Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
The USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51), the lead ship of her class, underway in the Mediterranean Sea in March 2003.
|Name:||Arleigh Burke-class destroyer|
|Operators:||United States Navy|
|Preceded by:||Kidd-class guided missile destroyer|
|Cost:||US$1,843M (DDG 114–116, FY2011/12)1|
|Length:||505 ft (154 m) (Flights I and II)
509 ft (155 m) (Flight IIA)
|Beam:||66 ft (20 m)|
|Draft:||30.5 ft (9.3 m)|
|Installed power:||3 × Allison AG9140 Generators (2500kW each, 440V)|
|Propulsion:||4 General Electric LM2500-30 gas turbines each generating 27,000 shp (20,000 kW);
coupled to two shafts, each driving a five-bladed reversible controllable pitch propeller;
Total output: 108,000 shp (81,000 kW)
|Speed:||In excess of 30 kn (56 km/h; 35 mph)|
|Range:||4,400 nmi (8,100 km) at 20 kn (37 km/h; 23 mph)|
|Boats & landing
|2 Rigid hull inflatable boats|
Flights I and II: None
|Aviation facilities:||hangars for two MH-60R LAMPS III helicopters|
The Arleigh Burke class of guided missile destroyers (DDGs) is the United States Navy's first class of destroyer built around the Aegis Combat System and the SPY-1D multi-function phased array radar. The class is named for Admiral Arleigh Burke, the most famous American destroyer officer of World War II, and later Chief of Naval Operations. The class leader, USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during Admiral Burke's lifetime.
They were designed as multi-role destroyers8 to fit the AAW (Anti-Aircraft Warfare) role with their powerful Aegis radar and anti-aircraft missiles; ASW (Anti-submarine warfare) role, with their towed sonar array, anti-submarine rockets, and ASW helicopter; ASUW (Anti-surface warfare) role with their Harpoon missile launcher; and strategic land strike role with their Tomahawk missiles. Some versions of the class no longer have the towed sonar, or Harpoon missile launcher. Their hull and superstructure were designed to have a reduced radar cross section9 The first ship of the class was commissioned on 4 July 1991. With the decommissioning of the last Spruance-class destroyer, Cushing, on 21 September 2005, the Arleigh Burke-class ships became the U.S. Navy's only active destroyers; the class has the longest production run for any postwar U.S. Navy surface combatant.10 The Arleigh Burke class is planned to be the third most numerous class of destroyer to serve in the U.S. Navy, after the Fletcher and Gearing classes; besides the 62 vessels of this class (comprising 21 of Flight I, 7 of Flight II and 34 of Flight IIA) in service by 2013, up to a further 42 (of Flight III) have been envisaged.
With an overall length of 505 feet (154 m) to 509 feet (155 m), displacement ranging from 8,315 to 9,200 tons, and weaponry including over 90 missiles, the Arleigh Burke-class ships are larger and more heavily armed than most previous ships classified as guided missile cruisers.11
The Arleigh Burke class is among the largest destroyers built in the United States. Only the Spruance and Kidd classes were longer (563 ft). The Burke class are multi-mission ships with a "combination of... an advanced anti-submarine warfare system, land attack cruise missiles, ship-to-ship missiles, and advanced anti-aircraft missiles,"12 The larger Ticonderoga-class ships were constructed on Spruance-class hullforms, but are designated as cruisers due to their radically different mission and weapons systems. The Burke class on the other hand were designed with a new, large, water-plane area-hull form characterized by a wide flaring which significantly improves sea-keeping ability. The hull form is designed to permit high speed in high sea states.9
The Arleigh Burke's designers incorporated lessons learned from the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers; with the Arleigh Burke class, the U.S. Navy also returned to all-steel construction. An earlier generation had combined a steel hull with an innovative superstructure made of lighter aluminum to reduce topweight, but the lighter metal proved vulnerable to cracking. Aluminum is also less fire-resistant than steel.13 A 1975 fire aboard USS Belknap gutted her aluminum superstructure.14 Battle damage to Royal Navy ships exacerbated by their aluminum superstructures during the 1982 Falklands War supported the decision to use steel. Another lesson from the Falklands War12 led the navy to protect the ship's vital spaces with double-spaced steel armor (creating a buffer for modern rockets), and kevlar spall liners.
