REPORT TO CONGRESS

DDG 51 FLIGHT III SHIPS AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE RADAR

ENGINEERING CHANGE PROPOSAL

Prepared by:
Assistant Secretary of the Navy
Research, Development, and Acquisition
1000 Navy Pentagon
Washington, DC 20350-1000

FEBRUARY 2015

The estimated cost of report or study for the Department

of Defense is approximately $15030 for the 2015 Fiscal
Year. This includes $30 in expenses and $15000 in DoD
labor.
Generated on 2015Jan26 RefID: 4-42B2CD8

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Introduction
The Department of the Navy (DoN) submits this Report to Congress on the DDG 51 Flight III design status as directed by the Senate Armed Services Committee (S.Rept.112-173). The Department is committed to the acquisition of the DDG 51 Flight III destroyers with an integrated Air and
Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) to meet the requirements for Integrated Air and Missile Defense
(IAMD) capabilities. After several years of study, analysis, requirements validation, and prototype
testing, the AMDR S-Band system is poised for successful integration into the DDG 51 Class ships
as the Flight III upgrade.
This report summarizes the background of the DDG 51 Class program, explains the new AMDR
system, describes the final scope of the engineering change proposal (ECP) required to field the
ADMR on a DDG 51 hull, depicts the resulting Flight III ship configuration, and outlines the way
forward to ensure this vital capability reaches the Fleet as quickly as possible. This report will also
show that with respect to systems and equipment levels of maturity for Flight III, the AMDR is the
only new development technology. The AMDR has successfully completed Milestone B, a full
system Preliminary Design Review, a hardware Critical Design Review, and will deliver its first
full ship set of production equipment by early FY 2020. The remaining equipment required to provide power and cooling to the AMDR are all based on currently existing equipment and therefore
induce low technical risk to the program. Given the tremendous capability improvement AMDR
provides to defeat emerging air and ballistic missile threats over current radars, the low to moderate
technical risk associated with implementing this radar on an FY 2016 DDG 51 justifies execution
of the ECP during the FY 2013-2017 multiyear procurement contract.
The specific language in the NDAA for FY13, section 125, is as follows:
Multiyear procurement authority for Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and associated systems (sec.
125). The committee believes that continued production of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers is critical to provide required forces for sea based ballistic missile defense (BMD) capabilities. The Navy
envisions that, if research and development activities yield an improved radar suite and combat
systems capability, they would like to install those systems on the destroyers in fiscal years 2016
and 2017, at which time the designation for those destroyers would be Flight III. Should the Navy
decide to move forward with the integration of an engineering change proposal (ECP) to incorporate a new BMD capable radar and associated support systems during execution of this multiyear
procurement, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit a report to the congressional defense committees, no later than with the budget request for the year of contract award of such an ECP. The report will contain a description of the final scope of this ECP, as well as the level of maturity of the
new technology to be incorporated on the ships of implementation and rationale as to why the maturity of the technology and the capability provided justify execution of the change in requirements
under that ECP during the execution of a multiyear procurement contract.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Background & Requirements

The ARLEIGH BURKE (DDG 51) Class ship is a multi-mission surface combatant capable of
meeting 21st century warfighting requirements. It operates offensively and defensively, independently, or as part of Carrier Strike Groups (CSG), Expeditionary Strike Groups (ESG), and Missile Defense Action Groups in multi-threat environments that include Air, Surface, and Subsurface
threats. Ships will respond to Low Intensity Conflict / Coastal and Littoral Offshore Warfare (LIC/
CALOW) Scenarios as well as Open Ocean Conflict providing and augmenting Power Projection,
Forward Presence Requirements, and Escort Operations at sea. DDG 51 Class primary missions
are to:
Conduct simultaneous Anti-Air Warfare (AAW) and Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) operations
Detect, track, and identify air targets, and acquire and engage hostile targets with weapons
Detect, track, and identify ballistic missile targets, and acquire and engage hostile targets
with anti-ballistic missile weapons
Conduct Electronic Warfare
Conduct Strike Warfare against land targets
Detect, locate, classify, and track submarines and conduct Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)
operations and engagements
Detect, locate, classify, and track surface contacts and conduct Anti-Surface Warfare
(ASUW) operations and engagements
Gather, display, and evaluate surface, subsurface, and air intelligence

Figure 1 - Flight III Operational View

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

The DDG 51 Class Program has awarded a total of 76 ships from 1985 to 2017 between two shipbuilders, General Dynamics Bath Iron Works (BIW) and Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII). Most
recently, 10 were awarded in June 2013 under Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) authority for FY1317. Sixty-two ships have been delivered. Of the remaining 14, six are in various stages of construction and will deliver in 2016 and beyond. The Flight III configuration will be integrated via
the Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) process onto the last three ships of the FY13-17 MYP: one
ship in FY16 and both FY17 ships. A follow-on FY18 MYP will continue the production line.
Prior to Flight III, the program has produced three flights (I, II and IIA). Flights II and IIA included
important modifications for changing mission requirements and technology updates, thus demonstrating the substantial capacity and flexibility of the base DDG 51 hull form. Flight II introduced
enhanced capability in Combat Systems and Electronic Warfare. Flight IIA constituted a more significant change to the ship by incorporation of an organic dual hangar/dual helicopter aviation facility, extended transom, zonal electrical power distribution (ZEDS), enhanced missile capacity, and
reconfigured primary radar arrays. The combined scope and means for integrating the changes for
Flight III is similar to the approach used in the Flight IIA upgrade. Additionally, during Flight IIA
production in the middle of the FY98-01 MYP, the class was significantly upgraded with a new radar, the AN/SPY-1D(V), and an improved combat management computing plant, AEGIS Baseline
7.1. The previous ship system changes were successfully executed by ECPs introduced via the existing systems engineering processes on both Flight II and IIA in support of the ongoing construction program. This methodology takes advantage of Navy and prime contractor experience with the
proven processes while offering effective and efficient introduction of the desired configuration
changes. It also provides the more affordable and effective approach toward producing this enhanced ship capability in lieu of starting a new ship design to incorporate the same capabilities into
a new production line for ship construction.
DDG 51 Flight III will be the third evolution of the original DDG 51 Class and will achieve the
U.S. Navys critical need for an enhanced surface combatant integrated IAMD capability. Flight III
will build on the warfighting capabilities of DDG 51 Flight IIA ships, providing this capability at
the earliest feasible time. Its defining characteristics include integration of the AMDR, associated
Combat Systems elements, and related Hull, Mechanical, and Electrical (HM&E) changes into a
modified repeat Flight IIA design. AMDR will give Flight III ships the ability to conduct simultaneous AAW and BMD operations. Flight III will contribute to mitigating the capability gaps identified in the Maritime Air and Missile Defense of the Joint Force (MAMDJF) Initial Capabilities
Document (ICD). The integrated Flight III ship system as delivered will meet the program requirements as stated in the DDG 51 Class Flight III Capabilities Development Document (CDD).
DDG 51 Flight III will execute four primary missions: (1) Integrated Air and Missile Defense, (2)
Anti-Surface Warfare, (3) Anti-Submarine Warfare, and (4) Strike Warfare, and will have the ability to plan, coordinate and execute alternate warfare commander responsibilities for either anti-air
warfare or ballistic missile defense.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

