The Future Surface Combatant

New Destroyer Emerges in U.S. Plans

As the DDG-1000 program continues it’s death spiral, the Navy is looking at alternative options. One of them is a proposed “Future Surface Combatant” (FSC), an option that is currently very short on details. Upgraded DDG-51s? Enlarged and evolved DDG-51s? Scaled-back DDG-1000s?

If the FCS ends up being to the DDG-1000 what the Virginia-class subs are to the Seawolfs, it might be okay.


  1. “The price tag for the DDG 1000 destroyer has hit $6 billion a copy, Pentagon documents show.” Impressive young jedi….Can we finally kill this waste of a ship? please??

  2. Minor grammar nit, I believe that should read “its death spiral”.

    This program has lacked any pragmatism. IMO any weapon system which relies on technological revolution which has not happened yet (e.g. energy weapons powerful enough to replace regular guns) is a pipe dream. Baby steps, Pentagon. Baby steps.

  3. Estimated DD(X) unit procurement costs (see Table 1) have
    increased substantially since 2004. The estimate for the first DD(X) has increased from about $2.8 billion to $3,291 million, or about 18%. The estimate for the second DD(X)has increased from $2,053 million to $3,061 million, or about 49%. The estimates for subsequent DD(X)s have increased from about $1.5 billion and $1.8 billion each to about $2.2 billion to $2.6 billion each, or roughly 45%. The Cost Analysis Improvement Group
    (CAIG) within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) reportedly believes that DD(X) procurement costs may be 20% to 33% higher than the new estimates. A meeting scheduled for April 29, 2005, to grant the DD(X) approval “Milestone B” approval to
    proceed was postponed, reportedly because of disagreement between the Navy and CAIG over estimated DD(X) procurement costs.

Comments are closed