Arleigh Burke-class destroyer#Characteristics

{{Infobox ship begin

| infobox caption =

}}{{Infobox ship image

| Ship image = File:US Navy 080906-N-1082Z-067 The guided-missile destroyer USS Roosevelt (DDG 80) transits the Atlantic Ocean.jpg

| Ship caption = USS Roosevelt, a Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer at sea

}}{{Infobox ship class overview

| Name = Arleigh Burke class

| Builders = * Ingalls Shipbuilding

Bath Iron Works

| Operators = {{Navy|United States}}

| Class before = * {{sclass|Kidd|destroyer|4}}

{{sclass|Spruance|destroyer|4}}

| Class after = * {{sclass|Zumwalt|destroyer|4}}

DDG(X)

| Subclasses =

| Cost = US$2.2 billion per ship (FY2024){{cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date=2023-12-20 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |url=https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231227030311/https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf |archive-date=2023-12-27 |access-date=2024-01-04 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |id=RL32109}}{{Refn|The Navy requests the procurement of two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in its FY2024 budget proposal. The estimated total procurement cost for these two ships is US$4.4328 billion (about US$4.4 billion).|group=N}}

| Built range = 1988–2011, 2013–present

| In service range =

| In commission range = 1991–present

| Total ships planned = 99

| Total ships on order = 15

| Total ships building = 10

| Total ships completed = 74

| Total ships canceled =

| Total ships active = 74

| Total ships laid up =

| Total ships lost =

| Total ships retired = 0

| Total ships preserved =

}}{{Infobox ship characteristics

| Hide header =

| Header caption =

| Ship type = Guided-missile destroyer

| Ship displacement = * Fully loaded:

Flight I: {{cvt|8300|LT|t|lk=on}}
Flight II: {{cvt|8400|LT|t}}{{Cite web |date=March 2003 |title=Transforming the Navy's Surface Combatant Force |url=https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/report_0.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161221210023/http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/report_0.pdf |archive-date=2016-12-21 |access-date=2023-01-26 |publisher=Congressional Budget Office |page=4}}
Flight IIA: {{cvt|9500|LT|t}}{{cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date=26 February 2010 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |id=RL32109 |url=https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA516419.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230319170137/https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA516419.pdf |archive-date=19 March 2023 |access-date=19 March 2023 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |page=3}}
Flight III: {{cvt|9700|LT|t}}{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |title=Navy DDG(X) Next-Generation Destroyer Program: Background and Issues for Congress |id=IF11679 |url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11679 |access-date=2023-02-07 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |page=1 |archive-date=17 October 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221017132911/https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11679 |url-status=live }}

| Ship length = * Flights I & II: {{cvt|505|ft}}

Flights IIA & III: {{cvt|509.5|ft}}

| Ship beam = {{cvt|66|ft}}

| Ship height =

| Ship draft = {{cvt|31|ft}}

| Ship depth =

| Ship decks =

| Ship deck clearance =

| Ship ramps =

| Ship ice class =

| Ship power = * Flights I–IIA: 3 × Rolls-Royce 501k34 Generators ({{cvt|3000|kW}} each, 450 V)

Flight III: 3 × Rolls-Royce 501k34 Generators ({{cvt|4000|kW}} each, 4,160 V){{Cite web |date=2016-08-04 |title=ARLEIGH BURKE DESTROYERS: Delaying Procurement of DDG 51 Flight III Ships Would Allow Time to Increase Design Knowledge |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/678891.pdf |access-date=2023-02-28 |publisher=Government Accountability Office |page=26 |archive-date=2 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230302033059/https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/678891.pdf |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |title=Celebrating 50 years of Delivering Marine Gas Turbine Generators |url=https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2022/celebrating-50-years-of-delivering-marine-gas-turbine-generators.aspx |access-date=2023-02-28 |website=rolls-royce.com |archive-date=20 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230220004947/https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2022/celebrating-50-years-of-delivering-marine-gas-turbine-generators.aspx |url-status=live }}

| Ship propulsion = * 4 × General Electric LM2500 gas turbines each generating {{cvt|26250|bhp|lk=in}};{{Cite web |title=LM2500 Gas Turbine Engine |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/eng/lm2500.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210918222200/https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/eng/lm2500.htm |archive-date=2021-09-18 |access-date=2016-12-07 |website=man.fas.org}}

coupled to two shafts, each driving a five-bladed reversible controllable-pitch propeller;
Total output: {{cvt|105000|bhp}}

| Ship speed = In excess of {{convert|30|kn|lk=in}}

| Ship range = {{cvt|4400|nmi|lk=in}} at {{convert|20|kn}}

| Ship boats = 2 × rigid-hull inflatable boats{{Cite web |date=2017-01-29 |title=170128-N-HB733-228 |url=https://www.cusnc.navy.mil/Media/Photos/igphoto/2001691843/ |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=U.S. Naval Forces Central Command |language=en-US |archive-date=27 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127010417/https://www.cusnc.navy.mil/Media/Photos/igphoto/2001691843/ |url-status=live }}

| Ship complement = * Flight I: 303 total

Flight IIA: 23 officers, 300 enlisted

| Ship crew =

| Ship time to activate =

| Ship sensors = {{Arleigh Burke-class destroyer sensors}}

| Ship EW = {{Arleigh Burke-class destroyer EW}}

| Ship armament = * Guns:

DDG-51 to 80: 1 × 5-inch/54-caliber Mark 45 gun#Variants
DDG-81 onwards: 1 × 5-inch (127 mm)/62 Mk 45 Mod 4 (lightweight gun)
DDG-51 to 84: 2 × Phalanx CIWS
DDG-85 onwards: 1 × 20 mm Phalanx CIWS
2 × M242 Bushmaster Mk 38 machine gun system
1 × Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy{{Refn|{{As of|2023}}, ODIN is deployed on six ships of the class.|group=N}}
DDG-88: 1 × High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS)
Missiles:
Flights I & II only: 2 × Mk 141 Harpoon anti-ship missile launcher
DDG-62: 4 × Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile, Harpoon missiles removed
Flights I & II: 1 × 29-cell, 1 × 61-cell (90 total cells) Mk 41 vertical launching system
Flights IIA & III: 1 × 32-cell, 1 × 64-cell (96 total cells) Mk 41 vertical launching system:
RIM-66M surface-to-air missile
RIM-156 surface-to-air missile
RIM-174A standard ERAM
RIM-161 anti-ballistic missile (BMD-equipped ships)
RIM-162 ESSM
BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missile
RUM-139 vertical launch ASROC
1 × SeaRAM{{Refn|{{As of|2023}}, SeaRAM is deployed on eight ships of the class, occupying a Phalanx CIWS slot.|group=N}}
Torpedoes:
2 × Mark 32 triple torpedo tubes:
Mark 46 lightweight torpedo
Mark 50 lightweight torpedo
Mark 54 lightweight torpedo

| Ship armor = 130 tons of Kevlar splinter protection around vital areasPolmar 2013, p. 145

| Ship aircraft = * Flights I & II: None

Flights IIA & III: Up to two MH-60R Seahawk LAMPS III helicopters

| Ship aircraft facilities = * Flights I & II: Flight deck with LAMPS III electronics

Flights IIA & III: Flight deck with LAMPS III electronics and two hangars

| Ship notes =

}}

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 after Arleigh Burke, an American destroyer admiral in World War II and later Chief of Naval Operations. With an overall length of {{convert|505|to|509.5|ft|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.

These warships are multi-mission destroyers able to conduct anti-aircraft warfare 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 ship-to-ship missiles and guns. With upgrades to their AN/SPY-1 radar systems and their associated missile payloads as part of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, as well as the introduction of the AN/SPY-6 radar system, the class has also evolved 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 {{sclass|Spruance|destroyer|2}}, {{USS|Cushing|DD-985|6}}, on {{nowrap|21 September}} 2005, the Arleigh Burke-class ships became the U.S. Navy's only active destroyers until the {{sclass|Zumwalt|destroyer|4}} became active in 2016. The Arleigh Burke class has the longest production run of any U.S. Navy surface combatant. {{As of|2025|1|post=,}} seventy-four are active, with twenty-five more planned to enter service.

Characteristics

=Variants=

The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer has four variants, referred to as "Flights". Newer Flights incorporate technological advancements.{{cite web |title=DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/ddg-51.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150803164022/http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ddg-51.htm |archive-date=3 August 2015 |access-date=1 August 2015 |website=man.fas.org}}

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{{cite web |title=Destroyers (DDG 51) |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2169871/destroyers-ddg-51/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250309144516/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2169871/destroyers-ddg-51/ |archive-date=9 March 2025 |access-date=1 April 2025 |website=navy.mil |publisher=United States Navy}}

File:USS Fitzgerald DDG-62.jpg|Flight I ship {{USS|Fitzgerald|DDG-62|6}} with Tactical Towed Array Sonar (TACTAS) in the center of the fantail, Harpoon missile launchers, distinctive stacks, and no helicopter hangars

File:USS Mustin (DDG 89) stbd stern view.jpg|Flight IIA ship {{USS|Mustin|DDG-89|6}} without TACTAS and no Harpoon launchers, but with helicopter hangars and new exhaust stacks design

File:DDG-125 acceptance trials.jpg|Flight III ship {{USS|Jack H. Lucas|DDG-125|6}} 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;{{Cite web |date=17 April 2010 |title=Photo Release -- Northrop Grumman-Built William P. Lawrence Christened; Legacy of Former POW Honored |url=https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/photo-release-northrop-grumman-built-william-p-lawrence-christened;-legacy-of-former-pow-honored |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201028202058/https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/photo-release-northrop-grumman-built-william-p-lawrence-christened;-legacy-of-former-pow-honored |archive-date=2020-10-28 |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Northrop Grumman |language=en}} only the {{sclass|Spruance|destroyer|5}}, {{sclass|Kidd|destroyer|5}} ({{convert|563|ft|m|disp=or|abbr=on}}), and {{sclass|Zumwalt|destroyer|5}} classes ({{convert|600|ft|m|disp=or|abbr=on}}) 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. The class's design incorporates stealth techniques, such as the angled (rather than traditional vertical) surfaces and the raked tripod mainmast, which make the ship more difficult to detect by radar.Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p. 592Baker 1998, p. 1020

Its designers incorporated lessons from the {{sclass|Ticonderoga|cruiser|1}}, which the Navy deemed too expensive to continue building and difficult to upgrade further.{{Cite book |last=Tomajczyk |first=Stephen |title=Modern U.S. Navy Destroyers |publisher=Zenith Imprint |year=2001 |isbn=9781610607339 |pages=60 |language=en}} For these destroyers, the U.S. Navy returned to all-steel construction, except the mast made of aluminum. 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;{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/11/us/navy-reverting-to-steel-in-shipbuilding-after-cracks-in-aluminum.html |title=Navy Reverting To Steel in Shipbuilding After Cracks in Aluminum |newspaper=The New York Times |agency=Associated Press |date=11 August 1987 |access-date=5 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170526234039/http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/11/us/navy-reverting-to-steel-in-shipbuilding-after-cracks-in-aluminum.html |archive-date=26 May 2017 |url-status=live}} a 1975 fire aboard {{USS|Belknap|CG-26|6}} gutted her aluminum superstructure.{{cite web |url=http://www.hazegray.org/faq/smn6.htm#F7 |title=Section F.7: Aluminum in warship construction |website=hazegray.org |date=30 March 2000 |access-date=21 November 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140408041743/http://www.hazegray.org/faq/smn6.htm#F7 |archive-date=8 April 2014 |url-status=live}} 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.{{cite web |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/ArleighB.htm |title=The Arleigh Burke: Linchpin of the Navy |website=man.fas.org |access-date=27 October 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211027004545/https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/ArleighB.htm |archive-date=27 October 2021 |url-status=live}} A design study called "Cruiser Baseline" was made for a ship that would incorporate the capabilities of the VLS-capable Ticonderoga class on a hull and superstructure designed to the same standards as the Arleigh Burke, although this study was for analytical purposes only and no such ship was built.{{cite web |last=Sims |first=Philip |date=28 March 2005 |title=Historical Review of Cruiser Characteristics, Roles and Missions |url=https://navalmarinearchive.com/research/docs/cruisers/pdf_docs/cruiser_roles_and_missions_public_release.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240707003118/https://navalmarinearchive.com/research/docs/cruisers/pdf_docs/cruiser_roles_and_missions_public_release.pdf |archive-date=7 July 2024 |access-date=1 April 2025 |website= |publisher=Naval Sea Systems Command |pages=107–108}}