The core changes between Flight IIA and Flight III and the systems technological maturity for
those changes are shown in Figure 2 and below. In addition to the incorporation of AMDR-S and
HM&E upgrades, the AMDR system will be integrated into the AEGIS Combat System. The evolution of the AEGIS Combat System as it pertains to the DDG 51 Class is shown in Figure 3, a progression that will continue with the incorporation of AMDR and other technologies as shown in
Figure 4.

Figure 2 - Primary Flight III Changes

Flight III Systems

Technological Maturity

AMDR

In Engineering & Manufacturing Development,

LRIP scheduled for FY 2017

MT-5 Gas Turbine Generator

Fielded on DDG 1000 class

4160VAC Electric Plant

Fielded on LHA 6 Class

300 Ton A/C Plant

In operation at vendor plant, environmental

qualification in progress

4160VAC to 1000VDC Power Conversion

Module

Fielded on DDG 1000 Class

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Figure 3 AEGIS Capabilities Evolution

Figure 4 - Most Recent AEGIS Baselines

Flight III Chronology

Flight III is an incremental upgrade to the DDG 51 Class, and includes tailored engineering modifications to this proven ship class to accommodate the larger, more powerful, and enhanced AMDR S
-Band system. The shipboard changes are driven by the need for more electrical power, increased
system cooling capability, re-arrangements and added volume to make room for the AMDR system,
and structural changes to restore acceptable growth margin for the life of the ship. All major equipment development is on track to support DDG 51 Class implementation of the AMDR in FY16.
The current baseline design for the DDG 51 Flight III has traceability back to the DDG 113 design
and the Radar Hull Study performed in 2009 that evaluated the DDG 51 Class and resulted in selection of the preferred hull for the AMDR. The timeline below depicts the key studies, important
analysis results, supporting design reviews, and Navy leadership decisions that led to restarting the
DDG 51 production line and to the anticipated Detail Design of the Flight III ECPs over the past
five years.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

DDG 51 Selected
Radar Hull Study (June November 2009)
Evaluated incorporating IAMD capabilities into DDG 51 and DDG 1000 hull
DDG 51 with 14 foot AMDR-S w/ SPY-3 and AEGIS Combat System selected
Additional power generation and cooling required - Recommended additional study in
power and AMDR Integration
DDG 51 Restart CNOs Evaluation Board (CEB) (23 December 2009)
Endorsed Flight III Upgrade Study
MAMDJF Gate 2 Review/ Resources & Requirements Review Board (R3B) (2 March 2010)
Validated results and findings of MAMDJF Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
Approved AMDR program to proceed to Gate 2
Approved DDG 51 Flight III as preferred hull to proceed to Gate 2
Cancelled CG(X) program
DDG 51 Flight III Defined
Flight Upgrade Study, Year 1 (February 2010 January 2011)
Technology Characterization
Trade Studies (assessed technology options for cost benefit)
Ship Concept Studies
Cost Analysis Comparison of the Flight III (IAMD) Ship Concepts
R3B held 11 February 2011
Approved 4,160 VAC power architecture on Flight III option with AMDR S and X
Bands
Flight Upgrade Study, Year 2 (February May 2012)
Refined DDG 51 Flight III Ship Concepts
Evaluated 450 VAC architecture without AMDR X-Band, but with SPQ-9B
Supported Flight III CDD Requirements
Cost Analysis Comparison of Flight III Concepts
R3B held 11 June and 24 July 2012
Approved to proceed to Gate 3
Approved 4,160 VAC power architecture over the legacy 450 VAC distribution
system
Approved SPQ-9B as the X-Band radar

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

DDG 51 Flight III Approved

Flight III, Gate 3 R3B (October 2012)
Approved Flight III CDD and Concept of Operations (CONOPs) for Joint Staffing
Flight III Preliminary Design (May 2012 April 2014)
In Progress Reviews (IPRs) A, B, C, and D conducted to converge design, manage
changes, and retain Space, Weight, Power, and Cooling Service Life Allowance
(SWaP-C SLA)
Flight III Contract Design (July 2013 October 2015)
Develop Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs)
AMDR Capability Development Document (CDD) Approved
Signed by CNO (20 April 2013)
Validated and signed by the JROC (27 June 2013)
AMDR Vendor Selected
Award Contract for AMDR S-Band and Radar Suite Controller (October 2013)
Award protested, start of work delayed
Protest withdrawn, work started (January 2014)
DDG 51 Flight III Preliminary Design Concurrence
Flight III Total Ship Design Review (TSDR) (18 March 2014)
Tailored Systems Engineering Technical Review (SETR) event to evaluate Flight III
Preliminary Design and early Contract Design deliverables
Report Stakeholder Steering Boards concurrence and approval for the Flight III Preliminary Design to proceed to System Functional Review (SFR)
DDG 51 Flight III ECPs Approved
Flight III Gate 4/5 R3B (20 March 2014)
Approved core change ECPs for Flight III
Flight III Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT) (06 May 2014)
Concurrence on Flight III readiness for Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) IPR

