Sie sind auf Seite 1von 403

PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information.

PDF generated at: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:06:53 UTC


US NAVY COMBAT SHIPS
POST WAR
Contents
Articles
SURFACE COMBAT SHIPS
1
Dealey-class destroyer escort 1
Claud Jones-class destroyer escort 3
Bronstein-class frigate 5
Brooke-class frigate 8
Knox-class frigate 11
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate 18
Freedom-class littoral combat ship 30
Independence-class littoral combat ship 35
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer 41
Gearing-class destroyer 50
Mitscher-class destroyer 60
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer 63
Farragut-class destroyer (1958) 67
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer 70
Spruance-class destroyer 75
Kidd-class destroyer 82
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer 86
Zumwalt-class destroyer 97
Boston-class cruiser 111
Galveston-class cruiser 113
Providence-class cruiser 115
Long Beach-class cruiser 117
Albany-class cruiser 119
Leahy-class cruiser 122
Belknap-class cruiser 127
California-class cruiser 130
Virginia-class cruiser 133
Ticonderoga-class cruiser 137
Iowa-class battleship 145
Pegasus-class hydrofoil 168
Essex-class aircraft carrier 171
Midway-class aircraft carrier 186
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier 190
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier 194
USS Enterprise (CVN-65) 198
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier 218
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier 230
AMPHIBIOUS
237
Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ship 237
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship 239
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship 243
America-class amphibious assault ship 248
Landing Ship, Tank 252
Newport-class tank landing ship 269
Casa Grande-class dock landing ship 273
Thomaston-class dock landing ship 276
Anchorage-class dock landing ship 278
Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship 281
Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship 284
Raleigh-class amphibious transport dock 286
Austin-class amphibious transport dock 287
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock 292
Charleston-class amphibious cargo ship 296
Landing Craft Air Cushion 299
Landing Craft Utility 304
SUBMARINES
310
Tench-class submarine 310
Greater Underwater Propulsion Power Program 312
USS Albacore (AGSS-569) 319
Barbel-class submarine 325
USS Nautilus (SSN-571) 327
Skate-class submarine 334
USS Seawolf (SSN-575) 336
Skipjack-class submarine 341
Permit-class submarine 343
Sturgeon-class submarine 347
Los Angeles-class submarine 351
Seawolf-class submarine 356
Virginia-class submarine 359
George Washington-class submarine 369
Ethan Allen-class submarine 371
Lafayette-class submarine 373
James Madison-class submarine 375
Benjamin Franklin-class submarine 377
Ohio-class submarine 379
References
Article Sources and Contributors 384
Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 390
Article Licenses
License 399
1
SURFACE COMBAT SHIPS
Dealey-class destroyer escort
USS Dealey (DE-1006)
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Uruguayan Navy
Colombian Navy
Preceded by: John C. Butler-classdestroyer escort
Succeededby: Claud Jones-classdestroyer escort
Built: 19521957
In commission: 19541994
Completed: 13
Preserved: 1
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer escort
Displacement: 1,270 long tons (1,290t)
Length: 314ft 6in (95.86m)
Beam: 36ft 9in (11.20m)
Draft: 18ft (5.5m)
Propulsion: 2 Foster-Wheeler boilers
1 De Laval geared turbine
20,000 shp (15 MW)
1 shaft
Speed: 25 knots (29mph; 46km/h)
Complement: 170
Armament: 4 3"/50 caliber guns
4 533mm (21.0in) torpedo tubes
2 ASW torpedo racks
2 Hedgehog anti-submarine
mortar
2 DCT (K-guns)
Dealey-class destroyer escort
2
The Dealey class destroyer escorts were the first post-World War II escort ships built for the United States Navy.
Slightly faster and larger than the escort destroyers of the previous era, they were fitted with twin-mounted 3 inch
guns, ASW rockets, a depth charge rack and 6 depth charge launchers. There were later modernizations that removed
the ASW rockets and the depth charges in favor of nuclear-capable anti-submarine rocket launchers and torpedo
mounts which fired lighter homing torpedoes.
They were decommissioned in 1972 and 1973 in favor of the Knox class frigate. USSDealey(DE-1006) and
USSHartley(DE-1029) were sold at surplus to other countries in 1972, with the remainder of the class being sold
for scrap.
Ships
Name Number Builder Commissioned-
Decommission
Fate
Dealey DE-1006 Bath Iron Works 1954-1972 Transferred to Uruguay as ROU 18 De Julio (DE-3)
Cromwell DE-1014 Bath Iron Works 1954-1972 Sold for scrap
Hammerberg DE-1015 Bath Iron Works 1955-1973 Sold for scrap
Courtney DE-1021 Defoe Shipbuilding 1956-1973 Sold for scrap
Lester DE-1022 Defoe Shipbuilding 1957-1972 Sold for scrap
Evans DE-1023 Puget Sound Bridge and Dredging 1957-1968 Sold for scrap
Bridget DE-1024 Puget Sound Bridge and Dredging 1957-1968 Sold for scrap
Bauer DE-1025 Bethlehem Steel, Alameda 1957-1973 Sold for scrap
Hooper DE-1026 Bethlehem Steel, Alameda 1958-1968 Sold for scrap
John Willis DE-1027 New York Shipbuilding 1957-1972 Sold for scrap
Van Voorhis DE-1028 New York Shipbuilding 1957-1972 Sold for scrap
Hartley DE-1029 New York Shipbuilding 1957-1972 Sold to Colombia as ARC Boyaca (DE-16)
Joseph K. Taussig DE-1030 New York Shipbuilding 1957-1972 Sold for scrap
External links
Dealey-class ocean escorts
[1]
at Destroyer History Foundation
[2]
References
[1] http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ dealeyclass/
[2] http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/
Claud Jones-class destroyer escort
3
Claud Jones-class destroyer escort
USS McMorris
Class overview
Builders: Avondale Shipyard
Operators: United States Navy
Indonesian Navy
Preceded by: Dealey-classdestroyer escort
Succeededby: Bronstein-classfrigate
Built: 19561959
In commission: 19581974
Completed: 4
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer escort
Displacement: 1,314 long tons (1,335t) standard
1,970 long tons (2,000t) full load
Length: 312ft (95m)
Beam: 38ft 10in (11.84m)
Draft: 12ft 1in (3.68m)
Propulsion: 4 Fairbanks-Morse 38ND8 Diesels
9,240 shp; 7,000 bhp
1 shaft
Speed: 2022 knots (3741km/h)
Range: 7,000nmi (13,000km) at 12kn (22km/h)
Complement: 171 total:
12 Officers
159 enlisted men
Armament: 2 3"/50 caliber guns (1 2)
6 12.75in (324mm) Mk.32 torpedo tubes (2
3)
2 Hedgehog anti-submarine mortar
The Claud Jones class destroyer escorts were four ships built for the US Navy in the late 1950s. These ships were a
Diesel version of the earlier Dealey class and were designed with the aim of producing a cheaper ship suitable for
rapid production in wartime. These ships also had reduced armament and speed compared to their predecessors.
They were not seen as effective anti submarine vessels and were sold after only 15 years service.
Claud Jones-class destroyer escort
4
Hull Numbers
A total of four ships of the Claud Jones class were built. All were decommissioned in 1973-1974 and sold onto the
Indonesian Navy. All ships were built by Avondale.
Claud Jones(DE-1033) : Commissioned 1958. Sold 1974, renamed KRI Monginsidi, in honor of Robert Wolter
Monginsidi, an Indonesian hero from Sulawesi.
John R. Perry(DE-1034) : Commissioned 1959. Sold 1973, renamed KRI Samadikun, in honor of Indonesian
Navy First Lieutenant Samadikun, Commanding Officer of sunk-fated RI Gadjah Mada (408), a wooden boat, in
Battle of Cirebon Bay against a Dutch destroyer.
Charles Berry(DE-1035) : Commissioned 1960. Sold 1974, renamed KRI Martadinata, in honor of Vice Admiral
Raden Eddy Martadinata, a former Indonesian Navt Commander.
McMorris(DE-1036) : Commissioned 4 March 1960 at Charleston, S.C., Lieutenant Cdr Martin Zenni in
command, assigned to Escort Squadron 3 (CruDesFlot 7) at Naval Station San Diego, Calif. Sold 1974, renamed
KRI Ngurah Rai after I Gusti Ngurah Rai, an Indonesian hero from Bali.
Resources
List of Cannon class Destroyer Escorts
[1]
External links
Claud Jones-class ocean escorts
[2]
at Destroyer History Foundation
[2]
References
[1] http:/ / www. destroyersonline. com/ usndd/ classcjones.htm
[2] http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ claudjonesclass/
Bronstein-class frigate
5
Bronstein-class frigate
USS McCloy FF-1038
Class overview
Name: Bronstein
Operators: United States Navy
Mexican Navy
Preceded by: Claud Jones-classdestroyer escort
Succeededby: Garcia-classfrigate
General characteristics
Type: frigate
Displacement: 2,360 tons standard, 2,960 full load
Length: 372ft (113m)
Beam: 41ft (12m)
Draught: 23ft (7.0m) to bottom of sonar dome
Propulsion: 2 Foster-Wheeler 600 PSI boilers
1 Westinghouse turbine coupled to 1 de Laval locked-train double reduction gears
1 shaft: 22,000 SHP (15 MW)
Speed: 26 knots (48km/h; 30mph)
Range: 4,000mi (6,400km) at 15 knots
Complement: 196 (16 officers, 180 men)
Accommodation for 20 officers, 200 men
Sensors and
processing systems:
Air search radar: AN/SPS-40
Surface search radar: AN/SPS-10
Fire control radar: AN/SPG-35
Sonar: AN/SQS-26 AX(R) (bow mounted)
[1]
TASS (Towed Array Sonar System): installed in the mid-1970s for trials but later removed
MK 6 Fanfare torpedo decoy system
Armament: MK-116 octuple ASROC launcher without reload capability
6 torpedo tubes (2, MK 32 triple torpedo mounts)
1 twin 3 inch/50 caliber MK 33 guns operated by an MK 56 radar director and MK 114 Mod 7 ASW
fire-control system using MK 1 target designation system.
1 3 gun was replaced by the AN/SQS-15 TASS towed array sonar on McCloy
Bronstein-class frigate
6
Aircraft carried: 0
USS Bronstein (FF-1037)
The Bronstein class frigates were United
States Navy warships, originally laid down
as ocean escorts (formerly called destroyer
escorts), but were all redesignated as
frigates on 30 June 1975 in the United States
Navy 1975 ship reclassification and their
hull designation changed from DE to FF.
The lead ship of the class was the
USSBronstein(FF-1037), laid down 16
May 1961 and commissioned 15 June 1963,
at Avondale Shipyards, Louisiana.
This class comprised the second generation
of post-World War II destroyer escorts.
These ships can be considered
developmental vessels as many new systems were installed to test for future use, such as a new hull design, larger
bow-mounted AN/SQS-26AX sonar system, and ASW weaponry. This class was a new design from the keel up,
incorporating the FRAM improvements, and was specifically designed to operate the DASH drone helicopter. The
sonar was later upgraded to the AN/SQS-26AX(R).
The top weight of the new ASW equipment and the large bow-mounted sonar made the Bronstein frigates too slow
to operate with the ASW task forces for which they had been designed. Thus the US Navy decided against any
further procurement of ships of this class. The later Garcia-classfrigates were given a larger power plant and greater
speed.
Ships
Only two ships of this class were built: USSBronstein(FF-1037) and USSMcCloy(FF-1038). Both were later sold
to the Mexican Navy.
Bronstein
Built by: Avondale Shipyards, Avondale, Louisiana
Laid down: 16 May 1961
Launched: 31 March 1962
Commissioned: 15 June 1963
Reclassified: As frigate (FF) 30 June 1975
Operations: US Pacific Fleet
Decommissioned: 13 December 1990
Stricken: 13 December 1990
Sold: To Mexico, 1 October 1993; renamed Hermenegildo Galeana (E-42); later ARM Hermenegildo Galeana
(F202)
Bronstein-class frigate
7
McCloy
Built by: Avondale Shipyards, Avondale, Louisiana
Laid down: 1 September 1961
Launched: 9 June 1962
Commissioned: 21 October 1963
Reclassified: As frigate (FF) 30 June 1975
Operations: US Atlantic Fleet
Decommissioned: 14 December 1990
Stricken: 17 December 1990
Sold: To Mexico, 1 October 1993; renamed ARM Nicolas Bravo (E-40); later ARM Nicolas Bravo (F201)
At one time the USS McCloy held the record for largest military drug bust at 49.5 tons of marijuana (late 1980s). A
sea going tug was forcefully boarded after an over night chase while the tug's crew tossed bales of cocaine overboard
and weapons fire was released the following morning at dawn. One of the tugs crew was wounded by .50 cal fire and
was helo'd off. A Coast Guard detachment estimated the amount and an attempt was made to tow the tug to port. The
tug had too much damage and sank in the night after several attempts to salvage her.
The McCloy made many drug busts late in her life, received several citations and was painted with Marijuana leaves
for each bust.
The McCloy sustained major damage during Hurricane Floyd in 1987 losing a large portion of its mast during the
storm. Shelter was sought in the city of Morehead NC while the storm passed and damage was assessed.
Other notables include involvement in the rescue of the crew of the USSBonefish. One of the last U.S. Navy diesel
submarines, it had a battery compartment fire and was abandoned by her crew off the coast of Florida. The McCloy
ran lifeguard ops and eventually was designated the tow vessel to bring the Bonefish to Charleston SC.
Notes
[1] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Sonars, Part 1" United States Naval Institute Proceedings July 1981 p.119
Sources
USS McCloy (http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021038. htm) navsource.org
Class history (http:/ / www. gyrodynehelicopters. com/ bronstein_class. htm) Gyrodyne Helicopter Historical
Foundation
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Bronstein class frigates.
Bronstein-class frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ bronsteinclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation
(http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
Bronstein info and photos (http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021037. htm)
McCloy info and photos (http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021038. htm)
Brooke-class frigate
8
Brooke-class frigate
USS Brooke (FFG-1)
Class overview
Builders: Lockheed Shipbuilding and Construction Company, Seattle, WA
Bath Iron Works
Operators: US Navy
Preceded by: Garcia class frigate
Succeededby: Knox class frigate and Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate
Built: 19621968
In commission: 19661989
Planned: 19
Completed: 6
Retired: 6
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile frigate
Displacement: 2,640 tons std
3,426tons full
Length: 414ft (126m)
Beam: 44ft (13m)
Draft: 14ft 6in (4.42m) (keel)
24ft (7.3m) (sonar)
Propulsion: 2 Foster-Wheeler boilers, 1 GE (1-3) or Westinghouse (4-6) geared turbine, 35,000 shp, 1 screw
Speed: 27.2knots
Range: 4,000nautical miles
Complement: 14 officers, 214 crew
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-52 3D air search radar
AN/SPS-10 surface search radar
AN/SPG-51 missile fire control radar
AN/SQS-26 bow mounted sonar
[1]
Brooke-class frigate
9
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32
Armament: 1 5"/38 caliber gun
1 Mk 22 RIM-24 Tartar/RIM-66 Standard missile launcher (16 missiles)
1 8 cell ASROC launcher
2 3 12.75 in (324mm) Mk 32 torpedo tubes, Mk 46 torpedoes
2 MK 37 torpedo tubes (fixed, stern, removed later)
Aircraft carried: 1 SH-2 Seasprite
The Brooke class was a United States Navy frigate class that is based on the Garcia class, but with the addition of
the Tartar Guided Missile Fire Control System. The first unit was commissioned in 1966 and the final sixth unit was
decommissioned in 1989.
Description
Brooke class ships were nearly identical to the Garcia class, except the second 5"/38 caliber gun was replaced with a
Tartar missile system and electronics. Brooke class ships also had the AN/SPS-52 3D air search radar instead of the
two dimension AN/SPS-40 and added the AN/SPG-51 for target tracking and missile guidance. The Mk 22, single
arm, 16 missile launcher was placed midships.
FFG-1 through FFG-3 had a Westinghouse geared steam turbine while FFG-4 through FFG-6 employed a General
Electric turbine. All ships had two Foster-Wheeler boilers. FFG-4 through FFG-6 had an angled base of the bridge
structure behind the ASROC launcher for automatic reloading.
The Brooke class was originally designed to carry the DASH drone, but were later equipped with LAMPS SH-2
Seasprite after the hangar was enlarged.
[2]
Oliver Hazard Perry class systems were evaluated on USSTalbot(FFG-4) including the Otobreda 76 mm gun, the
AN/SQS-56 sonar and other systems.
[3]
Initially authorized as guided missile destroyer escorts (DEG), FFG-1 through FFG-3 were authorized in FY1962
while FFG-4 through FFG-6 were authorized in FY1963. Plans called for ten more ships to be authorized in FY1964
and possibly three more in later years, but those plans were dropped because of the $11 million higher cost of the
DEG over an FF.
Units
Ship Name Hull
No.
Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
USSBrooke(FFG-1) FFG-1 Lockheed Shipbuilding and
Construction Company, Seattle
19661988 Disposed of by Navy title transfer to the
Maritime Administration, 28 March 1994
[4]
USSRamsey(FFG-2) FFG-2 Lockheed Shipbuilding and
Construction Company, Seattle
19671988 Disposed of in support of Fleet training
exercise, 15 June 2000
[5]
USSSchofield(FFG-3) FFG-3 Lockheed Shipbuilding and
Construction Company, Seattle
19681988 Disposed of in support of Fleet training
exercise, 11/02/1999
[6]
USSTalbot(FFG-4) FFG-4 Bath Iron Works 19671988 Disposed of by Navy title transfer to the
Maritime Administration, 28 March 1994
[7]
USSRichard L.
Page(FFG-5)
FFG-5 Bath Iron Works 19671988 Disposed of by Navy title transfer to the
Maritime Administration, 28 March 1994
[8]
USSJulius A.
Furer(FFG-6)
FFG-6 Bath Iron Works 19671989 Disposed of by Navy title transfer to the
Maritime Administration, 28 March 1994
[9]
Brooke-class frigate
10
Gallery
Talbot with angled
bridge structure for
automated ASROC
loading.
Ramsey's SPS-52, black panel at center and
AN/SPG-51, dish at right.
Schofield underway near San Diego,
CA
Notes
[1] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Sonars, Part 1" United States Naval Institute Proceedings July 1981 p.119
[2] Moore, John. Janes American Fighting Ships of the 20th Century. p185. Mallard Press, 1991. ISBN 0-7924-5626-2.
[3] GlobalSecurity.org Brooke class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ ffg-1. htm).
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG1.htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG2.htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG3.htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG4.htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG5.htm
[9] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG6.htm
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Brooke class frigates.
Brooke-class guided missile frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar. asp?class=BrookeClass) at Destroyer
History Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ ffg-1. htm
Knox-class frigate
11
Knox-class frigate
Knox-class frigate USS Robert E. Peary (FF-1073) and the skyline of San Francisco in the background
Class overview
Builders: Todd Shipyard, Seattle and San Pedro
Lockheed Shipbuilding and Construction Company
Avondale Shipyard
Operators: United States Navy
Republic of China Navy
Egyptian Navy
Hellenic Navy
Mexican Navy
Royal Thai Navy
Turkish Navy
Preceded by: Garcia-class frigate / Brooke-class frigate
Succeededby: Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
Built: 19651974
In commission: 19691994 (USN)
Completed: 46
Retired: 46 (USN)
General characteristics
Type: Frigate
Displacement: 4,260 tons (full load)
Length: 438ft (134m)
Beam: 46ft 9in (14.25m)
Draft: 24ft 9in (7.54m)
Propulsion: 1 shaft, one Westinghouse steam turbine, 2 V2M boilers. total 35,000 shp (maximum)
Speed: over 27 knots (50km/h)
Complement: 17 officers, 240 enlisted
Knox-class frigate
12
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-10 Surface Search Radar
AN/SPS-40 Air Search Radar
AN/SPS-67 Surface Search Radar
AN/SQS-26 Sonar
AN/SQR-18 Towed array sonar system
AN/SPG-53 Mk68 Gun Fire Control System
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
As Built AN/WLR-1C - AN/ULQ-6C and AN/SLA-15 (Comprising AN/SLQ-26
System)
AN/SLQ-32 Electronics Warfare System and Mark 36 SRBOC
Armament: one Mk-16 8 cell missile launcher for ASROC and Harpoon missiles
one Mk-42 5-inch/54 caliber gun
Mark 46 torpedoes from two dual tube launchers)
RIM-7 Sea Sparrow (BPDMS) or Phalanx CIWS
Aircraft carried: One SH-2 Seasprite (LAMPS I) helicopter
Knox-class frigates were United States Navy warships, originally laid down as ocean escorts (formerly called
destroyer escorts), but were all redesignated as frigates on 30 June 1975 in the USN 1975 ship reclassification and
their hull designation changed from DE to FF.
A sub-class of the Knox class was built, commonly referred to as the Hewes class. The primary differences were
slightly different arrangement of the "Officer's Country" staterooms with additional staterooms in the 01 level
instead of the open deck between the boat decks. The stateroom on the port side under the bridge was designated as a
"flag" stateroom, with the additional staterooms for flag staff when serving as a flagship.