=Passive defenses=

Arleigh Burke destroyers are equipped with AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare (EW) suites that provide electronic support. Vessels with the SLQ-32(V)3, SLQ-32(V)6, or SLQ-32(V)7 variant can jam radars.{{Cite web |title=AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare (EW) system |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/an-slq-32.htm |access-date=2022-08-30 |website=man.fas.org |archive-date=15 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221115175251/https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/an-slq-32.htm |url-status=live }}

File:Mark 36 SRBOC on USS Stout.jpg

The destroyers have Mark 36 infrared and chaff decoy launchers, as well as Nulka decoy launchers, for spoofing incoming AShMs.{{Cite web |date=11 July 2000 |title=Defense Acquisitions: Comprehensive Strategy Needed to Improve Ship Cruise Missile Defense |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-00-149.pdf |access-date=2023-01-23 |website= |publisher=Government Accountability Office |archive-date=3 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230203222930/https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-00-149.pdf |url-status=live }}Wertheim 2005, p. 913 For defeating incoming torpedoes, the class has two AN/SLQ-25 Nixie towed countermeasures.Polmar 2013, p. 142 The ships' Prairie-Maskers can reduce their radiated noise.Wertheim 2005, p. 948

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). Other NBC defenses include double air-locked hatches, pressurized compartments, and an external countermeasure washdown system.{{cite web |url=http://www.dvidshub.net/image/1024607/countermeasure-washdown-system-test |title=DVIDS – Images – Countermeasure washdown system test |work=DVIDS|access-date=27 October 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151017053143/https://www.dvidshub.net/image/1024607/countermeasure-washdown-system-test |archive-date=17 October 2015 |url-status=live}} The class's electronics are hardened against electromagnetic pulses.{{cite book |last= |first= |url=https://archive.org/details/the-encyclopedia-of-middle-east-wars-the-united-states-in-the-persian-gulf-afgha/ |title=The Encyclopedia of Middle East Wars: The United States in the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq Conflicts |publisher=ABC-CLIO |year=2010 |isbn=9781851099474 |editor-last=Tucker |editor-first=Spencer |location=Santa Barbara, California |page=376}} Fire suppression equipment includes water sprinklers in the living quarters and combat information center (CIC).

=Weapon systems=

The Arleigh Burke class are multi-mission ships with numerous combat systems, including anti-aircraft missiles, land attack missiles, ship-to-ship missiles, and an anti-submarine warfare (ASW) system. 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, the Arleigh Burkes are more heavily armed than many preceding guided-missile cruiser classes. 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.{{Cite web |title=AEGIS Weapon System |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2166739/aegis-weapon-system/ |access-date=2023-01-27 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=27 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127192554/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2166739/aegis-weapon-system/ |url-status=live }}

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.{{Cite web |title=AN/SPY-1 Radar |url=https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/an-spy-1-radar/ |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=Missile Threat |language=en-US |archive-date=6 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220806192727/https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/an-spy-1-radar/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite journal |last=Wilkinson Jr. |first=John |year=2001 |title=APL's Contributions to Aegis Programs: An Overview |url=https://www.jhuapl.edu/content/techdigest/pdf/V22-N04/22-04-Wilkinson.pdf |url-status=live |journal=The APL Technical Digest |publisher=Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=425 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230301193618/https://www.jhuapl.edu/content/techdigest/pdf/V22-N04/22-04-Wilkinson.pdf |archive-date=1 March 2023 |access-date=27 January 2023 }}Polmar 2013, p. 127

File:US Navy 031200-N-0000X-001 The guided missile cruiser USS Vicksburg (CG 69), and the guided missile destroyers USS Roosevelt (DDG 80), USS Carney (DDG 64) and USS The Sullivans (DDG 68) launch a coordinated volley of missiles d.jpg

The Standard Missile SM-2MR/ER and SM-6 provide area air defense, though they may also be used in a secondary anti-ship role.{{cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=7 March 2016 |title=Navy Sinks Former Frigate USS Reuben James in Test of New Supersonic Anti-Surface Missile |url=https://news.usni.org/2016/03/07/navy-sinks-former-frigate-uss-reuben-james-in-test-of-new-supersonic-anti-surface-missile |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170204163049/https://news.usni.org/2016/03/07/navy-sinks-former-frigate-uss-reuben-james-in-test-of-new-supersonic-anti-surface-missile |archive-date=4 February 2017 |access-date=20 November 2016 |website=USNI News}} The SM-2 uses semi-active radar homing (SARH); up to three targets may be simultaneously intercepted as the Arleigh Burkes have three AN/SPG-62 fire-control radars for terminal target illumination.{{cite web |date=October 2000 |title=Fire Controlman, Volume 2–Fire-Control Radar Fundamentals |url=https://maritime.org/doc/pdf/fc2.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141030031942/http://www.maritime.org/doc/pdf/fc2.pdf |archive-date=2014-10-30 |access-date=2023-01-27 |publisher=Naval Education and Training Professional Development Center}}{{Cite web |title=U.S. Navy Destroyer (Ship Class - DDG) |url=https://www.surfpac.navy.mil/Ships/By-Class/US-Navy-Destroyer-Ship-Class-DDG/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127192559/https://www.surfpac.navy.mil/Ships/By-Class/US-Navy-Destroyer-Ship-Class-DDG/ |archive-date=2023-01-27 |access-date=2023-01-27 |website=surfpac.navy.mil}} The SM-6, which provides over-the-horizon defense,{{cite web |url=http://breakingdefense.com/2015/08/sm-6-can-now-kill-both-cruise-and-ballistic-missiles/ |title=SM-6 Can Now Kill Both Cruise and Ballistic Missiles |last=Freedberg Jr. |first=Sydney |website=Breaking Defense |date=4 August 2015 |access-date=20 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161109204053/http://breakingdefense.com/2015/08/sm-6-can-now-kill-both-cruise-and-ballistic-missiles/ |archive-date=9 November 2016 |url-status=live}} 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 may be intercepted simultaneously.{{Cite web |title=Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) |url=https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/sm-6/ |access-date=2022-08-30 |website=Missile Threat |language=en-US |archive-date=30 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220830063340/https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/sm-6/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Scott |first=Richard |date=2020-11-06 |title=Canada approved for SM-2 Block IIIC missile purchase |url=https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/canada-approved-for-sm-2-block-iiic-missile-purchase |access-date=2023-01-23 |website=Janes |language=en |archive-date=6 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201106182907/https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/canada-approved-for-sm-2-block-iiic-missile-purchase |url-status=live }}

Flights IIA and III—and modernized Flight I and II ships—can carry RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSMs),{{Cite web |last=Hammond |first=Sara |date=2004-04-30 |title=Raytheon Awarded Full Rate Production Contract for Evolved SEASPARROW Missile |url=https://raytheon.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=10 |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=Raytheon News Release Archive |archive-date=27 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127050619/https://raytheon.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=10 |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |title=DDG 51 Flight III Destroyer/Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR)/Aegis Combat System |url=https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2016/navy/2016ddg51.pdf |access-date=2023-01-26 |publisher=Director, Operational Test and Evaluation |archive-date=21 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230221075221/https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2016/navy/2016ddg51.pdf |url-status=live }}{{Cite book |url=https://media.defense.gov/2020/May/18/2002302043/-1/-1/1/NPG17.PDF |title=U.S. Navy Program Guide 2017 |publisher=U.S. Department of the Navy |year=2017 |isbn=978-1090335104 |pages=36, 50–51 |language=en}} which provide medium-range air defense and are also capable of targeting other ships. ESSM is small enough to be quad-packed into a single Mk 41 VLS cell. ESSM Block 1 uses SARH, guided similarly to older SM-2s. ESSM Block 2, which achieved initial operating capability (IOC) in 2021, features a dual-mode seeker with ARH capability.{{Cite web |title=Evolved Seasparrow Missile Block 1 (ESSM) (RIM 162D) |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2168978/evolved-seasparrow-missile-block-1-essm-rim-162d/ |access-date=2022-08-30 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=24 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230124034832/http://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2168978/evolved-seasparrow-missile-block-1-essm-rim-162d/ |url-status=live }}

The SM-3, SM-6, and SM-2ER Block IV provide Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD), the SM-3 being an exoatmospheric interceptor{{Cite web |title=Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) |url=https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/sm-3/ |access-date=2022-08-30 |website=Missile Threat |language=en-US |archive-date=1 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220901040207/https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/sm-3/ |url-status=live }} and the latter two having terminal phase anti-ballistic capability.{{Cite web |title=Standard Missile-2 Block IV |url=https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/standard-missile-2-block-iv/ |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=Missile Threat |language=en-US |archive-date=31 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220831094808/https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/standard-missile-2-block-iv/ |url-status=live }} So vital has the Aegis BMD role become that all ships of the class are being updated with BMD capability.{{cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date= |title=Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress |id=RL33745 |url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL33745 |access-date=2023-03-15 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |archive-date=19 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230319040357/https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL33745 |url-status=live }} By January 2023, there were 51 BMD-capable Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.{{Cite web |title=Aegis Afloat |url=https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/defense-systems/aegis-afloat/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231123235823/https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/defense-systems/aegis-afloat/ |archive-date=2023-11-23 |access-date=2024-01-01 |website=Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance}} Flight III ships have been delivered since 2023 with 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.{{cite web |last=Katz |first=Justin |date=11 January 2022 |title=Raytheon to start backfitting destroyers with SPY-6 radar |url=https://breakingdefense.com/2022/01/raytheon-to-start-back-fitting-destroyers-with-spy-6-radar/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220411160920/https://breakingdefense.com/2022/01/raytheon-to-start-back-fitting-destroyers-with-spy-6-radar/ |archive-date=11 April 2022 |access-date=14 April 2022 |website=Breaking Defense}}

Flights I and II carry two stand-alone Harpoon anti-ship missile launchers for a total of four or eight Harpoons,Wertheim 2005, p. 947 providing an anti-ship capability with a range in excess of {{convert|65|nmi|lk=in}}. During Exercise RIMPAC 2024, DDG-62, a Flight I ship, launched a Naval Strike Missile (NSM); the launchers for the Harpoons were removed to make room for the NSM's proprietary launch boxes.{{Cite web |title=USS Fitzgerald fires first Naval Strike Missile |url=https://www.dvidshub.net/video/931592/uss-fitzgerald-fires-first-naval-strike-missile |access-date=2024-07-26 |website=DVIDS |language=en}}{{Cite web |last=Johnston |first=Carter |date=2024-06-29 |title=USS Fitzgerald and HMAS Sydney Show Up at RIMPAC 2024 with NSM |url=https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/06/uss-fitzgerald-and-hmas-sydney-show-up-with-nsm-at-rimpac-2024/ |access-date=2024-07-26 |website=Naval News |language=en-US}} The Long Range Anti-Ship Missile could be used from the class's VLS, as it has been tested with the Self Defense Test Ship.{{cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=20 July 2016 |title=LRASM Scores in Navy Test Ship Launch |url=https://news.usni.org/2016/07/20/lrasm-scores-ship-launch-test |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20241209202623/https://news.usni.org/2016/07/20/lrasm-scores-ship-launch-test |archive-date=9 December 2024 |access-date=1 April 2025 |website=USNI News}}

The class can perform tactical land strikes with VLS-launched Tomahawks. 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.{{Cite web |last=Grady |first=John |date=2020-01-22 |title=Entire Navy Tomahawk Missile Arsenal Will Upgrade To Block V |url=https://news.usni.org/2020/01/22/entire-navy-tomahawk-missile-arsenal-will-upgrade-to-block-v |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=23 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220123090950/https://news.usni.org/2020/01/22/entire-navy-tomahawk-missile-arsenal-will-upgrade-to-block-v |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Archus |first=Dorian |date=2021-03-26 |title=Raytheon delivers 1st Tomahawk Block V missiles to U.S. Navy |url=https://navalpost.com/raytheon-delivers-first-tomahawk-block-v-missiles-to-u-s-navy/ |access-date=2023-02-14 |website=Naval Post |language=en-US |archive-date=15 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230215034821/https://navalpost.com/raytheon-delivers-first-tomahawk-block-v-missiles-to-u-s-navy/ |url-status=live }}

