The Navy's DD(X) Destroyer Program

Abstract

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Taylor, and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the DD(X) destroyer program. Specifically, the Subcommittee asked the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to compare the actual costs of the DDG-51 destroyer program with those estimated for the DD(X) program, to discuss the realism of cost estimates for the DD(X), and to examine the affordability of the DD(X) in the context of the Navy's ship construction budget. CBO's ongoing analysis of the Navy's shipbuilding programs in general and the DD(X) program in particular indicates the following: (1) The lead ship of the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke class of destroyers was more expensive, in terms of cost per ton of light-load displacement, than the Navy's current estimate of the cost of the lead DD(X), suggesting that additional cost growth is possible in the DD(X) program. (2) The 35-year life-cycle costs of a DD(X) are likely to be higher than those of a recently purchased DDG-51 on a net-present-value basis. (3) The first DD(X) would consume 19-percent of the Navy's ship construction budget in the year it was built, compared with 11 percent for the first DDG-51 in 1985.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Jul 19, 2005
Accession Number
ADA447101

Entities

People

  • J. M. Gilmore

Organizations

  • Congressional Budget Office

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Ground and Sea Platforms

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Arleigh Burke Class
  • Ballistic Missile Submarines
  • Ballistic Missiles
  • Boats
  • Cost Estimates
  • Costs
  • Destroyers
  • Life Cycle Costs
  • Life Cycles
  • Military Personnel
  • Naval Vessels
  • Navy
  • Procurement
  • Shipbuilding
  • Ships
  • Submarines
  • Uss Arleigh Burke

Readers

  • Life Cycle Cost Analysis
  • Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering.
  • Public Financial Management and Budgeting