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Flight III DAB IPR (03 June 2014)

Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) of 19 June 2014 approved the acquisition plan
Approved Flight III Contract Design (CD) actions to proceed with Detail Design
Flight III CD Draft ECP Development (April 2014 October 2014)
DDG 51 Flight III Functional Baseline Approved
Flight III System Functional Review (01 October 2014)
Tailored Systems Engineering Technical Review event to evaluate Flight III Preliminary Design conclusion and Contract Design progress
Report Stakeholder Steering Boards concurrence and approval for the Flight III
Functional Baseline
DDG 51 Flight III Capability Development Document (CDD) Approved
Flight III signed by the CNO (08 May 2014)
Flight III CDD validated and signed by the JROC (28 October 2014)
AMDR Hardware Baseline Approved
AMDR Hardware Critical Design Review (CDR) (03 December 2014)
Systems Engineering Technical Review (SETR) event to evaluate hardware design
Report Stakeholder Steering Boards concurrence and approval for the AMDR
Functional Baseline

Meeting the Requirements

Throughout the five year span of evaluation and refinement as the ship concept was being matured,
the Flight III ship capability requirements were also being clarified and validated. A meticulous
and concerted effort was applied in considering the secondary effects of ship impacts created from
the Flight III changes to avoid degrading or compromising the existing DDG 51 Flight IIA requirements. A substantial milestone achievement was reached on 28 October 2014 when the Flight III
CDD was validated and approved by the JROC. The Flight III CDD requirements reflect an
achievable set of goals for upgrading the DDG 51 Class with the AMDR S-Band. The new requirements that could only be met by modifying the ship include the IAMD, SWaP-C SLA, Manpower,
and Alternate Warfare Commander requirements. As shown in Table 1, the majority of the remaining CDD requirements are met by the current DDG 51 Class design.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

10

Key Performance Parameters

(KPPs)

Key System Attributes (KSAs)

Other System Attributes

(OSAs)

Vertical Launching System (VLS) Cells

Boat Ops

NAVOSH
Compliance

SWARM

CBR Contamintn,
Detect, and Info

NVD
Compatibility

Survivability

Radar Cross Section (RCS)

Crypto Support

OCM Defense

Sustainment

Infrared (IR) Signature of Stacks

Electronic
Warfare

Offensive ASuW

Energy

IR Signature of Hull and Superstructure

Embedded Trng
Systems

Overpressure

Training

Acoustic Signature

EMP

Radar
Capabilities

Net Ready

Magnetic Signature

Environ Limiting
Conditions

Replenish at Sea

Force Protection

Sustained Speed

ESOH

Self Defense, Low

Slow

Cost

Endurance

Human System
Integration

Service Life

Schedule

Operation and Sustainability (O&S) Cost

Human Factors
Engineering

Strike Operations

Space, Weight, Power and Cooling

Service Life Allowance (SWaP-C SLA)

Reliability

Information
Assurance

Thermal
Radiation

Manpower

Modular Open
Systems

Training
Proficiency

Alternate Warfare Commander Function

METOC Support

Undersea
Warfare

Aviation Facilities

NSFS

UW Shock

Integrated Air and Missile Defense

(IAMD) of Joint Forces

Aviation Ordnance
New or modified
requirements driving
costed change

Requirements changed from Flight IIA

ORD, but already met and requiring no
ship modifications

Vulnerability
Requirements effectively
unchanged from Flight IIA ORD

Table 1 - Flight III CDD Requirements Summary

Systems Engineering Approach

ECP development is a fundamental systems engineering approach; an approach currently implemented in the DDG 51 program that has been continuously updated and improved since the programs inception in the early 1980s and has resulted in the successful delivery of 62 DDG 51 Class
destroyers. The last three ships of the FY13-17 MYP are designated as Flight III beginning with
one of the FY16 ship. The Flight III is a modified repeat of the existing baseline and will be centered on the addition of an IAMD capability in the form of the AMDR-S, associated enhanced combat systems elements and requisite supporting HM&E changes. These changes will be incorporated
via discrete ECPs with the same proven processes and rigor that produced successful Flight II and
IIA upgrades to the class. The list of the specific ECPs and the full scope of the Flight III change is
shown on the following page.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

11

Mandatory Flight III Core IAMD Changes

Install AMDR S-Band System and Radar Suite Control (RSC)
Replace the AN/SPY-1D(V) Radar with the AMDR S-Band and Radar Suite Controller,
including related processors, cooling equipment, and power distribution equipment
Add (3) Electronic Equipment Fluid Coolers (EEFC) to support AMDR-S equipment
Install Technology Insertion 16 Upgrades (TI 16+)
Modify Common Data Link Management System (CDLMS) with Tech Refresh due to Obsolescence
Deckhouse structure redesign changes to support array system weight
Roll-down habitability changes to accommodate AMDR S-Band equipment

Mandatory Flight III Core IAMD Changes (continued)

Electrical Plant Upgrades
Procure and Install (3) 4,160 VAC Ship Service Gas Turbine Generators (SSGTGs)
Modify 450 VAC distribution equipment and protection scheme
Procure and Install 4,160 VAC distribution equipment and protection schemes
Procure and Install (3) 4,160 to 450 VAC Ship Service Transformers
Procure and Install (2) 4,160 VAC to 1,000 VDC Power Conversion Modules (PCM)
Modify seawater pump for 4,160 VAC SSGTGs
Install HeptaFluoroPropane (HFP) firefighting system for SSGTG modules
Redesign the Fire Control System water cooler
Replace 5x 200 rTon Air Conditioning (AC) plants with 5x 300 rTon HES/C AC plants
Install flooding cross-connects & expand hull in way of flight deck (FLODES)
Increase inner-bottom structure
Other Directed Changes
Install habitability changes to increase accommodations
Changes that will be effected to the AEGIS combat system to integrate AMDR into AEGIS will be
included in the Advanced Capability Build (ACB) represented in the AEGIS Combat Systems Evolution, as shown in Figure 4.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

