USN Burke Class - News, Reports, Data, etc.

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by Jeff Head, Sep 26, 2012.

  1. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Arliegh Burke Class DDGs News & Developments

    The Arleigh Burke class destroyers represent the longest production run for any surface combatant in US History.

    [​IMG]

    These AEGIS destroyers use Phased Array Radar (PARs) and Vertical Launch Systems (VLS) for their anti-air, anti-surface and anti-submarine missiles. They have close in weapons systems to protect against "leaker" missiles and torpedoes for further ASW work. They defenses are controlled by the vaunted AEGIS combat management system...the most widely distributed and used battle management system in the world, which has continuously been updated and improved over the years along with the electronics and weapon systems feeding it.

    The Burke Class Flight I and II started with DDG-51, the USS Arleigh Burk commissioned July 4th, 1991. These Flight 1 and Flight II vessels, which were very close to the same with only minor changes, ran for 28 vessels through DDG-78, the USS Porter. They displaced 8,400 tons with 90 VLS tubes, eight SSMs, two CIWS, and six torpedo tubes.

    These initial vessels had a landing pad and "hook ups" for ASW and SAR helicopters, but no hangar. As the 30+ Spruance Class destroyers were de-commissioned the need for US destroyers that could house their own helicopters made a resurgence and a new modification for the Burke class destroyers was proposed.

    [​IMG]

    This produced the Flight IIA Burke Destroyer starting with the USS Oscar Ausin which was commissioned August 19, 2000.

    These newer vessels had a large hanger capable of housing up to two SH-60 Seahawk helicopters. They also increased the number of VLS tubes from 90 to 96. They displace over 9,200 tons. Since the Oscar Austin, another 34 vessels have been produced to date, with DDG-112, USS Michael Murphey being commissioned October 6, 2012.

    This is a total of 62 AEGIS destroyers commissioned in just over 22 years. Almost three per year for all of those years!

    Since that time, another has been launched, six more are at various stages of construction, and four more contracts have been awarded. for more Flight IIA vessels. This will make a total of 73 Flight I, Flight II, and Flight IIA vessels.

    Now, the first three Flight III vessels have been awarded, and it is expectedat least twelve of those will be built...and probably more.

    These are expected to be a bridge design to tie the United States Navy over to a new design that will ultimately replace the ageing 22 vessel strong Ticonderoga Class AEGIS cruisers. But it is possible that Flight II vessels will make up a majority of those replacements.

    So, at the very least there will be 85 Burke destroyers, and this may expand to 95, A huge run of a very successful, in fact the most successful, modern destroyer class on earth.

    An amazing run of very successful, very modern, and very modular class of ships which are a tribute to the naval designers who envisioned and designed them, the ship yards who built them, and the men and women who have operated and maintained them all of these years.
     
    #1 Jeff Head, Sep 26, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2015
  2. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Re: The Arliegh Burke Class Destroyers, longest running productrion run in US History

    Love this pic of the Burke Flight IIA in formation with a Tico Cruiser:

    [​IMG]
     
  3. PanAsian
    Offline

    PanAsian Major

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    4,040
    Re: The Arliegh Burke Class Destroyers, longest running productrion run in US History

    Little bro and big bro!
     
  4. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Re: The Arliegh Burke Class Destroyers, longest running productrion run in US History

    Hehe...LOL! Exactly.

    Except, as is the case in real life many times, little bro has grown up to pretty darn near the match for big bro!

    The new Zumwalt Class will look really good in conjunction with these.

    I will be really happy one day to see a brand new Burke Flight III DDG or two sailing in fromation with a new Ford Class CVN carrier and with a Zumwalt Class DDG and a new America Class LHA along for a multi-mission, Phibron Task Force.

    That will be very powerful stuff.
     
