Home » Budget Industry » Second Zumwalt Destroyer Michael Monsoor Completes Acceptance Trials


Second Zumwalt Destroyer Michael Monsoor Completes Acceptance Trials

Destroyer Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) underway during trials. US Navy Photo

The second Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyer has completed acceptance trials last week, according to a statement from Naval Sea Systems Command.

Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) is now pier-side at General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Maine after the Navy evaluation ahead of delivery to the service in March.

The second ship in the three-ship class conducted a battery of tests at the shipyard and underway in the Atlantic Ocean overseen by the Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey.

“[INSURV] reviewed the ship and its crew during a series of demonstrations both pierside and underway, evaluating the ship’s construction and compliance with Navy specifications,” according to the NAVSEA statement.
“Many of the ship’s onboard systems including navigation, damage control, mechanical, electrical, combat, communications, and propulsion systems were tested to validate performance met or exceeded Navy specifications.”

Monsoor’s first sets of builder’s trials were curtailed in December following problems discovered in the ship’s Integrated Power System.

“A harmonic filter aboard Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) failed one day after the ship left the yard on Dec. 4,” NAVSEA told USNI News in December.
“Harmonic filters are used in complex electrical systems to prevent unintended power fluctuations from damaging sensitive equipment.”

The IPS is complicated propulsion system that gives the Zumwalt-class massive power capability for a non-nuclear ship. The system is built around two Rolls Royce MT-30 gas turbines and two Rolls Royce MT-5 auxiliary gas turbines that can generate 75 megawatts.

Monsoor is the second of the three-ship, 23-billion class of guided-missile destroyers. The third, Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002) is still under construction.

The following is the complete Feb. 2, 2018, statement from Naval Sea Systems Command

BATH, Maine — The Navy’s next generation destroyer, the future USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001), successfully completed acceptance trials on Feb. 1.

The U.S. Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey reviewed the ship and its crew during a series of demonstrations both pier side and underway, evaluating the ship’s construction and compliance with Navy specifications.

Many of the ship’s onboard systems including navigation, damage control, mechanical, electrical, combat, communications, and propulsion systems were tested to validate performance met or exceeded Navy specifications.

“DDG 1001 performed exceedingly well during acceptance trials,” said Capt. Kevin Smith, DDG 1000 class program manager, Program Executive Office (PEO) Ships. “The industry and Navy team worked together to incorporate lessons learned from DDG 1000. The trials once again demonstrated how truly powerful and exceptional these ships are. ”

Zumwalt class destroyers feature a state-of-the-art electric propulsion system, wave-piercing tumblehome hull, stealth design and are equipped with some of the most advanced warfighting technology. These ships will be capable of performing a range of deterrence, power projection, sea control, and command and control missions while allowing the Navy to evolve with new systems and missions.

DDG 1001 was christened in June 2016, and is scheduled to deliver in the coming months. BIW is currently in production on the future USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002), as well as future Arleigh Burke class destroyers Thomas Hudner (DDG 116), Daniel Inouye (DDG 118), Carl M. Levin (DDG 120) and John Basilone (DDG 122).

As one of the Defense Department’s largest acquisition organizations, PEO Ships is responsible for executing the development and procurement of all destroyers, amphibious ships, special mission and support ships, and special warfare craft.

Like What You've Been Reading? Get Proceedings Today
Categories: Budget Industry, News & Analysis, Surface Forces, U.S. Navy
Sam LaGrone

About Sam LaGrone

Sam LaGrone is the editor of USNI News. He has covered legislation, acquisition and operations for the Sea Services since 2009 and spent time underway with the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps and the Canadian Navy.

  • kye154

    Although I have seen BIW construct some pretty nice ships, (I was on board for the commissioning of the USS Lake Erie), The Zumwalt class of ships aren’t all cracked up to what the Navy says they are. The Navy floundered badly. Consequently, the Zumwalt class was originally supposed to consist of 32 ships in total and has shrunk to a planned purchase of just three. This class of ships are far more vulnerable too, since they lack their planned 155mm guns, (which still has no GPS guided cannon ammunition for it, or and exorbitantly expensive Long-Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP), and its stripped-down anti-air role. A stealthy anti-submarine, special operations, and land attack arsenal ship? If so, why not build more submarines instead? They would be far more survivable and can stay on station much longer than the Zumwalts. There are 4 of the older Ohio class nuclear-powered guided missile submarines which were converted to be Tomahawk chuckers, and they did not costs $1 billion apiece. Having to strip a ship of its planned armament to keep costs under control defeats the whole purpose of building a ship in the first place. Time the Navy got smart about its acquisitions, and get contractors under control instead.