12

AMDR System Description

The AMDR suite consists of an S-Band radar (AMDR-S), X-Band radar (SPQ-9B), and a Radar
Suite Controller (RSC). AMDR-S is a new development IAMD radar providing sensitivity for long
range detection and engagement of advanced threats. The X-Band radar is a horizon-search radar
based on existing technology. The RSC provides radar resource management and coordination for
both S and X-Band, and interface to the combat system. The SPQ-9B, radar is already slated for
installation on the FY14 Flight IIA ships, and will not be further addressed in this report. Figure 5
shows the primary components of the AMDR system.
The AMDR-S and RSC development is managed by PEO Integrated Warfare Systems (IWS) 2.0
(Above Water Sensors), and is contracted to Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems. The planar array faces employ a digital beam-forming architecture, which replaces the analog waveguide system

Figure 5 AMDR System Overview

AIU
APDU
CEU
DBFS
DSPS
FTS

Array Interface Unit

Array Power Distribution Unit
Cooling Electronics Unit
Digital Beamforming System
Digital Signal Processing System
Frequency Time System

MPDU
RCPS
RSC
RTSS
UPS

Main Power Distribution Unit

Radar Control Processing Subsystem
Radar Suite Controller
Real-Time Simulation Subsystem
Uninterruptible Power Supply

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

13

of the legacy DDG 51 Class AN/SPY-1D(V) arrays. Enhanced power and multi-beam operation
provides advanced, robust BMD detection and
discrimination. AMDR-S will be capable of detecting a target half the size at twice the distance
compared with its predecessor.
Physically arranging all the AMDR equipment
into the DDG 51 ship was a major portion of the
preliminary design effort. Much of the equipment needs to be in close proximity to the array
faces to minimize high data rate cabling lengths.
This required placement of most of the processing and control cabinets in the combat tower,
on the 03 Level. A key advantage of AMDR is
the elimination of radar waveguides. In previous
shipboard radars, the installation of waveguides
require significant material and manpower.
Figure 6 - AMDR Digital Array
Figures 6 and 7 show the AMDR planar array and its components. Each of the four arrays is made
up of 37 building blocks called Radar Module Assemblies (RMAs). Each of these two foot RMA
cubes is a self-contained radar transmitter and receiver and are stacked together to form the required size array. The array employs an egg-crate structure to maintain flatness and hold the array
components. Liquid cooling is embedded within the system, and allows for Transmit-Receive Integrated Multichannel Module (TRIMM) replacement without the need for liquid disconnects. Modular radiator/radome panels can be replaced using simple tools while at sea. Although only slightly
larger than the AN/
SPY-1D(V), the
AMDR array is considerably heavier and
deeper. Fitting the
new AMDR arrays
into the deckhouse
requires ship structural modifications to
accommodate the
arrays. Use of smaller section modulus,
high strength beams
plus some local bulk
bulkead details
(notching) provide
sufficient clearance
without the need for
a major structural
Figure 7 - AMDR Array Plate and Radar Module Assembly
redesign.
Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

14

Component
Radar Modular Assembly
Radiator
Radar Control Processing Cabinet
Array Interface Unit Cabinet
Digital Signal Processing Cabinet
Digital Beam Forming Cabinet
RSC Cabinet
Other ship impacts, including the
RTSS Cabinet
arrangements, electrical, and cooling
Ship Wiring
requirements of the AMDR are adOLBFN
dressed later in this report.
Inertial Navigation System
AMDR development has been ongo- Array Integration Components
ing since 2006, with critical technol- Non RF LRU
ogy elements as well as some subArray Mechanical Structure
systems developed prior to the Engineering Development Model (EDM) Array NFR Fixture
Calibration Radar Modular Assembly
development phase. Since contract
award, multi-disciplinary incremen- Digital Beamformer (DBF)
tal preliminary and critical design
Digital Receiver Exciter (DREX)
reviews have been conducted on all Transmit-Receive Integrated Multiitems (e.g. component, subassembly,
channel Module
or configuration item), and have
Array Cooling System
been chaired and moderated by inLow Rate Initial Production Cabinet
dependent reviewers. Navy and inDREX & DBF CDR
house independent subject matter
Power Distribution System
experts participated in all reviews.
Figure 8 provides a general view of
the primary structural elements of
the DDG 51 deckhouse in the area
of the array installation. To accommodate the size and weight of the
AMDR arrays, resizing of many of
the structural elements was necessary.

Status
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete

Table 2 - Component iCDR Status

Within these reviews, the topic areas

map to the Navys Technical Review Manual (TRM) and the conduct and closure of these interim
Critical Design Reviews (iCDRs) are formally tracked and reported at monthly reviews. Table 2
lists the iCDRs performed, all of which included Navy participation.
AMDR Hardware and Systems Preliminary Design Reviews were conducted 21 May and 27 August 2014, respectively. On 3 December 2014, a Hardware CDR was successfully completed
which demonstrated that all Technical Performance Measures are compliant with requirements and
that the hardware design is of sufficient maturity to complete detail design and proceed to production of the Engineering Development Model array.
The AMDR program is on track to deliver a substantial performance improvement over the currently fielded AN/SPY-1D(V), with 30 times greater sensitivity. In order to deliver this needed capability on time and to mitigate development risk, the AMDR acquisition approach includes Agile
software development and a robust testing strategy that includes modeling and simulation anchored

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

15

with live flight tests. Raytheon has implemented

an Agile software development process for improved productivity, earliest possible delivery of
tactical software, and improved testability. Additionally, an AMDR Hardware in-the-Loop
(HWIL) facility, which includes a fully functioning portion of an AMDR array as well as all the
back-end processing equipment, and a Software
Integration Lab (SIL), consisting of another set
of AMDR back-end processing equipment, have
been installed and are operating at the contractor
facility in Sudbury, MA. The purpose of these
facilities, shown in Figure 9, is to support iterative hardware and software testing ahead of, and
then in support of, the EDM array. AMDR is on
Figure 8 - Deckhouse Structure
schedule to meet delivery dates for land based
testing.