    #4 Jeff Head, Sep 27, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2012
  5. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Comparing the the US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA DDG & the PLAN Type 052C DDG


    [​IMG]

    Comparing the the US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA DDG & the PLAN Type 052C DDG

    Over the last ten years, the People's Republic of China has been involved in one of the largest naval modernization and buildup programs since World War II. The People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has literally made up over 25 years of technology deficit in these last 10-15 years and now, instead of lagging the western powers by 30+ years, it has narrowed that gap to perhaps five years in many areas, and to parity in other areas.

    One of the most clear examples of this is in the PLAN's development of guided missile destroyers. They have gone through several quick iterations in this time, starting from their 1950s vintage technology Luda class destroyers and progressing through short runs of their Type 051 and initial Type 052 destroyers, coupled with a purchase of four, more modern Russian Sovremenny destoryers, to now serially producing their [/b]Type 052C, Lanzhou Class destroyer[/b], of which six have now been built. An advanced and upgraded version of this vessel, the Type 052D is now being produced with the first one already launched and outfitting. Serial production of these newer vessels is expected to continue with at least eight contemplated

    In the mean time, the US Navy, After building 31 of its Spruance Class Destroyers in the 1970-1980s, began building its AEGIS class Burke Destroyers in the late 1980s, building 28 of these vessels. The US then developed an advanced and upgraded version of the vessel called the [/b]Arleigh Burke Flight IIA destroyer[/b], of which now 33 have been built and at least five more will be built. After that, a run of what will be called the Arleigh Burke Flight III vessels is envisioned. Ten of those vessels are planned as a gap filler between the Arleigh Burke class overall, and the future class of US destroyers which design is still being developed.

    The Type 052C and Arleigh Burke Flight IIA vessels are remarkably similar. Both have VLS missiles as their main armament. Both have the ability to launch surface strike missiles, both are outfitted with Phased Array Radar systems and integrated battle management systems. Both have a single, forward main gun. Both have two close in weapons systems (CIWS), and both have an aft helo deck accomodating ASW helicopters.

    This being the case, and the fact that [/b]I build 1/350 scale modern war vessels for Carrier Strike Groups[/b], including the carriers and their escorts...which these two vessels figure heavily into for their respective navies, I thought it appropriate to compare the two vessels in 1/350 scale.

    Below are several pictures comparing the two vessels overall and their various systems. They are from my build of [/b]Trumpeter's 1/350 Scale PLAN Haikou, DDG-171 Type 052C[/b], and from [/b]Trumpeter's 1/350 scale USS Lassen, DDG-82 Arleigh Burke Flight IIA[/b].


    Overall Comparison of the Destroyers

    As stated in general terms, the vessels are very similar in the types of systems they carry and in the location of these systems on the overall laypout of the vessel. The Burke is a larger vessel. Here are the specs comparing the two:

    PLAN TYPE 52C Destroyer

    Length: 505 ft (154m)
    Beam: 56 ft (17m)
    Draft: 20 ft (6m)
    Displace (Full Load): 7,500 tons

    US Arliegh Burke Flight IIA Destroyer

    Length: 513 ft (155m)
    Beam: 66 ft (20m)
    Draft: 31 ft (9m)
    Displace (Full Load): 9,200 tons


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Forward VLS Launcher

    The Type 052C employs a VLS system that is a "cold launch" system. This means that the missile is ejected from its launch silo by compressed gas, and then the missile motor ignites to lift the vessel into the air and on its way. The missile fired is the HQ-9 missile with a maximum range of 125 miles (200 km) and a service ceiling of over 90,000 ft. The forward launcher of the Type 052C contains 36 missiles in six round compartments carrying six missiles each.