The Ticonderoga-class cruisers were deemed too expensive to continue building and too difficult to further upgrade.citation needed The angled rather than traditional vertical surfaces and the tripod mainmast of the Arleigh Burke design are stealth techniques,1516 which make the ship more difficult to detect, in particular by anti-ship missiles.
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.17 Other NBC defenses include a "countermeasure wash down system".18
Their Aegis radar differs from a traditional rotating radar that mechanically rotates 360 degrees for each "sweep" scan of the airspace which allows continual tracking of targets.9 The system's computer control also allows centralization of the previously separate tracking and targeting functions.9 The system is also resistant to electronic counter-measures.9 Their standalone Harpoon anti-ship missile launchers give them an anti-ship capability with a range in excess of 64 nm.9 " The 5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun, in conjunction with the Mark 34 Gun Weapon System, is an anti-ship weapon which can also be used for close-in air contacts or to support forces ashore with Naval Gun-Fire Support (NGF), with a range of up to 20 miles and capable of firing 20 rounds per minute."9 The class' Sparrow missile provide point defense against missiles and aircraft while the Standard Missile provides area anti-aircraft defense, additionally the ship has an electronics warfare suite that provides passive detection and decoy countermeasures.9
The class' Light airborne multipurpose system, or LAMPS helicopter system improves the ship's capabilities against submarines and surface ships, a helicopter able to serve as a platform to monitor submarines and surface ships, and launch torpedoes and missiles against them, as well as being able to support ground assaults with machine guns and Hellfire anti-armor guided missiles.19 The helicopters also serve in a utility role, able to perform ship replenishment, search and rescue, medical evacuation, communications relay, and naval gunfire spotting and controlling.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers have many combat systems. Burkes have the Navy's latest anti-submarine combat system with active sonar, a towed sonar array, and anti-submarine rockets.9 They support strategic land strikes with their VLS launched Tomahawks.9 They are able to detect anti-ship mines at a range of 1400 yards.20
So vital has the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMD) role of the class become that all ships of the class are being updated with BMD capability.2122 Burke production is being restarted in place of additional Zumwalt-class destroyers.23
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, Todd Shipyards and Ingalls Shipbuilding.17 On 3 April 1985 Bath Iron Works received a US$321.9 million contract to build the first of class, USS Arleigh Burke.24 Gibbs & Cox was awarded the contract to be the lead ship design agent.25 The total cost of the first ship was put at US$1.1 billion, the other US$778 million being for the ship's weapons systems.24 She 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.
The "Flight IIA Arleigh Burke" ships have several new features, beginning with the USS Oscar Austin (DDG-79). Among the changes are the addition of two hangars for ASW helicopters, and a new, longer Mark 45 Mod 4 5-inch/62-caliber naval gun (fitted on USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81) and later ships). Later Flight IIA ships starting with USS Mustin (DDG-89) have a modified funnel design that buries the funnels within the superstructure as a signature-reduction measure. TACTAS towed array sonar was omitted from Flight IIA ships and they also lack Harpoon missile launchers. Ships from DDG-68 to DDG-84 have AN/SLQ-32 antennas that resemble V3 configuration similar to those deployed on Ticonderoga-class cruisers, while the remainder have V2 variants externally resembling those deployed on some Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates. V3 has an active electronic countermeasures component while V2 is passive only. A number of Flight IIA ships were constructed without a Phalanx CIWS because of the planned Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile, but later the Navy decided to retrofit all IIA ships to carry at least one Phalanx CIWS by 2013.26
USS Pinckney, USS Momsen, USS Chung-Hoon, USS Nitze, USS James E. Williams and USS Bainbridge27 have superstructure differences to accommodate the Remote Mine-hunting System (RMS). Mk 32 torpedo tubes were moved to the missile deck from amidships as well.