Figure 9 - AMDR Testing Equipment

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

16

Electric Plant and Cooling Upgrades

Second to the AMDR installation, the Electric Plant
(EP) upgrades yield the next
largest change and ship impact, and have been an area
of focus for the Flight III
design team.
The DDG 51 Flight IIA
SSGTGs generate 450 VAC
power, while the Flight III
SSGTGs will create 4,160
VAC; providing the additional electrical power necessary to meet the perforFigure 10 - Flight III Electric Plant Concept
mance requirements of the
more powerful AMDR system. Figure 10 depicts the Flight III EP and distribution system with
4,160 VAC power that is converted to both 1,000 VDC for the AMDR System and stepped down
to 450 VAC for all other electrical ship systems. Total installed EP power for the existing Flight
IIA ships is 9.0 MW (3x 3,000 KW) while the Flight III ships will have 11.5 MW (3x 3,850 KW).
To minimize both risk and cost, the 4,160 VAC SSGTGs are derived from the Rolls Royce MT-5
developed for DDG 1000, reducing development cost and providing commonality. The new 4,160
VAC (termed high-side) equipment and cabling imposes additional protection and increased
standoff clearances for safety and survivability. While 4,160 VAC is new to DDG 51 Class, within
the Navy the 4,160 VAC system and equipment is used in many other ship classes and the DDG 51
program has leveraged the existing high voltage requirements, standards, and other ship program
experiences. Additionally, the EP incorporates the existing Flight IIA 450
VAC power distribution system
(termed low-side) to save substantial cost in complete redesign and testing. Figure 12 shows the Electrical
Plant one line diagram, with the 450
VAC system shown in black and the
4,160 VAC side depicted in blue.
To integrate the 4,160 VAC into the
DDG 51 EP, modifications to the
SSGTG technical and performance
specifications were necessary to acFigure 11 - 4,160 VAC SSGTG CAD Model

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

17

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Figure 12 - Flight III Electric Plant One-Line Diagram. (High-side equipment in blue)
18

count for differences between the DDG

1000 and DDG 51 Class electric plants.
Modification to the DDG 1000 SSGTG
(MT-5) is necessary to meet the electric
power quality performance measures of the
AMDR suite and the existing Flight IIA
capability requirements. These changes are
already under government contract, managed by the Electric Ships Office (PMS
320), with CDR completed in January 2015.
The generator modifications are underway
with PDR scheduled for February 2015.
SSGTG production contract was awarded in
January 2015, with the first hardware deliv- Figure 13 - PCM - Power Conversion Module
eries in fall 2017. Shore power for the
Flight III is provided via existing low-side connection, although provisions have been made to enable high-side shore power should 4,160 VAC pier service becomes more common in the future.
High-side power is not available when on 450 VAC shore power; in the event that AMDR arrays
need to be activated, the ship will need to bring one of the three SSGTGs online.
In concert with the development of the revised 4,160 VAC SSGTGs, two types of power conversion are required for the Flight III electrical distribution system. PCMs are being introduced to supply 1,000 VDC to the AMDR system. Two, 1.4 megawatt PCMs are being procured to convert
4,160 VAC from the SSGTGs to 1,000 VDC for the AMDR arrays. These machines have been
competitively awarded under the contract management of PMS 320. Like the SSGTGs, these units
are similar to those used on DDG 1000, but have been modified to meet the power quality requirements for the AMDR. The
two fully redundant units will
be installed on the Flight III
ships, located fore and aft for
maximum survivability. Operation of these two PCMs
will allow load sharing between the two for maximum
redundancy, or isolated operation by only one unit for maximum survivability and improved fuel economy. The
other power conversion involves three 4,160 VAC to
450 VAC step-down transformers. These units are
standard equipment on larger
Figure 14 - AMDR AC voltage conditioning and UPS backup
Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

19

ships, and the transformers specifically used for the Flight III are modified
units based on the LHD 8 design.
These units are planned to be contracted as Class Standard Equipment
(CSE) using the DDG 51 Class shipbuilders procurement process and
will be competitively awarded. The
three transformers will be arranged to
allow any combination of SSGTGs and
transformers to provide power to the
legacy 450 VAC electric distribution
system. This flexibility allows the
Figure 15 - Typical Dynamic Modeling Analysis Output
operator to select the best plant configuration depending on the need to balance fuel economy, redundancy, and survivability (battle
damage) while providing power to any and all portions of the ships combat and HM&E systems.
The AMDR system requires power to the processing cabinets at 208 VAC. Conditioning equipment is provided by the AMDR vendor as a complete system, as depicted in Figure 14. First converted through a single transformer, the power is filtered and conditioned by three notch filters and
three UPS cabinets to provide power conditioning and control. The UPS units also provide uninterrupted power via the battery cabinets, in the event of a loss of ships power. The conditioned power is then distributed to the various AMDR processing cabinets, and to the AMDR arrays.
Steady state analysis of the Electric Plant in various configurations has shown the architecture to be
sound, safe, and capable of providing sufficient power for all Flight III needs. Extensive analysis is
underway by the Flight III team to ensure all transient plant reactions and abnormal configurations
are accounted for, using a Dynamic Model Analysis (DMA) tool. A study guide was established by
the Navy team including PMS 400D, PMS 320, and SEA05 to define the effort. Figure 15 shows a
typical analysis output. The overall approach for each investigation concentrates on applying worst
case assumptions, identifying potential issues, then refining the modeling parameters for more accurate analysis. The DMA study analyzes transients, power quality, power continuity, and survivability. The results provide guidance to refine the plant configurations and amend the CONOPS to
afford the best practices which will be the basis of ships operations and crew training.
To date the DMA has completed the studies on transient analysis, power quality analysis, and work
is underway for the continuity analysis. The continuity analysis will look at any scenario, including
load shedding, where predicted transients are outside the design parameters, to ensure that the EP
protection gear will prevent system damage. The final phase of the study, scheduled for summer
2015, is a survivability analysis that will look at battle damage and recovery.
More electrical power is nearly always associated with increased heat loads, and the addition of
AMDR to the DDG 51 Class requires upgrades to the ships cooling capability. The existing Flight
IIA Air Conditioning (AC) plants, or chillers, are replaced with a modified system that increases

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

20

cooling from five 200 refrigeration ton (rTon) units to five

300 rTon units. Flight III will
leverage the new 300 rTon
High Efficiency Small Capacity (HES-C) system already
being developed and scheduled
for installation in the LPD
Class ships. Based on the existing 200 rTon AC plant condenser, the HES-C employs oil
free magnetic bearings for reduced friction and reduced
Figure 16 - Prototype HES/C 300 rton A/C Chiller
maintenance. The HES-C
chiller fits within the footprint of the existing unit, but Variable Speed Drive (VSD) cabinets are a
new addition to the machinery space arrangements. The VSD improves system efficiency, reduces
inrush currents, and improves reliability. An economizer is added for improved efficiency when
seawater temperature is above 75 degrees F. Figure 16 shows the prototype HES-C 300 rTon AC
unit.