File:USN MK-46 Mod 5 lightweight torpedo (cropped).jpg

Arleigh Burke-class ships have the 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.{{Cite web |title=Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/22pres/OPN_BA2_Book.pdf |access-date=2023-02-04 |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense |page=12 |archive-date=5 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230205023926/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/22pres/OPN_BA2_Book.pdf |url-status=live }} 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 can carry standoff RUM-139 vertical launch anti-submarine rockets. A Mark 32 triple torpedo tubes mount on each side of the ship can fire Mark 46, Mark 50, or Mark 54 lightweight torpedoes for short-range ASW. The ships can detect anti-ship mines at a range of about 1,400 meters.{{Cite web |title=Selected Acquisition Report (SAR): DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51) |url=https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2014_SARS/15-F-0540_DDG_51_SAR_Dec_2014.PDF |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211230200909/https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2014_SARS/15-F-0540_DDG_51_SAR_Dec_2014.PDF |archive-date=2021-12-30 |access-date=2023-02-05 |publisher=Washington Headquarters Services |page=13}}{{Cite web |title=AN/SQQ-89(V) Undersea Warfare / Anti-Submarine Warfare Combat System |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2166784/ansqq-89v-undersea-warfare-anti-submarine-warfare-combat-system/ |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=11 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220711063046/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2166784/ansqq-89v-undersea-warfare-anti-submarine-warfare-combat-system/ |url-status=live }}

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 for improved self-defense.{{Cite web |date=2015-09-15 |title=Navy Integrating SeaRAM on Rota-Based DDGs; First Installation Complete In November |url=https://news.usni.org/2015/09/15/navy-integrating-searam-on-rota-based-ddgs-first-installation-complete-in-november |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=31 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220831094804/https://news.usni.org/2015/09/15/navy-integrating-searam-on-rota-based-ddgs-first-installation-complete-in-november |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |date=2021-03-27 |title=USS Arleigh Burke heads for new European homeport with new kit |url=https://defbrief.com/2021/03/27/uss-arleigh-burke-heads-for-new-european-homeport-with-new-kit/ |access-date=2023-02-14 |website=Defense Brief |archive-date=21 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230221074945/https://defbrief.com/2021/03/27/uss-arleigh-burke-heads-for-new-european-homeport-with-new-kit/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |title=USS ROOSEVELT (DDG 80) |url=https://www.surflant.usff.navy.mil/Portals/44/Welcome%20Aboard%20brochure_1.doc |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=surflant.usff.navy.mil |archive-date=18 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221118173908/https://www.surflant.usff.navy.mil/Portals/44/Welcome%20Aboard%20brochure_1.doc |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |title=History |url=https://www.surflant.usff.navy.mil/Organization/Operational-Forces/Destroyers/USS-Bulkeley-DDG-84/About-Us/History/ |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=surflant.usff.navy.mil |archive-date=17 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221117185813/https://www.surflant.usff.navy.mil/Organization/Operational-Forces/Destroyers/USS-Bulkeley-DDG-84/About-Us/History/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |title=220927-N-GF955-1004 |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Photo-Gallery/igphoto/2003089913/ |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=17 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221117185048/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Photo-Gallery/igphoto/2003089913/ |url-status=live }} 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.{{Cite web |title=MK 38 - 25 mm Machine Gun System |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167836/mk-38-25-mm-machine-gun-system/ |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=15 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221115175249/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167836/mk-38-25-mm-machine-gun-system/ |url-status=live }} There are numerous mounts for crew-served weapons like the M2 Browning.{{Cite web |title=180627-N-GR120-0643 |url=https://allhands.navy.mil/Media/Gallery/igphoto/2002377270/ |access-date=2022-08-31 |website=allhands.navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=31 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220831031522/https://allhands.navy.mil/Media/Gallery/igphoto/2002377270/ |url-status=live }}

File:US Navy 070111-N-4515N-509 Guided missile destroyer USS Forest Sherman (DDG 98) test fires its five-inch gun on the bow of the ship during training.jpg 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, 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 {{convert|13|nmi|km}}.{{Refn|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 {{convert|20|nmi|km}}.{{Cite web |title=Mk 45 Mod 4 Naval Gun System |url=https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/mk-45-mod-4-naval-gun-system |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230226043627/https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/mk-45-mod-4-naval-gun-system |archive-date=2023-02-26 |access-date=2023-05-24 |website=BAE Systems}}|group=N}}{{Cite web |title=MK 45 - 5-inch 54/62 Caliber Guns |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167864/mk-45-5-inch-5462-caliber-guns/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221210015428/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167864/mk-45-5-inch-5462-caliber-guns/ |archive-date=2022-12-10 |access-date=2023-05-24 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US}} Arleigh Burkes can stow 680 5-inch rounds.{{Cite web |last=DiGiulian |first=Tony |title=5"/54 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mods 0 - 2 |url=http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-54_mk45.php |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230320234140/http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-54_mk45.php |archive-date=2023-03-20 |access-date=2023-05-23 |website=NavWeaps}}{{Cite web |last=DiGiulian |first=Tony |title=5"/62 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mod 4 |url=http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-62_mk45.php |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230320214143/http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-62_mk45.php |archive-date=2023-03-20 |access-date=2023-05-23 |website=NavWeaps}}

File:USS Kidd (DDG-100) San Diego.jpg

As of 2023, six destroyers (DDG-100, DDG-104, 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.{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Brian |date=2022-07-01 |title=Now Arriving: High-Power Laser Competition |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2022/july/now-arriving-high-power-laser-competition |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230813023950/https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2022/july/now-arriving-high-power-laser-competition |archive-date=2023-08-13 |access-date=2023-08-13 |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute}}{{Cite web |date=2022-12-27 |title=USS John Finn (DDG 113) Commemorates Navy Chief Petty Officer, Last Living Medal of Honor Recipient from the Attack on Pearl Harbor |url=https://www.dvidshub.net/image/7573156/uss-john-finn-ddg-113-commemorates-navy-chief-petty-officer-last-living-medal-honor-recipient-attack |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221228071920/https://www.dvidshub.net/image/7573156/uss-john-finn-ddg-113-commemorates-navy-chief-petty-officer-last-living-medal-honor-recipient-attack |archive-date=2022-12-28 |access-date=2023-08-13 |website=DVIDS |language=en}}{{Cite web |title=USS Kidd (DDG 100) |url=https://www.navysite.de/dd/ddg100.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231008155000/https://www.navysite.de/dd/ddg100.htm |archive-date=2023-10-08 |access-date=2023-08-13 |website=navysite.de}}{{Cite web |title=USS Sterett (DDG 104) |url=https://www.navysite.de/dd/ddg104.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230923071724/https://www.navysite.de/dd/ddg104.htm |archive-date=2023-09-23 |access-date=2023-12-24 |website=navysite.de}} DDG-88 is equipped with the higher-power High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS).

=Aircraft=

File:160518-N-AO823-027 (27316233692).jpg

Flights IIA and III have 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.{{cite web |title=SH-60 LAMPS MK III Seahawk |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ac/sh-60.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221208121739/https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ac/sh-60.htm |archive-date=8 December 2022 |access-date=27 October 2015 |website=man.fas.org}}

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 at a much lower cost than manned helicopters.{{Cite web |last=Eckstein |first=Megan |date=2022-04-06 |title=Textron drone deploys on US Navy destroyer as contractor-operated ISR node |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2022/04/06/textron-drone-deployed-on-navy-destroyer-as-contractor-operated-isr-node/ |access-date= |website=Defense News |language=en }}

Development

= Origins and Flight I =

The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) from 1970 to 1974, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, sought to improve the U.S. Navy through modernization at minimal cost. Zumwalt's approach to the fleet was a "high-low mix"—a few high-end, high-cost warships supplemented by 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 {{sclass|Charles F. Adams|destroyer|5}} destroyers.{{Cite web |last=Stillwell |first=Paul |date=2010-08-01 |title=Designing the Arleigh Burke's Hull |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2010/august/designing-arleigh-burkes-hull |access-date=2023-01-25 |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |language=en |archive-date=26 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230126005046/https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2010/august/designing-arleigh-burkes-hull |url-status=live }}Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, pp. 550–551Friedman 1982, pp. 388–389

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.{{cite news |first=Wayne |last=Biddle |title=The dust has settled on the Air Force's Great Engine |work=The New York Times |date=28 February 1984}} On 3 April 1985, Bath Iron Works received a US$321.9 million contract to build the first of the class, USS Arleigh Burke.{{cite news |date=3 April 1985 |title=Maine shipbuilder gets Navy contract for a new destroyer |work=The New York Times}} Gibbs & Cox was awarded the contract to be the lead ship design agent.{{cite web |date=January 2011 |title=History of Gibbs & Cox |url=http://www.gibbscox.com/historyofgibbscox.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110109012157/http://www.gibbscox.com/historyofgibbscox.htm |archive-date=9 January 2011 |access-date=6 February 2011 |publisher=Gibbs & Cox}} The Navy contracted Ingalls Shipbuilding to build the second ship.{{Cite web |title=USS BARRY (DDG 52) |url=https://www.nvr.navy.mil/SHIPDETAILS/SHIPSDETAIL_DDG_52.HTML |access-date=2023-01-25 |website=Naval Vessel Register |archive-date=29 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201029205417/https://www.nvr.navy.mil/SHIPDETAILS/SHIPSDETAIL_DDG_52.HTML |url-status=dead }}

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. To compensate for the limited length, a wide flaring bow was incorporated to maintain favorable seakeeping characteristics, and the originally-planned 80,000 shaft horsepower (shp) LM2500 gas turbines were upgraded to 100,000 shp. 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. Despite their constraints, the designers benefitted from insight gained from previous classes; for example, they chose an all-steel superstructure to improve survivability.

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

= Flight II =

The Flight II iteration of the class was introduced in FY1992. The incorporation of the AN/SRS-1A(V) Combat Direction Finding enhanced detection of signals.{{Cite web |title=AN/SRS-1A(V) Combat Direction Finding |url=https://irp.fas.org/program/collect/cdf.htm |access-date=2023-01-28 |website=irp.fas.org |archive-date=21 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230221021417/https://irp.fas.org/program/collect/cdf.htm |url-status=live }} The TADIX-B, JTIDS Command and Control Processor, and Link 16 improved communication with other assets.{{Cite web |title=COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS, COMPUTERS, AND INTELLIGENCE (C4I) |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/navy/docs/vis99/v99-ch3e.html |access-date=2023-01-28 |website=man.fas.org |archive-date=21 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230221021419/https://man.fas.org/dod-101/navy/docs/vis99/v99-ch3e.html |url-status=live }} The SLQ-32 EW suite was upgraded to (V)3, and the SPS-67(V)3 surface search radar was upgraded to (V)5.{{Cite web |title=AN/SPS-67(V) Radar Set |url=https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167975/ansps-67v-radar-set/ |access-date=2022-09-01 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US |archive-date=1 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220901023156/https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2167975/ansps-67v-radar-set/ |url-status=live }} Flight II also gained the capability to launch and control the SM-2ER Block IV.{{Cite web |title=DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51) |url=https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2019_SARS/20-F-0568_DOC_25_DDG_51_SAR_Dec_2019_Full.pdf |access-date=2023-01-27 |publisher=Washington Headquarters Services |page=7 |archive-date=27 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127192556/https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2019_SARS/20-F-0568_DOC_25_DDG_51_SAR_Dec_2019_Full.pdf |url-status=live }} An expansion of fuel capacity slightly increased the displacement.Saunders 2015, p. 940

= Flight IIA =

File:Burke class destroyer profile;wpe47485.png

The Flight IIA design was first procured in FY1994.{{cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date=26 February 2010 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |id=RL32109 |url=https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA516419.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230319170137/https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA516419.pdf |archive-date=19 March 2023 |access-date=19 March 2023 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |page=2}} Among the additions are two hangars and support facilities for ASW helicopters, Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), the Kingfisher mine detection system, and five blast-resistant bulkheads.Wertheim 2005, p. 946 To accommodate the hangars, the length was increased to {{convert|509.5|ft|abbr=on}}, and the rear-facing SPY-1D arrays are mounted one deck (eight feet) higher to prevent a blind spot. Flight IIA 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.Wertheim 2005, p. 945 New fiber optics improved bandwidth and helped reduce weight gain.Saunders 2015, p. 942 Systems removed from Flight IIA include the Harpoon missile launchers{{Refn|According to Polmar, the Harpoon launchers were removed to save weight. According to Wertheim, the Harpoon launchers were removed to save costs.|group=N}} and, starting with {{USS|McCampbell|DDG-85}}, the forward Phalanx CIWS. Flight IIA ships were initially built without the AN/SQR-19 TACTAS, though later units were subsequently installed with TACTAS.Polmar 2013, pp. 141–142