History
The 46 ships of the Knox class were the largest, last and most numerous of the US Navys second-generation ASW
escorts. The lead ship of the class was the USSKnox(FF-1052), laid down 5 October 1965 and commissioned 12
April 1969, at Todd Shipyards in Seattle. Planned as the follow-on to the twin 5-inch gun armed
Garcia-classfrigates and the Tartar missile-equipped Brooke-classfrigates, their initial design incorporated the prior
classes pressure-fired boilers (the design later was changed to conventional 1,200psi (8,300kPa) boilers) in a
similar-sized hull designed around the massive bow-mounted AN/SQS-26 sonar.
Ten ships were authorized in FY 1964, sixteen in 1965 and ten each for FYs 1966, 67 and 68; six were canceled in
1968 and four more in 1969. They were built in four different shipyards and were originally commissioned as
destroyer escorts (DEs) 10521097 in 19691974, they were redesignated as frigates (FF) on 30 June 1975.
In February 1972, after encountering a severe Nor'Easter off Cape Hatteras, the U.S.S. Trippe (1075) suffered major
damage to its ASROC missile launcher, which was ripped off its mounts. The Bureau of Ships ordered all of the
Knox class to have a retrofit "hurricane bow" which heighted the bow section to prevent burrowing into on-coming
seas and to protect the forecastle armament.
The Knox class was the Navys last destroyer-type design with a steam turbine powerplant.
Due to their unequal comparison to destroyers then in service (large size with low speed and a single screw and 5
inch gun), they became known to a generation of destroyermen as McNamaras Folly.
[1]
These ships were retired from the US Navy at the end of the Cold War due to their relative high running costs, a
declining defense budget, and need for ships with a more advanced ASW capability. None of the ships served more
than 23 years in the US Navy, and by 1994 all of the class had been retired, although some remain in service with
foreign nations such as Egypt, Taiwan, Thailand, and Mexico.
Knox-class frigate
13
Description
Aerial view of Knox-class frigate USS
McCandless (FF-1084)
Overhead view of Knox-class frigate USS
Fanning (FF-1076)
These ships were designed primarily as antisubmarine warfare (ASW)
platforms. They each had AN/SQS-26 hull-mounted sonar
manufactured by General Electric and capable of active echo ranging
in the 3.2kHz range. The active modes of operation included
omni-directional, phased directional, bottom bounce, and convergence
zone. The battle displays included A and B scans. There was also a
"Unit 31" chart readout display capable of long-distance passive
detection, often well beyond the ranges capable of the surface search
radar. The frigates were also equipped with an AN/AQS-35V
Independent Variable Depth Sonar (IVDS) manufactured by EDO
Corporation of College Point, NY, operating actively in the 13kHz
range with dual Planned Position Indicator (PPI) battle displays. The
IVDS' sonar transducers were packaged within a 2 ton
fiberglass-enclosed "fish" containing the sonar array and a
gyro-compass/sensor package launched by the massive 13V Hoist from
a stern compartment, located just beneath the main deck, to depths of
up to 600 feet (180m). The IVDS could take advantage of water layer
temperature conditions in close-range (less than 20,000 yards
(18,290m) submarine detection, tracking and fire-control.
At 4,200 metric tons (4,130 tons), with a length of 438 feet (133.5
metres) and a beam of 47 feet (14.3 m), they are driven by a single
screw geared turbine developing 35,000 shaft horsepower (26 MW),
giving them a speed of 27 knots (50km/h). The steam plant for these ships consists of two Combustion Engineering
or Babcock & Wilcox "D" type boilers, each equipped with a high-pressure (supercharger) forced draught air supply
system, allowing a plant working pressure of 1,200 psi and 1000F superheat.
[2]
They were equipped with one 5 in (127 mm) 54 caliber Mark 42 gun forward, an ASROC abaft the gun and forward
of the bridge. Since they were single purpose platforms their surface defense capability was nominal; however they
did mount Harpoon missiles and Mk-44/46 torpedoes. The aft weapons point was originally outfitted with Mk 25
basic point defense missile systems (BPDMS) for launching Sea Sparrow missiles. These were eventually refitted
with a 20 millimetre Phalanx CIWS. They were equipped with a helicopter hangar aft.
Baleares class
Five modified ships were built in Spain for the Spanish Navy as the Baleares class frigates.
Chi Yang class
Knox-class frigate
14
Chi Yang class FFG-932
In the 1990s the US agreed to transfer 8 Knox class frigates to the
Republic of China Navy (ROCN). The ROCN planned to upgrade
these ships with new air defense, anti-submarine, and electronic
warfare capabilities, including new radar, towed active sonar, CIWS
guns, VL air defense missiles, active/passive electronic warfare
systems, etc. However, due to budget considerations and the
acquisition of newer ships, only a few upgrades were implemented.
These frigates were renamed the Chi Yang class and assigned to the
ROCN 168 Patrol Squadron.
[3]
By 2005 the ROCN had removed several systems from the retired
Gearing class upgraded World War II-vintage destroyers and transferred them to the Chi Yang class FFG. These
systems include SM-1MR Standard missile in box launchers, H-930 modular combat system, and DA-08 air/surface
search radar. Each Chi Yang class frigate has 10 SM-1 missiles installed in two forward twin box launchers on top of
the helicopter hangar, and two triple box launchers installed between the stack and the hangar, pointing to port and
starboard.
[4]
The anti-submarine capability of the Chi Yang class FFG is provided by its SQS-26 bow-mounted sonar, SQS-35(v)
VDS, SQR-18(v)1 passive TAS, MD500 ASW helicopter, Mk-16 8-cell Harpoon/ASROC box launcher, and 4 x
Mk46 324mm torpedoes. While on ASW patrol, the frigate will carry 2 x Harpoon SSMs and 6 x ASROCs in its
Mk-16 box launcher.
[5]
These ships will be upgraded with Hsiung Feng III missiles.
[6]
Units
Ship Name Hull No. Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
Knox FF-1052 Todd, Seattle 19691992 Sunk as target
[7]
Roark FF-1053 Todd, Seattle 19691991 Scrapped
[8]
Gray FF-1054 Todd, Seattle 19701991 Scrapped
[9]
Hepburn FF-1055 Todd, San Pedro 19691991 Sunk as target
[10]
Connole FF-1056 Avondale 19691992 To Greece, renamed Ipirus (F-456) Sunk as target
[11]
Rathburne FF-1057 Lockheed 19701992 Sunk as target
[12]
Meyerkord FF-1058 Todd, San Pedro 19691991 Scrapped
[13]
W. S. Sims FF-1059 Avondale 19701991 Grant aid to Turkey as spare parts hulk
[14]
Lang FF-1060 Todd, San Pedro 19701991 Scrapped
[15]
Patterson FF-1061 Avondale 19701991 Scrapped
[16]
Whipple FF-1062 Todd, Seattle 19701992 To Mexico, renamed Almirante Francisco Javier Mina (F-214)
[17]
Reasoner FF-1063 Lockheed 19711993 To Turkey, renamed Kocatepe (F-252)
[18]
Lockwood FF-1064 Todd, Seattle 19701993 Scrapped
[19]
Stein FF-1065 Lockheed 19721992 To Mexico, renamed Ignacio Allende (F-211)
[20]
Knox-class frigate
15
Marvin Shields FF-1066 Todd, Seattle 19711992 To Mexico, renamed Mariano Abasolo (F-212)
[21]
Francis Hammond FF-1067 Todd, San Pedro 19711992 Scrapped
[22]
Vreeland FF-1068 Avondale 19701992 To Greece, renamed Makedonia (F-458) Decommissioned
[23]
Bagley FF-1069 Lockheed 19721991 Scrapped
[24]
Downes FF-1070 Todd, Seattle 19711992 Sunk as target
[25]
Badger FF-1071 Todd, San Pedro 19701991 Sunk as target
[26]
Blakely FF-1072 Avondale 19701991 Scrapped
[27]
Robert E. Peary FF-1073 Lockheed 19721992 To Taiwan, renamed Chih Yang (FF-932)
[28]
Harold E. Holt FF-1074 Todd, San Pedro 19711992 Sunk as target
[29]
Trippe FF-1075 Avondale 19701992 To Greece, renamed Thraki (F-457) sunk as target
[30]
Fanning FF-1076 Todd, San Pedro 19711993 To Turkey, renamed Adatepe (F-251)
[31]
Ouellet FF-1077 Avondale 19701993 To Thailand, renamed HTMS. Phutthaloetla Naphalai (FFG 462)
[32]
Joseph Hewes FF-1078 Avondale 19711994 To Taiwan, renamed Lan Yang (FF-935)
[33]
Bowen FF-1079 Avondale 19711994 To Turkey, renamed Akdeniz (F-257)
[34]
Paul FF-1080 Avondale 19711992 To Turkey as spare parts hulk
[35]
Aylwin FF-1081 Avondale 19711992 To Taiwan, renamed Ning Yang (FF-938)
[36]
Elmer Montgomery FF-1082 Avondale 19711993 To Turkey as spare parts hulk
[37]
Cook FF-1083 Avondale 19711992 To Taiwan, renamed Hae Yang (FF-936)
[38]
McCandless FF-1084 Avondale 19721994 To Turkey, renamed Trakya (F-257)
[39]
Donald B. Beary FF-1085 Avondale 19721994 To Turkey, renamed Karadeniz (F-255)
[40]
Brewton FF-1086 Avondale 19721992 To Taiwan, renamed Fong Yang (FF-933)
[41]
Kirk FF-1087 Avondale 19721993 To Taiwan, renamed Fen Yang (FF-934)
[42]
Barbey FF-1088 Avondale 19721992 To Taiwan, renamed Hwai Yang (FF-937)
[43]
Jesse L. Brown FF-1089 Avondale 19731994 To Egypt, renamed Dumyat (F961)
[44]
Ainsworth FF-1090 Avondale 19731994 To Turkey, renamed Ege (F-256)
[45]
Miller FF-1091 Avondale 19731991 To Turkey as spare parts hulk
[46]
Thomas C. Hart FF-1092 Avondale 19731993 To Turkey, renamed Zafer (F-253)
[47]
Capodanno FF-1093 Avondale 19731993 To Turkey, renamed Muavenet (F-250)
[48]
Pharris FF-1094 Avondale 19741992 To Mexico, renamed ARM Guadalupe Victoria (F-213)
[49]
Truett FF-1095 Avondale 19741994 To Thailand, renamed HTMS. Phutthayotfa Chulalok (FFG 461)
[50]
Valdez FF-1096 Avondale 19741991 To Taiwan, renamed Ki Yang (FF-939)
[51]
Moinester FF-1097 Avondale 19741994 To Egypt, renamed Rasheed (F.962)
[52]
Knox-class frigate
16
References
[1] "Knox class" (http:/ / www. destroyerhistory.org/ coldwar/ knoxclass. html), www.destroyerhistory.org. Retrieved 3 November 2009.
[2] [2] Przelin and Baker 1990, p.807.
[3] GlobalSecurity.org. Chi Yang (http:/ / www.globalsecurity. org/ military/ world/ taiwan/ chi-yang. htm).
[4] 070402-P-Taiwan (http:/ / www1. apan-info. net/ Portals/ 45/ VIC_Products/ 2007/ 04/ 070402-P-Taiwan. doc)
[5] Emerald Designs. Destroyer (http:/ / www.emeraldesigns. com/ matchup/ destroyer. htm).
[6] "Taiwan to expand missile deployment to counter China's navy." (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ wmd/ library/ news/ taiwan/ 2013/
taiwan-130216-cna01. htm)
[7] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021052.htm
[8] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021053.htm
[9] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021054.htm
[10] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021055.htm
[11] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021056.htm
[12] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021057.htm
[13] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021058.htm
[14] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021059.htm
[15] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021060.htm
[16] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021061.htm
[17] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021062.htm
[18] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021063.htm
[19] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021064.htm
[20] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021065.htm
[21] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021066.htm
[22] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021067.htm
[23] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021068.htm
[24] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021069.htm
[25] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021070.htm
[26] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021071.htm
[27] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021072.htm
[28] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021073.htm
[29] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021074.htm
[30] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021075.htm
[31] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021076.htm
[32] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021077.htm
[33] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021078.htm
[34] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021079.htm
[35] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021080.htm
[36] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021081.htm
[37] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021082.htm
[38] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021083.htm
[39] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021084.htm
[40] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021085.htm
[41] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021086.htm
[42] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021087.htm
[43] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021088.htm
[44] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021089.htm
[45] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021090.htm
[46] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021091.htm
[47] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021092.htm
[48] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021093.htm
[49] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021094.htm
[50] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021095.htm
[51] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021096.htm
[52] http:/ / www.navsource. org/ archives/ 06/ 06021097.htm
Przelin, Bernard and A.D. Baker III (editors). The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World
1990/91:Their Ships, Aircraft and Armament. Annapolis, Maryland, USA:Naval Institute Press, 1990. ISBN
0-8721-250-8.
Knox-class frigate
17
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Knox class frigates.
Knox-class frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ knoxclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation (http:/ /
destroyerhistory. org/ )
Global Security (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ ff-1052. htm)
Federation of American Scientists (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ ff-1052. htm)
USS Brewton FF-1086 Home Page (http:/ / www. ussbrewton. com/ )
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
18
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
The frigates Oliver Hazard Perry, Antrim and Jack Williams in 1982
Class overview
Name: Oliver Hazard Perry
Builders: Bath Iron Works
Todd Pacific Shipyards San Pedro
Todd Pacific Shipyards Seattle
Australian Marine Engineering Consolidated
Bazan
China Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Royal Australian Navy
Royal Bahrain Naval Force
Republic of China Navy
Egyptian Navy
Pakistan Navy
Polish Navy
Spanish Navy
Turkish Navy
Preceded by: Brooke-classfrigate
Succeededby: Freedom-classlittoral combat ship
Independence-classlittoral combat ship
Subclasses: Adelaide class (Australia)
Santa Mara class (Spain)
Cheng Kung class (Taiwan)
Built: 19752004
In commission: 1977Present
Completed: 71
Active: 11 (US Navy)
General characteristics
Type: Frigate
Displacement: 4,100 long tons (4,200t) full load
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
19
Length: 408ft (124m) waterline,
445ft (136m) overall,
453ft (138m) for "long-hull" frigates
Beam: 45ft (14m)
Draft: 22ft (6.7m)
Propulsion: 2 General Electric LM2500-30 gas turbines generating 41,000shp (31MW) through a single shaft and
variable pitch propeller
2 Auxiliary Propulsion Units, 350hp (260kW) retractable electric azimuth thrusters for maneuvering and
docking.
Speed: over 29 knots (54km/h)
Range: 4,500nmi (8,300km; 5,200mi) at 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph)
Complement: 176
Sensors and
processing systems:
Radar: AN/SPS-49, AN/SPS-55, Mk 92 fire control system
Sonar: SQS-56, SQR-19 Towed Array
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
SLQ-32(V)2, Flight III with sidekick,
Mark 36 SRBOC
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie
Armament: One single-arm Mk 13 Missile Launcher with a 40-missile magazine that contains SM-1MR anti-aircraft
guided missiles and Harpoon anti-ship missiles. Removed from the U.S. Navy ships starting in 2003, due to
the retirement of the SM-1 missile from American service
Mk 38 Mod 2 Naval Gun Systems installed on platforms over the removed MK 13 launchers
Two triple Mark 32 Anti-submarine warfare torpedo tubes with Mark 46 or Mark 50 anti-submarine warfare
torpedoes
One OTO Melara 76 mm/62 caliber naval gun
One 20 mm Phalanx CIWS rapid-fire cannon
Eight Hsiung Feng II SSM or four HF-2 and 4 HF-3 supersonic AShM, plus 2 Bofors 40mm/L70 guns (on
Taiwanese vessels only)
Aircraft carried: Two LAMPS multi-purpose helicopters (the SH-2 Seasprite LAMPS I on the short-hulled ships or the SH-60
Seahawk LAMPS III on the long-hulled ships)
The Oliver Hazard Perry class is a class of frigates named after the American Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry, the
hero of the naval Battle of Lake Erie. Also known as the Perry or FFG-7 class, the warships were designed in the
United States in the mid-1970s as general-purpose escort vessels inexpensive enough to be bought in large quantities
to replace World War II-era destroyers and 1960s-era Knox class frigates. Intended to protect amphibious landing
forces, supply and replenishment groups, and merchant convoys from submarines, they also later were part of
battleship-centric surface action groups and aircraft carrier battle groups/strike groups.
[1]
Fifty-five ships were built
in the United States: 51 for the United States Navy and four for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). In addition, eight
were built in Taiwan, six in Spain, and two in Australia for their navies. Former U.S. Navy warships of this class
have been sold or donated to the navies of Bahrain, Egypt, Poland, Pakistan, and Turkey.
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
20
Design and construction
Outboard profile of the "long-hull" design.
The ships were designed by the Bath Iron
Works shipyard in Maine in partnership
with the New York-based naval architects
Gibbs & Cox.
The Oliver Hazard Perry-class ships were
produced in 445-foot (136 meter) long
"short-hull" (Flight I) and 453-foot (138
meter) long "long-hull" (Flight III) variants.
The long-hull ships (FFG 8, 28, 29, 32, 33,
and 36-61) carry the larger SH-60 Seahawk
LAMPS III helicopters, while the short-hulled warships carry the smaller and less-capable SH-2 Seasprite LAMPS I.
Aside from the lengths of their hulls, the principal difference between the versions is the location of the aft capstan:
on long-hull ships, it sits a step below the level of the flight deck in order to provide clearance for the tail rotor of the
longer Seahawk helicopters. The long-hull ships also carry the RAST (Recovery Assist Securing and Traversing)
system for the Seahawk, a hook, cable, and winch system that can reel in a Seahawk from a hovering flight,
expanding the ship's pitch-and-roll range in which flight operations are permitted. The FFG 8, 29, 32, and 33 were
built as "short-hull" warships but were later modified into "long-hull" warships. Oliver Hazard Perry-class Frigates
were the second class of surface ship (after the Spruance-class destroyers) in the US Navy to be built with gas
turbine propulsion. The gas turbine propulsion plant was more automated than other Navy propulsion plants at the
time and could be centrally monitored and controlled from a remote engineering control center away from the
engines. The gas turbine propulsion plants also allowed the ship's speed to be controlled directly from the bridge via
a throttle control, a first for the US Navy.
American shipyards constructed Oliver Hazard Perry-class ships for the U.S. Navy and the Royal Australian Navy
(RAN). Early American-built Australian ships were originally built as the "short-hull" version, but they were
modified during the 1980s to the "long-hull" design. Shipyards in Australia, Spain, and Taiwan have produced
several warships of the "long-hull" design for their navies.
Scheme of the combat systems of the Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate.
Although the per-ship costs rose
greatlyWikipedia:Citation needed over the
period of production, all 51 ships planned
for the U.S. Navy were built. Some Oliver
Hazard Perry-class warships are planned to
remain in American service for years, but
some of the older ships have been
decommissioned and some scrapped. Others
of these decommissioned ships have been
transferred to the navies of other countries,
including Bahrain, Egypt, Poland, Pakistan,
and Turkey. Several of these have replaced
old Second World War-built American
destroyers that had been given to those
countries.
During the design phase of the Oliver Hazard Perry class, head of the Royal Corps of Naval Constructors, R.J.
Daniels, was invited by an old friend, US Chief of the Bureau of Ships, Adm Robert C Gooding, to advise upon the
use of variable-pitch propellers in the class. During the course of this conversation, Daniels warned Gooding against
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
21
the use of aluminium in the superstructure of the FFG-7 class as he believed it would lead to structural weaknesses.
A number of ships subsequently developed structural cracks, including a 40ft fissure in USS Duncan, before the
problems were remedied.
[2]
The Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates were designed primarily as anti-aircraft and anti-submarine warfare
guided-missile warships intended to provide open-ocean escort of amphibious warfare ships and merchant ship
convoys in moderate threat environments in a potential war with the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries.
They could also provide air defense against 1970s- and 1980s-era aircraft and anti-ship missiles. These warships are
equipped to escort and protect aircraft carrier battle groups, amphibious landing groups, underway replenishment
groups, and merchant ship convoys. They can conduct independent operations to perform such tasks as surveillance
of illegal drug smugglers, maritime interception operations, and exercises with other nations.
[3]
The addition of the Naval Tactical Data System, LAMPS helicopters, and the Tactical Towed Array System
(TACTAS) gave these warships a combat capability far beyond the original expectations. They are well-suited for
the littoral regions and most war-at-sea scenarios.
Notable combat actions
USS Stark listing to port following an air attack
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates made worldwide news twice during
the 1980s. Despite being small, these frigates were shown to be
extremely durable. During the IranIraq War, on 17 May 1987, the
USSStark was attacked by an Iraqi warplane. Struck by two Exocet
anti-ship missiles, thirty-seven American sailors died in the deadly
prelude to the American Operation Earnest Will, the reflagging and
escorting of oil tankers through the Persian Gulf and the Straits of
Hormuz. Less than a year later, on 14 April 1988, the Samuel B.
