It's both funny and sad: a destroyer instead of a cruiser, and nothing else

Of course, nothing like that. It’s just that the Ticonderoga-class cruisers are rapidly running out, there are no new ones and there won’t be any, and air defense has always been a necessary part of security for naval formations like the AUG, and it remains so. Moreover, today, with the advent of drones-kamikaze and anti-ship missiles new generation, Defense has become more relevant than ever. And the absence of a single command center in a naval group is a very unpleasant matter.
Modern radars on ships are capable of many things. But the information from them must be processed, targets must be classified, tracked, and assigned importance. That is, who needs to be shot down at the furthest approaches with a missile, and who will be enough for artillery shells on approach. After all, you wouldn’t launch a million-dollar missile at a drone assembled in a barn and limping along at the speed of a car with a couple dozen kilograms of explosives on board?
Here's a modern anti-ship missile flying at supersonic speed - that's a more than worthy target, isn't it?
The AUG Air Defense Headquarters is a very responsible position. It is there that all targets are tracked and priorities are set, since the main task of the headquarters is to protect all ships from air attacks, from the aircraft carrier to the bunker tanker, or, as they are also called, the technical tanker. It is clear that in battle it is not customary to make a mess (in general, depending on the circumstances, and sometimes it is not so shameful), but after the battle the absence of a bunker tanker can sadly affect the moral and volitional qualities of all crews.
Or, since we're talking about it, a tanker. It's clear that an aircraft carrier doesn't need fuel, the Americans have a nuclear power plant there, but those same destroyers don't feel good on the water without fuel oil. And water, which, as we know, is essential, especially on the water, is also transported by tankers.
In general, there are no useless ships in the group and there cannot be any, so in the event of an air attack, the air defense headquarters will work hard, smoking with brains and processors, repelling attacks from whatever flies towards the ships.

And these, we note, must be specially trained people at their workplaces, equipped with very good computers connected to the group's combat information network. So that it would be possible to promptly receive and process information from all the radars of the ship group and distribute target designations to both ships and aircraft.

The Ticonderoga-class cruisers were originally assigned this role, with additional space and computing power. Now the Tiks are going into history, and at a time when the air becomes… uncomfortable.
Considering that the new cruiser program died at the development stage, the Zumwalt was planned instead of the Ticonderoga. But this miscarriage of American shipbuilding, naturally, is in no way capable of replacing the Ticonderoga. Apparently, there was a change in the engineering and design school, and if the designers were able to fit 9800 universal launch cells and rooms for the air defense headquarters into the 122-ton displacement of the Tika, then only 15 launch cells fit into the 90 thousand tons of the Zumwalt. Well, and an absolutely unseaworthy hull, with which the under-destroyer simply cannot follow the order.
Overall, everything turned out sadly, the solitaire didn’t work out, and neither did the budget.
What to do when such a situation arises? Naturally, use what is at hand. And besides the Arleigh Burke, at your disposal fleet The USA has nothing.
That is, the principle is clear: “Use what is at hand and don’t look for anything else.”

Last year, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers took on the role of air defense headquarters for two carrier strike groups, and plans are underway to expand the practice.
As the U.S. Navy looks to add new Arleigh Burke-class III destroyers to the fleet, the existing IIA-class destroyers will increasingly assume the air defense headquarters role in the carrier strike group (CSG), which has long been served by the aging fleet of Ticonderoga-class cruisers.
Destroyer instead of cruiser...

The U.S. Navy has four types of guided missile destroyers in its fleet: Class I, Class II, Class IIA, and Class III. The Class III will one day assume the air defense commander mission, as they were designed specifically for that role, but to date only one, USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG-125), has been commissioned.
As a result, the IIA-class ships will assume the Commander-in-Chief Air Defense (CSG) mission as the Navy's cruiser fleet is decommissioned. Unlike traditional destroyers, which are often commanded by O-5s, the CSGs will be commanded by O-6s, like the cruisers, reflecting the increased importance of the mission.

USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG-125), the first of the Type III destroyers
A warship that serves as the AUG's air defense center is responsible for tracking any objects in the sky and coordinating actions within the AUG to identify and, if necessary, neutralize these threats. It is the air combat control center and can use all air defense assets of the group of ships to accomplish its missions.
Cruisers, which traditionally perform such missions, have a larger combat information center (CIC) with more operators and more equipment. Advances in destroyer equipment and the ever-improving Aegis combat system mean that the IIA class can perform the missions the Navy asks of them, even if it means making some compromises and carrying more crew, which leads to cramped conditions. However, it is unfortunately not possible to talk about a destroyer replacing a cruiser.

The Combat Information Center (CIC) aboard the modernized USS Ticonderoga is significantly larger than those on the Arleigh Burke destroyers, which were never designed to perform air defense command functions.
This year, destroyer commanders will increasingly serve as air defense center ship commanders, and eventually each of the Navy’s 11 carrier strike groups will have its own destroyer performing the mission. Surface Navy leaders say they are encouraged by the destroyers that performed the mission for two carrier strike groups last year.

