(See) DDG(X) - Zerstörerprogramm der US Navy

[Schneemann]

Mal wieder ein zaghaftes Lebenszeichen des Projektes:

DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer’s Capabilities And Costs Are Solidifying [...]

[Jan 15, 2025]

As the U.S. Navy’s next-generation destroyer, currently dubbed the DDG(X), continues through concept design stages, the service’s surface warfare director reiterated Tuesday how the future ship must be able to field a wider variety of weapons systems, while sporting nearly unprecedented levels of power production. And while questions remain about delivery schedules and cost, the Navy needs to make DDG(X) far more capable of taking on future systems and upgrades than its predecessor, the Arleigh Burke destroyer class, a design that is now officially ‘maxed out’ in terms of future growth. [...]

The Navy has remained largely mum as of late about where the DDG(X) effort currently stands, but Rear Adm. Bill Daly gave an update on the program during the Surface Navy Association’s annual conference, which TWZ attended.

“DDG(X) is a must do, operationally, tactically, for shipbuilding,” Daly said. “The DDG(X) design is our clean-sheet imperative to update warship endurance, power production and storage, C5I [command, control, communication, computer, cyber and intelligence], and weapons technology such as hypersonics and directed energy.” Daly noted that U.S. households consume 40% more power than they did when the lead destroyer in the current destroyer class, USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51), was built in the late 1980s, and that such consumption has translated to ships as well. [...]

TWZ has in the past reported what the DDG(X)’s so-called Integrated Power System (IPS) will offer:

“IPS will also be vital to meet the increased power generation demands of both directed-energy weapons and powerful sensor arrays. The technology behind IPS is the same as found in the Zumwalt class of destroyers, in which an advanced turbo-electric drive system replaces the traditional gas-turbine propulsion gear. While the Zumwalt class has not proved a success, with only three hulls completed, its propulsion system is unquestionably powerful, putting out more than 75 megawatts of power.”

Daly also suggested that the exact weapons systems aboard DDG(X) remain in the works, but TWZ has reported on how they will likely include long-range surface-to-air and hypersonic missiles, as well as directed-energy weapons. To date, Zumwalt class are the only Navy surface combatants capable of generating such high levels of electricity and are in the midst of being outfitted with launchers to eventually fire Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike (IRCPS) hypersonic missiles. [...]

Either way, DDG(X) is planned as a bigger ship than its Burke brethren, displacing 13,500 tons, which is nearly 40% greater than the 9,700-ton displacement of the latest Flight III Arleigh Burke variant, according to a December Congressional Research Service report.

While DDG(X) will host the Flight III Aegis Combat System and the high-powered AN/SPY-6 radar, also known as the Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) or Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR), DDG(X) will have more margin for growth than Flight IIIs, which means more space, weight capacity, electrical power and cooling capacity allowing it to accommodate new higher-power equipment and directed-energy weapons over its service life, the CRS report states.

https://www.twz.com/news-features/ddgx-n...olidifying

Schneemann

[Schneemann]

Fairbanks Morse Defense High-Speed Engine Selected for DDG(X) Evaluation

Fairbanks Morse Defense (FMD) has been awarded a contract to provide the U.S. Navy with an FM 175D high-speed diesel generator engine for integration into the DDG(X) land-based propulsion system test site, supporting the U.S. Navy’s goal of reducing design risks as it continues developing the next-generation platform. [...]

As the Navy’s next-generation large surface combatant, DDG(X) will integrate a wider array of advanced systems, demanding unprecedented levels of power generation. The ship is designed with an Integrated Power System (IPS) to generate, convert, and distribute power for ship operations. The DDG(X) electrical plant is expected to deliver more than 75 megawatts of power for standard operations while enabling high-energy equipment, advanced sensors, and enhanced propulsion systems.

The FM 175D propulsion system generator set can produce 3.8 MW of power, which is considered among the best in class for power density. Unlike conventional high-speed engines, the FM 175D delivers significantly greater power while maximizing fuel efficiency, making it an optimal choice to reduce the life cycle costs of the DDG(X) platform. It has a power output range of 1,740 to 4,400 kilowatts and operates at 1,800 to 2,000 RPM.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/202...valuation/

Schneemann

[Schneemann]

Report to Congress on the DDG(X) Program

[September 19, 2025] [...]

In the program designation DDG(X), the X means theprecise design for the ship has not yet been determined. Asmentioned earlier, the Navy wants to procure the firstDDG(X) in the early 2030s. Procurement of DDG-51s—the type of LSC currently being procured by the Navy—wouldend sometime after procurement of DDG(X)s begins. [...] The Navy envisages the DDG(X) as having (1) Flight IIIDDG-51 Aegis combat system elements; (2) more growthmargin than the Flight III DDG-51 design, meaning morespace, weight-carrying capacity, electrical power, andcooling capacity (aka SWAP-C) for accepting additional orhigher-power equipment and weapons (including directed-energy weapons) over the ship’s service life; (3) anintegrated power system (IPS); (4) reduced vulnerabilitydue to reduced infrared, acoustic, and underwaterelectromagnetic signatures; (5) increased cruising range andtime on station; and (6) increased weapon capacity. [...]

The Navy’s FY2025 30-year shipbuilding plan projectedLSCs being procured in FY2032 and subsequent years inannual quantities of generally one to two ships per year.The January 2025 CBO report estimates the DDG(X)’saverage procurement cost in constant FY2024 dollars at$4.4 billion—about 33% more than the Navy’s estimate(shown in the CBO report) of $3.3 billion. The CBO reportstates that “the Navy’s estimates for its destroyers implythat the DDG(X) would cost about 22 percent more than theDDG-51 Flight III but would have a full-load displacementthat was 50 percent greater than that ship. Such an outcome,however, seems unlikely given the history of surfacecombatants. [...]

The Navy’s proposed FY2026 budget requests $51.6million for Project 0411 (DDG[X] Concept Development)within Program Element (PE) 0603564N (Ship PreliminaryDesign & Feasibility Studies), which is line 46 in theNavy’s FY2026 research and development (R&D) account,and $81.9 million for “DDG(X) Power & Propulsion RiskMitigation & Demonstration,” which forms part of Project2471 (Integrated Power Systems [IPS]) within PE0603573N (Advanced Surface Machinery Systems) [...]

https://news.usni.org/2025/09/19/report-...gx-program

Schneemann