Roberts was nearly sunk by an Iranian mine. No lives were lost, but 10
sailors were evacuated from the warship for medical treatment. The
Roberts crew battled fire and flooding for 2 days, ultimately managing to save the ship. The U.S. Navy retaliated
four days later with Operation Praying Mantis, a one-day attack on Iranian oil platforms being used as bases for raids
on merchant shipping. Those had included bases for the minelaying operations that damaged the Samuel B. Roberts.
Both frigates were repaired in American shipyards and returned to full service. The USS Stark was decommissioned
in 1999, and scrapped in 2006.
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
22
Modifications
United States
The U.S. Navy and Royal Australian Navy has modified its remaining Perrys to reduce their operating costs,
replacing Detroit Diesel Company 16V149TI electrical generators with Caterpillar, Inc.-made diesel engines.
In mid-2000, the U.S.Navy removed the frigates' Mk 13 single-arm missile launchers and magazines because the
primary missile, the Standard SM-1MR, became outmoded.
USSRodney M. Davis(FFG-60) after the
removal of her foredeck Mk 13 missile launcher.
The "zone-defense" anti-aircraft warfare (AAW) capability has
vanished, and all that remains is a "point-defense" type of AAW
armament. It would supposedly have been too costly to refit the
Standard Missile SM-1MR missiles, which had little ability to bring
down sea-skimming missiles. Another reason is to allow more
SM-1MRs to go to American allies that operate Perrys, such as Poland,
Spain, Australia, Turkey, and Taiwan.
The loss of the launchers also strips the frigates of their Harpoon
anti-ship missiles. However, their Seahawk helicopters can carry the
much shorter-range Penguin and Hellfire anti-ship missiles.
The last nine ships of the class have new remotely operated 25-mm Mk 38 Mod 2 Naval Gun Systems installed on
platforms over the old MK 13 launcher magazine.
As of 2002, the U.S. Navy had updated the remaining active Oliver Hazard Perry-class warships' Phalanx CIWS to
the "Block 1B" capability, which allowed the Mk 15 20mm Phalanx gun to shoot at fast-moving surface craft and
helicopters. They were also to be fitted with the Mk 53 DLS "Nulka" missile decoy system, which will be better than
the presently-equipped chaff (SRBOC, Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff) and flares at guarding against
anti-ship missiles. It had been planned to outfit the remaining ships with one 32-cell RIM-116 Rolling Airframe
Missile launcher at the location of the former Mk-13, but this did not occur.
[4]
On June 16, 2009, Vice Admiral Barry McCullough turned down the suggestion of then-U.S. Senator Mel Martinez
(R-FL) to keep the Perrys in service, citing their worn-out and maxed-out condition.
[5]
However, U.S.
Representative Ander Crenshaw (R-FL) and former U.S. Representative Gene Taylor (D-MS) took up the cause to
retain the vessels.
[6]
The Perry-class frigates were to eventually be replaced by Littoral Combat Ships by 2019. However, the worn out
frigates are being retired faster than the LCSs are being built, which may lead to a gap in United States Southern
Command mission coverage.
[7]
According to Navy deactivation plans, all Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates will be
retired by October 2015, leaving the U.S. Navy without a frigate class of ships in over 70 years. The Kauffman will
be the last to be retired, scheduled for 21 September 2015, which will leave the Navy devoid of frigates for the first
time since 1943. The ships will either be made available for sale to foreign navies or dismantled.
[8]
Australia
Australia is spending A$1.46bn to upgrade Royal Australian Navy (RAN) Adelaide-class guided-missile frigates,
including equipping them to fire the SM-2 version of the Standard missile, adding an eight-cell Mk-41
[9]
vertical
launch system for Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles, and installing better air-search radars and long-range sonar.
The first of the upgraded frigates, HMASSydney, returned to the RAN fleet in 2005. Each of the four frigates to be
upgraded have the work at the Garden Island shipyard in Sydney, Australia, with the modernizations lasting between
18 months and two years. These frigates are planned to be replaced starting in 2013 by three new Hobart-class air
warfare destroyers equipped with the AEGIS combat system. However, the third of those destroyers will not be
commissioned until 2017, at the earliest.
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
23
The cost will be partly offset, in the short run, by the decommissioning and disposal of the two older frigates.
HMASCanberra was decommissioned on 12 November 2005 at naval base HMASStirling in Western Australia
and HMASAdelaide was decommissioned at that same naval base on 20 January 2008.
Turkey
The Turkish Navy had commenced the modernization of its G class frigates with the GENESIS (Gemi Entegre Sava
dare Sistemi) combat management system in 2007.
[10]
The first GENESIS upgraded ship was delivered in 2007, and
the last delivery is scheduled for 2011.
[11]
The "short-hull" Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates that are currently part
of the Turkish Navy were modified with the ASIST landing platform system at the Glck Naval Shipyard, so that
they can accommodate the S-70B Seahawk helicopters. Turkey is planning to add one eight-cell Mk 41 Vertical
Launching Systems (VLS) for the Evolved Sea Sparrow missile, to be installed forward of the present Mk 13 missile
launchers, similar to the case in the modernization program of the Australian Adelaide class frigates.
[12][13][14]
F-495
TCG Gediz was the first ship in the class to receive the Mk 41 VLS installation.
[15]
There are also plans for new
components to be installed that are being developed for the Milgem class warships (Ada class corvettes and F-100
class frigates) of the Turkish Navy. These include modern Three-dimensional and X-band radars developed by
Aselsan and Turkish-made hull-mounted sonars. One of the G class frigates will also be used as a test-bed for
Turkey's 6,000+ ton TF-2000 class anti-aircraft warfare (AAW) frigates that are currently being designed by the
Turkish Naval Institute.
Operators
Australia (Adelaide class): The Royal Australian Navy purchased six frigates. Four of them were built in the
United States while the other two were built in Australia. Four of the ships were upgraded with the addition of an
eight-cell Mk 41 VLS with 32 Evolved Sea Sparrow (ESSM) missiles, and the Standard Missile SM-2, plus
upgraded radars and sonars while the other two ships were decommissioned.
Bahrain: USSJack Williams was purchased from the American government in 1996 and re-christened
Sabha.
Egypt: Four Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates transferred from the U.S. Navy.
Pakistan: Six to be transferred,
[16]
The former USSMcInerney transferred to Pakistani Navy in August
2010.
[17]
Poland: Two frigates were transferred from the U.S. Navy in 2002 and 2003.
Taiwan (Cheng Kung-class): Taiwanese-built. Originally eight ships were equipped with eight Hsiung Feng
II anti-ship missiles, now all but PFG-1103 are carrying four HF-2 and four HF-3 supersonic AShM. The
PFG-1103 Cheng Ho will change the anti-ship mix upon their major overhaul. Seven out of eight ships added
Bofors 40mm/L70 guns for both surface and anti-air use. On November 5, 2012 Minister of Defense Kao
announced the U.S. government will sell Taiwan two additional Perry-class frigates that are about to be retired
from the U.S. Navy for a cost of US$240 million to be retrofitted and delivered in 2015.
[18]
Spain (Santa Maria class): Spanish-built: six frigates.
Turkey (G class): Eight former U.S. Navy Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates have been transferred to the
Turkish Navy. All have undergone extensive advanced modernization programs, and they are now known as the
G Class frigates. The Turkish Navy modernized G Class frigates have an additional Mk-41 Vertical Launch
System capable of launching Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles for close-in, as well as their longer-range SM-1
missiles; advanced digital fire control systems and new Turkish-made sonars.
Thailand: Two former U.S. Navy Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates are allocated by the US government to
the Royal Thai Navy, subject to acceptance by the Thai government: the former USSRentz and
USSVandegrift.
[19]
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
24
United States: The U.S. Navy commissioned 51 FFG-7 class frigates between 1977 and 1989. As of early
2014, 11 long-hull Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates remain in active service.
On May 11, 2009, the first International Frigate Working Group met in Mayport Naval Station to discuss
maintenance, obsolescence and logistics issues regarding Oliver Hazard Perry-class ships of the U.S. and foreign
navies.
[20]
The Oliver Hazard Perry frigates
Ship Name Hull
No.
Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
U.S.-built
Oliver Hazard Perry FFG-7 Bath Iron Works 19771997 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling, 21 April
2006
[21]
McInerney FFG-8 Bath Iron Works 19792010 Transferred to Pakistan as PNS Alamgir (F-260)
[22]
Wadsworth FFG-9 Todd Pacific Shipyards
(Todd), San Pedro
19782002 Transferred to Poland as ORP Gen. T. Kociuszko
(273)
[23]
Duncan FFG-10 Todd, Seattle 19801994 Transferred to Turkey as a parts hulk
[24]
Clark FFG-11 Bath Iron Works 19802000 Transferred to Poland as ORP Gen. K. Puaski
(272)
[25]
George Philip FFG-12 Todd, San Pedro 19802003 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 24 May 2004
[26]
Samuel Eliot Morison FFG-13 Bath Iron Works 19802002 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Gokova (F 496)
[27]
Sides FFG-14 Todd, San Pedro 19812003 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 24 May 2004
[28]
Estocin FFG-15 Bath Iron Works 19812003 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Goksu (F 497)
[29]
Clifton Sprague FFG-16 Bath Iron Works 19811995 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Gaziantep (F 490)
[30]
built for Australia as
HMASAdelaide
FFG-17 Todd, Seattle 19802008 Disposed, sunk as diving & fishing reef, 13 April
2011
[31]
built for Australia as
HMASCanberra
FFG-18 Todd, Seattle 19812005 Disposed, sunk as diving & fishing reef, 4 October
2009
[32]
John A. Moore FFG-19 Todd, San Pedro 19812000 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Gediz (F 495)
[33]
Antrim FFG-20 Todd, Seattle 19811996 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Giresun (F 491)
[34]
Flatley FFG-21 Bath Iron Works 19811996 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Gemlik (F 492))
[35]
Fahrion FFG-22 Todd, Seattle 19821998 Transferred to Egypt as Sharm El-Sheik (F 901)
[36]
Lewis B. Puller FFG-23 Todd, San Pedro 19821998 Transferred to Egypt as Toushka (F 906)
[37]
Jack Williams FFG-24 Bath Iron Works 19811996 Transferred to Bahrain as RBNSSabha(FFG-90)
[38]
Copeland FFG-25 Todd, San Pedro 19821996 Transferred to Egypt as Mubarak (F 911), renamed
Alexandria in 2011
[39]
Gallery FFG-26 Bath Iron Works 19811996 Transferred to Egypt as Taba (F 916)
[40]
Mahlon S. Tisdale FFG-27 Todd, San Pedro 19821996 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Gokceada (F 494)
[41]
Boone FFG-28 Todd, Seattle 19822012 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 23 February
2012
[42]
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
25
Stephen W. Groves FFG-29 Bath Iron Works 19822012 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 24 February
2012
[43]
Reid FFG-30 Todd, San Pedro 19831998 Transferred to Turkey as TCG Gelibolu (F 493)
[44]
Stark FFG-31 Todd, Seattle 19821999 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling, 21 June
2006
[45]
John L. Hall FFG-32 Bath Iron Works 19822012 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 9 March 2012
[46]
Jarrett FFG-33 Todd, San Pedro 19832011 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 26 May 2011
[47]
Aubrey Fitch FFG-34 Bath Iron Works 19821997 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling, 19 May
2005
[48]
built for Australia as
HMASSydney
FFG-35 Todd, Seattle 1983- In active service (Royal Australian Navy)
[49]
Underwood FFG-36 Bath Iron Works 1983-2013 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 8 March 2013
[50]
Crommelin FFG-37 Todd, Seattle 1983-2012 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 26 October
2012
[51]
Curts FFG-38 Todd, San Pedro 1983-2013 Decommissioned, on hold for foreign military sale,
25 January 2013
[52]
Doyle FFG-39 Bath Iron Works 1983-2011 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 29 July 2011
[53]
Halyburton FFG-40 Todd, Seattle 1983- In active service, to be decommissioned 8
September 2014
[54]
McClusky FFG-41 Todd, San Pedro 1983- In active service, to be decommissioned January
2015
[55]
Klakring FFG-42 Bath Iron Works 19832013 Decommissioned, on hold for foreign military sale,
22 March 2013
[56]
Thach FFG-43 Todd, San Pedro 1984-2013 Decommissioned, on hold for foreign military sale,
1 November 2013
[57]
built for Australia as
HMASDarwin
FFG-44 Todd, Seattle 1984- In active service (Royal Australian Navy)
[57]
De Wert FFG-45 Bath Iron Works 1983-2014 Decommissioned, on hold for foreign military sale,
4 April 2014
[58]
Rentz FFG-46 Todd, San Pedro 1984-2014 Decommissioned 9 May 2014
[59]
Nicholas FFG-47 Bath Iron Works 1984-2014 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 17 March
2014
[60]
Vandegrift FFG-48 Todd, Seattle 1984- In active service, to be decommissioned March
2015
[61]
Robert G. Bradley FFG-49 Bath Iron Works 1984-2014 Decommissioned, on hold for foreign military sale,
28 March 2014
[62]
Taylor FFG-50 Bath Iron Works 1984- In active service, to be decommissioned May 2015
[63]
Gary FFG-51 Todd, San Pedro 1984- In active service, to be decommissioned August
2015
[64]
Carr FFG-52 Todd, Seattle 1985-2013 Decommissioned, on hold for foreign military sale,
13 March 2013
[65]
Hawes FFG-53 Bath Iron Works 19852010 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 10 December
2010
[66]
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
26
Ford FFG-54 Todd, San Pedro 1985-2013 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 31 October
2013
[67]
Elrod FFG-55 Bath Iron Works 1985- In active service, to be decommissioned January
2015
[68]
Simpson FFG-56 Bath Iron Works 1985- In active service, to be decommissioned August
2015
[69]
Reuben James FFG-57 Todd, San Pedro 1986-2013 Decommissioned, to be disposed of, 30 August
2013
[70]
Samuel B. Roberts FFG-58 Bath Iron Works 1986- In active service, to be decommissioned May 2015
[71]
Kauffman FFG-59 Bath Iron Works 1987- In active service, to be decommissioned September
2015
[72]
Rodney M. Davis FFG-60 Todd, San Pedro 1987- In active service, to be decommissioned March
2015
[73]
Ingraham FFG-61 Todd, San Pedro 1989- In active service, to be decommissioned January
2015
[74]
Ship Name Hull No. Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
Australian-built
HMASMelbourne FFG 05 Australian Marine Engineering Consolidated (AMECON),
Williamstown, Victoria
1992- In active
service
HMASNewcastle FFG 06 AMECON, Williamstown 1993- In active
service
Spanish-built
SPS Santa Mara F81 Bazan, Ferrol 1986- In active
service
SPS Victoria F82 Bazan, Ferrol 1987- In active
service
SPS Numancia F83 Bazan, Ferrol 1989- In active
service
SPS Reina Sofa F84 Bazan, Ferrol 1990- In active
service
SPS Navarra F85 Bazan, Ferrol 1994- In active
service
SPS Canarias F86 Bazan, Ferrol 1994- In active
service
Taiwan-built (Republic of China)
ROCS Cheng Kung PFG-1101 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1993- In active
service
ROCS Cheng Ho PFG-1103 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1994- In active
service
ROCS Chi Kuang PFG-1105 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1995- In active
service
ROCS Yueh Fei PFG-1106 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1996- In active
service
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
27
ROCS Tzu I PFG-1107 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1997- In active
service
ROCS Pan Chao PFG-1108 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1997- In active
service
ROCS Chang
Chien
PFG-1109 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1998- In active
service
ROCS Tian Dan PFG-1110 China Shipbuilding, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 2004- In active
service
Related legislation
On April 7, 2014, the United States House of Representatives voted to pass the Taiwan Relations Act Affirmation
and Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2014 (H.R. 3470; 113th Congress), a bill that would allow eight more Perry
frigates to be transferred to foreign countries. The bill would authorize the President to transfer Curts and McClusky
to Mexico, and Rentz and Vandegrift to Thailand. The bill would also authorize the President to sell four units
(Taylor, Gary, Carr, and Elrod) to the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office of the United States
(which is the Taiwan instrumentality designated pursuant to the Taiwan Relations Act) for about $10 million each.
References
[1] [1] pp.42
[2] Daniels, R.J, p.219, The End Of An Era: The Memoirs Of a Naval Constructor, Periscope Publishing Ltd, 2004, ISBN 1-904381-18-9, ISBN
978-1-904381-18-1
[3] [3] Raleigh Clayton Muns, Oliver Hazard Perry Class Frigates: United States Navy (2010), p.3
[4] The Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet Norman Polmar. Naval Institute Press, 2005. page 161
[5] Navy has few FFG options to fill LCS gap (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 06/ navy_lcs_gap_061609w/ )
[6] Mayport frigates may get reprieve (http:/ / jacksonville. bizjournals. com/ jacksonville/ stories/ 2010/ 04/ 05/ daily43. html)
[7] Faram, Mark D. "Keeping frigates running no easy feat for crews." (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2012/ 05/
navy-crews-struggle-to-maintain-frigates-052912/ ) Navy Times, May 29, 2012.
[8] Decommissioning plan pulls all frigates from fleet by end of FY '15 (http:/ / www. militarytimes. com/ article/ 20140702/ NEWS04/
307020082/ Decommissioning-plan-pulls-all-frigates-from-fleet-by-end-FY-15) - Militarytimes.com, 2 July 2014
[9] http:/ / www. defenseindustrydaily.com/ mk-41-naval-vertical-missile-launch-systems-delivered-supported-updated-02139/
[10] Undersecretariat of Turkish Defence Industries: GENESIS modernization program (http:/ / www. ssm. gov. tr/ en/ projeler/ mebs/ prjgrpc3/
pages/ genesis__d. aspx)
[11] Turkish Navy official website: GENESIS modernization program (http:/ / www. dzkk. tsk. mil. tr/ turkce/ Modernizasyon.
asp?strAnaFrame=Modernizasyon& strIFrame=GENESISProjesi& intSelect=1)
[12] MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems for Turkish Navy : Naval Forces : Defense News Air Force Army Navy News (http:/ / www. defencetalk.
com/ news/ publish/ navy/ MK_41_Vertical_Launch_Systems_for_Turkish_Navy120015502. php)
[13] MK 41 Naval Vertical Missile Launch Systems Delivered, Supported (updated) (http:/ / www. defenseindustrydaily. com/
mk-41-naval-vertical-missile-launch-systems-delivered-supported-updated-02139/ )
[14] FMS: Turkey Requests MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems (http:/ / www. deagel. com/ news/
FMS-Turkey-Requests-MK-41-Vertical-Launch-Systems_n000004036. aspx)
[15] Turkishnavy.net: First Turkish Perry With Mk-41 VLS (http:/ / turkishnavy. net/ 2011/ 03/ 19/ first-turkish-perry-with-mk-41-vls-on/ )
[16] Official Website - Frigates (http:/ / www.paknavy.gov. pk/ frigate. htm)
[17] Pakistan to get refurbished warship from US (http:/ / timesofindia. indiatimes. com/ World/ Pakistan/
Pakistan_to_get_refurbished_warship_from_US/ rssarticleshow/ 3615200. cms) Times of India, October 19, 2008
[18] "Taiwan to buy Perry-class frigates from U.S." (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ wmd/ library/ news/ taiwan/ 2012/ taiwan-121105-cna02.
htm)
[19] http:/ / defense-studies. blogspot. com/ 2013/ 01/ us-transfers-two-ohp-class-frigates-to. html
[20] Mayport hosts frigate working group (http:/ / www.beachesleader. com/ articles/ 2009/ 05/ 22/ beaches_leader/ news/
doc4a163ec72453d680518247. txt)
[21] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG7.htm
[22] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG8.htm
[23] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG9.htm
[24] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG10. htm
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
28
[25] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG11. htm
[26] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG12. htm
[27] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG13. htm
[28] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG14. htm
[29] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG15. htm
[30] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG16. htm
[31] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG17. htm
[32] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG18. htm
[33] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG19. htm
[34] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG20. htm
[35] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG21. htm
[36] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG22. htm
[37] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG23. htm
[38] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG24. htm
[39] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG25. htm
[40] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG26. htm
[41] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG27. htm
[42] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG28. htm
[43] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG29. htm
[44] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG30. htm
[45] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG31. htm
[46] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG32. htm
[47] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG33. htm
[48] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG34. htm
[49] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG35. htm
[50] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG36. htm
[51] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG37. htm
[52] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG38. htm
[53] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG39. htm
[54] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG40. htm
[55] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG41. htm
[56] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG42. htm
[57] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG43. htm
[58] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG45. htm
[59] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG46. htm
[60] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG47. htm
[61] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG48. htm
[62] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG49. htm
[63] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG50. htm
[64] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG51. htm
[65] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG52. htm
[66] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG53. htm
[67] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG54. htm
[68] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG55. htm
[69] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG56. htm
[70] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG57. htm
[71] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG58. htm
[72] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG59. htm
[73] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG60. htm
[74] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ FFG61. htm
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate
29
Further reading
Bruhn, David D., Steven C. Saulnier, and James L. Whittington (1997). Ready to Answer All Bells: A Blueprint
for Successful Naval Engineering. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. ISBN1-55750-227-7. (Operating a Perry
frigate)
Friedman, Norman (1982). U.S. Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN0-87021-733-X. (Contains material on frigates and Perrys in particular)
Levinson, Jeffrey L. and Randy L. Edwards (1997). Missile Inbound. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN1-55750-517-9. (Attack on the USS Stark (FFG 31) )
Peniston, Bradley (2006). No Higher Honor: Saving the USS Samuel B. Roberts in the Persian Gulf (http:/ /
www. navybook. com/ nohigherhonor). Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. ISBN1-59114-661-5. (Mining of the
USS Samuel B. Roberts (FFG 58) )
Snow, Ralph L. (1987). Bath Iron Works: The First Hundred Years. Bath, Maine: Maine Maritime Museum.