    • Bubblehead

      The Zum’s are another toothless/useless ship from the Obama Administration. The USN was so desperate for $$$ they would put anything in the water, even if it meant putting sailors lives in jeopardy.

      The Zum’s do have a lot of potential however. Unlike the LCS which will always be a terd in the bowl. Using the Zum hull, with Enterprise radar & AEGIS, and one day a rail gun, it would be a very very powerful ship. And for pete’s (or Sailors) sake, put a CIWS on it. The AB’s are only short term answers and have zero room for growth of future weapons such as Laser & Railgun. If the USN had any forethought, a modified Zum could check all the boxes.

      If you look at the increasing lethality of ASM, hyper-velocity maneuverable MIRM warheads and weapons in general (mass attack by mini drones), a stealthy ship will be the only way to survive post 2025.

      Or like you said, build more subs. If there is a war with China & Russia, it will be subs that are the deciding factor. But subs are extremely expensive to build, even more expensive to maintain, and require a very specialized crew (IE $$$$) with a lot of training.

      • Nate

        The program was restructured and cut to three ships in July 08, president Obama didn’t take office until Jan 09. You’re blaming the wrong administration for this boondoggle.

        • Chesapeakeguy

          If anyone is going to interject that it was ‘this admin’ or ‘that admin’ that is responsible for a program and it faults, then they should be astute enough to research the histories of said programs. BOTH the Zumwalt and LCS classes came out of requirements originally put down and approved in the 1990s. The Zumwalt came forth from the SC-21 and DD-21 concepts. The LCS came about from the ‘Streetfighter’ concepts proposed in the 90s. In fact, in an odd way, the LCS ALSO came about from the processes that resulted in the Zumwalts, in that someone decided that replacing the LARGE vessels of the Tico and Burke and Spruanace classes that were then doing what was known as ‘littoral’ missions with a LARGER design (Zumwalt) was the way to go. But the Streetfighter approach took root, and then the LCS was continually gold plated to where they cost a bunch.

          Because links cannot be posted on here, I will spell out a great site that explains the evolution of the LCS quite well. It also touches on the Zumwalt development, but the focus is on the LCS. It is www dot wired dot com slash 2011 slash 08 slash future-warship-ran-aground slash. The actual article is titled “How the Navy’s Warship of the Future Ran Aground”. ALL on here should read it. Because though it is dated, it still resonates..

      • PolicyWonk

        The two worst acquisition programs that have shamed the USN are the so-called “Littoral Combat Ship”, and (so far) the DDG-1000’s – both of which were started under the GOP Administration of George W Bush.

        The taxpayers have been stuck forking over $36B for these LCS’s, that were “never intended to venture into the littorals to engage in combat”, according to an interview with former CNO Greenert on Breaking Defense. They were subsequently built to commercial standards without room for growth to enhance either weapons or protection.

        And now we have the Zumwalts (DDG-1000), were built despite the initial order being chopped down to three sea-frames, and a long range gun rendered useless by the ultra-high cost of ammunition.

        The Zumwalts, however, were (unlike both LCS’s) at least built to be warships, and have a huge power generating capacity that may come in very handy some day – though this remains to be seen – as does its mission within the USN at this time.

        • captlou

          Why the need to highlight these as “Bush’s fault”? Let’s look at the facts…

          The Zumwalt was ordered in 2008 – under Bush and laid down after he left office in 2011.

          The LCS Freedom and Independence were laid down under Bush in 2005-06. The vast majority of these classes was funded and built under Obama.

          Bush made the bad decisions to launch, but the bulk of the responsibility for these two failures also falls on Barack Hussein Obama’s regime. He and his SECDEF had every chance to cancel these dogs (recall the VH-71 debacle, also started by Bush but cancelled by BHO). Barry chose not to.

