U.S. Navy
Surface Shipbuilding Programs
For the U.S. Navy, Biggest isn’t always Best
If the Navy can’t successfully introduce smaller ship classes of ships, why does it think it can succeed with the largest surface combatants since World War II?
By Edward Lundquist
The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer is widely regarded as one of the most successful ship programs in U.S. Navy history. Pictured is USS Mahan (DDG 72) operating with Guyana Defense Force Defiant-class patrol vessel GDFS Shahous (1039) in the Caribbean Sea off the eastern coast of Guyana..
U.S. Navy photoThe Navy has announced a new class of guided missile battleships, the USS Defiant [BBG(X)] or the Trump-class, as the centerpiece of a new “Golden Fleet.” BBG(X)s would be 840 to 880 feet long and have a full load displacement of more than 35,000 tons. They would be the largest surface combatants built since World War II, and cost an estimated $17.5 to $22 billion each. The Navy wants 15 of them.
Because of its size and complexity, Defiant will undoubtedly be more challenging than most new ships the Navy has introduced. While some consider this class as a dawn of a new age of American naval shipbuilding and maritime supremacy, reality says otherwise. (Note: This article focuses on surface combatants, but similar problems pertain to submarines, aircraft carriers and amphibious ships.)
The current number is of ships in the fleet is 291, far short of the 355 mandated by law. For the fleet to grow, new ships have to enter service at a higher rate than older ships are being decommissioned. To achieve quantity, the navy need to build a large number of affordable warships. Investing is a large class of super-combatants could result in fewer new ships built.
All ships have a difficult introduction into service, often plagued with difficulties, delays and cost overruns. In the past two decades, however, the Navy has truncated or cancelled several critical classes before the program of record has been achieved, or before the first steel was even cut. The Freedom and Independence classes of littoral combat ships, Zumwalt-class guided missile destroyer, and Constellation-class guided missile frigate failed to build to the original programs of record. The CG(X) guided missile cruiser and DDG(X) large surface combatant were cancelled before the ships were under contract.
The Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
The original littoral combat ship program of record was to build 55 ships. The Navy decided to award contracts to two different shipbuilders, each with their own different designs. LCS was designed as a focused-mission ship, meant to be fast (40-knots-plus), agile and flexible to carry modular, interchangeable mission packages for the asymmetric threats associated with mine warfare, anti-submarine warfare, and protection against small, fast attack craft. The first contract was awarded in 2004. A total of 35 LCS were built — 16 Freedom-class monohulls built by Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Wisconsin; and 19 Independence-class trimarans built by Austal USA in Alabama. Fleet introduction was difficult. Some of the early ships were decommissioned well before their expected services lives (five of the Freedom class and two of the Independence class) There were plans to take more of them out of service early, but China’s growing naval presence in the Western Pacific has required more U.S. ships in that region, so the Navy is deferring the decision to decommission them.
Zumwalt-class DDG-1000
At the same time as the LCS was coming under contract, the Navy introduced another ship that was a radical departure from more conventional warships — the 16,000-ton Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyer. This new DDG had limited anti-aircraft capability compared to Aegis combatants, but had a superb sonar for littoral operations and a significant number of strike missiles in a new peripheral vertical launch system, as well as a pair of 155mm Advanced Gun System guns that fired the rocket-propelled guided Long Range Land Attack Projectile. The LRLAP had a range of over 66 miles, and could hit targets with GPS pinpoint accuracy. Instead of being an integral part of a carrier strike group, its capabilities were better suited to support Marine expeditionary forces going ashore and moving inland.
The Navy planned to build 32 Zumwalt-class DDG-1000 stealthy land attack destroyers (the ship had been on the drawing board in one form or another for years before the first contract was signed in 2008. Northrop Grumman was the lead, but that was ultimately passed to General Dynamics Bath Iron Works. However, the class was reduced to 24 ships, then 12, then seven then two, then none, and eventually three. The economies of scale to build this ship, or its first-of-its-kind Advanced Gun System (AGS) with the LRLAP — at a $1 million a round – made it cost prohibitive. Ultimately, just three ships were built, and their AGS systems subsequently removed to make room for the Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic missile.
It’s relevant to mention that another ship program, the CG(X) guided missile cruiser that was to replace the Ticonderoga-class Aegis guided missile cruisers, was cancelled all together. Instead, the navy continued the DDG 51 production line with the Flight III variant.
Constellation-class FFG 62
The Constellation is based on a “parent design,” in this case the multi-mission French/Italian FREMM frigate. The European ships come in two versions, with one being an all-purpose ship, and the other optimized for ASW. Using a mature parent design avoids risk. However, the Navy modified the design to use U.S.-made “government furnished equipment.” The initial design was 85 percent common with the parent FREMMs, but evolved to a design that was just 15 percent common, thus losing the substantial economies of scale originally intended. The program of record was to build 20 (and more later), but the Navy cancelled the 7,400-ton Constellation-class after two ships because of design creep, delays and cost overruns, which will leave the Navy with a unique ship that will be hard and expensive to support and maintain.
Finding itself without a frigate program, the Navy turned to a ready and willing Huntington Ingalls shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss., which just happened to be wrapping up building the Coast Guard’s National Security Cutter.
The NSC is a frigate-sized ship, but light on weapons, although it does represent a proven design and a hot production line. The Navy will modify the ship to carry more weapons, but could find itself in a similar situation as with the FFG 62 if they change the parent design too much.
Arleigh Burke-class DDG-51
The one big success story is the 9,700-ton, 509-foot Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) multi-mission destroyers. Since the first one was commissioned in 1991 there have been 78 DDG-51s that have joined the fleet, with successive improvements incorporated in the Flight II, Flight IIA, and now Flight III variants. It is expected that 90 will eventually be procured. But there is no more room to cram new capability on this proven hull and Aegis combat system.
That’s why the Navy was hard at work on the next guided missile destroyer, the DDG(X), to follow the DDG 51s. At 590 feet long and displacing 14,500 tons, DDG(X) would have with greater space, weight, power and cooling for more sophisticated sensors and weapons. But that program was just cancelled to make way for the new battleship.
Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said, “The battleship took the DDG(X) concept and put that on steroids.”
The so called “Golden Fleet” promotes a grand ambition. The Navy needs a big surface combatant, but not that big. Chinas navy is bigger the U.S. Navy. To counter it, the U.S. will need to grow the fleet, and that means more surface combatants. The BBG(X) program would consume a lot of resources and industrial capacity. They would be magnificent ships, but the end result might be a fleet with fewer ships.
