Back to news

August 29, 2018 | International, Naval

Navy’s Next Large Surface Combatant Will Draw From DDG-51, DDG-1000 — But Don’t Call it a Destroyer Yet

By:

THE PENTAGON – The Navy will buy the first of its Future Surface Combatants in 2023 – a large warship that will be built to support the Arleigh Burke Flight III combat system and will pull elements from the Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) and Zumwalt-class (DDG-1000) destroyer designs.

The combatant – not dubbed a cruiser, and potentially not dubbed a destroyer either – will be bigger and more expensive than the Arleigh Burke Flight III design and will have more room to grow into for decades to come, the director of surface warfare (OPNAV N96) told USNI News today.

Future Surface Combatant refers to a family of systems that includes a large combatant akin to a destroyer, a small combatant like the Littoral Combat Ship or the upcoming frigate program, a large unmanned surface vessel and a medium USV, along with an integrated combat system that will be the common thread linking all the platforms. Navy leadership just recently signed an initial capabilities document for the family of systems, after an effort that began in late 2017 to define what the surface force as a whole would be required to do in the future and therefore how each of the four future platforms could contribute to that overall mission requirement.

With the ICD now signed and providing the service with an idea of how many of each platform would be needed in a future fleet and how each would contribute as a sensor, a shooter or a command and control asset, Surface Warfare Director Adm. Ron Boxall and his staff are now able to begin diving into the finer details of what each platform would look like.

The first to be tackled is the large combatant, Boxall told USNI News today. He noted the effort would be more like the move from the Ticonderoga-class cruiser to the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer – where the same combat capability was kept, but housed in a more suitable hull – rather than the move from the Spruance-class destroyer to the cruiser, which maintained the same hull design but added in new combat capability.

After the addition of the AN/SPY-6(V) Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) to the DDGs' Aegis Combat System to create the Flight III design, Boxall said the resulting warfighting capability is one the Navy can use for years to come.

“We have a new capability on that hull now, so everything's going good – except for, as we look towards going further, we know we've maxed out that hull footprint,” Boxall said of the Arleigh Burke-class hull design, power-generation capability and more.
“So the key elements that we're looking at in this work we're doing on the requirements side is, keep the requirements about the same as DDG Flight III, but now look at what do we need a new hull to do.”

USNI News first reported last month that the large combatant would pair a new hull with the Flight III combat system.

The Navy will spend about the next six months having that conversation about what the new hull will need, though he suggested to USNI News that it would need sufficient space to carry helicopters and unmanned systems; it would need to support long-range missiles and weapons; it would have to include command and control systems able to support a staff onboard for air defense or offensive surface capability, much like the cruiser does today with the air defense commander role for a carrier strike group; it may incorporate DDG-1000's signature controls and integrated power system; and it will certainly have to be flexible and modular enough to quickly undergo upgrades and modernizations in the future as new systems are developed that the Navy will want to incorporate into the next block buy of large combatants or back fit fielded ones.

Though there has been much speculation about whether the large combatant would use an existing design or a new design, Boxall said there really are no designs out there that meet the Navy's needs without significant modifications.

Whereas the ongoing frigate design effort was able to mandate that bidders use mature parent designs, Boxall said “a lot of people in the world make frigates. Not many people make large surface combatants of the size and capability that we need. So we've got to kind of look to our portfolio of blueprints that we have as a starting point, and we'll edit and modify the hull and design things as we go forward.”

“I think what you're going to see won't be a huge deviation from things we have already, but at the same point, we are going to be making changes to anything we have” already in the fleet, he added.

In a nod towards the idea the next large combatant will share the same combat system as DDG Flight III and will perform much the same role in the fleet, Boxall said the Navy is starting with the DDG-51 Flight III capability development document (CDD); will go through a Large Surface Combatant Requirements Evaluation Team effort with requirements, acquisition and engineering personnel from the Navy and industry; and after six months call the finished product a “modified Flight III CDD.” Once that modified CDD is complete, it will be clearer how much the future large surface combatant will resemble its predecessor and how much it will be a new class of ship – which will likely determine its name.