Starting with {{USS|Winston S. Churchill|DDG-81}}, the longer 5-inch/62-caliber (127 mm) Mark 45 Mod 4 gun was installed. 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.{{Cite web |title=Northrop Grumman to Supply Radars for New U.S. Navy Destroyers |url=https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-to-supply-radars-for-new-u-s-navy-destroyers |access-date=2022-09-04 |website=Northrop Grumman Newsroom |language=en |archive-date=4 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220904065110/https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-to-supply-radars-for-new-u-s-navy-destroyers |url-status=live }} 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 shrouded by the superstructure. 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.{{Cite book |title=Vision, Presence, Power: A Program Guide to the U.S. Navy |publisher=U.S. Department of the Navy |year=2004 |edition=2004 |pages=86 |language=en}}

File:USS Momsen (DDG 92) stbd bow view.jpg

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. However, the Navy later changed its mind and decided to retrofit all IIA ships to carry at least one Phalanx CIWS by 2013.{{harvnb|Ewing|2008}}

DDGs 91–96 (USS Pinckney, {{USS|Momsen|DDG-92|6}}, {{USS|Chung-Hoon|DDG-93|6}}, {{USS|Nitze|DDG-94|6}}, {{USS|James E. Williams|DDG-95|6}}, and {{USS|Bainbridge|DDG-96|6}}) were built with superstructure differences to accommodate the AN/WLD-1 Remote Minehunting System (RMS).{{Cite web |date= |title=Department of the Navy: Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/11pres/RDTEN_BA4_Book.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230127192559/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/11pres/RDTEN_BA4_Book.pdf |archive-date=27 January 2023 |access-date=2023-01-27 |publisher=U.S. Department of the Navy |page=198}} However, only Pinckney, Momsen, and Bainbridge were installed with the system before the RMS program was canceled.

=Modernization=

Efforts to modernize the Arleigh Burke class began amid congressional concerns over the retirement of the {{sclass|Iowa|battleship}}. In 1996, the Navy began a program to field the Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) for the DDG-51 class.{{Cite web |date=5 May 2006 |title=National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 |url=https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-109hrpt452/pdf/CRPT-109hrpt452.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220717174728/https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-109hrpt452/pdf/CRPT-109hrpt452.pdf |archive-date=2022-07-17 |access-date=2022-11-18 |website= |publisher=U.S. Government Publishing Office |pages=193–194 |publication-place=Washington, D.C.}} The ERGM was to extend the class's 5-inch Mark 45 gun range to {{convert|63|nmi|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.{{cite web |title=MK 45 5-inch / 54-caliber (lightweight) gun; MK 45-5-inch / 62-caliber (MOD 4 ERGM) gun |url=https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-45.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211015223039/https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-45.htm |archive-date=15 October 2021 |access-date=20 November 2016 |website=man.fas.org}} However, the ERGM was canceled in 2008.{{Cite web |last=Torres |first=Rene |title=Raising the Iowa: Reactivating the Iowa Class Battleships to Fill the Current Naval Surface Fire Support Vacancy |url=https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA600139.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211121032931/https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA600139.pdf |archive-date=2021-11-21 |access-date=2023-01-21 |publisher=Marine Corps Combat Development Command |page=9}}

The current DDG-51 modernization program is designed to provide mid-life upgrades to ensure the destroyers remain effective with service lives of at least 35 years. Modernization of existing ships provides commonality with in-production ships. The program's goals are reduced manning, increased mission effectiveness, and reduced total cost. Mid-life modernization of Flight I and II ships is done in two phases: the first phase updates the hull, mechanical, and electrical (HM&E) systems, while the second phase focuses on Aegis Combat System upgrades and introduces an Open Architecture Computing Environment (OACE). By 2017, modernization technologies were introduced to production ships, and the Navy started modernization of Flight IIA ships through a single process combining both phases of upgrading.{{Cite book |title=Seapower 2019 Almanac |publisher=Navy League of the United States |year=2019 |location=Arlington, VA |page=20}} The capabilities of modernized destroyers include CEC, Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD),{{Refn|Integrated Air and Missile Defense refers to the ability to simultaneously perform anti-air warfare and ballistic missile defense.|group=N}} ESSM support, improved electronic support with Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 2, improved data processing with Boeing's Gigabit Ethernet Data Multiplex System,{{cite web |date=24 October 2011 |title=Boeing Deploys Gigabit Ethernet Data Multiplex System on USS Spruance |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1983 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111225130359/http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1983 |archive-date=25 December 2011 |access-date=27 December 2011 |publisher=Boeing}} and improvements to littoral warfare.{{cite web |date=4 November 2014 |title=CNO's Position Report: 2014 |url=http://www.navy.mil/cno/docs/141104_PositionReport.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150122182937/http://www.navy.mil/cno/docs/141104_PositionReport.pdf |archive-date=22 January 2015 |access-date=2014-11-26 |publisher=US Navy}}

File:Lt. Yuma Kuwata monitors surface contacts aboard USS John S. McCain (DDG 56) during Malabar 2020. (50570331182).jpg aboard {{USS|John S. McCain|DDG-56|6}}]]

In July 2010, BAE Systems announced it had been awarded a contract to modernize 11 ships.{{cite web |title=BAE to Modernize Up to 11 Norfolk-based Destroyers |url=http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/BAE-to-Modernize-Up-to-11-Norfolk-based-Destroyers-06498/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100807230224/http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/BAE-to-Modernize-Up-to-11-Norfolk-based-Destroyers-06498/ |archive-date=7 August 2010 |access-date=3 August 2010 |website=Defense Industry Daily}} In May 2014, USNI News reported that 21 of the 28 Flight I and II Arleigh Burke-class destroyers would not receive the full 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 HM&E systems, and on some ships, their anti-submarine suite.{{cite news |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=27 May 2014 |title=Navy Quietly Downscales Destroyer Upgrades |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |url=http://news.usni.org/2014/05/27/navy-quietly-downscales-destroyer-upgrades |url-status=live |access-date=20 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170618072015/https://news.usni.org/2014/05/27/navy-quietly-downscales-destroyer-upgrades |archive-date=18 June 2017}}{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2014-06-03 |title=Navy Altered Destroyer Upgrades Due to Budget Pressure, Demand for Ships |url=https://news.usni.org/2014/06/03/navy-altered-destroyer-upgrade-plan-due-budget-pressure-demand-ships |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=18 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221118173911/https://news.usni.org/2014/06/03/navy-altered-destroyer-upgrade-plan-due-budget-pressure-demand-ships |url-status=live }} Seven Flight I ships—DDGs 51–53, 57, 61, 65, 69—received the full $270 million Baseline 9 upgrade. Deputy of surface warfare Dave McFarland said that this change was due to the budget cuts in the Budget Control Act of 2011.{{cite news |last1=LaGrone |first1=Sam |date=3 June 2014 |title=Navy Altered Destroyer Upgrades Due to Budget Pressure, Demand for Ships |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |url=http://news.usni.org/2014/06/03/navy-altered-destroyer-upgrade-plan-due-budget-pressure-demand-ships |url-status=live |access-date=3 June 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140607010401/http://news.usni.org/2014/06/03/navy-altered-destroyer-upgrade-plan-due-budget-pressure-demand-ships |archive-date=7 June 2014}}

In 2016, the Navy announced it would begin outfitting 34 Flight IIA Arleigh Burkes with a hybrid-electric drive (HED) to lower fuel costs. The four LM2500 gas turbines of the class 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 {{convert|13|kn|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.{{cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=23 September 2015 |title=Navy Set to Install Hybrid Electric Drives in Destroyer Fleet Staring [sic] Next Year |url=http://news.usni.org/2015/09/23/navy-set-to-install-hybrid-electric-drives-in-destroyer-fleet-staring-next-year |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160905110200/https://news.usni.org/2015/09/23/navy-set-to-install-hybrid-electric-drives-in-destroyer-fleet-staring-next-year |archive-date=5 September 2016 |access-date=20 November 2016 |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute}} 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 changed budget priorities.{{Cite web |last=Larter |first=David |date=2018-03-08 |title=US Navy canceling program to turn gas-guzzling destroyers into hybrids |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/03/08/the-us-navy-is-cancelling-a-program-to-turn-gas-guzzling-destroyers-into-hybrids/ |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Defense News |language=en |archive-date=9 March 2018 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20180309220341/https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/03/08/the-us-navy-is-cancelling-a-program-to-turn-gas-guzzling-destroyers-into-hybrids/ |url-status=live }}

File:ArleighBurkeClassShips.jpg 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.{{cite web |url=http://news.usni.org/2015/09/15/navy-integrating-searam-on-rota-based-ddgs-first-installation-complete-in-November |title=Navy Integrating SeaRAM on Rota-Based DDGs; First Installation Complete in November |last=Eckstein |first=Megan |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |date=15 September 2015 |access-date=20 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161008160945/https://news.usni.org/2015/09/15/navy-integrating-searam-on-rota-based-ddgs-first-installation-complete-in-November |archive-date=8 October 2016 |url-status=live}} 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.

In February 2018, Lockheed Martin received a contract to deliver its High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and 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 {{cvt|5|mi|order=flip}} away.{{Cite web |last=Katz |first=Justin |date=2022-08-18 |title=Lockheed delivers high-energy laser four years in the making to US Navy |url=https://breakingdefense.sites.breakingmedia.com/2022/08/lockheed-delivers-high-energy-laser-four-years-in-the-making-to-us-navy/ |access-date= |website=Breaking Defense |language=en-US |archive-date=25 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230325022018/https://breakingdefense.com/2022/08/lockheed-delivers-high-energy-laser-four-years-in-the-making-to-us-navy/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Meredith |first=Roaten |date=19 October 2022 |title=Navy Destroyer Adds HELIOS Laser to Arsenal |url=https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2022/10/19/navy-destroyer-adds-helios-laser-to-arsenal |access-date= |website=nationaldefensemagazine.org |language=en |archive-date=23 October 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221023200306/https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2022/10/19/navy-destroyer-adds-helios-laser-to-arsenal |url-status=live }} It would be the first laser weapon put on a warship.[https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/03/03/navy-buys-ship-lasers-dazzle-drone-swarms-take-out-small-boats.html Navy Buys Lasers to 'Dazzle' Drones, Take Out Small Boats] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180305064319/https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/03/03/navy-buys-ship-lasers-dazzle-drone-swarms-take-out-small-boats.html |date=5 March 2018}}. Military.com. 3 March 2018{{Cite web |last=Freedberg Jr. |first=Sydney |date=2018-03-01 |title=First Combat Laser For Navy Warship: Lockheed HELIOS |url=https://breakingdefense.sites.breakingmedia.com/2018/03/first-combat-laser-for-navy-warship-lockheed-helios/ |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Breaking Defense |language=en-US |archive-date=25 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230325022030/https://breakingdefense.com/2018/03/first-combat-laser-for-navy-warship-lockheed-helios/ |url-status=live }} In November 2019, {{USS|Dewey|DDG-105}} had the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN) system installed. ODIN differs from the XN-1 LaWS previously mounted on {{USS|Ponce|LPD-15|6}} in that ODIN functions as a dazzler, which blinds or destroys optical sensors on drones rather than shooting down the aircraft.{{Cite web |last=Seck |first=Hope |date=2020-02-21 |title=The Navy Has Installed the First Drone-Stopping Laser on a Destroyer |url=https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/02/21/navy-has-installed-first-drone-stopping-laser-destroyer.html |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Military.com |language=en |archive-date=19 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019154419/https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/02/21/navy-has-installed-first-drone-stopping-laser-destroyer.html |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Szondy |first=David |date=2020-02-22 |title=US Navy deploys first anti-drone laser dazzler weapon |url=https://newatlas.com/military/us-navy-laser-dazzzler-weapon-drone/ |access-date= |website=New Atlas |language=en-US |archive-date=23 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200223202226/https://newatlas.com/military/us-navy-laser-dazzzler-weapon-drone/ |url-status=live }} HELIOS was delivered to the Navy in August 2022 and installed on {{USS|Preble|DDG-88}}. Preble was expected to begin at-sea testing of the HELIOS in FY2023.{{Cite web |last=Trevithick |first=Joseph |date=2022-08-23 |title=Here's Our First Look At A HELIOS Laser-Armed Navy Destroyer |url=https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-our-first-look-at-a-helios-laser-armed-navy-destroyer |access-date=2022-08-30 |website=The Drive |language=en |archive-date=30 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220830063338/https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-our-first-look-at-a-helios-laser-armed-navy-destroyer |url-status=live }}