ISBN0-9619449-0-0. (The origin and construction of the Perrys, from the design shipyard's point of view.)
Wise, Harold Lee (2007). Inside the Danger Zone: The U.S. Military in the Persian Gulf 1987-88 (http:/ / www.
insidethedangerzone. com). Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. ISBN1-59114-970-3.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates.
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ oliverhazardperryclass/ ) at Destroyer
History Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates: United States Navy (http:/ / www. archive. org/ details/
OliverHazardPerryClassFrigatesUnitedStatesNavy) Wikipedia book created 20 October 2009 at Internet Archive
Official U.S. Navy Fact File: Frigates (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200&
tid=1300& ct=4)
FFG-7 OLIVER HAZARD PERRY-class: by the Federation of American Scientists (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/
dod-101/ sys/ ship/ ffg-7. htm)
MaritimeQuest Perry Class Overview (http:/ / www. maritimequest. com/ warship_directory/ us_navy_pages/
frigates/ pages/ oliver_hazard_perry_class_overview. htm)
Launch of FFG 58 (http:/ / www. navybook. com/ no-higher-honor/ timeline/ ffg-58-launched-at-bath-iron-works/
)
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
30
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
For the RCI cruise ship class, see Freedom-class cruise ship.
Freedom class
Freedom shows off her new camouflage scheme on sea trials in February 2013 before her first deployment
Class overview
Builders: Lockheed Martin
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: None
Cost:
$670.4 million
[1]
Built: 2005
In commission: 2008
Building: 2
Planned: 12
Completed: 2
Active: 2
General characteristics
Type: Littoral combat ship
Displacement:
3,000t (3,000t) (full load)
[2]
Length: 378ft (115m)
Beam: 57.4ft (17.5m)
Draft: 12.8ft (3.9m)
Installed power: Electrical: 4 Isotta Fraschini V1708 diesel engines, Hitzinger generator units, 800 kW each
Propulsion: 2 Rolls-Royce MT30 36 MW gas turbines, 2 Colt-Pielstick diesel engines, 4 Rolls-Royce waterjets
Speed:
47 knots (87km/h; 54mph) (sea state 3)
[3]
Range: 3,500nmi (6,500km; 4,000mi) at 18 knots (33km/h; 21mph)
Endurance: 21 days (336 hours)
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
31
Boats & landing
craft carried:
11m (36ft) RHIB, 40ft (12m) high-speed boats
Complement: 50 core crew, 65 with mission crew (Blue and Gold crews)
Sensors and
processing systems:
EADS North America TRS-3D air and surface search radar
Lockheed Martin COMBATSS-21 combat management system
AN/SQR-20 Multi-Function Towed Array (As part of ASW mission module)
[4][5]
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
Argon ST WBR-2000 ESM system
Terma A/S SKWS decoy system
Armament:
AGM-114L Hellfire missiles
[6]
1 BAE Systems Mk 110 57 mm gun, 400 rounds in turret and two ready service magazines with 240 rounds
each.
[7]
4 .50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns
2 30 mm Mk44 Bushmaster II guns
One Mk 49 launcher with 21 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile Surface-to-Air Missiles
Other weapons as part of mission modules
Aircraft carried: 2 MH-60R/S Seahawk
MQ-8 Fire Scout
Freedom in Feb 2013 showing her large helideck
& the RAM launcher on the hangar.
An MH-60 Seahawk helicopter approaching
USSFreedom in 2009
The Freedom class is one of two classes of littoral combat ship built
for the United States Navy.
The Freedom class was proposed by Lockheed Martin as a contender
for USN plans to build a fleet of small, multipurpose warships to
operate in the littoral zone. Two ships were approved, to compete with
the Independence-class design offered by General Dynamics and
Austal for a construction contract of up to 55 vessels.
As of 2013[8], two ships are active and a third is under construction.
Despite initial plans to only accept one of the Freedom and
Independence variants, the USN has requested that Congress order ten
ships of each variant.
Planning and construction
Planning for a class of small, multipurpose warships to operate in the
littoral zone began in the early 2000s. The construction contract was
awarded to Lockheed Martin's LCS team (Lockheed Martin, Gibbs &
Cox, Marinette Marine, Bollinger Shipyards) in May 2004 for two
vessels. These would then be compared to two ships built by Austal
USA to determine which design would be taken up by the Navy for a
production run of up to 55 ships.
On 15 April 2003, the Lockheed Martin LCS team unveiled their Sea Blade concept based on the hull form of the
motor yacht Destriero.
[9][10]
The keel of the lead ship USSFreedom was laid down in June 2005, by Marinette Marine in Marinette, Wisconsin.
She was christened in September 2006, delivered to the Navy in September 2008, and commissioned that
November.
[11]
During INSURV trials, 2,600 discrepancies were discovered, including 21 considered
high-priority.
[12]
Not all of these were rectified before the ship entered service, as moving the ship away from
Milwaukee before the winter freeze was considered a higher priority.
[13]
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
32
Cost overruns during Freedom's construction combined with projected future overruns led the government to issue a
"Stop-work" in January 2007 and ultimately led to the cancellation of construction of LCS-3 (the second Lockheed
Martin ship) on April 13, 2007.
[14]
This ship was later re-ordered.
After much inconsistency on how testing and orders were to proceed, in November 2010, the USN asked that
Congress approve ten of both the Freedom and Independence variants.
[15][16][17]
Design
The ship is a semi-planing steel monohull with an aluminum superstructure. It is 377 feet (115m) in length,
displaces 2,950 metric tons, and can go faster than 45 knots (83km/h; 52mph). The design incorporates a large
reconfigurable seaframe to allow rapidly interchangeable mission modules, a flight deck with integrated helicopter
launch, recovery and handling system and the capability to launch and recover boats (manned and unmanned) from
both the stern and side.
The flight deck is 1.5 times the size of that of a standard surface ship, and uses a Trigon traversing system to move
helicopters in and out of the hangar. The ship has two ways to launch and recover various mission packages: a stern
ramp and a starboard side door near the waterline. The mission module bay has a 3-axis crane for positioning
modules or cargo. Problems with the electrical systems are the most serious problems with the Freedom class.
[18]
The fore deck has a modular weapons zone which can be used for a 57mm gun turret or missile launcher. A Rolling
Airframe Missile launcher is mounted above the hangar for short-range defense against aircraft and cruise missiles,
and .50-caliber gun mounts are provided topside. The Fleet-class unmanned surface vessel is designed for operations
from Freedom variant ships.
The core crew will be 40 sailors, usually joined by a mission package crew and an aviation detachment for a total
crew of about 75. Automation allows a reduced crew, which greatly reduces operating costs, but workload can still
be "gruelling". During testing of the class lead, two ship's companies will rotate on four-month assignments.
Four 750-kilowatt Fincantieri Isotta-Fraschini diesel generators provide 3 megawatts of electrical power to power the
ship systems.
[19]
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that fuel will account for only "8 percent to 18 percent" of the total
life-cycle costs for Freedom.
[20]
Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama has called the report into question and has
suggested that the Independence, built in his state, would be more fuel efficient and that less frequent refuelings
would have an impact on military operations beyond the cost of fuel.
[21]
In 2012, a Navy cybersecurity team found major deficiencies in Lockheed's Total Ship Computing Environment,
which controls the entire ship in order to reduce crewing requirements.
Survivability has been a criticism of both Littoral Combat Ship classes, rated at level one by the Navy, compared to
level two for the FFG-7 Perry-class frigate they are designed to replace. Lockheed claims the Freedom-class is
actually more survivable than FFGs because Navy requirements of various survivability levels have changed since
the FFGs were assessed, and that the Freedoms' hull is made of high-strength, low-weight steel that was not
previously around.
[22]
The USS Milwaukee (LCS-5) was the first Freedom-class LCS to be fitted with cavitation performance waterjets.
The jets create partial vacuums in liquid using an improved impeller blade design. Cavitation jets do not increase the
ship's top speed, but deliver 10 percent greater fuel efficiency with less noise and vibration, reduced life-cycle costs,
improved maintainability, increased availability, and potentially improved efficiency at lower speeds. The Navy
plans to add the new waterjets to every Freedom variant that is produced, including LCS 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13.
[23]
The
mixed flow design was changed to an axial design to push water parallel to the shaft of the impeller.
[24]
The first ships of both LCS classes were delivered before the designs were mature so that improvements could be
built into future ships. Many improvements to the Freedom-class came from the problems experienced by the USS
Freedom (LCS-1) on its first deployment including power outages, corroded equipment, a faulty air compressor. To
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
33
prevent water being taken into the anchor windlass room, the anchor winch, hydraulic unit, and mooring capstan
were replaced with a single electric chain winch on the main deck, and the existing towing chain was replaced with a
lighter chain. Corrosion resistance was also improved by the Impressed Current Cathodic Protection system being
modified by adding protections to the water jet inlet tunnel. Starting with LCS-3, the stern transom was lengthened
and buoyancy tanks were added to the stern to increase weight service and enhance stability. A significantly less
complex gas turbine electric start system will be added on LCS-5 to reduce costs and lower ship weight.
Lockheed has submitted a variety of upgrade options for Freedom-class ships to the Small Surface Combatant Task
Force, aimed at transforming the Littoral Combat Ship from "niche" platforms into ships with more protection and
firepower beyond Flight 0 to survive against more advanced military adversaries. With 180 metric tons of space
available for mission packages, there is room for added capabilities. Anti-aircraft warfare can be provided with the
installation of a SPY-1F air defense radar and permanently installed vertical launch systems (VLS). Current
118-meter length versions can house 4 to 32 VLS cells, each holding four RIM-162D Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles,
and can also hold SM-2 missiles. For surface warfare, the Mk 110 cannon can be replaced with a larger gun up to the
Mk 45 5-inch cannon; integration of the AGM-114L Hellfire missile for defense against fast attack craft (FAC) was
also factored in.
[25]
Ships
See also: List of littoral combat ships of the United States Navy
Two Freedom-class LCS ships have been commissioned. Four more Freedom-class LCS are under construction by
Lockheed Martin.
USSFreedom(LCS-1)
USSFort Worth(LCS-3)
USSMilwaukee(LCS-5)
USSDetroit(LCS-7)
USSLittle Rock(LCS-9)
USSSioux City(LCS-11)
USSWichita(LCS-13)
USSBillings(LCS-15)
USSIndianapolis(LCS-17)
An additional five Freedom-class ships are planned.
Surface Combat Ship
Lockheed Martin has offered an Aegis Combat System-equipped variant for national missile defense radar picket use
to a number of Persian Gulf states.
[26][27]
The Surface Combat Ship will be offered to Saudi Arabia as part of the 2011 arms deal.
[28][29]
The total cost for the
eight ships is reported to be as much as $5 billion.
[30]
In 2012, Lockheed renamed the SCS to match GD's Multi-Mission Combatant term and revealed that the full
capabilities, such as Aegis, would only be available on a stretched 3,500 ton hull.
[31]
Lockheed has also been working on a trimmed down version of the Freedom combat system to offer on the
international market for smaller patrol vessels.
[32]
This Multi-Mission Combat Ship adds in phased-array radar and a
vertical launch system on a smaller hull with a smaller crew size, at the cost of removing the high speed gas turbines
and one third of the mission module area.
[33]
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
34
References
[1] http:/ / www. aviationweek.com/ Article.aspx?id=/ article-xml/ awx_05_09_2012_p0-456237. xml
[2] Littoral Combat Ship datasheet (http:/ / acquisition.navy. mil/ rda/ content/ view/ full/ 4688)
[3] Refueling tops list of LCS crew challenges (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 05/ navy_lcs_051809w/ )
[4] AN/SQR-20 (http:/ / www. deagel. com/ Ship-Sensors/ ANSQR-20_a002184001. aspx)
[5] Littoral Combat Ship at the Joint Meeting INTERNATIONAL HYDROFOIL SOCIETY SNAME Panel SD-5 (http:/ / www. foils. org/
01_Mtg_Presdnloads/ LCS_SNAME_IHS041023.pdf)
[6] Navy Axes Griffin Missile In Favor of Longbow Hellfire for LCS (http:/ / news. usni. org/ 2014/ 04/ 09/
navy-axes-griffin-missile-favor-longbow-hellfire-lcs) - News.USNI.org, 9 April 2014
[7] Surface Warfare Mission Package Capabilities (http:/ / www. navsea. navy. mil/ nswc/ dahlgren/ ET/ LCS/ default. aspx)
[8] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=Freedom-class_littoral_combat_ship& action=edit
[9] Ross, Ken. "Lockheed Martin LCS Team Introduces Sea Blade Concept for Navy's LCS Program." (http:/ / www. lockheedmartin. com/
news/ press_releases/ 2003/ LockheedMartinLCSTeamIntroducesSeaB. html) Lockheed Martin, 15 April 2003.
[10] "LCS Brochure" (http:/ / www.lockheedmartin. com/ data/ assets/ ms2/ pdf/ LCS_Trifold_Brochure. pdf)
[11] http:/ / www.navy. mil/ search/ display.asp?story_id=40822
[12] Ewing, Philip, " Navy: InSurv recommends accepting LCS 2 (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 12/
navy_lcs2_acceptance_120909w/ )", Military Times, December 9, 2009.
[13] GAO-09-326SP Assessments of Major Weapon Programs, page 106 (http:/ / www. gao. gov/ new. items/ d09326sp. pdf)
[14] Cost Growth Leads To Stop-Work On Team Lockheed LCS-3 Construction (http:/ / www. defenseindustrydaily. com/
cost-growth-leads-to-stopwork-on-team-lockheed-lcs3-construction-updated-02957?ref=/ )
[15] Sessions, Jeff "Sessions comments today regarding the Navy's proposal to purchase additional Littoral Combat Ship" (http:/ / www.
globalsecurity. org/ military/ library/ news/ 2010/ 11/ mil-101103-sessions01. htm) Office of Jeff Sessions, 3 November 2010
[16] "US Navy said to buy LCS warships from both bidders" (http:/ / www. forexpros. com/ news/ general-news/
us-navy-said-to-buy-lcs-warships-from-both-bidders-171680) Reuters 3 November 2010
[17] Cavas, Christopher P. "Navy asks Congress to buy both LCS designs" (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2010/ 11/
defense-navy-picks-both-lcs-designs-110310/ ) NavyTimes, 4 November 2010
[18] "Littoral Combat Ship Cut Plan Reopens Navy Riff: Build Em Fast Or Rugged." (http:/ / breakingdefense. com/ 2014/ 01/
littoral-combat-ship-cut-plan-reopens-navy-riff-build-em-fast-or-rugged/ )
[19] USS Freedom demonstrates its power plant can handle vessels sensors and electronics (http:/ / mae. pennnet. com/ display_article/ 325943/
32/ ARTCL/ none/ none/ 1/ USS-Freedom-demonstrates-its-power-plant-can-handle-vessels-sensors-and-electronics/ )
[20] Life-Cycle Costs of Selected Navy Ships (http:/ / www. cbo. gov/ ftpdoc. cfm?index=11431& type=1)
[21] CBO Report Calls into Question Navys LCS Evaluation (http:/ / www. bignews. biz/ ?id=866364&
keys=Senator-Jeff-Sessions-NavalVessels)
[22] Lockheed Says It Can Easily Improve LCS (http:/ / breakingdefense. com/ 2014/ 06/ lockheed-says-it-can-easily-improve-lcs/ ) -
Breakingdefense.com, 10 June 2014
[23] LCS5 Gets New Waterjets (http:/ / defensetech. org/ 2014/ 05/ 15/ lcs5-gets-new-waterjets/ ) - Defensetech.org, 15 May 2014
[24] Navy Engineers LCS Changes (http:/ / www. dodbuzz. com/ 2014/ 06/ 27/ navy-engineers-lcs-changes/ ) - DoDBuzz.com, 27 June 2014
[25] Lockheed Outlines Post Littoral Combat Ship Pitch (http:/ / news. usni. org/ 2014/ 06/ 10/ 8077) - News.USNI.org, 10 June 2014
[26] Lockheed Martin pitches light warship concept for Gulf radar picket (http:/ / defensenews. com/ blogs/ dubai-air-show/ 2009/ 11/
lockheed-martin-pitches-light-warship-concept-for-gulf-radar-picket/ )
[27] LCS International brochure (http:/ / www.lmlcsteam.com/ advertising/ LCS_International_brochure. pdf)
[28] Wolf, Jim. "Saudis ask U.S. for price quotes for warships." (http:/ / www. reuters. com/ article/ 2011/ 04/ 08/
us-saudi-usa-arms-idUSTRE73787G20110408) Reuters, 8 April 2011.
[29] "Surface Combat Ship Designed as a Multi-mission Ship." (http:/ / www. lockheedmartin. com/ ms2/ features/ SCS_euronaval_102710.
html)
[30] "Lockheed proposes $5bn Aegis ships sale to Saudi Arabia." (http:/ / www. arabianbusiness. com/
lockheed-proposes-5bn-aegis-ships-sale-saudi-arabia-402233. html) Bloomberg News, 26 May 2011.
[31] "Lockheed Martin offers LCS-derived Multi-Mission Combatant." (http:/ / marinelog. com/ index. php?option=com_content&
view=article& id=3108:2012-10-23-10-15-15& catid=1:latest-news& Itemid=195)
[32] "BAE and Thales plot course for smaller warships to fight pirates." (http:/ / www. independent. co. uk/ news/ world/ europe/
bae-and-thales-plot-course-for-smaller-warships-to-fight-pirates-8227549. html)
[33] "China Shipbuilder Calls for Greater Cooperation with U.S. Firms." (http:/ / www. defensenews. com/ article/ 20130217/ DEFREG04/
302170014/ China-Shipbuilder-Calls-Greater-Cooperation-U-S-Firms)
Freedom-class littoral combat ship
35
External links
Freedom class Littoral Combat Ship on navyrecognition.com (http:/ / www. navyrecognition. com/ index.
php?option=com_content& task=view& id=72)
Independence-class littoral combat ship
For the class of aircraft carrier, see Independence-class aircraft carrier.
USSIndependence alongside at Naval Air Station Key West, in March 2009.
Class overview
Builders: Austal USA
Operators: United States Navy
Cost:
$704 million First Ship
[1]
Future Ships $360 million
Building: 2
Planned: 12
Completed: 2
Active: 1 with 1 being fitted out
General characteristics
Type: Littoral combat ship
Displacement: 2,307 metric tons light, 3,104 metric tons full, 797 metric tons deadweight
Length: 127.4m (418ft)
Beam: 31.6m (104ft)
Draft: 14ft (4.27m)
Propulsion:
2 MTU Friedrichshafen 20V 8000 Series diesel engines, 2x General Electric LM2500 gas turbines, 2x
American VULKAN light weight multiple-section carbon fiber propulsion shaftlines, 2x LJ160E and 2x
LJ150E Wrtsil waterjets,
[2]
retractable bow-mounted azimuth thruster, 4 diesel generators
Speed:
44 knots (51mph; 81km/h)
[3]
Range:
4,300 nm at 18 knots
[4]
Capacity: 210 metric tons (206 long tons, 231 short tons)
Complement: 40 core crew (8 officers, 32 enlisted) plus up to 35 mission crew
Independence-class littoral combat ship
36
Sensors and
processing systems:
SAAB AN/SPS-77(V)1 Sea GIRAFFE 3D air and surface search radar
Sperry Marine BridgeMaster E navigational radar
AN/KAX-2 electro-optical sensor with TV and FLIR
Northrop Grumman ICMS (Integrated Combat Management System)
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
ITT Corporation ES-3601 ESM system
4 SRBOC decoy launchers for chaff and infrared decoys
BAE Systems NULKA active radar decoy system
Armament:
AGM-114L Hellfire missiles
[5]
1x BAE Systems Mk 110 57 mm gun
[6]
4 .50-cal guns (2 aft, 2 forward)
1x Raytheon SeaRAM CIWS
Other weapons as part of mission modules
Aircraft carried: 2 MH-60R/S Seahawk
MQ-8 Fire Scout
The Independence-class is a class of littoral combat ships built for the United States Navy.
The hull design evolved from a project at Austal to design a 40 knot cruise ship. That hull design evolved into the
high-speed trimaran ferry HSCBenchijigua Express and the Independence class was then proposed by General
Dynamics and Austal as a contender for Navy plans to build a fleet of small, multipurpose warships to operate in the
littoral zone. Two ships were approved, to compete with Lockheed Martin's Freedom-class design for a construction
contract of up to 55 vessels.