The U.S. Navy has begun a modernization program for the Arleigh Burke class aimed at improving the gun systems on the ships in an effort to address congressional concerns over the retirement of the Iowa-class battleships. This modernization was to include an extension of the range of the 5-inch (127 mm) guns on the flight I Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (USS Arleigh Burke to USS Ross) with extended range guided munitions (ERGMs) that would have given the guns a range of 40 nautical miles (74 km).282930 However, the ERGM was cancelled in 2008.31
The modernization program is designed to provide a comprehensive mid-life upgrade to ensure that the class remains effective. Reduced manning, increased mission effectiveness, and a reduced total cost including construction, maintenance, and operation are the goals of the modernization program. Modernization technologies will be integrated during new construction of DDG-111 and 112, then retrofitted into DDG flight I and II ships during in-service overhaul periods.32 The first phase will update the hull, mechanical, and electrical systems while the second phase will introduce an open architecture computing environment (OACE). The result will be improved capability in both ballistic missile defense (BMD) and littoral combat.3334 By 2018 all Burkes homeported in the Western Pacific will have upgraded anti-submarine systems, including the new AN/SQR-20 Multifunction Towed Array.35
The Navy is also upgrading the ships' ability to process data. Beginning with USS Spruance, the Navy is installing an internet protocol (IP) based data backbone, which enhances the ship's ability to handle video. Spruance is the first destroyer to be fitted with the Boeing Company's gigabit Ethernet data multiplex system (GEDMS).36
The class was scheduled to be replaced by Zumwalt-class destroyers beginning in 2020,38 but an increasing threat from both long- and short-range missiles caused the Navy to restart production of the Arleigh Burke-class and consider placing littoral combat mission modules on the new ships.3940
In April 2009 the Navy announced a plan that limited the Zumwalt-class to three units while ordering another three Arleigh Burke-class ships from both Bath Iron Works and Ingalls Shipbuilding.23 In December 2009 Northrop Grumman received a $170.7 million letter contract for DDG-113 long-lead-time materials.41 Shipbuilding contracts for DDG-113 to DDG-115 were awarded in mid-2011 for US$679.6m–$783.6m;42 these do not include government-furnished equipment such as weapons and sensors which will take the average cost of the FY2011/12 ships to US$1,842.7m per vessel.1 DDG-113 to DDG-115 will be "restart" ships, similar to previous Flight IIA ships, but including modernization features such as Open Architecture Computing Environment; DDG-116 to DDG-121 will be "Technology Insertion" ships with elements of Flight III, and Flight III proper will start with DDG-122.43
Flight III ships, construction starting in FY2016 in place of the canceled CG(X) program, have various design improvements including radar antennas of mid-diameter increased to 14 feet (4.3 m) from the previous 12 feet (3.7 m).44 These Air and Missile Defense Radars (AMDR) use digital beamforming, instead of the earlier Passive Electronically Scanned Array radars.45
However, costs for the Flight III ships increased rapidly as expectations and requirements for the program have grown. In particular, this was due to the changing requirements needed to carry the proposed Air and Missile Defense Radar system required for the ships' ballistic missile defense role.46 The Government Accountability Office found that the design of the Flight IIIs was based on "a significantly reduced threat environment from other Navy analyses" and that the new ships would be "at best marginally effective".47
In spite of the production restart, the Navy is expected to fall short of its requirement for 94 missile-defense-capable destroyer and cruiser platforms starting in FY 2025 and continuing past the end of the 30-year planning window. While this is a new requirement as of 2011, and the United States Navy has never had so many large missile-armed surface combatants, the relative success of the Aegis ballistic missile defense system has shifted this national security requirement onto the Navy. The shortfall will arise as older platforms that have been refitted to be missile-defense-capable (particularly the cruisers) are retired in bulk before new destroyers are planned to be built.48
The Navy is considering extending the acquisition of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers into the 2040s, according to revised procurement tables sent to Congress, which have the Navy procuring Flight IV ships from 2032 through 2041.49
In April 2014, the U.S. Navy began the early stages of developing a new destroyer to replace the Arleigh Burke-class called the "Future Surface Combatant". The new class is expected to enter service in the early 2030s and initially serve alongside the 22 Flight III DDGs. No hull design or shape has been speculated yet, although the destroyer class will incorporate emerging technologies like lasers, on-board power-generation systems, increased automation, and next-generation weapons, sensors, and electronics. They will leverage technologies in use on other platforms such as the Zumwalt-class destroyer, Littoral Combat Ship, and Gerald Ford-class aircraft carriers. The Future Surface Combatant may place importance on the Zumwalt-class destroyer's electric drive system that propels the ship while generating 58 megawatts of on-board electrical power, levels required to operate future directed energy weapons. Laser weapon systems are likely to become more prominent to engage threats without using missiles that could potentially cost more than the target it is engaging. Less costly weapon system may help keep the destroyer class from becoming too expensive. Initial requirements for the Future Surface Combatant will emphasize lethality and survivability, as well as being able to continue to protect aircraft carriers. The ships also have to be modular to allow for inexpensive upgrades of weaponry, electronics, computing, and sensors over time as threats evolve.50
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Cole was damaged on 12 October 2000 in Aden, Yemen while docked, by an attack in which an apparently 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.