    The US vessel, on the other hand, uses a "hot launch" system where the missiles engine ignites in the launch silo and lifts directly from there, the hot gases from the missile exhaust being diverted out of the silo through specially designed vents. The system is designated as the Mk-41 VLS System. The US launchers can carry multiple missile types including the Standard Anti-air missile (SM2-ER Block IV), the Tomahawk cruise missile, the SUBROC anti-submarine missile, and the Evolved Sea Saprrow (ESSM) in a 4-pak container for each VLS cell. The US system is significantly smaller in terms of its footprint and carriers 32 missiles in it's forward 4x8 grid. The Standard Missiles range up to 120 miles for cruise missile engagement, or, up to 310 miles (500 km) for ballistic missile engagement. The Tomahawk missile shave ranges in excess of 1,500 miles, and newer Block IV Tomoahawks can attack surface ships as well. The Evolved Sea Sparrow missile is a medium ranged misisles with engagement capabilities up to 30 miles (50 km). In addition to the US, Australia. Canada, Germany, Turkey, Greece, Japan, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, Spain, and the United Arab Emirates are using the ESSM.


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Forward Close in Weapon System (CIWS)

    The Type 052C employs a Type 730 CIWS, meaning it is a 7 barrelled, 30 millimeter gatling type gun. It is similar in appearance to the Dutch Goalkeepr CIWS used by Euopean powers, particularly the UK on its vessels, though the 30mm gun itself is almost exactly like the General Electric GAU-8/A Avenger. It has an effective firing rate of 4,200 rounds per minute (5,800 rpm max) with an effective range of 1.8 miles (3 km) and weighs in at over 17,000 lbs. It is a standalone system.

    The US System is the Phalanyx System, which is a six barrel, 20 millimeter gatling type gun system. The US Phalanyx System has been employed for over 25 years and has undergone numerous upgrades and continuous testing to upgrade its radars, sensors, and firing mechanisms to be tested successfully against the latest missile and aircraft threats. The US effective fire rate is 4,500 rounds per minute with an effective range of 2.2 miles (3.5 km). It weighs in at 13,000 lbs and is a standalone system. Phalanyx is used by the US Navy, the US Coast Guard, the US Army (ground mounted version), and the navies of 16 allied nations.


    http://www.jeffhead.com/PLAN-USA-DDGCompare/DDG-Compare-006.jpg[/img]
    http://www.jeffhead.com/PLAN-USA-DDGCompare/DDG-Compare-007.jpg[/img]

    Forward Main Gun

    The Type 052C employs a singel 100 mm dual Purpose (DP) main gun forward, which can fire at a rate up to 40 rounds per minute, out to an effective range (for surface targets) of 13.5 miles (22 km) and against aircraft at 6.2 miles (10 km). The new Type 052D will mount a 130mm DP gun with a little slower rate of fire and but longer range.

    The US Arleigh Burke Flight IIA vessels mount a single 127mm, 62 caliber main gun forward, which can fire up to 20 round per minute out to an effective range of 15 miles (24 km) against surface and air targets. The new Flight III Burkes may use the Advanced Gun System (AGS) now mounted on the US Zumwalt class destroyer. This is a 155 mm gun that can fire extended range, precision guided munitions out to 80 miles at a rate of 10 rounds per minute.


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Phased Array Radar (PARS) and Battle Management

    The Type 052C has four PAR panels mounted around the main deck house, forward on the vessel. The system ir reportedly designated the Type 348 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) system and operates in the S-band with a maximum range of 280 miles (450 km) and a resultion of .5 meters. The battle management system employed is unknown and the number of simultaneous targets it can track and engage is also currently unknown. The system reportedly conforms to the MIL-STD-1553B standard.

    The US System employed is the AEGIS System. The PAR Radar is the the AN/SPY-1D Radar System operating in the S-band and which can track well over 100 targets simultaneously out to over 150 miles. Japan, Korea, Spain, Norway and Australia all use the AEGIS system on their principle anti-air warfare, multim-mission surface combatants. A significant capability ot the AEGIS system is its Cooperative Engaement (CE) capability which allows it to use and control systems of other CE equiped vessels, aircraft, or other equipment thus vastly extending its range capability to that of the furthest deployed asset, be it a vessel, a base, an aircraft, or even satellites.


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Aft VLS and CIWS Systems

    Both vessels employ the same systems on the after portion of the vessel as they do forward. For the Type 052C PLAN destroyer this consists of another Type 730 CIWS and 12 more VLS tubes in two, sex cell round containers. For the US Arleigh Burke FLight IIA vessel, this consists of another Phalanyx 2omm CIWS and an 8x8 MK-41 VLS launcher with 64 missiles.