As of 2010, the lead ship is active, while a second ship, Coronado, was commissioned in 2014. Despite initial plans
to only accept one of the Independence and Freedom classes, the Navy has requested that Congress order ten
additional ships of each class, for a total 12 ships per class. In February 2012, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus
announced that the fifth Independence-class littoral combat ship will be named USSGabrielle Giffords, and the sixth
USSOmaha.
[7]
In April 2013, the name Manchester was assigned to LCS-14, while in June 2013, the name Tulsa
was assigned to LCS-16.
Planning and construction
USSIndependence(LCS-2) under construction,
2007.
Planning for a class of small, multipurpose warships to operate in the
littoral zone began in the early 2000s. In July 2003, a proposal by
General Dynamics (partnering with Austal USA, the American
subsidiary of Australian shipbuilder Austal) was approved by the
Navy, with a contract for two vessels.
[8]
These would then be
compared to two ships built by Lockheed Martin to determine which
design would be taken up by the Navy for a production run of up to 55
ships.
The first ship, USSIndependence was laid down at the Austal USA
shipyard in Mobile, Alabama, on 19 January 2006. The planned second
ship was cancelled in November 2007, but reordered in May 2009, and laid down in December of that year as
USSCoronado, shortly before Independence was launched.
[9]
The development and construction of Independence as of June 2009 was running at 220% over-budget. The total
projected cost for the ship is $704 million. The Navy had originally projected the cost at $220 million. Independence
began builder's trials in July 2009, three days behind schedule because of maintenance issues.
[10]
A leak in the port
gas turbine saw the order of trials altered, but builder's and acceptance trials were completed by November.
[11][12]
and although her first INSURV inspection revealed 2,080 deficiencies, these were rectified in time for the ship to be
handed over to the Navy in mid-December, and commissioned in mid-January 2010.
[13]
Independence-class littoral combat ship
37
Navy leaders said that the fixed price competition offered the Austal design an equal shot, in spite of its excess size,
cost and limited service.
[14]
After much inconsistency on how testing and orders were to proceed, in November 2010, the Navy asked that
Congress approve ten of both the Independence and Freedom classes.
[15][16][17]
Design
The Independence-class design began life at Austal as a platform for a high-speed cruise ship. The principal
requirements of that project were speed, stability and passenger comfort, and Austal's team determined that the
trimaran hull form offered significant passenger comfort and stability advantages over both a catamaran and a
monohull. The high-speed cruise ship project evolved into Austal's commercial high-speed trimaran ferry
HSCBenchijigua Express. The ships are 127.4m (418ft) long, with a beam of 31.6m (104ft), and a draft of 13ft
(3.96m). Their displacement is rated at 2,176 tons light, 2,784 tons full, and 608 tons deadweight.
The standard ship's company is 40, although this can increase depending on the ship's role with mission-specific
personnel. The habitability area with bunks is located under the bridge. The helm is controlled by joysticks instead of
traditional steering wheels.
[18]
Although the trimaran hull increases the total surface area, it is still able to reach sustainable speeds of about 50
knots (93km/h; 58mph), with a range of 10,000 nautical miles (19,000km; 12,000mi).Wikipedia:Citation needed
Austal claims that the design will use a third less fuel than the competing Freedom class, but the Congressional
Budget Office found that fuel would account for 18 percent or less of the total lifetime cost of Freedom.
[19]
The lack of bridge wings on the Independence class had been noted as the top problem in the entire LCS program to
the extent that these will need to be retrofitted onto existing ships.
[20]
The lightweight aluminum construction of the Independence-class ships makes them more vulnerable to damage
than the Freedom-class ships.
[21]
The first ships of both LCS classes were delivered before the designs were mature so that improvements could be
built into future ships. The Navy is improving the Independence-class with bridge wings for safety and replacing the
5.1-meter Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat (RHIB) with a 7-meter boat. An improved cathodic protection system will
enhance corrosion protection. Like the Freedom-class, the Independence will be getting axial flow water jets which
pushes water parallel to the shaft of the impeller to improve efficiency and reduce maintenance; they will also be
upgraded to handle the horsepower provided by the gas turbine propulsion system. A winch control system will
modulate the motion of the anchor to reduce the reliance on manual hand brakes. The mission bay side door will be
redesigned for reliability and the platform lift elevator reconfigured to better handle weapons and ordnance.
[22]
Modular mission capability
Stern view
The Independence class carries a default armament for self-defense,
and command and control. However, unlike traditional fighting ships
with fixed armament such as guns and missiles, tailored mission
modules can be configured for one mission package at a time. Modules
may consist of manned aircraft, unmanned vehicles, off-board sensors,
or mission-manning detachments.
The interior volume and payload is greater than some destroyers and is
sufficient to serve as a high-speed transport and maneuver platform.
The mission bay is 15,200 square feet (1,410m
2
), and takes up most of
the deck below the hangar and flight deck. With 11,000 cubic metres
(390,000cuft) of payload volume, it was designed with enough payload and volume to carry out one mission with a
separate mission module in reserve, allowing the ship to do multiple missions without having to be refitted.
Independence-class littoral combat ship
38
One Mobicon Flexible Container Handling System is carried on each ship in order to move mission
containers.
[23][24]
In addition to cargo or container-sized mission modules, the bay can carry four lanes of multiple Strykers, armored
Humvees, and their associated troops. An elevator allows air transport of packages the size of a 20-foot-long (6.1m)
shipping container that can be moved into the mission bay while at sea. A side access ramp allows for vehicle
roll-on/roll-off loading to a dock and allows the ship to transport the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.
[25]
Armament and sensors
Loading a SEARAM missile
launcher
The Raytheon SeaRAM missile defense system is installed on the hangar roof.
The SeaRAM combines the sensors of the Phalanx 1B close-in weapon system
with an 11-missile launcher for the RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile, creating
an autonomous system.
The Independence-class ships also have an integrated LOS Mast, Sea Giraffe 3D
Radar and SeaStar Safire FLIR. Northrop Grumman has demonstrated sensor
fusion of on and off-board systems in the Integrated Combat Management
System (ICMS) used on the LCS.
[26]
The vessels have an Interior
Communications Center that can be curtained off from the rest of bridge instead
of the heavily protected Combat Information Center found on Navy warships.
[27]
Side and forward surfaces are angled for reduced radar profile. The Fleet-class
unmanned surface vessel is designed for operations from Independence-class
ships.
The flight deck, 1,030m
2
(11,100sqft), can support the operation of two SH-60 Seahawk helicopters, multiple
unmanned aerial vehicles, or one CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter. H-60 series helicopters provide airlift, rescue,
anti-submarine, radar picket and anti-ship capabilities with torpedoes and missiles. DARPA's Tactically Exploited
Reconnaissance Node (TERN) program aims to build a Medium-altitude long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle
(MALE UAV) that can operate from LCS-2 and can carry a payload of 600 pounds (270kg) out to an operational
radius of 600900 nautical miles (1,1001,700km). First flight of a TERN demonstrator is expected in 2017. The
trimaran hull will allow flight operations up to sea state 5.
[28]
Austal USA vice president Craig Hooper has
responded to critics of the class's light armament by suggesting that the ships employ long range drones instead.
Control system
The control system for this class is provided by General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems through an open
architecture computing infrastructure (OPEN CI),
[29]
while Lockheed provides their own control system for their
variant of the LCS.
[30]
OPEN CI includes the information technology (IT) infrastructure for the combat and seaframe
control systems. This IT infrastructure also includes the primary operator interface for the control and monitoring of
mission module operations.
[31]
The General Dynamics OPEN CI is also used on the Spearhead-class Joint High Speed Vessel, also built by
Austal.
[32]
Independence-class littoral combat ship
39
Corrosion management
After the lead ship of the class suffered from aggressive disintegration due to galvanic corrosion, Austal has made
changes to the remaining ships in the class. Coronado will have "new anti-corrosion surface treatments", and
Jackson will have "an array of tested corrosion-management tools and processes".
[33]
Derivative designs
Austal has proposed a much smaller and slower trimaran, called the 'Multi Role Vessel' (MRV 80). Though it is only
half the size of their LCS design, it would still be useful for border protection and counter piracy operations.
Ships
One Independence-class LCS has been commissioned. A second has been launched. Two more are under
construction, and four others have been named.
On March 5, 2013, the Navy awarded contract options to fund construction of LCS-14 and LCS-16, the fifth and
sixth ships in its 10-ship block buy.
An additional four Independence-class ships are planned.
USSIndependence(LCS-2)
USSCoronado(LCS-4)
USSJackson(LCS-6)
USSMontgomery(LCS-8)
USSGabrielle Giffords(LCS-10)
USSOmaha(LCS-12)
USSManchester(LCS-14)
USSTulsa(LCS-16)
Notable appearances in media
USS Independence appears in the Discovery Channel documentary Inside: A 21st Century Warship, which also
featured USSFreedom(LCS-1)
References
[1] Ewing, Philip, " LCS 2 delays trials after engine issue (http:/ / militarytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 06/ navy_lcs2_delay_062909w/ )", Military
Times, June 29, 2009.
[2] USS Independence LCS-2 - GE LM2500 Gas Turbines (http:/ / www. dieselpowermag. com/ features/ 1002dp_uss_independence_lcs_2/
ge_lm2500_gas_turbines. html)
[3] Navy's newest warships top out at more than 50 mph (http:/ / www. google. com/ hostednews/ ap/ article/
ALeqM5gtAdCDYzA8NImWi1iBA8ukiBF08wD9BG6HU00)
[4] In high-stakes LCS competition, disagreement on how to rank the best deal (http:/ / blog. al. com/ live/ 2010/ 04/
in_high-stakes_lcs_competition. html)
[5] Navy Axes Griffin Missile In Favor of Longbow Hellfire for LCS (http:/ / news. usni. org/ 2014/ 04/ 09/
navy-axes-griffin-missile-favor-longbow-hellfire-lcs) - News.USNI.org, 9 April 2014
[6] GDLCS Media Center (http:/ / www.gdlcs. com/ media-center/ media-kit)
[7] " Introducing... The USS Omaha (http:/ / www.wowt.com/ news/ headlines/ Introducing_the_USS_Omaha_139388048. html?ref=048),"
WOWT, February 15, 2012.
[8] " General Dynamics Bath Iron Works Team Wins Preliminary Design Award for U.S. Navys Littoral Combat Ship (http:/ / www.
generaldynamics.com/ news/ press_releases/ 2003/ July17, 2003 News Release-3. htm)". General Dynamics press release, 17 July 2003.
[9] General Dynamics Littoral Combat Ship Team Delivers Independence (LCS 2) and Lays Keel for Coronado (LCS 4) (http:/ / www.
prnewswire. com/ news-releases/
general-dynamics-littoral-combat-ship-team-delivers-independence-lcs-2-and-lays-keel-for-coronado-lcs-4-79674292. html)
Independence-class littoral combat ship
40
[10] Ewing, Philip, " LCS 2 begins sea trials after 3-day delay (http:/ / militarytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 07/ navy_lcs2_sea_trials_070209w/ )",
Military Times, July 3, 2009.
[11] Turbine-seal leak means more tests for LCS 2 (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 08/ navy_lcs_indy_080309w/ )
[12] Cava, Christopher P., " Trials successful for 2nd LCS hull (http:/ / militarytimes. com/ news/ 2009/ 11/ navy_DN_111909_LCStrials/ )",
Military Times, November 21, 2009.
[13] Navy News Service, " (http:/ / www. navy.mil/ view_single. asp?id=80016)", Navy.mil, January 16, 2010.
[14] Navy says the field is level for teams competing for LCS contract (http:/ / www. al. com/ news/ press-register/ metro. ssf?/ base/ news/
1260440129204000. xml& coll=3)
[15] Sessions, Jeff "Sessions comments today regarding the Navy's proposal to purchase additional Littoral Combat Ship" (http:/ / www.
globalsecurity. org/ military/ library/ news/ 2010/ 11/ mil-101103-sessions01. htm) Office of Jeff Sessions, 3 November 2010
[16] "US Navy said to buy LCS warships from both bidders" (http:/ / www. forexpros. com/ news/ general-news/
us-navy-said-to-buy-lcs-warships-from-both-bidders-171680) Reuters 3 November 2010
[17] Cavas, Christopher P. "Navy asks Congress to buy both LCS designs" (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2010/ 11/
defense-navy-picks-both-lcs-designs-110310/ ) NavyTimes, 4 November 2010
[18] Cavas, Christopher P., " LCS 2 features large hangar, bigger berths (http:/ / militarytimes. com/ news/ 2010/ 01/
navy_insidelook_lcs2_011110w/ )", Military Times, January 11, 2010.
[19] Navy not using fuel cost data in LCS competition (http:/ / blog. al. com/ live/ 2010/ 05/ navy_not_looking_at_fuel_effic. html)
[20] "Redeeming Freedom -- Changes for the U.S. Navy's Littoral Combat Ship." (http:/ / aviationweek. com/ defense/
redeeming-freedom-us-navy-seeks-renew-faith-lcs)
[21] "Ships Leaking $37 Billion Reflect Eisenhowers Warning." (http:/ / www. bloomberg. com/ news/ 2013-02-21/
ships-leaking-37-billion-reflect-eisenhower-s-warning. html)
[22] Navy Engineers LCS Changes (http:/ / www. dodbuzz. com/ 2014/ 06/ 27/ navy-engineers-lcs-changes/ ) - DoDBuzz.com, 27 June 2014
[23] "US Navy snaps up Aussie straddle carrier." (http:/ / www. supplychainreview. com. au/ news/ articleid/ 71026. aspx) SupplyChain Review,
25 November 2010
[24] "Mobicon Flexible Container Handling System." (http:/ / www. mobiconsystems. com/ ) Mobicon Systems, 2009
[25] General Dynamics Littoral Combat Ship brochure (http:/ / www. gdlcs. com/ sites/ default/ files/ LCS_brochure_1-09. pdf)
[26] Northrop Grumman-Led Team Demonstrates Means to Effectively Enhance Littoral Warfighting Capabilities (http:/ / www. globenewswire.
com/ newsroom/ news.html?d=171665)
[27] LCS 2: Itll blow your mind (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2010/ 04/ defense_navy_independence_041210w/ )
[28] USS Independence LCS 2 - General Info (http:/ / ussindependenceship. org/ overview_ship. php)
[29] General Dynamics to Deliver Open Architecture-based Combat Systems for 10 Littoral Combat Ships (http:/ / www. gd-ais. com/ News/
General-Dynamics-to-Deliver-Open-Architecture-based-Combat-Systems-for-10-Littoral-Combat-Ships-)
[30] Murtaugh, Dan. "Austal taps General Dynamics for LCS combat systems ." (http:/ / blog. al. com/ press-register-business/ 2011/ 01/
austal_taps_general_dynamics_f.html) Press-Register, 3 January 2010.
[31] General Dynamics Successfully Integrates Littoral Combat Ship Mission Package Computing Environment (http:/ / www. gd-ais. com/
News/ General-Dynamics-Successfully-Integrates-Littoral-Combat-Ship-Mission-Package-Computing-Environment), General Dynamics
Press Release, March 18, 2008
[32] "The Power of Open Architecture." (http:/ / www. gd-ais. com/ Capabilities/ Our-Approach/ OPEN-CI)
[33] Axe, David. "Plenty of Blame to Go Around for Disappearing Warship." (http:/ / www. wired. com/ 2011/ 07/
plenty-of-blame-to-go-around-for-disappearing-warship/ ) Wired, 5 July 2011.
External links
Media related to USS Independence (LCS-2) at Wikimedia Commons
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
41
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
USS Allen M. Sumner (DD-692), the lead ship of her class, seen here in 1970.
Class overview
Name: Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
Builders: Various
Operators: United States Navy
Republic of China Navy (Taiwan)
Argentine Navy
Brazilian Navy
Chilean Navy
Colombian Navy
Hellenic Navy
Republic of Korea Navy (South Korea)
Turkish Navy
Imperial Iranian Navy
Venezuelan Navy
Preceded by: Fletcherclass
Succeededby: Gearingclass
Subclasses: Robert H. Smithclass
Cost: $8 million, excluding armament
In commission: 1943-1975 (USN)
Planned: 70
Completed: 58
Lost: 4
Preserved: 2
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: 2,200-2,220 tons standard
3,515 tons full load
Length: 369ft (112m) waterline
376 ft 6 in (114.8 m) overall
376 ft (114.6 m) overall (DD.725-728 & 730-734)
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
42
Beam: 41ft (12m)
40 ft (12.2 m) (DD.692-709)
40 ft 9 in (12.4 m) (DD.744)
41 ft 3 in (12.6 m) (DD.770-776)
Draft: 15ft 9in (4.80m) normal
19 ft (5.8 m) full load
18 ft 9 in (18.4 m) full load (DD.735-40 & 749-751 & 771-773)
Propulsion: 4 Babcock & Wilcox or Foster Wheeler boilers; two General Electric or Westinghouse geared steam turbines,
60,000 shp (45 MW) total; two shafts
Speed: 34 knots (63km/h; 39mph)
Range: 6,000 nmi at 15 knots (11,100 km @28 km/h)
503 tons oil fuel (except DD.692-709 500 tons, DD.735-740 515 tons)
Complement: 336-363
Armament: As built:
6 5 in/38 cal guns (127 mm) (in 3 2 Mk 38 DP mounts)
12 40 mm Bofors AA guns (2 4 & 2 2)
11 20 mm Oerlikon cannons
2 depth charge racks
6 K-gun depth charge throwers
10 21 in (533 mm) torpedo tubes
Typical by 1950:
6 5 in/38 cal guns (127 mm) (in 3 2 Mk 38 DP mounts)
6 3 in/50 cal guns (76 mm) (2 2, 2 1)
2 Hedgehog ASW weapons
1 depth charge rack
6 K-gun depth charge throwers
Typical after FRAM II: (1960-65)
6 5 in/38 cal guns (127 mm) (in 3 2 Mk 38 DP mounts)
2 triple Mark 32 torpedo tubes for Mark 44 torpedoes
1 Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter (DASH)
Variable Depth Sonar (VDS)
The Allen M. Sumner class was a group of 58 destroyers built by the United States during World War II. Another
twelve ships were completed as destroyer minelayers. Often referred to as simply the Sumner class, this class was
characterized by their twin 5"/38cal-gun mounts, dual rudders, additional anti-aircraft weapons, and many other
advancements over the previous Fletcher class. The Sumner design was extended 14 feet (4.3m) amidships to
become the Gearing class, which was produced in larger numbers.
Completed in 194345, four were lost in the war and one was damaged so badly it was scrapped, but the surviving
ships served in the US Navy into the 1970s. After being retired from the US fleet, 29 of them were sold to other
navies, where they served many more years. Two still exist as museum ships, one in South Carolina, and one in
Taiwan.
Description
The first ship was laid down in May 1943, while the last was launched in April 1945. In that time the United States
produced 58 Allen M. Sumner-class destroyers. The Sumner class was an improvement of the previous Fletcher
class, which were built from 1941 until 1944. In addition to three twin 5"/38cal mounts replacing the Fletchers' five
single mounts, Sumners had twin rudders, giving them better maneuverability for ASW work when compared to
Fletchers. The 5-inch guns were guided by a Mark 37 Gun Fire Control System with a Mark 25 fire control radar
linked by a Mark 1A Fire Control Computer stabilized by a Mark 6 8,500 rpm gyro. This fire control system
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
43
provided effective long-range anti-aircraft (AA) or anti-surface fire. The Sumners also had much more short-range
anti-aircraft armament than the Fletchers, with 12 40 mm guns and 11 20 mm guns compared with 8 40 mm and 7
20 mm for a typical late-war upgraded Fletcher. The initial design retained the Fletchers' heavy torpedo armament of
10 21" (533mm) tubes in two quintuple mounts, firing the Mark 15 torpedo. As the threat from kamikaze aircraft
mounted in 1945, and with few remaining Japanese warships to use torpedoes on, most of the class had the after
quintuple 21" torpedo tube mount replaced by an additional 40 mm quadruple mount for 16 total 40mm guns.
[1][2]
The Sumners achieved a 20% increase in 5" gun armament and almost a 50% increase in light AA armament on a
hull the same length as a Fletcher, only 15 inches (38 cm) wider, and about 15" (38 cm) deeper in draft. The increase
in standard displacement was only 150 tons, about 7.5%. Thus, the Sumner class was a significant improvement in
combat power at a small increase in cost.
See also Robert H. Smith-class destroyer minelayer (DM), twelve of which were built on hulls originally intended as
Sumners. Gearing class-destroyers were of the same design, modified with a 14-foot (4.3m) midship extension to
carry more fuel to extend the ships' range.
Construction
Eighteen were built by Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company in Kearny, New Jersey. Fourteen were built by
Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine. Ten were built by Bethlehem Steel's Mariners Harbor shipyard on Staten Island.
Six were built by Bethlehem Steel's Union Iron Works in San Francisco, California. Five were built by Bethlehem
Steel in San Pedro, California. Five were built by Todd Pacific Shipyards in Seattle, Washington.