Also by 2018, all Arleigh Burke-class ships homeported in the Western Pacific were scheduled to have upgraded ASW systems, including the TB-37U MFTA replacing the AN/SQR-19 TACTAS.{{cite web |last=Keller |first=John |title=Lockheed Martin to build anti-submarine warfare (ASW) towed-array sonar systems for surface warships |url=http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2017/06/towed-array-sonar-surface-warships-anti-submarine-warfare-asw.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201182913/http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2017/06/towed-array-sonar-surface-warships-anti-submarine-warfare-asw.html |archive-date=1 December 2017 |access-date=19 February 2018 |website=militaryaerospace.com|date=6 June 2017 }}{{cite web |last=Greenert |first=Jonathan |author-link=Jonathan Greenert |date=18 September 2013 |title=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 |url=http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS00/20130918/101291/HHRG-113-AS00-Wstate-GreenertUSNJ-20130918.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130923100518/http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS00/20130918/101291/HHRG-113-AS00-Wstate-GreenertUSNJ-20130918.pdf |archive-date=23 September 2013 |access-date=21 September 2013 |publisher=US House of Representatives}}

In FY2019, the Navy started a program to procure the Mod 4 variant of the Mark 38 machine gun system{{Cite web |title=Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/21pres/PANMC_BOOK.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221114034054/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/21pres/PANMC_BOOK.pdf |archive-date=2022-11-14 |access-date=2022-12-10 |website= |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense |page=136}} to address "unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and high speed maneuverable unmanned surface vehicle (USV) threats."{{Cite web |title=Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.stratvocate.com/files/2021/RDTEN_BA4_Book-p1235/RDTEN_BA4_Book.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221210061231/https://www.stratvocate.com/files/2021/RDTEN_BA4_Book-p1235/RDTEN_BA4_Book.html |archive-date=2022-12-10 |access-date=2022-12-10 |website= |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense |page=1147}} Mod 4 will incorporate the 30 mm Mk44 Bushmaster II instead of the 25 mm M242 Bushmaster of previous variants.{{Cite web |last=Ong |first=Peter |date=21 April 2022 |title=USGC's Polar Security Cutters to Receive Mark 38 Mod 4 Guns |url=https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/usgcs-cutters-to-receive-30mm-mark-44/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220522130754/https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/usgcs-cutters-to-receive-30mm-mark-44/ |archive-date=2022-05-22 |access-date=2022-12-10 |website=Naval News |language=en-US}} The Mk 38 Mod 4 is planned to be fielded on Flight IIA and III Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.{{Cite web |title=Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/23pres/WPN_Book.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230131030042/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/23pres/WPN_Book.pdf |archive-date=2023-01-31 |access-date=2023-01-30 |website= |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense |page=465}}

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 {{cvt|3|ft|abbr=on}} 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.{{Cite web |last=Larter |first=David |date=2020-10-21 |title=All US Navy destroyers will get hypersonic missiles, says Trump's national security adviser |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/10/21/all-us-navy-destroyers-will-get-hypersonic-missiles-trumps-national-security-advisor-says/ |access-date= |website=Defense News |language=en |archive-date=21 October 2020 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20201021160145/https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/10/21/all-us-navy-destroyers-will-get-hypersonic-missiles-trumps-national-security-advisor-says/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last1=LaGrone |first1=Sam |last2=Shelbourne |first2=Mallory |date=2020-10-22 |title=Path to Install Hypersonic Weapons on Arleigh Burke Destroyers Unclear |url=https://news.usni.org/2020/10/22/path-to-install-hypersonic-weapons-on-arleigh-burke-destroyers-unclear |access-date= |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=27 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201027020553/https://news.usni.org/2020/10/22/path-to-install-hypersonic-weapons-on-arleigh-burke-destroyers-unclear |url-status=live }} 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.{{Cite web |last=McLeary |first=Paul |date=2020-10-22 |title=Signaling China, White House Floats Putting Hypersonic Missiles On Destroyers |url=https://breakingdefense.sites.breakingmedia.com/2020/10/signaling-china-white-house-floats-putting-hypersonic-missiles-on-destroyers/ |access-date= |website=Breaking Defense |language=en-US |archive-date=25 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230325022018/https://breakingdefense.com/2020/10/signaling-china-white-house-floats-putting-hypersonic-missiles-on-destroyers/ |url-status=live }}

About 20 Flight IIA destroyers will undergo further modernization under the DDG MOD 2.0 program.{{cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2023-01-31 |title=Navy Destroyer Modernization Program Could Cost $17B, Take Up to 2 Years Per Hull |url=https://news.usni.org/2023/01/31/navy-destroyer-modernization-program-could-cost-17b-take-up-to-2-years-per-hull |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230201015225/https://news.usni.org/2023/01/31/navy-destroyer-modernization-program-could-cost-17b-take-up-to-2-years-per-hull |archive-date=2023-02-01 |access-date=2023-11-12 |website=USNI News}} DDG MOD 2.0 will backfit SPY-6(V)4 and Aegis Baseline 10 to provide similar capabilities to Flight III ships,{{Refn|The AN/SPY-6 is a scalable system made up of radar module assemblies (RMAs), self-contained 2'x2'x2' radar boxes. Different numbers of RMAs can be combined to create different-sized variants of the SPY-6.{{Cite web |title=U.S. Navy's SPY-6 Family of Radars |url=https://www.raytheonmissilesanddefense.com/what-we-do/missile-defense/sensors/spy6-radars |access-date=2023-02-15 |website=Raytheon Missiles & Defense |archive-date=8 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230208190407/https://www.raytheonmissilesanddefense.com/what-we-do/missile-defense/sensors/spy6-radars |url-status=live }} Due to the smaller superstructure of Flight IIA ships compared to Flight III ships, the radar implementation will be scaled down from the Flight III's version (24-RMA SPY-6(V)4 vs. 37-RMA SPY-6(V)1).|group=N}} as well as upgrade cooling systems to support the new radar. DDG MOD 2.0 will also deliver the AN/SLQ-32(V)7 EW suite, which adds the SEWIP Block 3 electronic attack subsystem.{{Cite web |date=13 January 2022 |title=SEWIP / AN/SLQ-32(V) Electronic Warfare System Overview & Program Status |url=https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/Exhibits/SNA2022/SNA2022-CAPTJasonHall-SEWIP.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221121224805/https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/Exhibits/SNA2022/SNA2022-CAPTJasonHall-SEWIP.pdf |archive-date=21 November 2022 |access-date=2022-11-30 |publisher=Program Executive Office Integrated Warfare Systems}}{{Cite web |last=Hutchison |first=Todd |date=2023-09-07 |title=Guided Missile Destroyer: (DDG MOD) 2.0 |url=https://shipbuildersusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/DIST-A_3_INDP_DDG-MOD-2.0-V5.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231108132808/https://shipbuildersusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/DIST-A_3_INDP_DDG-MOD-2.0-V5.pdf |archive-date=2023-11-08 |access-date=2023-11-10 |publisher=Naval Sea Systems Command}} In May 2021, the Navy approved a "Smart Start Plan" for four ships—DDGs 91, 93, 95, 97—to make a gradual transition to DDG MOD 2.0. These ships will undergo a DDG MOD 1.5 phase that provides the SLQ-32(V)7; in 2023, DDG-91 became the first destroyer to receive SLQ-32(V)7.{{Cite web |last=Trevithick |first=Joseph |date=2023-09-22 |title=Navy Destroyer Looks Significantly Different After Major Upgrade |url=https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-destroyer-looks-significantly-different-after-major-upgrade |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231001084733/https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-destroyer-looks-significantly-different-after-major-upgrade |archive-date=2023-10-01 |access-date=2023-11-10 |website=The Drive}} They will then receive the SPY-6(V)4, Aegis Baseline 10, and cooling system upgrades during a later depot modernization period.

Starting in 2025, the Navy will replace Phalanx CIWS on the destroyers with RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launchers to improve their point defense capability. Arleigh Burkes with the latest Aegis baselines will receive the 21-cell Mk 49 RAM launcher; Arleigh Burkes with older Aegis software will receive the 11-cell SeaRAM.{{Cite web |title=Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/25pres/OPN_BA4_Book.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240329012735/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/25pres/OPN_BA4_Book.pdf |archive-date=2024-03-29 |access-date=2024-04-18 |website= |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense |page=51}}{{Cite web |title=Department of the Navy: Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/25pres/OMN_Book.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240419235733/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/25pres/OMN_Book.pdf |archive-date=2024-04-19 |access-date=2024-04-18 |website= |publisher=U.S. Department of the Navy |page=344}} It is unclear if ships with two Phalanx CIWS or ships already in a Phalanx-SeaRAM configuration will retain one Phalanx.{{Cite web |last=Trevithick |first=Joseph |date=2024-04-09 |title=Rolling Airframe Missiles To Arm Arleigh Burke Destroyer Fleet |url=https://www.twz.com/sea/rolling-airframe-missiles-to-arm-arleigh-burke-destroyer-fleet |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240412055038/https://www.twz.com/sea/rolling-airframe-missiles-to-arm-arleigh-burke-destroyer-fleet |archive-date=2024-04-12 |access-date=2024-04-18 |website=The War Zone}}

= Production restarted =

File:USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000).jpg

{{USS|Michael Murphy|DDG-112|}} was originally intended to be the last of the Arleigh Burke class. The Navy planned to shift production to the Zumwalt-class destroyer focusing on NGFS and littoral operations.{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |title=Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress |url=https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20081009_RL32109_d095159665886dd8927f8c540bed2b0ff2bf57eb.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210701072624/https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20081009_RL32109_d095159665886dd8927f8c540bed2b0ff2bf57eb.pdf |archive-date=2021-07-01 |access-date=2023-03-16 |website= |publisher=Congressional Research Service |pages=1–2, 5}} However, at a July 2008 hearing, Navy officials announced intentions to restart Arleigh Burke production in place of additional Zumwalts, testifying to the latter's inability to counter emerging ballistic missiles, anti-ship missiles, and blue-water submarines.{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |title=Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress |url=https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20081009_RL32109_d095159665886dd8927f8c540bed2b0ff2bf57eb.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210701072624/https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20081009_RL32109_d095159665886dd8927f8c540bed2b0ff2bf57eb.pdf |archive-date=2021-07-01 |access-date=2023-03-16 |website= |publisher=Congressional Research Service |pages=1, 13–14, 53–54}} Arleigh Burke-class destroyers have been in production for longer than any other surface combatant class in the U.S. Navy's history.{{Cite web |last=Sharp |first=David |date=2010-01-05 |title=After 2-plus decades, Arleigh Burke-class destroyer breaks record |url=https://www.fosters.com/story/lifestyle/2010/01/05/after-2-plus-decades-arleigh/51750620007/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230121175840/https://www.fosters.com/story/lifestyle/2010/01/05/after-2-plus-decades-arleigh/51750620007/ |archive-date=21 January 2023 |access-date=2023-01-21 |website=Foster's Daily Democrat |language=en-US}}

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.{{Cite web |last=Drew |first=Christopher |date=2009-04-08 |title=Contractors Agree on Deal to Build Stealth Destroyer |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/business/09defense.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171101233203/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/business/09defense.html |archive-date=2017-11-01 |publisher=Navy Times}} In December 2009, Northrop Grumman received a $170.7 million letter contract for {{USS|John Finn|DDG-113|}} long lead-time materials.{{cite web |url=https://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4172 |title=Contracts for Wednesday, December 02, 2009 |publisher=Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), U.S. Department of Defense |date=2 December 2009 |access-date=23 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100301230348/http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4172 |archive-date=1 March 2010 |url-status=live}} Contract N00024-10-C-2308. Shipbuilding contracts for DDG-113 to DDG-115 were awarded in mid-2011 for $679.6 million–$783.6 million;{{cite web |date=2011-09-26 |title=DDG 51 Class Ship Construction Contract Awards Announced |url=http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=62942 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180328165343/http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=62942 |archive-date=2018-03-28 |access-date=2011-10-23 |publisher=Naval Sea Systems Command Office of Corporate Communication}} these do not include government-furnished equipment such as weapons and sensors, which took the average cost of the FY2011/12 ships to about $1.843 billion per vessel.{{cite web |url=http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA543249 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |id=RL32109 |date=19 April 2011 |first=Ronald |last=O'Rourke |publisher=Congressional Research Service |access-date=23 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121130074248/http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA543249 |archive-date=30 November 2012 |url-status=dead}} 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. Funds are spent on long lead-time items in the year before the main procurement of each ship. DDG-114 and DDG-115 together cost $577.2 million (FY2010) + $2.922 billion (FY2011) = $3.499 billion (p. 20), and DDG-116 cost $48 million (FY2011) + $1.981 billion (FY2012) = $2.029 billion (p. 7), making an average for the three ships of about $1.843 billion.

