.
  164. Truver, Scott (1 May 1997). "The U.S. Navy in Review". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 2 March 2023. Retrieved 2 March 2023.
  165. "Photo: A Tomahawk cruise missile is fired from an Arleigh Burke class destroyer". UPI. Archived from the original on 25 November 2020. Retrieved 3 January 2023.
  166. "030322-N-1035L-002". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 5 March 2016. Retrieved 3 January 2023.
  167. "Navy Names Forward Deployed Ships to Rota, Spain". www.navy.mil. 16 February 2012. Archived from the original on 23 May 2018.
  168. Fabey, Michael (1 April 2013). "NavWeek: Keeping Asian Waters Pacific". Aviation Week. Archived from the original on 19 March 2023. Retrieved 16 March 2023.
  169. Kozin, Vladimir (18 February 2014). "Time to Sign a Super New START". The Moscow Times. Archived from the original on 29 November 2022. Retrieved 20 May 2023.
  170. Larter, David (23 June 2018). "As threats mount, US Navy grapples with costly ballistic missile defense mission". defensenews.com. Retrieved 18 December 2018.
  171. Tomlinson, Lucas (3 October 2016). "US warships sent to area where Iran-backed rebels attacked Saudi-led coalition ship". Fox News. Archived from the original on 22 September 2018. Retrieved 2 September 2022.
  172. LaGrone, Sam (11 October 2016). "USS Mason Fired 3 Missiles to Defend From Yemen Cruise Missiles Attack". USNI News. Archived from the original on 9 August 2018. Retrieved 2 September 2022.
  173. Copp, Tara. "Aegis defense system helped stop missile attack on USS Mason". Stars and Stripes. Archived from the original on 2 September 2022. Retrieved 2 September 2022.
  174. Ziezulewicz, Geoff (3 November 2017). "Four ship crews receive Combat Action Ribbon". Navy Times. Archived from the original on 18 April 2021. Retrieved 2 September 2022.
  175. Stewart, Phil (13 October 2016). "U.S. military strikes Yemen after missile attacks on U.S. Navy ship". Reuters. Archived from the original on 25 May 2019. Retrieved 5 September 2022.
  176. LaGrone, Sam (16 October 2016). "USS Mason 'Appears to Have Come Under Attack'". USNI News. Archived from the original on 2 September 2022. Retrieved 2 September 2022.
  177. Lamothe, Dan; Ryan, Missy; Gibbons-Neff, Thomas (6 April 2017). "U.S. strikes Syrian military airfield in first direct assault on Bashar al-Assad's government". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 7 April 2017. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  178. "Strikes On Shayrat Airfield, Syria: Areas of Impact". U.S. Department of Defense. Archived from the original on 30 September 2022. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  179. Rogoway, Tyler; Trevithick, Joseph (14 April 2018). "Here Are All The Details The Pentagon Just Released Regarding Its Missile Attack On Syria (Updated)". The Drive. Archived from the original on 19 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2023.
  180. Leoni, Victoria (17 April 2018). "How the US positioned its warships to trick Russia ahead of Syrian strikes". Navy Times. Retrieved 18 February 2023.
  181. Cox, Samuel (October 2020). "H-055-3: Attack on USS Cole (DDG-67) – October 2000". Naval History and Heritage Command. Archived from the original on 18 February 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  182. Truver, Scott; Holzer, Robert (1 May 2013). "U.S. Navy in Review". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 26 January 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
  183. "USS Fitzgerald En Route to San Diego". Naval Sea Systems Command. Archived from the original on 18 November 2022. Retrieved 18 November 2022.
  184. "NTSB Accident Report on Fatal 2017 USS John McCain Collision off Singapore". USNI News. 6 August 2019. Archived from the original on 24 June 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
  185. Wertheim, Eric (1 December 2020). "Japan's New Aegis DDG". U.S. Naval Institute. Archived from the original on 19 October 2022. Retrieved 25 January 2023.
  186. "Sejong the Great class Destroyer - ROK Navy". Navy Recognition. Archived from the original on 25 January 2023. Retrieved 25 January 2023.
  187. Kōda, Yōji [in Simple English] (December 2015). "History of Domestic Built Destroyers of JMSDF". Ships of the World (in Japanese). Kaijin-sha (827). NAID 40020655404.
  188. Ishī, Kōyū (December 2019). "Overview of World's Aegis ships: Kongo-class". Ships of the World (in Japanese). Kaijin-sha (913): 88–89. NAID 40022058771.
  189. LaGrone, Sam (15 August 2016). "Report: South Korea Wants BMD Capability for Destroyers". USNI News. Archived from the original on 15 August 2016. Retrieved 25 January 2023.
  190. Archived 2 May 2012 at the Wayback Machine
  191. "San Diego-Based Destroyers To Be Transferred To Hawaii This Summer". KPBS Public Media. 8 January 2014. Archived from the original on 19 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2023.
  192. Vincent, Mal (11 October 2013). "Navy helped bring "Captain Phillips" to Norfolk". The Virginian-Pilot. Archived from the original on 24 October 2020. Retrieved 20 May 2023.
  193. Littlejohn, Donna; Kuznia, Rob; Mazza, Sandy (6 January 2014). "South Bay, Harbor Area communities work to attract more filming". Daily Breeze. Archived from the original on 28 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  194. Webb, Justin (9 November 2012). "Naval Base San Diego; USS Halsey featured in "The Last Ship"". www.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 10 August 2018. Retrieved 27 January 2023.

Bibliography

Further reading
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Arleigh Burke class destroyers.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.