USSBarton(DD-722) was the first ship of the class to be laid down and the first to be commissioned.
USSHenley(DD-762) was the last commissioned.
Service
The Sumners served on radar picket stations in the Battle of Okinawa, as well as other duties, and had several losses.
Cooper, Meredith, Mannert L. Abele, and Drexler were lost during the war, and Hugh W. Hadley was so badly
damaged by a kamikaze attack that she was scrapped soon after the war ended. After the war most of the class
(except some of the light minelayers) had their 40-mm and 20-mm guns replaced by up to six 3"/50 caliber guns
(76mm), and the pole mast was replaced by a tripod to carry a new, heavier radar. On most ships one depth charge
rack was removed and two Hedgehog mounts added. One of the two quintuple 21-in (533mm) torpedo tube
mountings had already been removed on most to make way for a quadruple 40-mm gun mounting and additional
radar for the radar picket mission. 33 ships were converted under the Fleet Rehabilitation and Modernization II
(FRAM II) program 1960-65, but not as extensively as the Gearings. Typically, FRAM Sumners retained all three
5"/38 twin mounts and received the Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter (DASH) and two triple Mark 32 torpedo tubes
for the Mark 44 torpedo, with all 3-inch and lighter guns, previous ASW armament, and 21" torpedo tubes being
removed. Variable Depth Sonar (VDS) was also fitted; however, ASROC was not fitted. Ships that did not receive
FRAM were typically upgraded with Mk 32 triple torpedo tubes in exchange for the K-guns, but retained Hedgehog
and one depth charge rack.
In Navy slang, the modified destroyers were called "FRAM cans", "can" being a contraction of "tin can", the slang
term for a destroyer or destroyer escort.
Many Sumners provided significant gunfire support in the Vietnam War. They also served as escorts for Carrier
Battle Groups (Carrier Strike Groups from 2004) and Amphibious Ready Groups (Expeditionary Strike Groups from
2006). From 1965, some Sumners were transferred to the Naval Reserve Force (NRF), with a partial active crew to
train Naval reservists.
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
44
Disposition
USSDe Haven(DD-727) c.1970 fitted with
FRAM II modifications.
The ships served in the US Navy into the 1970s. DASH was withdrawn
from anti-submarine warfare (ASW) service in 1969 due to poor
reliability. Lacking ASROC, the Sumners were left without a standoff
ASW capability, and were decommissioned 1970-73, with most being
transferred to foreign navies. The FRAM Sumners were effectively
replaced as ASW ships by the Knox-class frigates (destroyer escorts
prior to 1975), which were commissioned 1969-74 and carried a
piloted helicopter, typically the Kaman SH-2 Seasprite, and ASROC.
After the Sumners were retired from the US fleet, seven were sunk by
the US in fleet training exercises and 13 were scrapped, while 29 were
sold to other navies (two for spare parts), where they served for many
more years. 12 were sold to the Republic of China Navy and 2 were
sold to the Republic of Korea Navy. 2 were sold to the Shah of Iran and 1 was sold to Turkey. 1 was sold to Greece.
2 were sold to Venezuela, 2 to Colombia, 2 sold to Chile, 5 sold to Brazil and 4 to Argentina.
Two ships are now museum ships: USSLaffey(DD-724) at Patriot's Point, Charleston, South Carolina, and
USSTaussig(DD-746) in Taiwan.
Ships in class
Ship Name Hull
No.
Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
Allen M.
Sumner
DD-692 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441973 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping
[3] [4]
Moale DD-693 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441973 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping
[5] [6]
Ingraham DD-694 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441971 Sold to Greece 16 July 1971 as Miaoulis
[7]
Cooper DD-695 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
1944 Torpedoed and sunk by destroyer Take while
intercepting a Japanese convoy into Ormoc Bay 3
December 1944
[8]
English DD-696 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441970 Sold to Republic of China Navy 11 August 1970 as
Huei Yang
[9]
Charles S.
Sperry
DD-697 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441973 Sold to Chile 8 January 1974 as Ministro Zenteno
[9]
Ault DD-698 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441970 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping
[10]
[11]
Waldron DD-699 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441973 Sold to Colombia 30 October 1973 as Santander
(DD-03)
[12]
[13]
Haynsworth DD-700 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
1944-c.1970 Sold to Republic of China Navy 12 May 1970 as
Yuen Yang
[14]
John W. Weeks DD-701 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441970 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
11/19/1970
[15]
[16]
Hank DD-702 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441972 Sold to Argentina 1 July 1972 as Segui
[17]
[18]
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
45
Wallace L. Lind DD-703 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441973 Sold to Republic of Korea Navy 4 December 1973
as Dae Gu
[19]
[20]
Borie DD-704 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441972 Sold to Argentina 1 July 1972 as Hiplito Bouchard
(D-26)
[21]
Compton DD-705 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441972 Sold to Brazil 27 September 1972 as Mato Grosso
[22]
Gainard DD-706 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441971 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping
[23]
Soley DD-707 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19441970 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[24]
Harlan R.
Dickson
DD-708 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
1944-c.1972 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 4 January
1973
[25]
[26]
Hugh Purvis DD-709 Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company
19451972 Sold to Turkey 1 July 1972 as Zafer (F 253)
[27]
[28]
Barton DD-722 Bath Iron Works 19431968 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise.
[29]
Walke DD-723 Bath Iron Works 19441970 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 3 January
1975
[30]
[31]
Laffey DD-724 Bath Iron Works 19441975 Preserved as memorial and berthed at Patriot's Point,
Charleston, South Carolina
[32]
[33]
O'Brien DD-725 Bath Iron Works 19441972 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise, 12
January 1972
[34]
[35]
Meredith DD-726 Bath Iron Works 1944 Sunk 9 June 1944, Wreck sold and scrapped 5
August 1960
[36]
De Haven DD-727 Bath Iron Works 19441973 Sold to Republic of Korea Navy, 5 December 1973
as Incheon
[37]
[38]
Mansfield DD-728 Bath Iron Works 19441973 Sold to Argentina 4 June 1974 for spare parts
[39]
[40]
Lyman K.
Swenson
DD-729 Bath Iron Works 19441971 Sold to Republic of China Navy 6 May 1974 for
spare parts
[41]
[42]
Collett DD-730 Bath Iron Works 19441970 Sold to Argentina in 1974 as Piedra Buena (D-29)
[43]
[44]
Maddox DD-731 Bath Iron Works 19441969 Sold to Republic of China Navy as Po Yang
[45]
[46]
Hyman DD-732 Bath Iron Works 1944-c.1969 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping
[47]
Mannert L.
Abele
DD-733 Bath Iron Works 19441945 Sunk by an Ohka bomb during the battle for
Okinawa 12 April 1945
[48]
Purdy DD-734 Bath Iron Works 1944-c.1973 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 6 January
1974
[49]
Drexler DD-741 Bath Iron Works 19441945 Sunk by kamikaze 28 May 1945
[50]
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
46
Blue DD-744 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441971 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
04/28/1977
[51]
[52]
Brush DD-745 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441969 Sold to Republic of China Navy 9 December 1969
as Hsiang Yang
[53]
Taussig DD-746 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441970 Sold to Republic of China Navy as Lo Yang
(DD-14). Now a museum in Taiwan.
[54]
[55]
Samuel N.
Moore
DD-747 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441969 Sold to Republic of China Navy 10 December 1969
as Heng Yang (DD-2)
[56]
Harry E.
Hubbard
DD-748 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441969 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping
[57]
Alfred A.
Cunningham
DD-752 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441971 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise, 10
January 1979
[58]
[59]
John R. Pierce DD-753 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19441973
(Decommoisioning
phamplet)
Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 10
January 1974
[60]
[61]
Frank E. Evans DD-754 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19451969 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise, 10
October 1969
[62]
[63]
John A. Bole DD-755 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19451970 Sold to Republic of China Navy 6 May 1974 for
spare parts
[64]
[65]
Beatty DD-756 Bethlehem Steel, Staten
Island
19451972 Sold to Venezuela 14 July 1972 as Carabobo
[66]
Putnam DD-757 Bethlehem Steel, San
Francisco
19441973 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 6 January
1974
[67]
[68]
Strong DD-758 Bethlehem Steel, San
Francisco
19441973 Sold to Brazil, 31 October 1973, as Rio Grande do
Norte (D-37)
[69]
[70]
Lofberg DD-759 Bethlehem Steel, San
Francisco
19451971 Sold to Republic of China Navy 6 May 1974 for
spare parts
[71]
[72]
John W.
Thomason
DD-760 Bethlehem Steel, San
Francisco
19451970 Sold to Republic of China Navy 6 May 1974 as Nan
Yang
[73]
[74]
Buck DD-761 Bethlehem Steel, San
Francisco
19451973 Sold to Brazil 16 July 1973 as Alagoas
[75]
[76]
Henley DD-762 Bethlehem Steel, San
Francisco
1945-c.1973 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 6 January
1974
[77]
[78]
Lowry DD-770 Bethlehem Steel, San
Pedro
1944-c.1973 Sold to Brazil 31 October 1973 as Espirito Santo
[79]
[80]
Hugh W. Hadley DD-774 Bethlehem Steel, San
Pedro
19441945 Sold 2 September 1947 for scrap
[81]
Willard Keith DD-775 Bethlehem Steel, San
Pedro
19441972 Sold to Colombia as Caldas (DD-02)
[82]
James C. Owens DD-776 Bethlehem Steel, San
Pedro
19451973 Sold to Brazil 15 July 1973 as Sergipe
[83]
[84]
Zellars DD-777 Todd Pacific Shipyards,
Seattle
19441971 Sold to Iran 12 October 1973 as Babr
[85]
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
47
Massey DD-778 Todd Pacific Shipyards,
Seattle
1944-c.1969 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 10
January 1974
[86]
[87]
Douglas H. Fox DD-779 Todd Pacific Shipyards,
Seattle
19441973 Sold to Chile 8 January 1974 Ministro Portales
(DD-17)
[88]
[89]
Stormes DD-780 Todd Pacific Shipyards,
Seattle
19451970 Sold to Iran 16 February 1972 Palang (DDG-9)
[90]
Robert K.
Huntington
DD-781 Todd Pacific Shipyards,
Seattle
19451970 Sold to Venezuela as Falcon
[91]
[92]
Bristol DD-857 Bethlehem Steel, San
Pedro
19451969 Sold to Republic of China Navy 9 December 1969
Hua Yang
[93]
References
[1] ." The Sumner Class As Built (http:/ / www. destroyersonline. com/ usndd/ sumnrasbuilt. htm) Retrieved 25 August 2009."
[2] [2] Friedman, Norman "US Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History (Revised Edition)", Naval Institute Press, Annapolis:2004, ISBN
1-55750-442-3.
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD692.htm
[4] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ a6/ allen_m_sumner. htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD693.htm
[6] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ m12/ moale.htm
[7] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ i2/ ingraham-iii. htm
[8] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ c13/ cooper. htm
[9] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ english.htm
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD698.htm
[11] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ a14/ ault. htm
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD699.htm
[13] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ w2/ waldron. htm
[14] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h4/ haynsworth.htm
[15] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD701.htm
[16] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ j4/ john_w_weeks. htm
[17] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD702.htm
[18] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h2/ hank.htm
[19] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD703.htm
[20] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ w2/ wallace_l_lind. htm
[21] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ b8/ borie-ii.htm
[22] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ c12/ compton.htm
[23] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ g1/ gainard.htm
[24] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ s14/ soley.htm
[25] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD708.htm
[26] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h2/ harlan_r_dickson. htm
[27] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD709.htm
[28] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h9/ hugh_purvis. htm
[29] http:/ / history. navy.mil/ danfs/ b3/ barton-ii.htm
[30] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD723.htm
[31] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ w2/ walke-iii. htm
[32] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD724.htm
[33] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ l1/ laffey-ii.htm
[34] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD725.htm
[35] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ o1/ obrien-iv.htm
[36] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ m9/ meredith-iii.htm
[37] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD727.htm
[38] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ d2/ de_haven-ii.htm
[39] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD728.htm
[40] http:/ / history. navy.mil/ danfs/ m3/ mansfield.htm
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
48
[41] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD729.htm
[42] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ l33/ lyman_k_swenson. htm
[43] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD730.htm
[44] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ c11/ collett.htm
[45] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD731.htm
[46] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ m1/ maddox-iii.htm
[47] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h10/ hyman. htm
[48] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ m3/ mannert_l_abele. htm
[49] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ p13/ purdy.htm
[50] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ d6/ drexler. htm
[51] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD744.htm
[52] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ b7/ blue-ii. htm
[53] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ b10/ brush-i. htm
[54] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD746.htm
[55] http:/ / history. navy.mil/ danfs/ t3/ taussig. htm
[56] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ s4/ samuel_n_moore. htm
[57] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h3/ harry_e_hubbard. htm
[58] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD752.htm
[59] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ a6/ alfred_a_cunningham. htm
[60] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD753.htm
[61] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ j3/ john_r_pierce. htm
[62] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD754.htm
[63] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ f4/ frank_e_evans. htm
[64] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD755.htm
[65] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ j3/ john_a_bole-i. htm
[66] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ b4/ beatty-ii.htm
[67] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD757.htm
[68] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ p13/ putnam-ii. htm
[69] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD758.htm
[70] http:/ / history. navy.mil/ danfs/ s19/ strong-ii.htm
[71] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD759.htm
[72] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ l7/ lofberg.htm
[73] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD760.htm
[74] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ j4/ john_w_thomason. htm
[75] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD761.htm
[76] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ b10/ buck-iii.htm
[77] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD762.htm
[78] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h4/ henley-iii.htm
[79] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD770.htm
[80] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ l8/ lowry.htm
[81] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ h9/ hugh_w_hadley. htm
[82] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ w8/ willard_keith. htm
[83] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD776.htm
[84] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ j1/ james_c_owens. htm
[85] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ z1/ zellars. htm
[86] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD778.htm
[87] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ m6/ massey.htm
[88] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD779.htm
[89] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ d5/ douglas_h_fox. htm
[90] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ s19/ stormes. htm
[91] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD781.htm
[92] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ r7/ robert_k_huntington. htm
[93] http:/ / www.history. navy. mil/ danfs/ b9/ bristol-ii.htm
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer
49
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Allen M. Sumner class destroyers.
Allen M. Sumner-class destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ sumner-gearingclass/ sumnerclass/ ) at Destroyer
History Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
GlobalSecurity.org (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ dd-692. htm)
http:/ / www. gyrodynehelicopters. com/ sumner_class. htm
"Super Destroyer Packs Punch of Prewar Cruiser." (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=h98DAAAAMBAJ&
pg=PA32& dq=Popular+ Science+ 1930+ plane+ "Popular+ Mechanics"& hl=en&
ei=eQ6ITrr5C-Xv0gGm0M3lDw& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=7&
ved=0CEYQ6AEwBjgo#v=onepage& q& f=true) Popular Mechanics, February 1945, p.32.
NavSource Destroyer Photo Page (http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 05idx. htm)
Gearing-class destroyer
50
Gearing-class destroyer
USS Gearing (DD-710)
Class overview
Name: Gearing-class destroyer
Builders: Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine
Bethlehem Steel, Fore River Shipyard
Bethlehem Steel, San Francisco
Bethlehem Steel, San Pedro, Los Angeles, California
Boston Navy Yard
Charleston Navy Yard
Consolidated Steel, Orange, Texas
Federal Shipbuilding, Kearny, N.J.
Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle
Operators: United States Navy
Republic of China Navy (Taiwan)
Hellenic Navy
Republic of Korea Navy
Spanish Navy
Turkish Navy
Pakistan Navy
Argentine Navy
Brazilian Navy
Mexican Navy
Ecuadorian Navy
Islamic Republic of Iran Navy
Preceded by: Allen M. Sumnerclass
Succeededby: Mitscherclass
Planned: 156
Completed: 99
Cancelled: 57
Active: 1
Laid up: 2
Retired: 98
Preserved: 7
General characteristics as originally built
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: 2,616tons standard; 3,460tons full load
Gearing-class destroyer
51
Length: 390.5ft (119.0m)
Beam: 40.9ft (12.5m)
Draft: 14.3ft (4.4m)
Propulsion: 2 shaft; General Electric steam turbines; 4 boilers; 60,000shp
Speed: 36.8 knots (68.2km/h)
Range: 4,500nmi (8,300km; 5,200mi) at 20 knots (37km/h;
23mph)
(8,300 km at 37 km/h)
Complement: 350 as designed
Armament: As built:
6 5 in /38 cal guns (127 mm) (3 2)
12 40 mm Bofors AA guns (2 4 & 2 2)
11 20 mm Oerlikon cannons
2 depth charge racks
6 K-gun depth charge throwers
10 21 in (533 mm) torpedo tubes
Typical by 1950:
6 5 in/38 cal guns (127 mm) (in 3 2 Mk 38 DP mounts)
6 3 in/50 cal guns (76 mm) (2 2, 2 1)
2 Hedgehog ASW weapons
1 depth charge rack
6 K-gun depth charge throwers
Typical after FRAM I (1960-65)
4 5 in/38 cal guns (127 mm) (in 2 2 Mk 38 DP mounts)
1 ASROC 8-cell launcher
2 triple Mark 32 torpedo tubes for Mark 44 torpedoes
1 Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter (DASH)
Variable Depth Sonar (VDS)
The Gearing class is a group of 98 destroyers built for the US Navy during and shortly after World War II. The
Gearing design was a minor modification of the immediately preceding Allen M. Sumner class. The hull was
lengthened 14ft (4.3m) amidships, creating more storage space for fuel, thus giving the ships a larger range than the
Sumners.
The first Gearings were not ready for service until mid-1945, so they saw relatively little wartime service. They
continued serving, with a series of upgrades, until the 1970s. At that time many were sold to other nations, where
they served many more years.
Ten Gearing-class ships still exist. ARM Netzahualcyotl (D-102), formerly USSSteinaker(DD-863), is active in
the Mexican navy. As of April 2012 two were laid up in non-operational condition in Kaohsiung, Taiwan: ROCS
Chien Yang (DDG-912), formerly USSJames E. Kyes(DD-787) and ROCS Sheng Yang (DDG-923), formerly
USSPower(DD-839). The other seven are museum ships: ROKN Kang Won (DD-922), formerly USSWilliam R.
Rush(DD-714), near Busan, South Korea; TCGGayret(D-352), formerly USSEversole(DD-789), in Izmit,
Turkey; ROKN Jeong Buk (DD-916), formerly USSEverett F. Larson(DD-830), near Gangneung, South Korea;
ROCS Te Yang (DDG-925), formerly USSSarsfield(DD-837), in Tainan, Taiwan; USSJoseph P. Kennedy,
Jr.(DD-850) in Fall River, MA; ROKN Jeong Ju (DD-925), formerly USSRogers(DD-876), near Cheonan, South
Korea and USSOrleck(DD-886) in Lake Charles, LA.
Gearing-class destroyer
52
Procurement and construction
31 vessels were authorised on 9 July 1942:
DD-710 to DD-721 awarded to Federal Shipbuilding, Kearny.
DD-742 to DD-743 awarded to Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine.
DD-763 to DD-769 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, San Francisco.
DD-782 to DD-791 awarded to Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle.
4 vessels were authorised on 13 May 1942:
DD-805 to DD-808 awarded to Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine.
3 vessels were authorised on 27 March 1943 under the Vincent-Trammell Act:
DD-809 to DD-811 awarded to Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine. (later cancelled)
118 vessels were authorised on 19 July 1943 under the 70% Expansion Act:
DD-812 awarded to Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine. (later cancelled)
DD-813 to DD-814 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, Staten Island. (later cancelled)
DD-815 to DD-825 awarded to Consolidated Steel, Orange. (815 and 816 later cancelled)
DD-826 to DD-850 awarded to Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine.
DD-851 to DD-853 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, Fore River Shipyard, Quincy.
DD-854 to DD-856 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, Staten Island. (later cancelled)
DD-858 to DD-861 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, San Pedro.
DD-862 to DD-872 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, Staten Island.
DD-873 to DD-890 awarded to Consolidated Steel, Orange.
DD-891 to DD-893 awarded to Federal Shipbuilding, Kearny. (later cancelled)
DD-894 to DD-895 awarded to Consolidated Steel, Orange. (later cancelled)
DD-896 to DD-904 awarded to Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine. (later cancelled)
DD-905 to DD-908 awarded to Boston Navy Yard. (later cancelled)
DD-909 to DD-916 awarded to Bethlehem Steel, Staten Island. (later cancelled)
DD-917 to DD-924 awarded to Consolidated Steel, Orange. (later cancelled)
DD-925 to DD-926 awarded to Charleston Navy Yard. (later cancelled)
(Of the missing numbers in this sequence - 722 to 741, 744 to 762, 770 to 781, and 857 were allocated to orders for
Allen M. Sumner class destroyers; 792 to 804 were awarded to orders for Fletcher class destroyers.)