In October 2011 it was announced that four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers would be forward-deployed in Europe to support the NATO missile defence system. The ships, to be based at Naval Station Rota, Spain, were named in February 2012, as Ross, Donald Cook, Porter and Carney.51 By reducing travel times to station, this forward deployment will allow for six other destroyers to be shifted from the Atlantic in support of the Pivot to East Asia.52 Russia has threatened to quit the New START treaty over this deployment, calling it a threat to their nuclear deterrent.53
- Builders: 34 units constructed by General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works Division and 28 by Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, Ingalls Shipbuilding
- AN/SPY-1 Radar and Combat System Integrator: Lockheed Martin
|Arleigh Burke||DDG-51||Bath Iron Works||16 September 1989||4 July 1991||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Barry||DDG-52||Ingalls Shipbuilding||8 June 1991||12 December 1992||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|John Paul Jones||DDG-53||Bath Iron Works||26 October 1991||18 December 1993||San Diego, California||Active|
|Curtis Wilbur||DDG-54||Bath Iron Works||16 May 1992||19 March 1994||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Stout||DDG-55||Ingalls Shipbuilding||16 October 1992||13 August 1994||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|John S. McCain||DDG-56||Bath Iron Works||26 September 1992||2 July 1994||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Mitscher||DDG-57||Ingalls Shipbuilding||7 May 1993||10 December 1994||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Laboon||DDG-58||Bath Iron Works||20 February 1993||18 March 1995||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Russell||DDG-59||Ingalls Shipbuilding||20 October 1993||20 May 1995||San Diego, California||Active|
|Paul Hamilton||DDG-60||Bath Iron Works||24 July 1993||27 May 1995||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Ramage||DDG-61||Ingalls Shipbuilding||11 February 1994||22 July 1995||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Fitzgerald||DDG-62||Bath Iron Works||29 January 1994||14 October 1995||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Stethem||DDG-63||Ingalls Shipbuilding||17 July 1994||21 October 1995||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Carney||DDG-64||Bath Iron Works||23 July 1994||13 April 1996||Mayport, Florida||Active|
|Benfold||DDG-65||Ingalls Shipbuilding||9 November 1994||30 March 1996||San Diego, California||Active|
|Gonzalez||DDG-66||Bath Iron Works||18 February 1995||12 October 1996||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Cole||DDG-67||Ingalls Shipbuilding||10 February 1995||8 June 1996||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|The Sullivans||DDG-68||Bath Iron Works||12 August 1995||19 April 1997||Mayport, Florida||Active|
|Milius||DDG-69||Ingalls Shipbuilding||1 August 1995||23 November 1996||San Diego, California||Active|
|Hopper||DDG-70||Bath Iron Works||6 January 1996||6 September 1997||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Ross||DDG-71||Ingalls Shipbuilding||22 March 1996||28 June 1997||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Mahan||DDG-72||Bath Iron Works||29 June 1996||2 February 1998||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Decatur||DDG-73||Bath Iron Works||10 November 1996||29 August 1998||San Diego, California||Active|
|McFaul||DDG-74||Ingalls Shipbuilding||18 January 1997||25 April 1998||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Donald Cook||DDG-75||Bath Iron Works||3 May 1997||4 December 1998||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Higgins||DDG-76||Bath Iron Works||4 October 1997||24 April 1999||San Diego, California||Active|
|O'Kane||DDG-77||Bath Iron Works||28 March 1998||23 October 1999||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Porter||DDG-78||Ingalls Shipbuilding||12 November 1997||20 March 1999||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Flight IIA: 5"/54 variant|
|Oscar Austin||DDG-79||Bath Iron Works||7 November 1998||19 August 2000||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Roosevelt||DDG-80||Ingalls Shipbuilding||10 January 1999||14 October 2000||Mayport, Florida||Active|
|Flight IIA: 5"/62 variant|
|Winston S. Churchill||DDG-81||Bath Iron Works||17 April 1999||10 March 2001||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Lassen||DDG-82||Ingalls Shipbuilding||16 October 1999||21 April 2001||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Howard||DDG-83||Bath Iron Works||20 November 1999||20 October 2001||San Diego, California||Active|