Combat System Integration

AMDR will be integrated into the AEGIS combat system via the software in ACB 20. The hardware will remain the TI-16 suite, with added processors and consoles to meet the Flight III requirements.
The inclusion of AMDR into AEGIS ACB 20 was based on the extensive analysis through the PEO
IWS led Capability Phasing Plan (CPP) process. The CPP utilizes disciplined, analytical, coordinated processes to assess capability gaps and identify and prioritize combat system solutions for
ACB 20. CPP analytical factors include:
Threat Assessment
Fleet Warfighting Capability Gaps
Kill Chains
Schedules
Cost Estimates
External Reliance
Risks
Concept of Employment (CONEMP), Concept of Integration (COI).
The CPP working group coordinated across the Fleet, PEOs, System Commands (SYSCOMs),
Missile Defense Agency (MDA), Science and Technology (S&T) and Industry. The CPP process
mapped the results of the gap assessments with candidate warfighter capabilities, applying killchain analysis and cost estimation for integration into the AEGIS combat system. The result
Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

21

formed the base for the ACB 20 integration recommendation to OPNAV N96 Surface Warfare Tactical Requirements Group (SWTRG) process. The decision to include AMDR in ACB 20 was
made at a senior Flag level review.
PEO IWS 1.0 (AEGIS) and IWS 2.0, with input from Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, are executing a rigorous systems engineering approach to develop the lower level requirements. Through this
process, the team has identified a set of Use Cases that define how the radar and combat system
will interact. The team is also defining the functional architecture of the system and the interface
design plan. Any hardware interfaces of AEGIS architecture are defined in the Flight III ECPs,
while the software portions will follow on a schedule to support software integration.
Although the Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is not until 2023, PEO IWS 1.0 is developing a
test asset, the Combat System Interface Support Equipment (CS ISE), that will allow for early risk
reduction testing between AMDR and AEGIS. The test asset will include early limited prototyping
of various architectures and will be used to demonstrate the maturity of selected critical interfaces.
Testing with AMDR will occur in FY17 to support the AMDR Milestone C decision.
The Flight III Combat Information Center (CIC) will be rearranged to most effectively enable
IAMD, BMD, and other mission CONOPS. TI-16 hardware, currently under development for
DDG 121 and follow, will continue to be used for the Flight III upgrade. The CDS (Common Display System) consoles allow flexible configuration, in that each console can be designated for a

Figure 17 - Combat Information Center (CIC), Notional Single Ship

IAMD and USW Arrangement

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

22

wide variety of combat responsibilities. For the Flight III design, four additional consoles are added to allow Alternate Warfare Commander roles in the Fleet IAMD mission. Figures 17 and 18
show two typical configurations of the Flight III CIC.
Space for two Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) consoles is required by the Flight III CDD, which
is reserved in the forward starboard corner of the CIC. The next few years will likely bring rapid
advances in UAV technology, and the DDG 51 Class will be ready to incorporate UAVs as required. Modification to one of the two helo hangars is expected, and would be necessary to accommodate UAVs and the associated support equipment. Note: The UAV change is only a space reservation within CIC. There is no physical change planned or scheduled. The space reservation supports a foreseeable future change based on existing Flight IIA operations.
There are several other changes being incorporated on the Flight IIA ships that are necessary enablers for Flight III modifications.
The removal of SPY-1D(V) relieved the requirement for the dedicated SPY cooling skid. However, the Mk 99 Fire Control System (FCS) also received cooling water supply from this skid, so to
provide cooling water to the Mk 99 System a new FCS cooler is being procured. The FCS cooler is
physically smaller than the SPY cooler. The new cooler leverages the design of 1044A type cool-

Figure 18 - CIC Arrangement, Notional Air and Missile Defense Commander (Alternate)

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

23

ing skids, used on CG 47 Class ships, with improvements for corrosion control and user interface. This reduces developmental efforts and maximizes parts commonality for the Fleet.
Electronic Equipment Fluid Coolers (EEFCs) are introduced on Flight IIA ships on DDG 119 to
eliminate two large cooling skids. The EEFCs are point of service coolers for the combat system
equipment throughout the ship. The implementation of this change enabled removal of the Sonar
Equipment Cooling Skid and the Control and Display (C&D) Cooling Skid. The removal of this
equipment is necessary to make room for the Flight III 4,160 VAC switchgear and other equipment.
Another enabling technology being incorporated prior to Flight III is Integrated Power Node
Center (IPNC). Implemented on DDG 121 and follow ships as a cost reduction initiative, the IPNCs will replace the current DDG 51 400Hz electrical service architecture, removing the single
large converter, over 100 pieces of support equipment, and a large amount of cabling. The IPNCs are point of service converters (there will be eight on the Flight IIA ships), which will retain
the same functionality as displaced equipment. Space vacated by the older 400 Hz frequency
converter allows optimal location of the Flight III PCMs.
Figure 19 diagrams the significant integration testing of AMDR with the AEGIS Weapon System.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