    Thus the PLAN Type 052C destroyer carriers 48 total HQ-9 AAW missiles, while the US Arleigh Burke Flight IIA destroyer carries a total of 96 missiles which can vary between the various anti-missile (AAW), Tomohawk (ASM and ASuM), SUBROC (ASW), and ESSM missiles.


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Helicopter Pad and Hanger

    The Type 052C carries a single ASW helicopter (usually a KA-28 ASW helo, or a Z-9C ASW helo) for antisubmarine warfare...or for recon and surveillance and targeting purposes for anti-surface (shipping) warfare.

    The US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA has two hangers and can carry two SH-60 ASW helicopters for anti-submarine warfare or also for recon, surveillance, and targeting misisons.


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Conclusion/Summary

    The People's Republic of Chna and the United States both employ powerful multi-mission, anti-air warfare destroyers with their navies. The Type 052C is a smaller vessel with less missiles and a smaller hanger. Generally its systems (CIWS, VLS, etc) are somewhat larger and probably indicate the continued progress necessary by the PRC and PLAN in areas of electronic micronization. But the systems are very strong and represent an absolutely phenominal increase in terms of capability and lethatlit over what the PLAN put to sea just a few short years ago. Her ASW warfare is good with her single ASW helo and she has adequate self-defense sonars employed on the vessel itself. The follow-on Type 052D vessel will make advances in some of the areas mentioned here, particularly with the new 130mm main gun, and most particularly with a new VLS system which will see the new vessel carry 64 missiles with a potential variety of missile choices for the VLS cells. This will be a critical step forward for the PLAN.

    The US Arleigh Burke Flight IIA Class destroyer is recognized as the standard and leader in the field. She carriers 96 missiles of many different types which can be suited for the mission while continuing to provide complete AAW coverage. She carries two ASW helos, and a very strong, offensive sonar capability mounted forward on her hull. Her main gun is extremely capable in terms of range and accuracy. Her CIWS and medium range AAW capanbility means she has world-class defense capabilities for the fleet and for herself from Ballistic Missile range down to point defense and all areas in between. The follow on Arleigh Burke Flight III will see improved AEGIS functionality with multi-mode AESA capanbility, newer and better missiles on the cutting edge of technology, an imporved gun system (potentially the Advanced Gun System (AGS) employed on the Zumwalt Class DDG), and the capability to later incorporate the direct energy weapons and system now being developed and tested by the US Navy.

    You can see all of these actual destroyers and carriers, read their histories and specifictions for the Aircraft Carriers:

    WORLD-WIDE AIRCRAFT CARRIERS

    ...and for the destroyers which escort these carriers:

    AEGIS AND AEGIS-LIKE VESSELS OF THE WORLD
     
  6. FORBIN
    Offline

    FORBIN Lieutenant General
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    13,669
    Likes Received:
    23,062
    Re: Comparing the the US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA DDG & the PLAN Type 052C DDG

    Great !

    I have several comments and questions :

    The Burke/Austin are more powerful (96 miss/56) and versatile that the Type 052C, especially much better for their ASW ability with two SH-60 vs Z-9/Ka-28 less good*.
    But it is really unfortunate that they do not have Harpoon. (Such as submarines)
    Fortunately, the CG / DDG are often 4/5 and Burke and Ticonderoga have Harpoon.

    * ASW war/capability is the major weakness of the PLAN, additional they have not enough helicopters to equip all their ships especially now with in more the Liaoning.

    Something could compensate the absence of Harpoon, this is the SM-2, I think that would have anti-ship capacity, but its load is low 60 kg, the Harpoon 220, however it is supersonic, I do not think that its trajectory whether sea skimming
    ( Altitude up to 20 m) ?