|Bulkeley||DDG-84||Ingalls Shipbuilding||21 June 2000||8 December 2001||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Flight IIA: 5"/62, one 20mm CIWS variant26|
|McCampbell||DDG-85||Bath Iron Works||2 July 2000||17 August 2002||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Shoup||DDG-86||Ingalls Shipbuilding||22 November 2000||22 June 2002||Everett, Washington||Active|
|Mason||DDG-87||Bath Iron Works||23 June 2001||12 April 2003||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Preble||DDG-88||Ingalls Shipbuilding||1 June 2001||9 November 2002||San Diego, California||Active|
|Mustin||DDG-89||Ingalls Shipbuilding||12 December 2001||26 July 2003||Yokosuka, Japan||Active|
|Chafee||DDG-90||Bath Iron Works||2 November 2002||18 October 2003||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Pinckney||DDG-91||Ingalls Shipbuilding||26 June 2002||29 May 2004||San Diego, California||Active|
|Momsen||DDG-92||Bath Iron Works||19 July 2003||28 August 2004||Everett, Washington||Active|
|Chung-Hoon||DDG-93||Ingalls Shipbuilding||15 December 2002||18 September 2004||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Nitze||DDG-94||Bath Iron Works||3 April 2004||5 March 2005||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|James E. Williams||DDG-95||Ingalls Shipbuilding||25 June 2003||11 December 2004||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Bainbridge||DDG-96||Bath Iron Works||13 November 2004||12 November 2005||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Halsey||DDG-97||Ingalls Shipbuilding||9 January 2004||30 July 2005||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Forrest Sherman||DDG-98||Ingalls Shipbuilding||2 October 2004||28 January 2006||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Farragut||DDG-99||Bath Iron Works||23 July 2005||10 June 2006||Mayport, Florida||Active|
|Kidd||DDG-100||Ingalls Shipbuilding||22 January 2005||9 June 2007||San Diego, California||Active|
|Gridley||DDG-101||Bath Iron Works||28 December 2005||10 February 2007||San Diego, California||Active|
|Sampson||DDG-102||Bath Iron Works||16 September 2006||3 November 2007||San Diego, California||Active|
|Truxtun||DDG-103||Ingalls Shipbuilding||2 June 2007||25 April 2009||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Sterett||DDG-104||Bath Iron Works||19 May 2007||9 August 2008||San Diego, California||Active|
|Dewey||DDG-105||Ingalls Shipbuilding||26 January 2008||6 March 2010||San Diego, California||Active|
|Stockdale||DDG-106||Bath Iron Works||10 May 2008||18 April 2009||San Diego, California||Active|
|Gravely||DDG-107||Ingalls Shipbuilding||30 March 2009||20 November 2010||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|Wayne E. Meyer||DDG-108||Bath Iron Works||18 October 2008||10 October 2009||San Diego, California||Active|
|Jason Dunham||DDG-109||Bath Iron Works||1 August 2009||13 November 2010||Norfolk, Virginia||Active|
|William P. Lawrence||DDG-110||Ingalls Shipbuilding||15 December 2009||4 June 2011||San Diego, California||Active|
|Spruance||DDG-111||Bath Iron Works||6 June 2010||1 October 2011||San Diego, California||Active|
|Michael Murphy||DDG-112||Bath Iron Works||7 May 2011||6 October 2012||Pearl Harbor, Hawaii||Active|
|Flight IIA: Restart|
|John Finn||DDG-113||Ingalls Shipbuilding||Laid down|
|Ralph Johnson||DDG-114||Ingalls Shipbuilding||Construction on contract54|
|Rafael Peralta||DDG-115||Bath Iron Works||Construction on contract55|
|Flight IIA: Technology Insertion|
|Thomas Hudner||DDG-116||Bath Iron Works||Construction on contract|
|Paul Ignatius||DDG-117||Ingalls Shipbuilding||Contract awarded(MYP)|
|Daniel Inouye||DDG-118||Bath Iron Works||Contract awarded(MYP)|
|DDG-119||Ingalls Shipbuilding||Contract awarded(MYP)|
|DDG-120||Bath Iron Works||Contract awarded(MYP)|
USS Michael Murphy was originally intended to be the last of the Arleigh Burke class. However with reduction of the Zumwalt-class production, the Navy requested new DDG-51-class ships.56 Long-lead materials contracts were awarded to Northrop Grumman in December 2009 for DDG-113 and in April 2010 for DDG-114.57 General Dynamics received a long-lead materials contract for DDG-115 in February 2010.5859 It is anticipated that in FY2012 or FY2013, the Navy will commence detailed work for a Flight III design and request 24 ships to be built from 2016 to 2031.60 In May 2013, a total of 77 Burke-class ships was planned.61 The Flight III variant is in the design phase as of 2013. In June 2013, the US Navy awarded $6.2 billion in destroyer contracts.62 Up to 42 Flight III ships are expected to be procured by the Navy with the first ship entering service in 2023.63
In this image of USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62), a Flight I ship, note TACTAS in center of fantail, lack of helicopter hangars, and design of stacks.