“It is the big question: what do you call the future large surface combatant? I don't know. I don't think you call it a cruiser. I don't think you call it a destroyer. Maybe – I don't know what it is,” Boxall said, noting that he has commanded both a cruiser and destroyer and that they get used in much the same fashion, save for the cruiser's role as the air defense commander ship, which the future large surface combatant will have the capability of doing with its command and control suite.

Once the first large combatant is designed and purchased in the 2023 “block” – following the current block-buy of Flight III DDGs from Ingalls Shipbuilding and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, which spans from Fiscal Years 2018 to 2022 – new blocks will be planned for every five years. As USNI News has reported, this block structure, laid out in a Surface Combatant Capability Evolution Plan, would allow the insertion of new hardware and software in a predictable timeline. This would help researchers and developers in the government and in industry understand when a new capability would have to be matured by to be included in the next block design, and anything not quite ready yet could wait until the next block. This setup is much like the Virginia-class attack submarine's block upgrade approach to adding in new capabilities, and its Acoustic Rapid Commercial-off-the-shelf Insertion (ARCI) process of adding new capabilities in via new construction and back fitting existing subs. However, Boxall noted the surface community had the added challenge of managing this block buy and upgrade effort across four or more types of surface combatants, compared to just one class of attack submarines.

Unlike before, when the surface community would undergo a massive planning effort – like the CG(X) cruiser replacement design that ultimately was too expensive and not accepted by the Navy – and then cease planning for many years before undertaking another massive effort, Boxall said he hoped the block upgrades would create a “heartbeat type of effort, where you always have something going on.”

https://news.usni.org/2018/08/28/navys-next-large-surface-combatant-will-draw-ddg-51-ddg-1000-dont-call-destroyer

On the same subject

  • First upgraded F-35s won’t be ready for combat until next year

    April 24, 2024 | International, Aerospace

    First upgraded F-35s won’t be ready for combat until next year

    The F-35 upgrades known as Technology Refresh 3 are now a year overdue and have halted deliveries of the newest fighter jets from Lockheed Martin.

  • Repair deployed ships in theater to optimize combat power

    January 17, 2024 | International, Naval

    Repair deployed ships in theater to optimize combat power

    Opinion: Vast ocean distances that take weeks to traverse make the ability to regenerate forces quickly a critical enabler for mission success.

  • Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - January 06, 2020

    January 7, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - January 06, 2020