    Questions for armament of Austin :

    They are armed how many missiles by models ( SM-2, VL Asroc ... ) in average ?
    They have how many of torpedoes including those for SH-60 ?
    Why Mk 41 very good system can not receive the Harpoon, a question of size ? What is the size of thecells Mk 41 ?

    For VLS in general :
    I notice elsewhere many VLS whose latest ( ex : Sylver... ) can not receive anti-ship missiles, while these systems have were designed after the missiles, strange !

    The only could receive, maybe ? VLS of Type 052D, if it' s real, this would be the only VLS completely versatile.
    If it is confirmed it can receive ASW and CM missiles .

    I take this opportunity to ask another question :
    is it possible recharge the VLS at sea from supply ships ?

    NB : Tic and AB have a crane in their VLS.
     
    #6 FORBIN, Jan 20, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2013
  7. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Re: Comparing the the US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA DDG & the PLAN Type 052C DDG

    The VLS Harpoon was a project that was cancelled because in 2009 the US began development and then production of the upgraded Tactical Tomahawk crusie missile, Block IV giving it ASM capability.

    This missile can loiter, can provide BDA, can switch targets and be re-routed by command, and can use UAV, Satellite, and other network (ie, Global Hawk or its replacement, E-2D, etc networks) input to change its target on the fly. It also can attack surface vessels. The surface vessel attack range is up to 900 nauticle miles (1,700 kilometers). So, the Flight IIA class and others will be using this capability.

    And yes, the SM-2 does have ASW capability, but as you say, they are small missiles and very valuable for the AAW role, so they would rarely be used in actual combat for that except in emergencies.

    Loadout for the 96 VLS on the Burke IIAs or the 128 VLS on the Ticonderogas is changed according to mission. Generally more than half of those missiles at least are AAW Standard missiles. They can also carry quad packed ESSM for mid range AAW, the Tomahawk missiles of various types, VL SUBROC, and the Anti-Ballistic missiles.

    Usually specific ships are fitted with the ABMs and they will carry 24 or more of them for that role. They are then positioned as a shield to protect specific areas (ie. The US Coasts, Japan, etc.).

    Most ships usually carry alleast 12-18 Tomahawks, though that number will vary according to mission.

    While it is possible to change missiles at sea for the VLS, it is a very difficult and time consuming task and is rarely done. It is usually done in port.

    Each vessle carries two, three topreedo launchers and they can have replacements if necessary, and the two helos carry torps too. In addition to the six on the launchers, I do not know how many other torpedoes are carried by the vessels. I would imagine that each helo will have probably enough for three loadouts or six each...but that is just a surmize on my part.
     
  8. PanAsian
    Offline

    PanAsian Major

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    4,040
    Re: Comparing the the US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA DDG & the PLAN Type 052C DDG

    Hi Jeff, thank you for the informative post, can you do a comparison of the ships' propulsion as well?

    Just from eyeballing the screws on the models it seems like the Arleigh Burkes have much larger ones compared to the 052Cs. Just as the sonar bulb on the AB is much larger than that on the 052C and is likely more powerful I imagine the AB's propulsion is also much more powerful?
     
  9. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Re: Comparing the the US Navy Arleigh Burke Flight IIA DDG & the PLAN Type 052C DDG

    Well, here are the comparisons of the propulsion:

    Burke:
    - 4 GE LM2500, Gas Turbines
    - Two shafts
    - Speed 31+ knots

    Lanzhou:
    - 2 DA80/DN80, CODOG Units
    - Two shafts
    - Speed 33 knots

    Keep in mnd that the Burke displace almost 3,000 tons more than the Lanzhous.

    As to bow sonars:

    Burke:
    - SQS-53C hull mounted sonar (HMS), medium frequency active search and attack.
    - Passive or active operations, tracks up to 100 active targets.
    - Variable Depth Sonar (VDS) mode phased out of US hull mounted sonars 15 years ago.
    - Indegenous US Design incoporates up to three convergence zone alrgorythms.
    - Acquistion ranges up to 30 km for active & up to 150 km for passive using convergence zone variables.
    - Integrated into the overall ships defensive systems through the AN/SQQ-89 Surface Ship ASW Combat System
    - Generally recognized as the best, most powerful bow mounted sonar in the world.