In this image of USS Mustin (DDG-89), a Flight IIA ship, note lack of TACTAS in center of fantail, aft helicopter hangars, Phalanx CIWS mount and different design of exhaust stacks.
Starboard side of USS Momsen (DDG-92), note torpedo tubes mounted on missile deck vs earlier mounted amidships. Also note superstructure changes to accommodate a Remote Minehunting System (RMS) holding bay.
- Kolkata-class destroyer; India
- Horizon-class frigate; Franco-Italian
- Kongō-class destroyer; Japanese
- Atago-class destroyer; Japanese
- Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate; Norwegian
- Sejong the Great-class destroyer; Korean
- Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate; Spanish
- Type 45 (Daring-class) destroyer; United Kingdom
- FREMM multipurpose frigate; Franco-Italian
- Type 052D destroyer; Chinese
- De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate; Dutch
- Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate, Danish
- Sachsen-class frigate, German
- O'Rourke, Ronald (19 April 2011). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service. Retrieved 23 October 2011. Since 1 and 2 ships are procured in alternate years and the "1 in a year" ships cost more, the fairest estimate of unit price comes from averaging three ships across two years. US$50-300m is spent on long lead-time items in the year before the main procurement of each ship. DDG-114 and DDG-115 together cost US$577.2m (FY2010) + US$2,922.2m (FY2011) = US$3,499.4m,(p25) and DDG-116 cost US$48m (FY2011) + US$1,980.7m (FY2012) = US$2,028.7m,(p12) making an average for the three ships of US$1,847.2m. DDG-113 cost US$2,234.4m.(p6)
- "DOD Announces Selected Acquisition Reports". United States Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs). 15 April 2011. Archived from the original on 29 May 2011. Retrieved 20 April 2011.
- "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service Reports for the People (Open CRS). 26 February 2010. Archived from the original on 23 April 2010. Retrieved 15 April 2010.
- "COMDESRON FIFTEEN". United States Navy. Retrieved 9 October 2010.
- "USS Lassen – About Us". United States Navy. Archived from the original on 11 October 2010. Retrieved 9 October 2010.
- pamphlet 09-MDA-4298 (4 MAR 09).
- DDG-51 Arleigh Burke – Flight IIA
- After 2-plus decades, Navy destroyer breaks record
- "Northrop Grumman-Built William P. Lawrence Christened; Legacy of Former POW Honored". Northrop Grumman, 17 April 2010.
- "Navy Reverting To Steel In Shipbuilding After Cracks In Aluminum". The New York Times, 11 August 1987.
- Section F.7: Aluminum in warship construction. hazegray.org, 30 March 2000.
- Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p.592.
- Baker 1998, p.1020.
- Biddle, Wayne (28 February 1984). "The dust has settled on the Air Force's Great Engine". The New York Times.
- "Countermeasure washdown system test"
- "Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) DDG 51"
- Sea-Based Ballistic Missile Defense – Background and Issues for Congress
- Galrahn (23 September 2009). "Fact Check – Technicals of AEGIS BMD". Information Dissemination. Retrieved 27 December 2011.
- Contractors Agree on Deal to Build Stealth Destroyer. Navy Times, 8 April 2009.
- "Maine shipbuilder gets Navy contract for a new destroyer". The New York Times. 3 April 1985.
- "History of Gibbs & Cox". Gibbs & Cox. January 2011. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
- Analyst: DDGs without CIWS vulnerable. Navy Times. 16 September 2008.
- DN-SD-07-24674 (up to DDG-96)dead link
- Taken from the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, pages 67–68dead link
- Taken from the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, p. 193dead link
- Federation of American Scientists report on the MK 45 5-inch gun and ammunition payload for the US Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
- Navy ends ERGM funding Navy Times
- The US Navy – Fact File
- DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-Class Aegis Guided-Missile Destroyer Modernization
- "DRS Technologies Wins Contract to Continue its Support for Arleigh Burke-Class Guided Missile Destroyers Modernization Program". December 4, 2013.