Cancelled vessels
In March 1945, the orders for 36 of the above vessels were cancelled, and 11 more orders were cancelled in August
1945. Following the close of World War II, 6 further vessels were cancelled in 1946, while another 4 (DD-927 to
DD-930) were completed as destroyer leaders DL-2 to DL-5:
the Castle (DD-720) and Woodrow R. Thomson (DD-721), the last pair of the twelve vessels launched by Federal
Shipbuilding at Kearny, were cancelled on 11 February 1946. They were sold on 29 August 1955 and scrapped.
the Lansdale (DD-766) and Seymour D. Owen (DD-767), both launched by Bethlehem at San Francisco, were
cancelled on 7 January 1946. Their bows were used for repair to other destroyers, and their remains were
scrapped in 1958-59.
the Hoel (DD-768) and Abner Read (ii) (DD-769), both building by Bethlehem at San Francisco, were cancelled
on 12 September 1946 prior to launch and broken up on the slip.
Four unnamed vessels (DD-809 to DD-812) awarded to Bath Iron Works, five others (DD-813, DD-814, and
DD-854 to DD-856) awarded to Bethlehem at Staten Island, and two more (DD-815 and DD-816) awarded to
Consolidated Steel Corporation at Orange, were all cancelled on 12 August 1945. DD-815 would have been
Gearing-class destroyer
53
named Charles H. Roan (the name was re-allocated to DD-853).
Three more unnamed vessels (DD-891 to DD-893) awarded to Federal Shipbuilding at Kearney, were cancelled 8
March 1945.
Ten more unnamed vessels (DD-894, DD-895, and DD-917 to DD-924) awarded to Consolidated Steel
Corporation at Orange, and four more (DD-905 to DD-908) awarded to Boston Navy Yard, and another two
(DD-925 and DD-926) awarded to Charleston Navy Yard, were all cancelled on 27 March 1945.
Nine more unnamed vessels (DD-896 to DD-904) awarded to Bath Iron Works, and another eight (DD-909 to
DD-916) awarded to Bethlehem at Staten Island, were all cancelled on 28 March 1945.
Description
The first ship was laid down in August 1944, while the last was launched in March 1946. In that time the United
States produced 98 Gearing-class destroyers. The Gearing class was a seemingly minor improvement of the
previous Sumner class, which were built from 1943 until 1945. The main difference was that the Gearings were 14
feet (4.3 m) longer in the midship section, allowing for increased fuel tankage for greater range, an important
consideration in Pacific War operations. More importantly in the long run, the Gearings' increased size made them
much more suitable for upgrades than the Sumners, as seen in the wartime radar picket subclass, the 1950s radar
picket destroyer (DDR) and escort destroyer (DDE) conversions, and the Fleet Rehabilitation and Modernization
(FRAM) conversions 1960-65. As designed, the Gearings' armament was identical to the Sumners'. Three twin
5"/38cal Mark 38 dual purpose (DP) mounts constituted the main battery. The 5-inch guns were guided by a Mark 37
Gun Fire Control System with a Mark 25 fire control radar linked by a Mark 1A Fire Control Computer stabilized by
a Mark 6 8,500 rpm gyro. This fire control system provided effective long-range anti-aircraft (AA) or anti-surface
fire. Twelve 40 mm guns and 11 20 mm guns were also retained. The initial design retained the Sumners' heavy
torpedo armament of 10 21" (533mm) tubes in two quintuple mounts, firing the Mark 15 torpedo. As the threat from
kamikaze aircraft mounted in 1945, and with few remaining Japanese warships to use torpedoes on, most of the class
had the after quintuple 21" torpedo tube mount replaced by an additional 40 mm quadruple mount (prior to
completion on later ships) for 16 total 40mm guns. 26 ships (DD-742-745, 805-808, 829-835, and 873-883) were
ordered without torpedo tubes to allow for radar picket equipment; these were redesignated as DDRs in 1948.
[1][2][3]
1946-59 upgrades
Following World War II most of the class had their AA and anti-submarine warfare (ASW) armament upgraded. The
40 mm and 20 mm guns were replaced by 2-6 3"/50 caliber guns (up to 2 2, 2 1). One depth charge rack was
removed and two Hedgehog mounts added. The K-guns were retained. Nine additional (for a total of 35) ships were
converted to radar picket destroyers (DDR) in the early 1950s; these typically received only one 3"/50cal twin mount
to save weight for radar equipment, as did the wartime radar pickets. Nine ships were converted to escort destroyers
(DDE), emphasizing ASW. USS Carpenter (DD-825) was the most thorough DDE conversion, with 4 3"/70cal guns
in twin enclosed mounts, two Weapon Alpha launchers, four new 21" torpedo tubes for the Mark 37 ASW torpedo,
and one depth charge rack.
[4]
Gearing-class destroyer
54
FRAM I upgrade
USSSarsfield(DD-837) as delivered and
USSRowan(DD-782) after FRAM I.
In the late 1950s forty-four of the Gearing-class destroyers underwent
extensive modernization overhauls, known as FRAM I, which were
designed to convert them from an AAdestroyer to an anti-submarine
warfare platform. FRAM removed all of the DDR and DDE
equipment, and these ships were redesignated as DDs. FRAM I and
FRAM II conversions were completed 1960-65.
The FRAM MK I program was designed primarily for the
Gearing-class destroyers. This upgrade included rebuilding the ship's
superstructure, engines, electronic systems, radar, sonar, and weapons.
The second twin 5" gun mount and all previous AA guns and ASW
equipment were removed. Upgraded systems included SQS-23 sonar, SPS-10 surface search radar, 2 triple Mark
32 torpedo tubes, 8-cell Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC) box launcher, and one QH-50C DASH ASW drone
helicopter, with its own landing pad and hangar. Both the Mk 32 torpedo tubes and ASROC launched Mk 44 homing
ASW torpedoes. ASROC could also launch a nuclear depth charge. On 11 May 1962, USS Agerholm (DD-826)
tested a live nuclear ASROC in the "Swordfish" test.
In Navy slang, the modified destroyers were called "FRAM cans", "can" being a contraction of "tin can", the slang
term for a destroyer or destroyer escort.
The Gyrodyne QH-50C DASH was an unmanned anti-submarine helicopter, controlled remotely from the ship. The
drone could carry 2 Mk.44 homing ASW torpedoes. During this era the ASROC system had an effective range of
only 5 nautical miles (9km), but the DASH drone allowed the ship to deploy ASW attack to sonar contacts as far as
22 nautical miles (41km) away.
An upgraded version of DASH, QH-50D, remained in use by the US Army until May, 2006.
FRAM II upgrade
The FRAM MK II program was designed primarily for the Sumner class destroyers, but was used to upgrade the
Gearing class as well. This upgrade program included life-extension refurbishment, a new radar system, ASROC
(not fitted on the Sumners), Mk.32 torpedo tubes, DASH ASW drone, and most importantly, a new variable depth
sonar (VDS).
Service and Disposition
Many of the Gearings provided significant gunfire support in the Vietnam War. They also served as escorts for
Carrier Battle Groups (Carrier Strike Groups from 2004) and Amphibious Ready Groups (Expeditionary Strike
Groups from 2006). DASH was withdrawn from ASW service in 1969 due to poor reliability. With ASROC
continuing to provide a standoff ASW capability, the Gearings were retained in service for several years, with most
being decommissioned and transferred to foreign navies 1973-80. They were replaced as ASW ships by the
Spruance-class destroyers, which were commissioned 1975-83. These had the same ASW armament as a Gearing
FRAM destroyer, with the addition of improved sonar and a piloted helicopter, initially the Kaman SH-2 Seasprite
and from 1984 the Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk. Some Gearings served in the Naval Reserve Force (NRF) from 1973,
remaining in commission with a partial active crew to provide training for Naval reservists. The last World War II
surface combatant in US naval service was the USS William C. Lawe (DD-763), a Gearing FRAM I,
decommissioned and stricken 1 October 1983 and expended as a target 14 July 1999.
[5]
Gearing-class destroyer
55
Yang class
After the Gearing-class ships were retired from USN service, many were sold abroad, including over a dozen to the
Republic of China Navy (ROCN) in Taiwan. These ships, along with Fletcher-class and Allen M. Sumner-class
destroyers also acquired then, were upgraded under the WuChin (Chinese: ) I, II, and III programs and known
throughout the ROCN as the Yang-class (Chinese: ) destroyers as they were assigned names that all end
with the word "Yang". The last batch of 7WC-III program vessels, all of them Gearing class, were retired in early
2000s.
Under the most advanced Wu Chin III upgrade program, all World War Two vintage weapons were removed and
replaced with 4 Hsiung Feng II SSM, 10 SM-1 (box launchers), 1 8-cell ASROC, 1 76 mm gun, 2 40
mm/70 AA, 1 20 mm Phalanx CIWS and 2 triple 12.75" torpedo tubes. The DASH ASW drones were not
acquired, but hangar facilities aboard those ships that had them were later used to accommodate ASW versions of
MD 500 Defender helicopters.
After the Yang-class destroyers were decommissioned, the SM-1 launch boxes were moved to Chi Yang-class
frigates to improve their anti-air capability.
Ships in class
Ship Name Hull
No.
Builder Laid down Commission Decommission
Gearing DD-710 Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, Kearny,
New Jersey
10 August 1944 3 May 1945 2 July 1973
Eugene A. Greene DD-711 Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, Kearny,
New Jersey
17 August 1944 8 June 1945 31 August 1972
Gyatt DD-712 Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, Kearny,
New Jersey
15 April 1945 2 July 1945 22 October 1969
Kenneth D. Bailey DD-713 Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, Kearny,
New Jersey
21 September
1944
31 July 1945 20 January 1970
William R. Rush DD-714 Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Company, Newark, New
Jersey
19 October
1944
21 September
1945
1 July 1978
William M. Wood DD-715 Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Company, Newark, New
Jersey
2 November
1944
24 November
1945
1 December 1976
Wiltsie DD-716 Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Company, Newark, New
Jersey
13 March 1945 12 January 1946 23 January 1976
Theodore E.
Chandler
DD-717 Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, Kearny,
New Jersey
23 April 1945 22 March 1946 1 April 1975
Hamner DD-718 Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Company, Newark, New
Jersey
25 April 1945 12 July 1946 1 October 1979
Epperson DD-719 Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, Kearny,
New Jersey
20 June 1945 19 March 1949 1 December 1975
Frank Knox DD-742 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 8 May 1944 11 December
1944
30 January 1971
Southerland DD-743 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 27 May 1944 22 December
1944
26 February 1981
William C. Lawe DD-763 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Francisco,
California
12 March 1944 18 December
1946
1 October 1983
Gearing-class destroyer
56
Lloyd Thomas DD-764 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Francisco,
California
26 March 1944 21 March 1947 12 October 1972
Keppler DD-765 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Francisco,
California
23 April 1944 23 May 1947 1 July 1972
Rowan DD-782 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 25 March 1944 31 March 1945 18 December
1975
Gurke DD-783 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Tacoma, Washington 1 July 1944 12 May 1945 30 January 1976
McKean DD-784 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 15 September
1944
9 June 1945 1 October 1981
Henderson DD-785 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 27 October
1944
4 August 1945 30 September
1980
Richard B.
Anderson
DD-786 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 1 December
1944
26 October 1945 20 December
1975
James E. Kyes DD-787 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 27 December
1944
8 February 1946 31 March 1973
Hollister DD-788 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 18 January
1945
29 March 1946 31 August 1979
Eversole DD-789 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 28 February
1945
10 May 1946 11 July 1973
Shelton DD-790 Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington 31 May 1945 21 June 1946 31 March 1973
Chevalier DD-805 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 12 June 1944 9 January 1945 5 July 1972
Higbee DD-806 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 26 June 1944 27 January 1945 15 July 1979
Benner DD-807 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 10 July 1944 13 February
1945
20 November
1970
Dennis J. Buckley DD-808 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 24 July 1944 2 March 1945 2 July 1973
Corry DD-817 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 5 April 1945 27 February
1946
27 February 1981
New DD-818 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 14 April 1945 5 April 1946 1 July 1976
Holder DD-819 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 23 April 1945 18 May 1946 1 October 1976
Rich DD-820 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 16 May 1945 3 July 1946 10 November
1977
Johnston DD-821 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 26 March 1945 23 August 1946 27 February 1981
Robert H. McCard DD-822 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 20 June 1945 23 October 1946 5 June 1980
Samuel B. Roberts DD-823 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 27 June 1945 22 December
1946
2 November
1970
Basilone DD-824 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 7 July 1945 26 July 1949 1 November
1977
Carpenter DD-825 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 30 July 1945 15 December
1949
20 February 1981
Agerholm DD-826 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 10 September
1945
20 June 1946 1 December 1978
Robert A. Owens DD-827 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 29 October
1945
5 November
1949
16 February 1982
Timmerman DD-828 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 1 October 1945 26 September
1952
27 July 1956
Gearing-class destroyer
57
Myles C. Fox DD-829 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 14 August 1944 20 March 1945 1 October 1979
Everett F. Larson DD-830 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 4 September
1944
6 April 1945 30 October 1972
Goodrich DD-831 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 18 September
1944
24 April 1945 30 November
1969
Hanson DD-832 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 7 October 1944 11 May 1945 31 March 1973
Herbert J. Thomas DD-833 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 30 October
1944
29 May 1945 4 December 1970
Turner DD-834 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 13 November
1944
12 June 1945 26 September
1969
Charles P. Cecil DD-835 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 2 December
1944
29 June 1945 1 October 1979
George K.
MacKenzie
DD-836 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 21 December
1944
13 July 1945 30 September
1976
Sarsfield DD-837 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 15 January
1945
31 July 1945 1 October 1977
Ernest G. Small DD-838 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 30 January
1945
21 August 1945 13 November
1970
Power DD-839 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 26 February
1945
13 September
1945
1 October 1977
Glennon DD-840 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 12 March 1945 4 October 1945 1 October 1976
Noa DD-841 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 26 March 1945 2 November
1945
31 October 1973
Fiske DD-842 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 9 April 1945 28 November
1945
5 June 1980
Warrington DD-843 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 23 April 1945 20 December
1945
30 September
1972
Perry DD-844 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 14 May 1945 17 January 1946 1 July 1973
Bausell DD-845 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 28 May 1945 7 February 1946 30 May 1978
Ozbourn DD-846 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 16 June 1945 5 March 1946 30 May 1975
Robert L. Wilson DD-847 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 2 July 1945 28 March 1946 30 September
1974
Witek DD-848 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 16 July 1945 23 April 1946 19 August 1968
Richard E. Kraus DD-849 Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine 31 July 1945 23 May 1946 1 July 1976
Joseph P.
Kennedy, Jr.
DD-850 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Fore River
Shipyard, Quincy, Massachusetts
2 April 1945 15 December
1945
2 July 1973
Rupertus DD-851 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Fore River
Shipyard, Quincy, Massachusetts
2 May 1945 8 March 1946 10 July 1973
Leonard F. Mason DD-852 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Fore River
Shipyard, Quincy, Massachusetts
2 May 1945 28 June 1946 2 November
1976
Charles H. Roan DD-853 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Fore River
Shipyard, Quincy, Massachusetts
2 April 1945 12 September
1946
21 September
1973
Fred T. Berry DD-858 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Pedro,
California
16 July 1944 12 May 1945 15 September
1970
Norris DD-859 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Pedro,
California
29 August 1944 9 June 1945 4 December 1970
Gearing-class destroyer
58
McCaffery DD-860 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Pedro,
California
1 October 1944 26 July 1945 30 September
1973
Harwood DD-861 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, San Pedro,
California
29 October
1944
28 September
1945
1 February 1971
Vogelgesang DD-862 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 3 August 1944 28 April 1945 24 February 1982
Steinaker DD-863 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 1 September
1944
26 May 1945 24 February 1982
Harold J. Ellison DD-864 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 3 October 1944 23 June 1945 1 October 1983
Charles R. Ware DD-865 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 1 November
1944
21 July 1945 30 November
1974
Cone DD-866 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 30 November
1944
18 August 1945 1 October 1982
Stribling DD-867 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 15 January
1945
29 September
1945
1 July 1976
Brownson DD-868 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 13 February
1945
17 November
1945
30 September
1976
Arnold J. Isbell DD-869 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 14 March 1945 5 January 1946 4 December 1973
Fechteler DD-870 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 12 April 1945 2 March 1946 11 September
1970
Damato DD-871 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 10 May 1945 27 April 1946 30 September
1980
Forrest Royal DD-872 Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Staten Island, New York 8 June 1945 29 June 1946 27 March 1971
Hawkins DD-873 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 14 May 1944 10 February
1945
1 October 1979
Duncan DD-874 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 22 May 1944 25 February
1945
15 January 1971
Henry W. Tucker DD-875 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 29 May 1944 12 March 1945 3 December 1973
Rogers DD-876 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 3 June 1944 26 March 1945 1 October 1980
Perkins DD-877 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 19 June 1944 4 April 1945 15 January 1973
Vesole DD-878 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 3 July 1944 23 April 1945 1 December 1976
Leary DD-879 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 11 August 1944 7 May 1945 31 October 1973
Dyess DD-880 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 17 August 1944 21 May 1945 27 January 1981
Bordelon DD-881 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 9 September
1944
5 June 1945 1 February 1977
Furse DD-882 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 23 September
1944
10 July 1945 31 August 1972
Newman K. Perry DD-883 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 10 October
1944
26 July 1945 27 February 1981
Floyd B. Parks DD-884 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 30 October
1944
31 July 1945 2 July 1973
John R. Craig DD-885 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 17 November
1944
20 August 1945 27 July 1979
Orleck DD-886 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 28 November
1944
15 September
1945
1 October 1982
Gearing-class destroyer
59
Brinkley Bass DD-887 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 20 December
1944
1 October 1945 3 December 1973
Stickell DD-888 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 5 January 1945 31 October 1945 1 July 1972
O'Hare DD-889 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 27 January
1945
29 November
1945
31 October 1973
Meredith DD-890 Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas 27 January
1945
31 December
1945
29 June 1979
References
[1] ." The Sumner Class As Built (http:/ / www. destroyersonline. com/ usndd/ sumnrasbuilt. htm) Retrieved 25 August 2009."
[2] [2] Friedman, Norman "US Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History (Revised Edition)", Naval Institute Press, Annapolis:2004, ISBN
1-55750-442-3.
[3] [3] Silverstone, Paul H. "U.S. Warships of World War II", Ian Allan Ltd., London:1965.
[4] [4] Friedman, p. 510-513.
[5] [5] Friedman
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Gearing class destroyers.
Gearing-class destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ sumner-gearingclass/ gearingclass/ ) at Destroyer History
Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
http:/ / www. gyrodynehelicopters. com/ gearing_class. htm
Mitscher-class destroyer
60
Mitscher-class destroyer
USS Wilkinson (DL-5) underway in late 1950s
Class overview
Name: Mitscher-class destroyer
Builders: Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine (2)
Bethlehem Steel, Fore River Shipyard (2)
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Gearing-classdestroyer
Succeededby: Forrest Sherman-classdestroyer
Built: 19491954
In commission: 19531978
Completed: 4
Retired: 4
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: 3,642tons standard; 4,855 full load
Length: 490ft (150m)
Beam: 47.5ft (14.5m)
Draft: 14.7ft (4.5m)
Propulsion: 2 shaft; gear steam turbines; 4 boilers; 80,000shp (60 MW)
Range: 4,500nmi (8,330km) at 20 knots (37km/h)
Armament: 2x 5in (127mm); 4x 3in (76mm); 8x 20mm; 4x 21in (533mm) TT; 2x Weapon Alpha ASW rocket launcher;
1x depth charge rack
The Mitscher-class destroyer was an experimental destroyer class of four ships that were built for the United States
Navy shortly after World War II. Considerably larger than all previous destroyers, they would have been the first
post-war destroyer class had they not been reclassified during construction as destroyer leaders (DL). Commissioned
in 1953-1954, two of the class served until 1969, and were scrapped in the 1970s. The other two were converted into
guided missile destroyers (DDG), served until 1978, and were sold for scrap by 1980.
Mitscher-class destroyer
61
Description
All four Mitscher class ships were ordered 3 August 1948 and were named for admirals of the Second World War.
Each ship displaced 3,331tons light, 3,642tons standard and 4,855tons under full load with a length of 494 feet
(151m), a 50-foot (15m) beam and a 26-foot (8m) draft.
Beyond that, each ship had a different loadout of propulsion and other systems so as to determine the best course of
action for future destroyer design.
In the early 1960s, the Mitscher class underwent modernization through the Class Improvement Program (CIP),
which included the replacement of the boilers on the first two ships of the class.
USS Mitscher (DDG-35) after her conversion to a
guided missile destroyer, 1971.
Ships in class
Ship Name Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Ref
Mitscher(DL-2) Bath Iron Works 19531978 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
(DRMS) for scrapping, 1August1980
[1]
John S.