DDGs 113 through 115 are "restart" ships, similar to previous Flight IIA ships, but including modernization features such as OACE and the TB-37U MFTA, which are being backfit onto previous ships.{{Cite web |last= |title=Department of Defense: Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget Estimates |url=https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/21pres/OPN_BA2_BOOK.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220121052553/https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/21pres/OPN_BA2_BOOK.pdf |archive-date=2022-01-21 |access-date=2023-02-08 |website= |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense |pages=12, 16}}

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.{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=14 June 2011 |title=US proposes Flight IV Arleigh Burke and life extension for command ships |url=http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065929797 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120914174113/http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065929797 |archive-date=14 September 2012 |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Defense & Security Intelligence & Analysis: IHS Jane's |language=en}} This was canceled to cover the cost of the {{sclass|Columbia|submarine}}s, with the air defense commander role retained on one cruiser per carrier strike group.{{cite news |last1=LaGrone |first1=Sam |date=14 July 2014 |title=Navy Cancelled New Destroyer Flight Due to Ohio Replacement Submarine Costs |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |url=http://news.usni.org/2014/07/14/navy-cancelled-new-destroyer-flight-due-ohio-replacement-submarine-costs |url-status=live |access-date=14 July 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140715081140/http://news.usni.org/2014/07/14/navy-cancelled-new-destroyer-flight-due-ohio-replacement-submarine-costs |archive-date=15 July 2014}}

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.{{cite web |last=Shelbourne |first=Mallory |date=25 April 2022 |title=Navy Puts Forth 9-ship Multi-Year Deal for Arleigh Burke Destroyers |url=https://news.usni.org/2022/04/25/navy-puts-forth-9-ship-multi-year-deal-for-arleigh-burke-destroyers |access-date=30 May 2022 |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |archive-date=24 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220524213930/https://news.usni.org/2022/04/25/navy-puts-forth-9-ship-multi-year-deal-for-arleigh-burke-destroyers |url-status=live }}

=Flight IIA Technology Insertion=

DDG-116 to DDG-124 and DDG-127 will be "Technology Insertion" ships with elements of Flight III.{{Cite web |last=Vavasseur |first=Xavier |date=2021-10-02 |title=USS Carl Levin (DDG 120) Christened at Bath Iron Works |url=https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/2798223/uss-carl-levin-ddg-120-christened-at-bath-iron-works/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.navy.mil%2FPress-Office%2FNews-Stories%2FArticle%2F2798223%2Fuss-carl-levin-ddg-120-christened-at-bath-iron-works%2F |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230524025433/https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/2798223/uss-carl-levin-ddg-120-christened-at-bath-iron-works/ |archive-date=2023-05-24 |access-date=2023-05-23 |website=navy.mil |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last=Vavasseur |first=Xavier |date=2020-04-09 |title=HII Begins Fabrication Of DDG 51 Flight III Destroyer Ted Stevens |url=https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-defense-news/hii-begins-fabrication-of-ddg-51-flight-iii-destroyer-ted-stevens/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220518195310/https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-defense-news/hii-begins-fabrication-of-ddg-51-flight-iii-destroyer-ted-stevens/ |archive-date=2022-05-18 |access-date=2023-05-23 |website=Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance}} For example, {{USS|Delbert D. Black|DDG-119|}} and onwards have the AN/SPQ-9B, a feature of Flight III, instead of the AN/SPS-67.{{Cite web |title=Northrop Grumman to Supply AN/SPQ-9B Radars for Three U.S.Navy Vessels |url=https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-to-supply-an-spq-9b-radars-for-three-u-s-navy-vessels |access-date=2022-09-01 |website=Northrop Grumman Newsroom |language=en |archive-date=1 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220901040421/https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-to-supply-an-spq-9b-radars-for-three-u-s-navy-vessels |url-status=live }} Flight III proper began with the third ship procured in 2016,{{cite news |last1=LaGrone |first1=Sam |date=1 May 2016 |title=Bath Iron Works Will Build First Flight III Arleigh Burke DDG |website=USNI News |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |url=https://news.usni.org/2016/05/01/bath-iron-works-will-build-first-flight-iii-arleigh-burke-ddg |url-status=live |access-date=1 May 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160502120236/https://news.usni.org/2016/05/01/bath-iron-works-will-build-first-flight-iii-arleigh-burke-ddg |archive-date=2 May 2016}} {{USS|Jack H. Lucas}} (DDG-125).{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2017-06-28 |title=Huntington Ingalls Industries Awarded First Flight III Arleigh Burke Destroyer |url=https://news.usni.org/2017/06/28/hii-wins-award-build-first-flight-iii-arleigh-burke-destroyer |access-date=2023-01-23 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=23 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230123235047/https://news.usni.org/2017/06/28/hii-wins-award-build-first-flight-iii-arleigh-burke-destroyer |url-status=live }}

= Flight III =

File:DDG-125 After Launch.jpg

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.{{Cite web |title=Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer Flight III |url=https://amiinter.com/wnpr/pdfami/pdfex/amiproject.php?newcontID=630&countryID=68 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230523025321/https://amiinter.com/wnpr/pdfami/pdfex/amiproject.php?newcontID=630&countryID=68 |archive-date=2023-05-23 |access-date=2023-05-22 |website=Worldwide Naval Projections Report |publisher=AMI International |page=3}} The Navy planned to procure 24 Flight III ships from FY2016 to FY2031.{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date=2010-06-14 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |url=http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32109_20100614.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140822162447/http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32109_20100614.pdf |archive-date=2014-08-22 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |page=1 |id=RL32109}} In June 2013, it awarded $6.2 billion in destroyer contracts.{{cite web |title=Contract View |url=http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=5056 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150714090059/http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=5056 |archive-date=14 July 2015 |access-date=27 October 2015}} 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 IAMD role.{{Cite web |last=Fabey |first=Michael |date=10 June 2011 |title=Potential DDG-51 Flight III Requirements Growth Raises Alarms |url=https://aviationweek.com/potential-ddg-51-flight-iii-requirements-growth-raises-alarms |url-access=subscription |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Aviation Week |archive-date=19 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230319040358/https://aviationweek.com/potential-ddg-51-flight-iii-requirements-growth-raises-alarms |url-status=live }} An AMDR with a mid-diameter of {{convert|22|ft|m}} had been proposed for CG(X), while the DDG-51 Flight III design could carry an AMDR with a mid-diameter of only {{convert|14|ft|m}}.{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date=2010-06-14 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |url=http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32109_20100614.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140822162447/http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32109_20100614.pdf |archive-date=2014-08-22 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |page=9 |id=RL32109}} 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.{{Cite web |last=Freedberg Jr. |first=Sydney |date=2012-10-05 |title=Navy Bets On Arleigh Burkes To Sail Until 2072; 40 Years Afloat For Some |url=https://breakingdefense.com/2012/10/navy-bets-on-arleigh-burkes-to-sail-until-2072-40-years-afloat/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220821041205/https://breakingdefense.com/2012/10/navy-bets-on-arleigh-burkes-to-sail-until-2072-40-years-afloat/ |archive-date=21 August 2022 |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Breaking Defense |language=en-US}}

The Flight III's AN/SPY-6 AMDR with a mid-diameter of {{convert|14|ft|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 {{convert|12|ft|m}}.{{Cite web |date=30 March 2010 |title=Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs |url=https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-10-388sp.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220119001456/https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-10-388sp.pdf |archive-date=19 January 2022 |access-date=2022-11-18 |website= |publisher=Government Accountability Office}}{{Cite web |date=July 2016 |title=Shielded from Oversight: The Disastrous US Approach to Strategic Missile Defense |url=https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/07/Shielded-from-Oversight-appendix-10.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221225060029/http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/07/Shielded-from-Oversight-appendix-10.pdf |archive-date=2022-12-25 |access-date=2023-05-22 |publisher=Union of Concerned Scientists |page=7}} According to the SPY-6's contractor Raytheon, the 37-RMA SPY-6(V)1 is 30 times more sensitive and capable of detecting objects "half the size at twice the distance" compared to the SPY-1D.{{Cite web |title=Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) / AN/SPY-6 |url=https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/amdr/ |access-date=2022-08-30 |website=Missile Threat |language=en-US |archive-date=15 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115205832/https://missilethreat.csis.org/defsys/amdr/ |url-status=live }} The Flight III's SPY-6 is integrated with Aegis Baseline 10.{{Cite web |last=Biehn |first=Andrew |title=AEGIS Baseline 10 and SPY-6 Integration & Path to Navy Operational Architecture (NOA) |url=https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/Exhibits/SAS2021/SAS2021-AEGIS_and_Forge.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210805031834/https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/Exhibits/SAS2021/SAS2021-AEGIS_and_Forge.pdf |archive-date=2021-08-05 |access-date=2023-01-23 |publisher=Naval Sea Systems Command}} The new radar also requires more power; the three-megawatt, 450 V AG9140 generators were upgraded to four-megawatt, 4,160 V AG9160 generators. Additionally, the air conditioning plants were upgraded to increase the ships' cooling capacity. The area near where the two rigid-hull inflatable boats (RHIBs) are stored was enclosed to accommodate additional crew, so the RHIBs are stacked.{{Cite web |date=2017-01-21 |title=SNA 2017: Huntington Ingalls Industries Unveils Scale Model of DDG 51 Flight III Design |url=https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/naval-news/naval-exhibitions/2017-archives/sna-2017-show-daily-news/4816-sna-2017-huntington-ingalls-industries-unveils-scale-model-of-ddg-51-flight-iii-design.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221201031017/https://navyrecognition.com/index.php/naval-news/naval-exhibitions/2017-archives/sna-2017-show-daily-news/4816-sna-2017-huntington-ingalls-industries-unveils-scale-model-of-ddg-51-flight-iii-design.html |archive-date=2022-12-01 |access-date=2023-05-22 |website=Navy Recognition |language=}} 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.{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=Seth |date=2022-01-12 |title=DDG 51 Program Update |url=https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/Exhibits/SNA2022/SNA2022-CAPTSethMiller-DDG51Update.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221121224824/https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Portals/103/Documents/Exhibits/SNA2022/SNA2022-CAPTSethMiller-DDG51Update.pdf |archive-date=2022-11-21 |access-date=2023-05-22 |publisher=Naval Sea Systems Command |page=5}}

Flight III achieved IOC in 2024.{{Cite web |title=Modernized Selected Acquisition Report (MSAR): DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51) |url=https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2023_SARS/DDG%2051%20MSAR%20Dec%202023.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241206141533/https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2023_SARS/DDG%2051%20MSAR%20Dec%202023.pdf |archive-date=6 December 2024 |access-date=1 April 2025 |publisher=Washington Headquarters Services |page=13}} {{As of|2025|1|post=,}} a total of 24 Flight III ships have been ordered. The U.S. Navy may procure up to 42 Flight III ships for an overall total of 117 ships of the class.{{cite web |last=McCullough |first=Bernard |date=2013-01-29 |title=Now Hear This - The Right Destroyer at the Right Time |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2013/january/now-hear-right-destroyer-right-time |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230319032539/https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2013/january/now-hear-right-destroyer-right-time |archive-date=2023-03-19 |access-date=2023-03-18 |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute}}

Replacement

File:DDG(X) SNA 2022.png as presented in the 2022 Surface Navy Association symposium]]

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 2030s and initially serve alongside the Flight III Arleigh Burkes. The destroyer class will incorporate emerging technologies like lasers, onboard power-generation systems, increased automation, and next-generation weapons, sensors, and electronics. They will use technologies from other platforms, such as the Zumwalt-class destroyer, littoral combat ships, and the {{sclass|Gerald R. Ford|aircraft carrier}}.{{Cite web |last=Osborn |first=Kris |date=9 April 2014 |title=Navy Makes Plans for New Destroyer for 2030s |url=https://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/04/09/navy-makes-plans-for-new-destroyer-for-2030s.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140413144015/http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/04/09/navy-makes-plans-for-new-destroyer-for-2030s.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm |archive-date=13 April 2014 |access-date=9 April 2014 |website=Military.com |language=en}}

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 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. The Future Surface Combatant has evolved into the Large Surface Combatant, which became the DDG(X).{{cite web |last=Eckstein |first=Megan |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/06/04/navy-creates-ddgx-program-office-after-years-of-delays-for-large-combatant-replacement/ |title=US Navy creates DDG(X) program office after years of delays for large combatant replacement |work=DefenseNews |date=4 June 2021 |access-date=19 February 2022 |archive-date=5 June 2021 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210605131159/https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/06/04/navy-creates-ddgx-program-office-after-years-of-delays-for-large-combatant-replacement/ |url-status=live }} The Navy plans to procure the first DDG(X) in FY2032.