24

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

Figure 19 - AMDRAEGIS Testing Overview

25

Ship Integration and Impacts

Flight III configuration with AMDR and necessary electric plant and cooling upgrades impose a
number of ship arrangement changes to the DDG 51 Class ship. Additional equipment requires the
representative number of machinery arrangements or relocations of displaced equipment in several
ship spaces, as well as the expansion of deckhouse volume by adding a starboard enclosure similar
to what was done on DDG 91 through DDG 96 for the Remote Minehunting System (RMS). The
added weight of these systems and structural impacts require additional efforts to retain sufficient
future growth margins for ship stability in terms of weight and KG (center of gravity). A rigorous
systems engineering effort was undertaken during preliminary design to mitigate these impacts.
Growth margins will be successfully obtained by executing the modifications described in the paragraphs below. Figure 20 shows the arrangement of the AMDR array rooms, and the processing
cabinets in Radar Room 2. The two fan rooms outboard of Radar Room 2 will be upsized to handle
the added cooling needs of this equipment.
Two propylene glycol based Cooling Equipment Units (CEUs) are added below decks on the 2nd
Platform, as shown in Figure 21. The CEUs are based on existing DDG 1000 units. PCMs and
switchgear for 1,000 VDC are placed in the two power conversion rooms, with the forward space
shown in Figure 21. Additional equipment is located in Combat System Equipment Room (CSER)
#2 and the Power Supply Room, shown in Figure 22.

Figure 20 - 03 Level Preliminary Arrangements

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

26

The CEU equipment displaces crew bunks previously in Crew Living Space 2.
The Flight III CDD requires
increased accommodations,
which is accomplished by
adding a starboard side enclosure on the 01 Level, and
by increasing most officer
staterooms to a three-rack
configuration. The new starboard side enclosure is
shown in Figure 23, just aft
of the now stacked Rigid
Hull Inflatable Boat (RHIB)
configuration. The existing
boat davit retained the
Figure 21 - Preliminary Arrangements of Forward PCM and
AMDR CEUs
stacked boat height requirement even after the RMS
was removed, so no new procurement is required for this change.
There are also arrangements changes in the machinery spaces as a result of the additional switchgear and EP protection gear. Preliminary design efforts have shown feasible locations for all major
equipment. General arrangements will be further refined in Detail Design.

Figure 22 - Preliminary arrangements of CSER#2 and Power Supply Room

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

27

Figure 23 - 01 Level arrangements showing new enclosure

Beyond arrangement there are associated effects to the ships weight and KG. To maintain acceptable margin for future growth, the Flight III team was able to improve the ships reserve buoyancy by increasing the flight deck beam above the waterline, combined with cross flooding ducts to
raise the ships limiting displacement to 10,700 tons (increased from 10,300 tons). This design
change allowed an increase in inner-bottom structural weight to lower the ships center of gravity
(KG), an approach that was also used for the design of the Flight IIA ships. Increased inner-bottom
structure has the added benefit of further strengthening the hull girder, thereby improving resistance
to underwater explosives.
The DDG 51 Class ships have been densely outfitted and internal space (volume) limited for some
time. Other SWaP-C allowances are within reasonable design practices and the CDD requirements.
Current ship design parameters are listed below.
Select Flight III Characteristics and Service Life Margins
Displacement: 9709 ltons
KG:
24.96 ft
Electric Load: 5,458 kW
Cooling Load: 1,206 rtons

Displacement SLA:
991 ltons (10.2%)
KG SLA:
.62 ft
Electric SLA: 1,904 kW (40%)
Cooling SLA: 294 rtons (20%)

Impacts to all subsystems continues to be refined, with the DDG 51 Class Design Agent (BIW)
now maintaining configuration control of the ECP packages. The design agents from both DDG
51 shipbuilders, BIW and HII, are under contract to continue development of the Flight III ECPs.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

28

Flight III Program Execution and Risk Management

The Flight III program is supported by appropriate design execution, Systems Engineering Technical Reviews, and stakeholder relationships consistent with meeting requirements and overall program schedule. Major supporting component developments for AMDR-S, PCMs, and SSGTGs are
well underway by the associated Participating Resource Managers (PARMs) with schedules and
milestones that support the overall Flight III delivery targets. Detail design was started in FY14
with the Program Office delivering Government Furnished Information (GFI) to the shipyard services to support continued Flight III development. Continued development of GFI will support detail design fidelity leading to successful Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review
(CDR), and Production Readiness Review
(PRR) targeting 90% design completion supEvent
Schedule
porting start of construction. Significant Flight
Q4 2014
III milestone dates for design and construction Begin Detail Design
are captured in Table 3. PARM schedules are Start Construction
Q3 2017
integrated with anticipated in-yard need dates
AEGIS Light-Off
Q3 2020
for construction and testing resulting in successful light-off and delivery targeted for
Delivery
Q3 2021
FY22. Management approach to supporting
Table 3 - Flight III Schedule
construction, test, and delivery will be consistent with multi-year procedures already in
place.
The DDG 51 AEGIS program office employs a risk management plan based on the guidance provided in applicable Defense Acquisition documents, which were then tailored specifically to the
DDG 51 Flight III program. Risk management occurs in main areas for Flight III: AMDR/RSC
development, combat system development and total ship design, including HM&E modifications
necessary to support AMDR and the combat system.
DDG 51 Flight III risk management is tracked internally by a Risk Management Board (RMB)
which meets quarterly. Participants of the RMB include the AEGIS program office, shipyard representatives, and PARM (AMDR, SSGTG, and PCM) representatives, along with combat system
and ship design team members. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss and track the status on
current risks, along with introducing any additional risks that may need to be added to the risk register. Once a risk is entered into the risk register, it is tracked through the life of the program.
Quarterly RMB reviews and numerical rescoring of the risk show trends and effectiveness of mitigation efforts.