    ARMY Adams Communication & Engineering Technology Inc.,* Reston, Virginia (W15P7T-20-D-0001); Advanced Technology Systems Co.,* McLean, Virginia (W15P7T-20--D0003); The Boeing Co., Ridley Park, Pennsylvania (W15P7T-20-D-0004); CopaSat LLC,* Tampa, Florida (W15P7T-20-D-0005); GATR Technologies Inc., Huntsville, Alabama (W15P7T-20-D-0006); DataPath Inc., Duluth, Georgia (W15P7T-20-D-0007); Envistacom LLC, Atlanta, Georgia (W15P7T-20-D-0008); Fairwinds Technologies LLC,* Annapolis, Maryland (W15P7T-20-D-0009); General Dynamics One Source LLC, Fairfax, Virginia (W15P7T-20-D-0010); Globecomm Systems Inc., Hauppauge, New York (W15P7T-20-D-0011); Kratos Technology & Training Solutions Inc., San Diego, California (W15P7T-20-D-0012); NewSat North America LLC, Indian Harbour Beach, Florida (W15P7T-20-D-0013); Nexagen Network Inc.,* Morganville, New Jersey (W15P7T-20-D-0014); PAE National Security Solutions LLC, Fredericksburg, Virginia (W15P7T-20-D-0015); Quantum Research International Inc., Huntsville, Alabama (W15P7T-20-D-0016); Serco Inc., Herndon, Virginia (W15P7T-20-D-0017); STS International Inc.,* Berkeley Springs, West Virginia (W15P7T-20-D-0018); Telecommunication Systems Inc., Annapolis, Maryland (W15P7T-20-D-0019); TMC Design Corp.,* Las Cruces, New Mexico (W15P7T-20-D-0020); Trace Systems Inc.,* Vienna, Virginia (W15P7T-20-D-0021); Tribalco LLC, Bethesda, Maryland (W15P7T-20-D-0022); and Ultisat Inc., Gaithersburg, Maryland (W15P7T-20-D-0023), will compete for each order of the $5,100,000,000 hybrid (cost-no-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price) contract for the Global Tactical Advanced Communication Systems (GTACS II) and services. Bids were solicited via the internet with 24 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 5, 2030. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity. IOEI-EQM JV,* San Diego, California, was awarded a $35,000,000 fixed-price level-of-effort contract to provide emergency, immediate or rapid-response environmental remediation services at contaminated sites. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 11, 2022. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity (W9128F-20-D-0020). Young's General Contracting Inc.,* Poplar Bluff, Missouri, was awarded a $9,199,326 firm-fixed-price contract for flood rehabilitation of the Clear Creek-Platte River Right Bank Levee System. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work will be performed in Omaha, Nebraska, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 7, 2020. Fiscal 2020 civil construction funds in the amount of $9,199,326 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity (W9128F-20-C-0007). Manson Construction Co., Seattle, Washington, was awarded an $8,396,000 firm-fixed-price contract for dredging of the Mississippi River. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work will be performed in Plaquemines, Louisiana, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 12, 2020. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance-Recovery Act and civil works funds in the amount of $8,396,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, is the contracting activity (W912P8-20-C-0010). Indtai Inc., Vienna, Virginia, was awarded a $7,640,269 modification (P00016) to contract W9124J-17-C-0018 to deliver adult education programs and services. Work will be performed at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, with an estimated completion date of July 27, 2020. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance, Army funds in the amount of $7,640,269 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, is the contracting activity. NAVY Ace Electronics Defense Systems LLC,* Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is awarded a $64,405,123 single-award, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract with firm-fixed-price delivery orders for the production and delivery of manufacturing kits, spare parts and first article testing for the hardware component refresh of the Tactical Tomahawk Weapons Control System (AN/SWG-5(V)6). The AN/SWG-5(V)6 upgrade offers new offensive capabilities to upgraded ships in support of the Maritime Strike Tomahawk, addresses obsolescence risks and improves the operability and maintainability of the system hardware. This single-award, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract has a five-year ordering period, which, if all line item quantities are ordered, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $64,405,123, with an ordering period to January 2025. Work will be performed in Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and is expected to be complete by January 2025. Fiscal 2019 other procurement (Navy) funding in the amount of $259,118 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with one proposal received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division, Port Hueneme, California, is the contracting activity (N63394-20-D-0002). Engineered Coil Co., doing business as DRS Marlo Coil, High Ridge, Missouri, is awarded an $11,007,314 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price contract for up to 103 modular refrigeration systems in support of Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia Division (NSWCPD). The supplies under this contract cover the Air Conditioning Refrigeration and Thermal Management Control System Branch (Code 411) and the Auxiliary Machinery Systems Division (Code 41) of the NSWCPD. These supplies are in support of CVN 68, CVN 69, CVN 74, CVN 75 and CVN 77. Work will be performed in High Ridge, Missouri, and is expected to be complete by December 2023. Fiscal 2020 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding for $2,212,490 will be obligated at time of award via an individual task order and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. In accordance with Section 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1), this contract was not competitively procured (only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements). NSWCPD, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity (N64498-20-D-0002). DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Conmed Corp., Utica, New York, has been awarded a maximum $36,000,000 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for hospital equipment and accessories for the Defense Logistics Agency Electronic Catalog. This was a competitive acquisition with 102 responses received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. Location of performance is New York, with a Dec. 29, 2024, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2025 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE2DH-20-D-0027). *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2051251/source/GovDelivery/

All news