Operational history

File:US Navy 030322-N-1035L-002 The guided missile destroyer USS Milius (DDG 69) launches a Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) toward Iraq.jpg in 2003]]

The class saw its first combat action through Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) strikes against Iraq.{{Cite web |title=History |url=https://www.surflant.usff.navy.mil/Organization/Operational-Forces/Destroyers/USS-Laboon-DDG-58/About-Us/History/ |access-date=2023-03-02 |website=surflant.usff.navy.mil |archive-date=2 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230302173805/https://www.surflant.usff.navy.mil/Organization/Operational-Forces/Destroyers/USS-Laboon-DDG-58/About-Us/History/ |url-status=live }} Over 3 and 4 September 1996, {{USS|Laboon|DDG-58|6}} and {{USS|Russell|DDG-59|6}} launched thirteen and eight TLAMs, respectively, as part of Operation Desert Strike.{{Cite web |last=Truver |first=Scott |date=1997-05-01 |title=The U.S. Navy in Review |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1997/may/us-navy-review |access-date=2023-03-02 |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |language=en |archive-date=2 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230302173808/https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1997/may/us-navy-review |url-status=live }} In December 1998, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers again performed TLAM strikes as part of Operation Desert Fox.{{Cite web |title=Photo: A Tomahawk cruise missile is fired from an Arleigh Burke class destroyer |url=https://www.upi.com/News_Photos/view/upi/32f507f836ac3ebd6589efebe2d360ab/A-Tomahawk-cruise-missile-is-fired-from-an-Arleigh-Burke-class-destroyer/ |access-date=2023-01-03 |website=UPI |language=en |archive-date=25 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201125020405/https://www.upi.com/News_Photos/view/upi/32f507f836ac3ebd6589efebe2d360ab/A-Tomahawk-cruise-missile-is-fired-from-an-Arleigh-Burke-class-destroyer/ |url-status=live }} 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.{{Cite web |title=030322-N-1035L-002 |url=http://www.navy.mil/view_image.asp?id=5554 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305150817/http://www.navy.mil/view_image.asp?id=5554 |archive-date=5 March 2016 |access-date=3 January 2023 |website=navy.mil}}

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.{{Cite web |date=2012-02-16 |title=Navy Names Forward Deployed Ships to Rota, Spain |url=http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=65393 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180523194515/http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=65393 |archive-date=2018-05-23 |website=navy.mil}} 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.{{Cite web |last=Fabey |first=Michael |date=1 April 2013 |title=NavWeek: Keeping Asian Waters Pacific |url=https://aviationweek.com/navweek-keeping-asian-waters-pacific |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230319033704/https://aviationweek.com/navweek-keeping-asian-waters-pacific |archive-date=19 March 2023 |access-date=16 March 2023 |website=Aviation Week}} Russia threatened to quit the New START treaty over this deployment, calling it a threat to their nuclear deterrent.{{Cite web |last=Kozin |first=Vladimir |date=2014-02-18 |title=Time to Sign a Super New START |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/02/18/time-to-sign-a-super-new-start-a32201 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221129023917/https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/02/18/time-to-sign-a-super-new-start-a32201 |archive-date=2022-11-29 |access-date=2023-05-20 |website=The Moscow Times |language=en}} 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.{{cite web |last=Larter |first=David |date=23 June 2018 |title=As threats mount, US Navy grapples with costly ballistic missile defense mission |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/23/as-threats-mount-us-navy-grapples-with-costly-ballistic-missile-defense-mission/ |access-date=18 December 2018 |publisher=defensenews.com }}

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.{{Cite web |last=Tomlinson |first=Lucas |date=2016-10-03 |title=US warships sent to area where Iran-backed rebels attacked Saudi-led coalition ship |url=https://www.foxnews.com/world/us-warships-sent-to-area-where-iran-backed-rebels-attacked-saudi-led-coalition-ship |access-date=2022-09-02 |website=Fox News |language=en-US |archive-date=22 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180922084516/http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/03/us-warships-sent-to-area-where-iran-backed-rebels-attacked-saudi-led-coalition-ship.html |url-status=live }} 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.{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2016-10-11 |title=USS Mason Fired 3 Missiles to Defend From Yemen Cruise Missiles Attack |url=https://news.usni.org/2016/10/11/uss-mason-fired-3-missiles-to-defend-from-yemen-cruise-missiles-attack |access-date=2022-09-02 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=9 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180809090937/https://news.usni.org/2016/10/11/uss-mason-fired-3-missiles-to-defend-from-yemen-cruise-missiles-attack |url-status=live }} On 12 October, in the Bab el-Mandeb strait, Mason again detected an inbound anti-ship missile, which was intercepted at a range of {{convert|8|mi}} by an SM-2.{{Cite web |last=Copp |first=Tara |title=Aegis defense system helped stop missile attack on USS Mason |url=https://www.stripes.com/news/aegis-defense-system-helped-stop-missile-attack-on-uss-mason-1.433974 |access-date=2022-09-02 |website=Stars and Stripes |language=en |archive-date=2 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220902043119/https://www.stripes.com/news/aegis-defense-system-helped-stop-missile-attack-on-uss-mason-1.433974 |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Ziezulewicz |first=Geoff |date=2017-11-03 |title=Four ship crews receive Combat Action Ribbon |url=https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/11/03/four-ship-crews-receive-combat-action-ribbon/ |access-date=2022-09-02 |website=Navy Times |language=en |archive-date=18 April 2021 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210418095811/https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/11/03/four-ship-crews-receive-combat-action-ribbon/ |url-status=live }} On 13 October, Nitze conducted TLAM strikes destroying three Houthi radar sites used in the previous attacks.{{Cite news |last=Stewart |first=Phil |date=2016-10-13 |title=U.S. military strikes Yemen after missile attacks on U.S. Navy ship |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-missiles-idUSKCN12C294 |access-date=2022-09-05 |archive-date=25 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190525223834/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-missiles-idUSKCN12C294 |url-status=live }} 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.{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2016-10-16 |title=USS Mason 'Appears to Have Come Under Attack' |url=https://news.usni.org/2016/10/15/cno-richardson-uss-mason-attacked-cruise-missiles-off-yemen |access-date=2022-09-02 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=2 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220902043118/https://news.usni.org/2016/10/15/cno-richardson-uss-mason-attacked-cruise-missiles-off-yemen |url-status=live }}

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 al-Assad's chemical attack on his people three days prior.{{cite news |last1=Lamothe |first1=Dan |last2=Ryan |first2=Missy |last3=Gibbons-Neff |first3=Thomas |date=2017-04-06 |title=U.S. strikes Syrian military airfield in first direct assault on Bashar al-Assad's government |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-weighing-military-options-following-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/2017/04/06/0c59603a-1ae8-11e7-9887-1a5314b56a08_story.html |access-date=2023-01-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170407024143/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-weighing-military-options-following-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/2017/04/06/0c59603a-1ae8-11e7-9887-1a5314b56a08_story.html |archive-date=2017-04-07}} The ships fired a total of 59 Tomahawk missiles.{{Cite web |title=Strikes On Shayrat Airfield, Syria: Areas of Impact |url=https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Photos/igphoto/2001728631/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220930073805/https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Photos/igphoto/2001728631/ |archive-date=2022-09-30 |access-date=2023-01-26 |publisher=U.S. Department of Defense}} On 14 April 2018, Laboon and Higgins conducted another TLAM strike against Syria. They fired seven and twenty-three TLAMs, respectively. The strike targeted chemical weapon sites as part of a continued effort against Assad's use of chemical warfare.{{Cite web |last1=Rogoway |first1=Tyler |last2=Trevithick |first2=Joseph |date= 14 April 2018|title=Here Are All The Details The Pentagon Just Released Regarding Its Missile Attack On Syria (Updated) |url=https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20120/heres-all-the-details-the-pentagon-just-released-regarding-its-missile-attack-on-syria |access-date=2023-02-18 |website=The Drive |language=en |archive-date=19 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230219003816/https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20120/heres-all-the-details-the-pentagon-just-released-regarding-its-missile-attack-on-syria |url-status=live }} 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.{{Cite web |last=Leoni |first=Victoria |date=2018-04-17 |title=How the US positioned its warships to trick Russia ahead of Syrian strikes |url=https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2018/04/17/how-the-us-positioned-its-warships-to-trick-russia-ahead-of-syrian-strikes/ |access-date=2023-02-18 |website=Navy Times |language=en }}

In October and November 2023, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers USS Carney and USS Thomas Hudner, while deployed in the Red Sea, shot down numerous drones and missiles. On 19 October, Carney shot down at least three cruise missiles and eight drones that were potentially targeting Israel.{{Cite web |last= |first= |title=US Navy destroyer in Red Sea shoots down cruise missiles fired by Houthis in Yemen: Pentagon |url=https://abcnews.go.com/International/security-incident-involving-us-navy-destroyer-red-sea/story?id=104147141 |access-date=2023-11-30 |website=ABC News |language=en}} On 15 and 22 November, Thomas Hudner shot down numerous drones launched by Houthi rebels from Yemen.{{Cite news |last=Mongilio |first=Heather |date=22 November 2023 |title= USS Thomas Hudner Downs Multiple Drones Launched from Yemen |work=USNI News |url=https://news.usni.org/2023/11/22/uss-thomas-hudner-downs-multiple-drones-launched-from-yemen |access-date=30 November 2023}} On 27 November, Carney detected two ballistic missile launches from Houthi-controlled territory headed towards herself and nearby M/V Central Park; they splashed ten nautical miles away.{{cite web |last=Shelbourne |first=Mallory |date=26 November 2023 |title=U.S. Navy Detains 5 After Failed Attempt to Capture Merchant Ship, IKE in Persian Gulf |url=https://news.usni.org/2023/11/26/u-s-warships-monitoring-potential-oil-tanker-seizure-in-gulf-of-aden |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231207005617/https://news.usni.org/2023/11/26/u-s-warships-monitoring-potential-oil-tanker-seizure-in-gulf-of-aden |archive-date=7 December 2023 |access-date=6 December 2023 |website=USNI News}} On 29 November, Carney intercepted another Houthi missile.{{Cite news |last=Mongilio |first=Heather |date=29 November 2023 |title=CENTCOM: Iranian Drone Made Unsafe Pass by USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, USS Carney Downs Houthi Missile |work=USNI News |url=https://news.usni.org/2023/11/29/iranian-drone-flew-near-uss-dwight-d-eisenhower-in-unsafe-manner-centcom-says |access-date=30 November 2023}} On 30 December, USS Gravely shot down two anti-ship ballistic missiles fired from Houthi-controlled territory at herself and nearby container ship Maersk Hangzhou.{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2023-12-31 |title=U.S. Navy Helo Crews Kill Houthi Assault Boat Teams After Red Sea Attack |url=https://news.usni.org/2023/12/31/u-s-navy-helo-crews-kill-houthi-assault-boat-teams-after-red-sea-attack |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231231172231/https://news.usni.org/2023/12/31/u-s-navy-helo-crews-kill-houthi-assault-boat-teams-after-red-sea-attack |archive-date=2023-12-31 |access-date=2024-01-01 |website=USNI News}} On 30 January 2024, a Houthi anti-ship cruise missile fired toward the Red Sea came within one mile of Gravely''; she used her Phalanx CIWS to shoot down the missile.{{Cite web |last=Liebermann |first=Oren |last2=Bertrand |first2=Natasha |date=31 January 2024 |title=US warship had close call with Houthi missile in Red Sea |url=https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/31/politics/us-warship-close-call-houthi-missile/index.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240201022639/https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/31/politics/us-warship-close-call-houthi-missile/index.html |archive-date=1 February 2024 |access-date=31 January 2024 |website=CNN}}{{Cite web |last=Sherman |first=Ella |last2=Epstein |first2=Jake |date=31 January 2024 |title=A Houthi missile got so close to a US destroyer the warship turned to a last resort gun system to shoot it down: report |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/houthi-missile-close-us-warship-close-in-weapon-system-2024-1 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240131223004/https://www.businessinsider.com/houthi-missile-close-us-warship-close-in-weapon-system-2024-1 |archive-date=31 January 2024 |access-date=31 January 2024 |website=Business Insider}}