    • Hank J

      “they did not cost $1 billion apiece.” You are correct, they cost at least double that way back in the 1990s.

      • kye154

        Sorry, it appears part of that sentence dropped out from what I originally wrote. Meant to say, they did not ost $1 billion apiece to be refurbished. Thanks for bringing that up.

    • Christopher Perrien

      A “stealth” gunfire support ship. Mutually exclusive specifications

  • Corporatski Kittenbot 2.0

    The orphan ships.

    Unwanted, without a mission and nowhere near as capable as they might appear.

    • incredulous1

      I think they are for towing practice

    • El Kabong

      Better than the LCS….

      • Corporatski Kittenbot 2.0

        Well, it has a sharp looking prow, so it could slice through enemy ships I suppose!

        The LCS, having the sturdiness of a coffee cup couldn’t do that!

        • El Kabong

          The return of the ram-ship! 😉

          Agreed, those glorified yachts aren’t good for much beyond patrols, training and port visits.

  • IssacBabel

    Query, does either ship have it’s secondary autocannons ?
    I haven’t been able to find a picture of them.
    DDG-1002 should get the original dual 57mm cannons and replace
    the Ammoless Gun System, with a pair of Mk 71s. lightweight 8in guns.
    I got really big Dillon press, I’ll make the ammo.

    • Corporatski Kittenbot 2.0

      They dropped the 57mms and were supposed to put a couple of 30mms IFV guns in their place.

  • ElmCityAle

    I might ask why even bother to mount the guns, but perhaps they serve as a visual reminder of the shame the navy should feel over one of the biggest weapons systems debacles in history.

    • Corporatski Kittenbot 2.0

      I suppose they were probably already paid for…. but yes, there is no actual reason to mount them.

  • RobM1981

    I’m sure this is “as scheduled,” but wow… this is really slow motion. The ships are launching with obsolete weapons.

    What if this was, say, a dishwasher? What if you and your spouse were talking about buying a new dishwasher? You’d say say “you know, there is no soap for this dishwasher anymore. They don’t make soap. Also, it can’t load the rinse agent. They forgot to include that capability in the design. Maybe we should save the money?”

    Not the Navy. They have a ship that can’t load the ABM version of the Standard, and can’t load ammunition for it’s “advanced” gun, but they’re going to complete it and launch it anyhow.

    That’s what’s called “professional oversight” of your tax dollars.

    Fortunately it’s not a lot of money, right?

  • thebard3

    If only it had a gun…..

  • Rob C.

    They should suspend building install regular launchers in place of the guns. At least they’ll functional use. Stupid service cancelling everything related to the ships to make them functional.

  • thebard3

    I think we might see these ships showing up in Philadelphia, Suisun Bay, and Beaumont TX in the not too distant future.

  • Real sailor

    While this ship may remain somewhat toothless without it’s ammo for it’s pair of 155mm, it still has lots of VLS tubes, great ASW systems, stealth, etc., and overall, it’s built very much a warship, able to take hits and keep on fighting. Whereas, a ‘scary look’ from the enemy will put the 100% toothless and tinfoil LCS out of action.

    • ElmCityAle

      It’s much worse than that – while they have 80 VLS cells, that have half of the originally conceived radar systems and no AEGIS processing behind it, but rather a new and unproven processing system. (Even one of the LCS versions uses a system derived from AEGIS code.) Zumwalt class ships will require special versions of SM-2 and ESSM missiles with different guidance systems, because the ships lack the usual illuminators. I wonder what the delivery schedule will be for those special versions of the missiles required for any semblance of self-defense?

  • Ed L

    Ah, just toss on a half a dozen MK 110 on board and a couple of regular 127mm in 2x mountings. Or how about this, bring the old 8 inch lightweight gun out of storage and build a couple more. Mount them super empose one above the other. Change them to cruisers. That’s what they really are at that size

  • battlestations

    23 Billion for 3 ships? That’s enough for a carrier battle group!

    • Christopher Perrien

      Enough for an entire Navy (not built in America)