    Lanzhou:
    - SJD-8/9 hull mounted sonar (HMS), meduim frequency search and attack sonar.
    - Passive or active operations and incorporates Variable Depth Sonar (VDS) operations.
    - Probably based on/developed from the French DUBV-23/43 HMS/VDS system.
    - HMS/VDS ranges of 20/50 kilometers .

    Here's more info on the AN/SQQ-89. It is an integrated ASW combat system combining improved sensors and weapon control systems with advanced acoustic data processing and display. The system integrates the AN/SQS-53B/C hull mounted sonar, the AN/SQR-19(V) Tactical Towed Array Sonar and the AN/SQQ-28(V) LAMPS MK III Shipboard Electronics with the ASW Control System (ASWCS) MK 116 MOD 5/6/7/8/9 and supports the operational concepts of full-dimensional protection and precision engagement by providing long range detection, tracking, localization and correlation of surface and subsurface contacts and engagement of subsurface contacts via the ship's Combat Direction System or Command and Decision subsystem. Various combinations of the AN/SQS-53B/C, the AN/SQR-19(V), the AN/SQQ-28(V) and the MK 116 constitute the AN/SQQ-89 variants installed on the Ticonderoga Class and Arleigh Burke Class vessels. Combinations of the AN/SQR-19(V) and AN/SQQ-28(V) only are included in the AN/SQQ-89(V) variant installed on the OHP Class FFGs, which is why they remain strong ASW platforms with their various sonars and helos.
     
    #9 Jeff Head, Jan 20, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2013
  10. Jeff Head
    Offline

    Jeff Head General
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    24,104
    Likes Received:
    32,242
    Construction orders in excess of 6.2 billion let for construction of nine more Burke

    This news was released in early June and really should be on this thread. This will get the Burkes up to 72 vessels (there are currently 62 vessels), and to the point that the Flight III Burke vessels will start building and replacing the Ticonderoga cruisers.


    The current status of the builds is as follows:

    62nd vessel: DDG-112 USS Michael Murphey Commissioned Oct 6, 2012
    63rd vessel: DDG-113 USS John Finn (1st of new Contract Ships: IIA Restart)
    64th vessel: DDG-114 USS Ralph Johnson (2nd of new Contract Ships: IIA Restart)
    65th vessel: DDG-115 USS Rafael Prralta (3rd of new Contract Ships: IIA Restart)
    66th vessel: DDG-116 USS Thomas Hudner (4th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)
    67th vessel: DDG-117 USS Paul Ignatius (5th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)
    68th vessel: DDG-118 USS Daniel Inouye (6th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)
    69th vessel: DDG-119 Not named Yet (7th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)
    70th vessel: DDG-120 Not named Yet (8th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)
    71st vessel: DDG-121 Not named Yet (9th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)
    72nd vessel: DDG-122 Not named Yet (10th of new Contract Ships: IIA Technology Insert)

    73rd vessel: DDG-123 Not named Yet (1st Flight III Areligh Burke)
    74th vessel: DDG-124 Not named Yet (2nd Flight III Areligh Burke)
    75th vessel: DDG-125 Not named Yet (3rd Flight III Areligh Burke)
    76th vessel: DDG-126 Not named Yet (4th Flight III Areligh Burke)
    77th vessel: DDG-127 Not named Yet (5th Flight III Areligh Burke)
    78th vessel: DDG-128 Not named Yet (6th Flight III Areligh Burke)
    79th vessel: DDG-129 Not named Yet (7st Flight III Areligh Burke)
    80th vessel: DDG-130 Not named Yet (8th Flight III Areligh Burke)

    Right now there are 62 Burkes. This will bring it up to 72 Burkes. Then the Flight III Burkes will start building, replacing the Ticonderoga Cruisers.
     
Loading...

Share This Page