During the Iranian strikes on Israel on 13 April 2024, USS Arleigh Burke and USS Carney fired four to seven SM-3s, shooting down at least three Iranian ballistic missiles. This was the first time the SM-3 was employed in combat.{{cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2024-04-15 |title=SM-3 Ballistic Missile Interceptor Used for First Time in Combat, Officials Confirm |url=https://news.usni.org/2024/04/15/sm-3-ballistic-missile-interceptor-used-for-first-time-in-combat-officials-confirm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240419135422/https://news.usni.org/2024/04/15/sm-3-ballistic-missile-interceptor-used-for-first-time-in-combat-officials-confirm |archive-date=2024-04-19 |access-date=2024-04-19 |website=USNI News}}{{Cite web |last=Lendon |first=Brad |date=2024-04-14 |title=Analysis: How Israel and allied defenses intercepted more than 300 Iranian missiles and drones |url=https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/14/middleeast/israel-air-missile-defense-iran-attack-intl-hnk-ml/index.html |access-date=2024-04-14 |website=CNN |language=en}}

On 1 October 2024, USS Bulkeley and USS Cole fired 12 SM-3 and SM-6 missiles against Iranian ballistic missiles.{{Cite web |last=Epstein |first=Jake |title=New videos show US Navy warship firing interceptors to fend off Iranian ballistic missiles launched at Israel |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/us-navy-warship-fires-interceptor-at-iran-ballistic-missiles-video-2024-10 |access-date=2024-11-23 |website=Business Insider |language=en-US}}

Accidents and major incidents

=USS ''Cole'' bombing=

File:USS Cole (DDG-67) Departs.jpg

{{USS|Cole|DDG-67|6}} 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.{{Cite web |last=Cox |first=Samuel |date=October 2020 |title=H-055-3: Attack on USS Cole (DDG-67) – October 2000 |url=https://www.history.navy.mil/about-us/leadership/director/directors-corner/h-grams/h-gram-055/h-055-3.html |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=Naval History and Heritage Command |language=en-US |archive-date=18 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230218233224/https://www.history.navy.mil/about-us/leadership/director/directors-corner/h-grams/h-gram-055/h-055-3.html |url-status=live }}

=USS ''Porter'' and MV ''Otowasan'' collision=

{{See also|USS Porter (DDG-78)#2012 collision|label 1=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.{{Cite web |last1=Truver |first1=Scott |last2=Holzer |first2=Robert |date=2013-05-01 |title=U.S. Navy in Review |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2013/may/us-navy-review |access-date=2023-01-26 |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |language=en |archive-date=26 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230126021559/https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2013/may/us-navy-review |url-status=live }}

=USS ''Fitzgerald'' and MV ''ACX Crystal'' collision=

{{main|l1=USS Fitzgerald and MV ACX Crystal collision|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.{{Cite web |title=USS Fitzgerald En Route to San Diego |url=https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Media/News/SavedNewsModule/Article/2219241/uss-fitzgerald-en-route-to-san-diego/ |access-date=2022-11-18 |website=Naval Sea Systems Command |language=en-US |archive-date=18 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221118173910/https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Media/News/SavedNewsModule/Article/2219241/uss-fitzgerald-en-route-to-san-diego/ |url-status=live }}

=USS ''John S. McCain'' and ''Alnic MC'' collision=

{{Main|l1=USS John S. McCain and Alnic MC collision|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.{{cite web |author= |date=6 August 2019 |title=NTSB Accident Report on Fatal 2017 USS John McCain Collision off Singapore |url=https://news.usni.org/2019/08/06/ntsb-accident-report-on-fatal-2017-uss-john-mccain-collision-off-singapore |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200624065719/http://news.usni.org/2019/08/06/ntsb-accident-report-on-fatal-2017-uss-john-mccain-collision-off-singapore |archive-date=24 June 2020 |access-date=8 August 2020 |website=USNI News}}

Contractors

Builders: 39 units constructed by General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works Division, and 35 by Huntington Ingalls Industries (formerly Northrop Grumman Ship Systems), Ingalls Shipbuilding{{Cite web |last=O'Rourke |first=Ronald |date=December 21, 2022 |title=Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress |id=RL32109 |url=https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115070459/https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf |archive-date=2023-01-15 |access-date=2023-01-27 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |number=RL32109}}
AN/SPY-1 radar and Aegis Combat System integrator: Lockheed Martin
AN/SPY-6 radar: Raytheon

Ships in class

{{Main|List of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers|l1=List of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers}}

Derivatives

Destroyer classes based on the Arleigh Burke have been adopted by the following naval forces:{{Cite web |title=Sejong the Great class Destroyer - ROK Navy |url=https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/132-republic-of-korea-navy-vessels-ships-and-equipment/rok-navy-frigates-a-destroyers/844-sejong-the-great-sejongdaewang-kdx-iii-class-aegis-destroyer-republic-of-korea-rok-navy-yulgok-yi-i-seoae-yu-seong-ryong-hyundai-heavy-industries-hhi-dsme-datasheet-pictures-photos-video-specifications.html |access-date=2023-01-25 |website=Navy Recognition |archive-date=25 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230125171807/https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/132-republic-of-korea-navy-vessels-ships-and-equipment/rok-navy-frigates-a-destroyers/844-sejong-the-great-sejongdaewang-kdx-iii-class-aegis-destroyer-republic-of-korea-rok-navy-yulgok-yi-i-seoae-yu-seong-ryong-hyundai-heavy-industries-hhi-dsme-datasheet-pictures-photos-video-specifications.html |url-status=live }}

{{flagicon|Japan}} The Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force:
{{sclass|Atago|destroyer|1}}{{Cite journal |last=Kōda |first=Yōji |author-link=:simple:Yoji Koda |date=December 2015 |title=History of Domestic Built Destroyers of JMSDF |journal=Ships of the World |language=ja |publisher=Kaijin-sha |issue=827 |id={{NAID|40020655404}}}}
{{sclass|Kongō|destroyer|1}}{{Cite journal |last=Ishī |first=Kōyū |date=December 2019 |title=Overview of World's Aegis ships: Kongo-class |journal=Ships of the World |language=ja |publisher=Kaijin-sha |issue=913 |pages=88–89 |id={{NAID|40022058771}}}}
{{sclass|Maya|destroyer|1}}{{Cite web |last=Wertheim |first=Eric |date=2020-12-01 |title=Japan's New Aegis DDG |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/december/japans-new-aegis-ddg |access-date=2023-01-25 |publisher=U.S. Naval Institute |language=en |archive-date=19 October 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221019225228/https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/december/japans-new-aegis-ddg |url-status=live }}
{{flagicon|South Korea}} The Republic of Korea Navy:
{{sclass|Sejong the Great|destroyer|1}}{{Cite web |last=LaGrone |first=Sam |date=2016-08-15 |title=Report: South Korea Wants BMD Capability for Destroyers |url=https://news.usni.org/2016/08/15/report-south-korea-wants-bmd-capability-guided-missile-destroyers |access-date=2023-01-25 |website=USNI News |language=en-US |archive-date=15 August 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160815133049/https://news.usni.org/2016/08/15/report-south-korea-wants-bmd-capability-guided-missile-destroyers |url-status=live }}

In popular culture

The 2009 film Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen features USS Preble.{{citation needed|date=May 2024}}

The 2012 film Battleship features {{USS|John Paul Jones|DDG-53|6}}, {{USS|Benfold|DDG-65|6}}, and {{USS|Sampson|DDG-102|6}}.{{Cite web |date=2014-01-08 |title=San Diego-Based Destroyers To Be Transferred To Hawaii This Summer |url=https://www.kpbs.org/news/military/2014/01/08/san-diego-based-destroyers-be-transferred-hawaii-s |access-date=2023-02-18 |website=KPBS Public Media |archive-date=19 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230219013729/https://www.kpbs.org/news/military/2014/01/08/san-diego-based-destroyers-be-transferred-hawaii-s |url-status=live }}

The 2013 film Captain Phillips features USS Truxtun, which stood in for the ship from the true event, USS Bainbridge.{{Cite web |last=Vincent |first=Mal |date=2013-10-11 |title=Navy helped bring "Captain Phillips" to Norfolk |url=https://www.pilotonline.com/entertainment/article_32f9dc47-7510-566e-a65d-10ecbebbe818.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201024040259/https://www.pilotonline.com/entertainment/article_32f9dc47-7510-566e-a65d-10ecbebbe818.html |archive-date=2020-10-24 |access-date=2023-05-20 |website=The Virginian-Pilot}}

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}}.{{cite web |last1=Littlejohn |first1=Donna |last2=Kuznia |first2=Rob |last3=Mazza |first3=Sandy |date=2014-01-06 |title=South Bay, Harbor Area communities work to attract more filming |url=https://www.dailybreeze.com/2014/01/06/south-bay-harbor-area-communities-work-to-attract-more-filming/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230128032247/https://www.dailybreeze.com/2014/01/06/south-bay-harbor-area-communities-work-to-attract-more-filming/ |archive-date=2023-01-28 |access-date=2023-01-27 |work=Daily Breeze}} 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.{{cite web |last=Webb |first=Justin |date=2012-11-09 |title=Naval Base San Diego; USS Halsey featured in "The Last Ship" |url=http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=70567 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180810163012/http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=70567 |archive-date=2018-08-10 |access-date=2023-01-27 |website=navy.mil}}

The 2015 film San Andreas features an unidentified Arleigh Burke-class destroyer during a scene following a tsunami. A second and third unidentified destroyer also appear near the end of the film in the San Francisco Bay.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

Notes

References

= Citations =

= Bibliography =

{{cite book |last=Baker |first=A. D. |title=The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World, 1998–1999: Their Ships, Aircraft, and Systems |location=Annapolis, Maryland |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=1998 |isbn=1-55750-111-4}}
{{cite magazine |last=Ewing |first=Philip |title=Analyst: DDGs without CIWS vulnerable |magazine=Navy Times |date=16 September 2008 |url=http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/09/navy_ciws_091508w/ |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120527023526/http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/09/navy_ciws_091508w/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=27 May 2012}}
{{Cite book |last=Friedman |first=Norman |url=https://archive.org/details/usdestroyersillu0000frie/ |title=U.S. Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=1982 |isbn=9780853685210 |location=Annapolis, Maryland |url-access=registration}}
{{cite book |last1=Gardiner |first1=Robert |last2=Chumbley |first2=Stephen |date=1995 |url=https://archive.org/details/conwaysallworlds0000unse_i1t7/ |title=Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1947–1995 |location=Annapolis, Maryland |url-access=registration |publisher=Naval Institute Press |isbn=1-55750-132-7}}
{{Cite book |last=Polmar |first=Norman |url=https://archive.org/details/navalinstitutegu0000polm_19ed/ |title=The Naval Institute Guide to Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=2013 |isbn=9781591146872 |edition=19th |location=Annapolis, Maryland |url-access=registration}}
{{Cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/janes-fighting-ships-2015-2016/ |title=Jane's Fighting Ships 2015–2016 |publisher=Janes Information Group |year=2015 |isbn=978-0710631435 |editor-last=Saunders |editor-first=Stephen}}
{{cite book |last=Wertheim |first=Eric |url=https://archive.org/details/navalinstitutegu0000unse_j3x1/ |title=The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World, 2005–2006: Their Ships, Aircraft, and Systems |location=Annapolis, Maryland |url-access=registration |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=2005 |isbn=978-1591149347}}

External links

[https://web.archive.org/web/20110725231406/http://destroyerhistory.org/arleighburkeclass/ Arleigh Burke-class destroyers] at [https://web.archive.org/web/20090219202357/http://destroyerhistory.org/ Destroyer History Foundation]
[http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/burke Arleigh Burke class (Aegis) page on naval-technology.com]
[http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2873 Arleigh Burke Flight I & Flight II Class destroyer- United States Navy on navyrecognition.com] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150725010551/http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2873 |date=25 July 2015 }}

Category:Naval ships of the United States

Category:Destroyer classes