USS Cowpens (CG-63) fires a salvo of standard surface-to-air missiles
The USS Frank E. Peterson, Jr. (DDG-121) deployed last year as part of the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) Carrier Strike Group as an air defense hub. Meanwhile, fellow IIA-class destroyer USS Daniel Inui (DDG-118) also performed similar duties for the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) carrier group last year. The Daniel Inui trained for the role before the deployment, then assumed the mission after the strike group’s cruiser was out of action for technical reasons, according to Vice Adm. Brendan McLane, chief of Naval Surface Forces.
While McLane did not identify the cruiser by name, online reports indicate that the USS Lake Erie (CG-70) was unable to participate in the mission. However, McLane said the USS Daniel Inui performed well after the cruiser's air defense crew was transferred to the destroyer.
According to him, both warships were prepared for such a scenario before the deployment began.
The aging cruiser fleet has had problems with operational readiness, and as outside analysts have put it, botched upgrades have resulted in billions being wasted (we wrote about this) while the service life of the cruisers has barely increased.
While the details remain unclear, last month the USS Gettysburg (CG-64) found itself at the center of a friendly fire incident when the Gettysburg shot down an F/A-18 Super Hornet from the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) in the Red Sea. The ship, which was just a few years from the end of its service life, had recently been modernized and is the most advanced of its kind to date, but that didn’t seem to affect its combat effectiveness. Or rather, it did, but not in the way the Navy would have liked.

Flights aboard the aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman on December 18, 2024
Between the retirement of the last cruisers and the commissioning of the Type III destroyers, the Navy plans to use one Type IIA destroyer as the air defense hub for each of its 11 carrier strike groups. The USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81) will deploy this summer as part of the USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77) carrier strike group, and the USS Mason (DDG-87) is preparing to take over that role with another carrier, Cahill said. The Navy has not named the other ships that will assume air defense command, but it is clear that they will be assigned.
Meanwhile, other IIA-class destroyers are undergoing upgrades to improve their performance and extend their service life.
The ships will be equipped with a new automated chemical warfare agent detection system that successfully completed operational testing aboard the USS Mason. By the end of the year, the Navy plans to install the new system, designed to quickly alert service members to the presence of chemical warfare agents, on all guided missile destroyers and cruisers, aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, littoral combat ships, and cargo ships/supply ships.
The question is where chemical weapons could be used against American ships weapon, remains open for now, but if there are concerns about this, it means that the command understands where it is going to send its ships.

USS Mason (DDG 87)
As for the air defense center equipment, the destroyer can accommodate additional personnel required to perform air defense tasks, which requires the presence of several additional observation posts in the warship's BIC.

Time and combat use of destroyers will show how convenient this is to implement. Moreover, there is one unpleasant aspect: designating a destroyer as the center of the group's air defense means that the AUG will have one less warship to perform other tasks. The personnel documents for the IIA-type ships also do not indicate the necessary additional people, which could lead to long-term changes in the crew.
This adds another layer of training and speeds up the tempo of operations a bit for everyone on the ship. Also, typically all other AUG battle group commanders are on the carrier, as there is much more space there to begin with, and there has long been a debate in the community about whether the AA commander's mission should be performed from a cruiser/destroyer, or whether the AA center belongs on the carrier.
And here, of course, there is a lot of food for thought. An aircraft carrier is a very stable platform, and a nuclear one never knows a deficit in energy. But, firstly, even without air defense, there are a lot of radars working to support flights, and secondly, in case of troubles like an anti-ship missile hit, you can lose many commanders. If it lands well, of course.
So the principle of not keeping all your eggs in one basket is quite applicable here. Especially since, with reservations and some modifications, the Arleigh Burke generation IIA can cope with such a task.
The change in missions for the IIA-class destroyers comes as the Navy awaits the mass entry of the III-class destroyers. Navy officials have not said when the new destroyers will join the fleet, but analysis and other reports indicate that the III-class ships are suffering from rising costs and delivery delays.
The U.S. Navy currently has 74 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. Two second-generation Arleigh Burke destroyers and 2 third-generation Arleigh Burke destroyers are already under construction or have already been approved for procurement by Congress. An earlier Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate also found that the 18 third-generation Arleigh Burke destroyers called for in the Navy’s latest 3-year shipbuilding plan would cost an average of $23 billion, up from previous estimates of $3 billion per ship.
In principle, nothing new or surprising, there is an opinion that Congress will find money for destroyers. Or, in extreme cases, they will start the press and print a couple of truckloads of dollars, thereby solving the financing problem.
The report also said that the destroyers currently under construction have “suffered significant delays.” Only one Type III destroyer, USS Jack Lucas (DDG-125), has been commissioned to date, and the keel of a second destroyer, the future USS Louis H. Wilson, Jr. (DDG-2023), was laid in 126. The future USS Ted Stevens (DDG-128) was also launched in 2023. Inside Defense reported in June that other Type III vessels could be delayed by six to 25 months.

While Navy leaders have expressed confidence that the IIA-class destroyers can handle the air defense mission while the service awaits the III-class ships, the stopgap solution nonetheless reflects long-standing challenges the service and the American shipbuilding industry face when it comes to procuring and delivering warships on time. And while legislative and other efforts are underway to potentially address these shortcomings, it remains to be seen whether American shipbuilding can be set on a better path.
In general, what we call "Trishkin's caftan". It cannot be said that everything is smooth and even in the Russian fleet, and we have strange maneuvers. Just recently, the Americans were unanimously discussing the Admiral Nakhimov's launching of tests in terms of whether it was a betrayal or a victory. Yes, a huge chest filled with missiles is debatable. It is, one might say, unfashionable. The ship should be small and inconspicuous.
But if it comes to distribution - this stealth will go to the sea devil, and a couple of hundred missiles that the Admiral Nakhimov can launch at once - this is a couple of hundred missiles. This will make any ballistic computer sweat, and especially the one that will be installed on a destroyer and is not really intended for such tasks.
But there is nothing to be done: for lack of, as they say... Therefore, while there are no destroyers that can almost fully replace cruisers, the Ticonderogas will be replaced by destroyers that can do this almost fully.
Well, it's not for us to judge the processes that are happening in the best navy in the world. For now, at least, in the best, and then we'll have to see. At this rate, they'll sail far...
Information