- Greenert, Admiral Jonathan (18 September 2013). "Statement Before The House Armed Services Committee On Planning For Sequestration In FY 2014 And Perspectives Of The Military Services On The Strategic Choices And Management Review" (pdf). US House of Representatives. Retrieved 21 September 2013.
- "Boeing: Boeing Deploys Gigabit Ethernet Data Multiplex System on USS Spruance". Boeing.mediaroom.com. 24 October 2011. Retrieved 27 December 2011.
- "BAE to Modernize Up to 11 Norfolk-based Destroyers". Archived from the original on 7 August 2010. Retrieved 3 August 2010.
- Resource Implications of the Navy’s 2008 Shipbuilding Plan. Congressional Budget Office. 23 March 2007.
- "Missile Threat Helped Drive DDG Cut". Defense News. 4 August 2008. Retrieved 27 December 2011.
- Navy's future linked to flexible weapons: chief
- "Contracts for Wednesday, December 02, 2009". Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), U.S. Department of Defense. 2 December 2009. Retrieved 23 October 2011. Contract N00024-10-C-2308.
- "DDG 51 Class Ship Construction Contract Awards Announced". Naval Sea Systems Command Office of Corporate Communication. 26 September 2011. Retrieved 23 October 2011.
- Lyle, Peter C. (2010). "DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Burke-Class Destroyer – New Construction Program" (PDF). Naval Sea Systems Command. p. 17. Retrieved 23 October 2011. Presentation summarising the restart program.
- RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress. CRS, 26 February 2010.
- GAO-10-388SP, "Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs". GAO, 30 March 2010
- Fabey, Michael. "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms." Aviation Week, 10 June 2011.
- Freedberg, Sydney J. Jr. "Navy Bets On Arleigh Burkes To Sail Until 2072; 40 Years Afloat For Some." 5 October 2012.
- O'Rourke, Ronald. "CRS-RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress." Congressional Research Service, 2 March 2012.
- "US proposes Flight IV Arleigh Burke and life extension for command ships". Jane's Information Group, 14 June 2011.
- Navy Makes Plans for New Destroyer for 2030s - Military.com, 9 April 2014
- Navy, Navy Names Forward Deployed Ships to Rota, Spain
- "NavWeek: Keeping Asian Waters Pacific."
- "Russia may quit START III after US deploys destroyer in Europe". voiceofrussia.com. The Voice of Russia. 2 February 2014. Retrieved 31 January 2014.
- "U.S. Navy Awards HII USD 697.6 Million Contract for New DDG 114 Destroyer". Shipbuilding Tribune. 27 September 2011. Archived from the original on 2 October 2011. Retrieved 2 October 2011.
- "GDBIW Wins USD 680 Million Contract for Construction of Two DDG 51 Destroyers (USA)". Shipbuilding Tribune. 28 September 2011. Archived from the original on 2 October 2011. Retrieved 2 October 2011.
- RL32109, Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress. Congressional Research Service, 23 December 2009.
- "Northrop Grumman awarded $114M contract; Navy orders 30th DDG 51 ship", www.gulflive.com, 24 April 2010.
- "General Dynamics wins over $900 mln in Navy deals", Reuters, 26 February 2010.
- "BIW to purchase DDG 115 material", UPI.com, 2 March 2010.
- CRS RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress 14 June 2010
- "Department of Defense Announces Selected Acquisition Report". United States Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs). 23 May 2013. Retrieved 3 June 2013.
- Cavas, Christopher P. "Saudi Arabia Mulling BMD-Capable Destroyers". Defense News, 13 June 2011.
- Baker, A.D. The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 1998–1999. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1998. ISBN 1-55750-111-4.
- Gardiner, Robert and Chumbley, Stephen. Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 1947–1995. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1995. ISBN 1-55750-132-7.
- Sanders, Michael S. (1999). The Yard: Building a Destroyer at the Bath Iron Works. New York: HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-019246-1. (Describes the construction of Donald Cook (DDG-75) at Bath Iron Works.)
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Arleigh Burke class destroyers.|
- Arleigh Burke-class destroyers at Destroyer History Foundation
- Arleigh Burke unit list on globalsecurity.org
- Arleigh Burke class (Aegis) page on naval-technology.com