Conclusion
This report has provided a description of the final scope of the ECP required to field the ADMR on
a DDG 51 hull, and has detailed the level of maturity of the new technology to be incorporated on
these ships, beginning with one of the two DDG 51s in FY 2016. With respect to Flight III systems
level of maturity, the AMDR is the only new development technology. The AMDR has successfully completed Milestone B, a full system Preliminary Design Review, a hardware Critical Design
Review, and will deliver its first full ship set of production equipment by early FY 2020. The re-

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

29

maining equipment required to provide power and cooling to the AMDR are all based on currently
existing equipment and therefore induce low technical risk to the program. Given the tremendous
capability improvement AMDR provides to defeat emerging air and ballistic missile threats over
current radars, the low to moderate technical risk associated with implementing this radar on an FY
2016 DDG 51 justifies execution of the ECP during the FY 2013-2017 multiyear procurement contract.
This report has assembled the latest available design and integration information based on the recent design reviews, assumptions, decisions, and sources provided to address the questions posed.
In summary, the AMDR technology has matured, ship impacts are clearly understood, and design
efforts are underway for ECP development. The Navy's intention, as stated and supported by the
contents of this report, is to integrate AMDR-S into the DDG 51 ARLEIGH BURKE Class ships
beginning with the last ship of FY16. The AMDR-S integration with the proven AEGIS Combat
System into the DDG 51 Flight IIA by ECP is the shortest path to meet fleet requirements for cost
effective IAMD capability with the lowest technical and cost risk.

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

30

Additional Reading:
Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command (SEA 05D), DDG 51 Class Flight Upgrade Technical Concept Study, Year 1, Ser 05D/054, 23 Feb 2011. (FOUO, Limited Distribution)
Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command (SEA 05D), DDG 51 Class Flight Upgrade Technical Concept Study, Year 2, Ser 05D/434, 14 Dec 2012. (FOUO, Limited Distribution)
Capabilities Development Document (CDD) for the DDG 51 Flight III, JROCM 122-14, 28 October 2014
Future DDG (Radar/Hull) Study Final Report (U), Dated 10 November 2009 (CLASSIFIED
Document)
Maritime Air and Missile Defense of the Joint Forces (MAMJDF) Initial Capabilities Document
(ICD) Dated 01 May 2006 (CLASSIFIED Document)
Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) Top Level Radar Performance (TLRP) for AMDR SBand, Appendix F document, dated 10 November 2009 (CLASSIFIED Document)
Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) Capability Development Document (CDD), JROCM
123-13, 27 June 2013 (CLASSIFIED Document)
Surface Ship Theater Air and Missile Defense Assessment (SSTAMDA) Summary Study Report, N86/8S177518, 09 Jul 08 (CLASSIFIED Document)

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

31

Acronym List
AAW
AC
ACB
ADM
AIU
AMDR
AoA
APDU
ASUW
ASW
AWS
BIW
BMD
C&D
C5I
CALOW
CEB
CD
CDD
CDLMS
CDR
CDS
CEU
CIC
CONEMP
COI
CONOPS
CPP
CSE
CSER
CSG
DAB
DBFS
DMA
DREX
DSPS
ECP
EEFC
EDM
EP
ESG

Anti-Air Warfare
Air Conditioning
AEGIS Capability Build
Acquisition Decision Memorandum
Array Interface Unit
Air and Missile Defense Radar
Analysis of Alternatives
Array Power Distribution Unit
Anti-Surface Warfare
Anti-Submarine Warfare
AEGIS Weapon System
General Dynamics Bath Iron Works
Ballistic Missile Defense
Control and Display
Command, Control, Communications,
Computers, Combat System, and Intelligence
Coastal and Littoral Offshore Warfare
CNOs Evaluation Board
Contract Design
Capability Development Document
Common Data Link Management System
Critical Design Review
Common Display System
Cooling Electronics Unit
Combat Information Center
Concept of Employment
Concept of Integration
Concept of Operations
Capability Phasing Plan
Class Standard Equipment
Combat System Equipment Room
Carrier Strike Group
Defense Acquisition Board
Digital Beamforming System
Dynamic Modeling Analysis
Digital Receiver Exciter
Digital Signal Processing System
Engineering Change Proposal
Electronic Equipment Fluid Cooler
Engineering Development Model
Electric Plant
Expeditionary Strike Group

ESSM
FCS
FLODES
FTS
HES/C
HFP
HII
HM&E
HWIL
IAMD
ICD
iCDR
INS
IOC
IPNC
IPR
IR
ISE
JROC
KW
LIC
LRIP
MAMDJF
MDA
MPDU
MW
MYP
NIFC-CA
O&S
OIPT
OSA
PARM
PCM
R3B
RCPS
RCS
RHIB
RMA
RMS
RSC

Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile

Fire Control System
Full Load Displacement Enhancement System
Frequency Time System
High Efficiency Small Compressor
HeptaFluoroPropane
Huntington Ingalls Industries
Hull, Mechanical, and Electrical
Hardware in-the-Loop
Integrated Air and Missile Defense
Initial Capabilities Document
Interim Critical Design Review
Inertial Navigation System
Initial Operational Capability
Integrated Power Node Center
In Progress Review
Infra-Red
Interface Support Equipment
Joint Requirements Oversight Council
KiloWatt
Low Intensity Conflict
Low Rate Initial Production
Maritime Air and Missile Defense of
the Joint Force
Missile Defense Agency
Main Power Distribution Unit
MegaWatt
Multi-Year Procurement
Navy Integrated Fire Control Counter Air
Operation and Sustainability
Overarching Integrated Product
Team
Other System Attributes
Participating Resource Manager
Power Conversion Module
Resource Requirements Review
Board
Radar Control Processing Subsystem
Radar Cross Section
Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat
Radar Module Assembly
Remote Minehunting System
Radar Suite Controller

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

32

rTons
RTSS
S&T
SETR
SEWIP
SFR
SIL
SLA
SSGTG
SWaP-C
SWTRG
SYSCOM
TI
TRIMM
TRM
TSDR
UAV
UPS
USW
VLS
VSD
ZEDS

Tons of Refrigeration Capability

Real-Time Simulation Subsystem
Science and Technology
Systems Engineering Technical Review
Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement
Program
System Functional Review
Software Integration Lab
Service Life Allowance
Ship Service Gas Turbine Generator
Space, Weight, Power, and Cooling
Surface Warfare Tactical Requirements
Group
System Command
Technology Insertion
Transmit-Receive Integrated Multichannel
Module
Technical Review Manual
Total Ship Design Review
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
Uninterruptible Power Supply
Undersea Warfare
Vertical Launching System
Variable Speed Drive
Zonal Electrical Distribution System

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release.

33