McCain(DL-3)
Bath Iron Works 19531978 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
(DRMS) for scrapping, 13December1979
[2]
Willis A. Lee(DL-4) Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19541969 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
(DRMS) for scrapping, 1June1973
[3]
Wilkinson(DL-5) Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19541969 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
(DRMS) for scrapping, 1June1975
[4]
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Mitscher class destroyers.
http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ dd-927. htm
http:/ / www. gyrodynehelicopters. com/ mitscher_class. htm
Mitscher-class destroyer
62
References
[1] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG35. htm
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG36. htm
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DL4.htm
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DL5.htm
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer
63
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer
USS Hull (DD-945)
Class overview
Name: Forrest Sherman class destroyer
Builders: Bath Iron Works
Bethlehem Steel Quincy
Ingalls Shipbuilding
Puget Sound Bridge and Dredging Company
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Mitscher-classdestroyer
Succeededby: Farragut-class destroyer
Built: 19531959
In commission: 19551988
Completed: 18
Retired: 18
Preserved: 4
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: 2,800tons standard
4,050tons full load
Length: 407ft (124m) waterline
418ft (127m) overall
Beam: 45ft (14m)
Draft: 22ft (6.7m)
Propulsion: General Electric steam turbines (Westinghouse in DD-931)
4 1,200psi (8.3MPa) Foster-Wheeler boilers (Babcock and Wilcox in DD-937, DD-943, DD-944, DD-945,
DD-946 and DD-948)
70,000shp (52MW), 2 shafts.
Speed: 32.5 knots (60.2km/h)
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer
64
Range: 4,500 nautical miles (8,300km) at 20 knots (37km/h)
Complement: 15 officers, 318 enlisted
Armament: 3 5inch (127mm) 54-calibre Mark 42 single gun mounts
4 3inch (76mm) 50-caliber Mark 33 guns
2 Mark 10/11 Hedgehogs
4 21inch (533mm) torpedo tubes.
The 18 Forrest Sherman-class destroyers were the first US post-war destroyers (DD-927 to DD-930 were
completed as destroyer leaders). Commissioned beginning in 1953, these ships served until the late 1980s. Their
weaponry underwent considerable modification during their years of service. Four were converted to guided missile
destroyers.
Three ships of the class have become museum ships, nine have been sunk in training exercises, and the others have
been scrapped or are scheduled to be scrapped.
Construction
Nine ships were constructed by Bath Iron Works of Bath, Maine, five were built by Bethlehem Steel at the Fore
River Shipyard in Quincy, Massachusetts, two were built by Ingalls Shipbuilding at Pascagoula, Mississippi and two
were built by Puget Sound Bridge and Dredging Company in Seattle, Washington. These destroyers were assigned
hull numbers 931 to 951, but the series skipped over the numbers used to designate the war prizes DD-934 (the
Japanese ex-Hanazuki), DD-935 (the German T-35), and DD-939 (the German Z-39).
Description
At the time they entered service, these ships were the largest US destroyers ever built, 418 feet (127m) long, with a
standard displacement of 2800 tons. They were originally armed with 3 5-inch (127mm)/54 caliber guns mounted in
single turrets (one forward and two aft), 4 3-inch (76mm)/50 caliber AA guns in twin mounts, as well as hedgehogs
and torpedoes for ASW. However, over the years, weaponry was considerably modified. The hedgehogs and 3-inch
(76mm) guns were removed from all ships during the 1960s and 1970s. In addition the fixed torpedo tubes were
replaced by two triple 12.75 inches (324mm) Mark 32 torpedo tube mounts. Eight of the class were modernized to
improve their ASW capabilities, becoming the Barry class. These ships were fitted with an eight cell ASROC
launcher in place of the No.2 5-inch (127mm) gun, and with a variable-depth sonar system.
USSBarry(DD-933) with aft gun mount
removed and replaced with an ASROC launcher.
Four of the destroyersJohn Paul Jones(DD-932),
Parsons(DD-949), Decatur(DD-936), and Somers(DD-947)were
converted to guided missile destroyers.
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer
65
USS Decatur (DDG-31) after conversion to a
guided missile destroyer with one of the aft gun
mounts replaced with a Mk 13 missile launcher.
As a test platform, the Hull(DD-945) carried the Navy's prototype
8"/55 caliber Mark 71 gun light-weight gun from 1975-1978 when the
program was canceled, and the 5-inch mount was restored. USSHull
remains the only modern destroyer-type to carry an 8-inch (203mm)
gun.
Hull(DD-945) and later ships were equipped with B&W Bailey Meter
Company's new automatic boiler combustion control system, and a
modified hurricane bow/anchor configuration. These ships are listed as
Hull-class destroyers in some references.
Disposition
Of the 18 completed, nine were disposed of in fleet training exercises, five were sold by Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service (DRMS) for scrapping, three are museums and one (Forrest Sherman) is awaiting scrapping.
Ships in class
Ship Name Hull No. Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
Forrest
Sherman
DD-931 Bath Iron Works 19551982 Stricken, to be disposed of by dismantling, 04/02/2010
[1]
John Paul
Jones
DD-932/DDG-32 Bath Iron Works 19561982 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
01/31/2001
[2]
Barry DD-933 Bath Iron Works 19561982 Stricken, retained by Navy as museum, 01/31/1983; now
museum in Washington, D.C.
[3]
Decatur DD-936/DDG-31 Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19561983 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
07/21/2004
[4]
Davis DD-937 Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19571982 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 06/30/1994
[5]
Jonas Ingram DD-938 Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19571983 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
07/23/1988
[6]
Manley DD-940 Bath Iron Works 19571983 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 06/30/1994
[7]
Du Pont DD-941 Bath Iron Works 19571983 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 12/11/1992
[8]
Bigelow DD-942 Bath Iron Works 19571982 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
04/02/2003
[9]
Blandy DD-943 Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19571982 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 06/30/1994
[10]
Mullinnix DD-944 Bethlehem Steel, Fore
River Shipyard
19581983 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
08/23/1992
[11]
Hull DD-945 Bath Iron Works 19581983 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
04/07/1998
[12]
Edson DD-946 Bath Iron Works 19581988 Donated as a museum/memorial; now museum in Bay
City, Michigan
[13]
Somers DD-947/DDG-34 Bath Iron Works 19591982 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
07/22/1998
[14]
Forrest Sherman-class destroyer
66
Morton DD-948 Ingalls Shipbuilding 19591982 Disposed of, sold by Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS) for scrapping, 03/04/1992
[15]
Parsons DD-949/DDG-33 Ingalls Shipbuilding 19591982 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
04/25/1989
[16]
Richard S.
Edwards
DD-950 Puget Sound Bridge and
Dredging Company
19591982 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
04/10/1997
[17]
Turner Joy DD-951 Puget Sound Bridge and
Dredging Company
19591982 Donated as a museum/memorial, 04/10/1991; now
museum in Bremerton, WA
[18]
References
[1] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD931.htm
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG32. htm
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD933.htm
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG31. htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD937.htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD938.htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD940.htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD941.htm
[9] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD942.htm
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD943.htm
[11] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD944.htm
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD945.htm
[13] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD946.htm
[14] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG34. htm
[15] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD948.htm
[16] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG33. htm
[17] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD950.htm
[18] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD951.htm
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Forrest Sherman class destroyers.
Forrest Sherman-class destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ forrestshermanclass/ ) at Destroyer
History Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
Farragut-class destroyer (1958)
67
Farragut-class destroyer (1958)
USS Farragut (DDG-37)
Class overview
Name: Farragut class destroyer
Builders: Bethlehem Steel Quincy
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
San Francisco Naval Shipyard
Philadelphia Naval Shipyard
Bath Iron Works
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Forrest Sherman-classdestroyer
Succeededby: Charles F. Adams-classdestroyer
Built: 19571961
In commission: 19591993
Completed: 10
Retired: 10
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: 4,167 tons (standard)
5,648 tons (full load)
Length: 512.5ft (156.2m)
Beam: 52.3ft (16m)
Draught: 17.8ft (5.4m)
Propulsion: 2 shaft
2 Allis-Chalmers turbines
4 each 1,200 Pound forced draft Babcock and Wilcox D-type super heated
boilers
85,000shp (63,000kW)
Speed: 32 knots (59km/h)
Range: 5,000nmi (9,000km) at 20 knots (37km/h)
Complement: 360
Farragut-class destroyer (1958)
68
Sensors and
processing systems:
1 AN/SPS-10 surface search RADAR
[1]
1 AN/SPS-37 air search RADAR
1 AN/SPS-39 3D air search RADAR
1 AN/SPG-53 gun fire control RADAR
[2]
2 AN/SPG-55 Terrier fire control RADAR
[3]
AN/SQS-23 SONAR
[4]
Armament: 1 Mark 10 Launcher Terrier SAM
1 5in (127 mm)
1 ASROC Launcher
6 12.8in (324 mm) ASW TT
8 Boeing Harpoon SSM (After third update)
The Farragut class was the second destroyer class of the United States Navy to be named for Admiral David
Glasgow Farragut. The class is sometimes referred to as the Coontz class, since Coontz was first to be designed and
built as a guided missile ship, whereas the previous three ships were designed as all-gun units and converted later.
[5]
Ten Farragut-class ships were ordered between 1955 and 1957. Each ship displaced 5,800 tons under full load, with
a length of 512 feet (156m), a 52-foot (16m) beam and a top speed of 33 knots (61km/h). Originally commissioned
as guided missile frigates (DLG), they were redesignated as guided missile destroyers (DDG) under the fleet
realignment in 1975. They were also the only redesignated ships to be renumbered as well under the realignment,
with the first unit changing from DLG-6 to DDG-37 and all subsequent vessels being renumbered upwards in order.
All ships of the class were decommissioned between 1989 and 1994 and subsequently scrapped.
Ships in class
Name Number Builder Launched Commissioned Home
port
Status
Farragut DDG-37 Bethlehem Steel
Corporation
18 July 1958 10 December
1960
Decommissioned 31 October
1989
Luce DDG-38 Bethlehem Steel
Corporation
11 December
1958
20 May 1961 Decommissioned 1 April 1991
Macdonough DDG-39 Bethlehem Steel
Corporation
9 July 1959 4 November 1961 Decommissioned 23 October
1992
Coontz DDG-40 Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard
6 December 1958 15 July 1960 Decommissioned 2 October 1989
King DDG-41 Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard
6 December 1958 17 November
1960
Decommissioned 28 March 1991
Mahan DDG-42 San Francisco Naval
Shipyard
7 October 1959 25 December
1960
Decommissioned 15 June 1993
Dahlgren DDG-43 Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard
16 March 1960 8 April 1961 Decommissioned 31 July 1992
William V.
Pratt
DDG-44 Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard
6 March 1960 4 November 1961 Decommissioned 30 September
1991
Dewey DDG-45 Bath Iron Works 30 November
1958
7 December 1959 Decommissioned 31 August 1990
Preble DDG-46 Bath Iron Works 23 May 1959 9 May 1960 Decommissioned 15 November
1991
The fictional USS Bedford was depicted as a Farragut class destroyer, using a large model ship, in the 1965 cold-war
film The Bedford Incident.
Farragut-class destroyer (1958)
69
References
[1] Blackman, Raymond V. B. Jane's Fighting Ships (1970/71) p.432
[2] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Shipboard Radars" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1978 p.145
[3] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Shipboard Radars" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1978 p.144
[4] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Sonars, Part 1" United States Naval Institute Proceedings July 1981 p.119
[5] DLG 6 / DDG-37 Farragut / DLG 9 Coontz (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ ddg-37. htm)
External links
Farragut-class frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ farragutclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation
(http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
70
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
USS Charles F. Adams (DDG-2)
Class overview
Name: Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
Builders: Bath Iron Works
New York Shipbuilding Corporation
Defoe Shipbuilding Company
Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington
Avondale Marine
Puget Sound Bridge and Dredging Company
Operators: United States Navy
Hellenic Navy
Preceded by: Farragut-class destroyer
Succeededby: Spruance-classdestroyer
Subclasses: Royal Australian Navy: Perth-class
German Navy: Ltjens-class
Completed: 23
Retired: 23
Preserved: 1
General characteristics
Class & type: Guided missile destroyer
Displacement: 3,277 tons standard, 4,526 full load
Length: 437ft (133m)
Beam: 47ft (14m)
Draught: 15ft (4.6m)
Propulsion: 2 steam turbines providing 70,000shp (52MW); 2 shafts
4 1,275psi (8,790kPa) boilers
Speed: 33 knots (61km/h)
Range: 4,500 nautical miles (8,300km) at 20 knots (37km/h)
Complement: 310-333
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
71
Sensors and
processing systems:
1 AN/SPS-10 surface search RADAR
[1]
1 AN/SPS-37 air search RADAR
1 AN/SPS-39 3D air search RADAR
2 AN/SPG-51 Tartar fire control RADAR
[2]
1 AN/SPG-53 gun fire control RADAR
[3]
AN/SQS-23 SONAR
[4]
Armament: 1 Mk 11 missile launcher (DDG2-14) or Mk 13 single arm missile launcher (DDG-15-24) for RIM-24 Tartar
SAM system, or later the RIM-66 Standard (SM-1) and Harpoon antiship missile
2 5"/54 caliber Mark 42 (127 mm) gun
1 RUR-5 ASROC Launcher
6 12.8 in (324 mm) ASW Torpedo Tubes (2 Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes)
The Charles F. Adams class is a ship class of 29 guided missile destroyers built between 1958 and 1967. Twenty
three destroyers were built for the United States Navy, three for the Royal Australian Navy, and three for the West
German Bundesmarine. The design of these ships was based on that of Forrest Sherman-class destroyers, but the
Charles F. Adams class were the first class designed to serve as guided missile destroyers. 19 feet (5.8m) of length
was added to the center of the design of the Forrest Sherman-class to carry the ASROC launcher, and the boilers
were upgraded from 600psi (4,100kPa) to 1,275psi (8,790kPa) boilers. Both changes caused significant
maintenance problems in the long run for all the ships. The Charles F. Adams-class destroyers were the last steam
turbine-powered destroyers built for the U.S. Navy. Starting with the later Spruance-class destroyers, all U.S. Navy
destroyers have been powered by gas turbines. Some of the destroyers of the Charles F. Adams-class served during
the blockade of Cuba in 1962 and during the War in Vietnam.
Although designed with cutting-edge technology for the 1950s, by the mid-1970s it was clear to the Navy that the
Charles F. Adams-class destroyers were not prepared to deal with modern air attacks and guided missile. To reduce
this vulnerability, the Navy began the New Threat Upgrade (NTU) program. This consisted of a number of sensor,
weapons and communications upgrades that were intended to extend the service lives of the ships. Under the NTU,
these destroyers received improved electronic warfare capability through the installation of the AN/SLQ-32(V)2 EW
Suite.
The upgraded combat system would include the MK86 Gun Fire Control System with AN/SPQ-9 radar, the Hughes
AN/SPS-52C 3D radar, the AN/SPG-51C (Digital) Fire Control Radars, and the Naval Tactical Data System
(NTDS). These ships were also planned to have the ability to launch several Harpoon antiship missiles, which were
to be installed in their MK-11 Tartar missile launcher.
During the 1980s, the Reagan Administration chose to accelerate production of the Ticonderoga-class guided missile
cruisers and build the Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers as replacements for these and other classes of
destroyers, and of nuclear-powered cruisers. The result of this was that only three of these destroyers, Tattnall,
Goldsborough, and Benjamin Stoddert received the full upgrade.
Other ships, of the class, such as Charles F. Adams, received only partial upgrades, which included the AN/SLQ-32
and Harpoon Missile upgrades, that were intended to extend their service lives until the Arleigh Burke-class could
reach operational capability.
The United States Navy decommissioned its last Charles F. Adams destroyer, the Goldsborough, on 29 April 1993.
The Australian and German navies decommissioned their last ships of this class by 2003. Four ships of this class
were transferred to the Hellenic Navy in 1992, but those have also been decommissioned.
The Charles F. Adams has been placed on inactive hold status and there are attempts by private groups to have it
preserved as a museum ship. Mlders (D186) was made into a museum ship, but all of the other destroyers in the
class have been sunk as targets, sunk for diving wrecks or sold for scrap.
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
72
Ships in class
Mlders, a Ltjens class destroyer as
museum ship of the German Navy
Ship Name Hull No. Commission
Decommission
Fate Notes
Charles F. Adams DDG-2 19601990 Museum hold
[5]
John King DDG-3 19611990 Scrapped
[6]
Lawrence DDG-4 19621990 Scrapped
[7]
Claude V. Ricketts DDG-5 19621989 Scrapped
[8]
Barney DDG-6 19621990 Scrapped
[9]
Henry B. Wilson DDG-7 19601989 sunk as target ship
[10]
Lynde McCormick DDG-8 19611991 Sunk as target
[11]
Towers DDG-9 19611990 Sunk as target
[12]
Sampson DDG-10 19611991 Scrapped
[13]
Sellers DDG-11 19611989 Scrapped
[14]
Robison DDG-12 19611991 Scrapped
[15]
Hoel DDG-13 19621990 Converted to power barge, then scrapped
[16]
Buchanan DDG-14 19621991 Sunk as target
[17]
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
73
Berkeley DDG-15 19621992 Sold to Greece as Themistocles (D-221), scrapped later
[18]
Joseph Strauss DDG-16 19631990 Sold to Greece as Formion (D-220), scrapped later
[19]
Conyngham DDG-17 19631990 Scrapped
[20]
Semmes DDG-18 19621991 Sold to Greece as Kimon (D-218), scrapped later
[21]
Tattnall DDG-19 19631991 Scrapped
[22]
Goldsborough DDG-20 19631993 Sold to Australia as a parts hulk, scrapped later
[23]
Cochrane DDG-21 19641990 Scrapped
[24]
Benjamin Stoddert DDG-22 19641991 Sank while under tow en route for scrapping
[25]
Richard E. Byrd DDG-23 19641990 Sold to Greece for parts, sunk as target later
[26]
Waddell DDG-24 19641992 Sold to Greece as Nearchos (D-219), sunk as target later
[27]
Hellenic Navy
HS Kimon (D-218) (formerly USS Semmes)
HS Nearchos (D-219) (formerly USS Waddell)
HS Formion (D-220) (formerly USS Joseph Strauss)
HS Themistocles (D-221) (formerly USS Berkeley)
Ltjens class
The Ltjens rendering honours after 9-11
Main article: Ltjens class destroyer
The Ltjens class destroyer was a modification of the Charles F.
Adams class for the Bundesmarine (the Navy of West Germany). It
differed from the Adams class in the layout of the crew
accommodations, the location of the bow sonar, a second large aerial
mast and different funnels.
Ltjens (D185)
Mlders (D186)
Rommel (D187)
Perth class
Main article: Perth class destroyer
The Royal Australian Navy had three Charles F. Adams class units constructed to their own specifications (these
ships were designated the Perth class). Although broadly similar to the US Navy's vessels, the Australian ships were
fitted with the Ikara system instead of the ASROC that was fitted to the American units. The three ships were:
HMASPerth(D 38)
HMASHobart(D 39)
HMASBrisbane(D 41)
Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
74
Notes
[1] Blackman, Raymond V. B. Jane's Fighting Ships (1970/71) p.437
[2] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Shipboard Radars" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1978 p.144
[3] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Shipboard Radars" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1978 p.145
[4] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Sonars, Part 1" United States Naval Institute Proceedings July 1981 p.119
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG2. htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG3. htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG4. htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG5. htm
[9] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG6. htm
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG7. htm
[11] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG8. htm
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG9. htm
[13] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG10. htm
[14] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG11. htm
[15] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG12. htm
[16] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG13. htm
[17] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG14. htm
[18] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG15. htm
[19] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG16. htm
[20] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG17. htm
[21] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG18. htm
[22] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG19. htm
[23] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG20. htm
[24] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG21. htm
[25] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG22. htm
[26] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG23. htm
[27] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DDG24. htm
External links
D-186 FGS Mlders, Deutsches Marine Museum, Wilhelmshaven Germany (http:/ / www. marinemuseum. de/ )
DDG-38 HMAS Perth, Artificial Dive Reef, Albany Australia (http:/ / www. hmasperth. com. au/ )
DDG-2 USS Charles F. Adams, Jacksonville Historic Naval Ship Association, Jacksonville Florida (http:/ / www.
adamsclassmuseum. org/ )
Adams Class Veterans Association (http:/ / www. adamsclassddgvets. org/ )
Charles F. Adams-class guided missile destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ charlesfadamsclass/ ) at
Destroyer History Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
Spruance-class destroyer
75
Spruance-class destroyer
USS Spruance (DD-963), shown with VLS.
Class overview
Name: Spruance-class destroyer
Builders: Ingalls Shipbuilding, Pascagoula, Mississippi
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Charles F. Adams-class destroyer
Succeededby: Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
Subclasses: Kidd-class destroyer
Built: 19721983
In commission: 19752005
Completed: 31
Active: 1 (Paul F. Foster) as SDTS
Retired: 30
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: 8,040 (long) tons full load
Length: 529 ft (161 m) waterline; 563 ft (172 m) overall
Beam: 55 ft (16.8 m)
Draft: 29 ft (8.8 m)
Propulsion: 4 General Electric LM2500 gas turbines, 2 shafts, 80,000shp (60MW)
Speed: 32.5 knots (60 km/h)
Range: 6,000 nautical miles (11,000km; 6,900mi) at 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph)
3,300 nautical miles (6,100km; 3,800mi) at 30 knots (56km/h; 35mph)
Complement: 19 officers, 315 enlisted
Spruance-class destroyer
76
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-40 air search radar
AN/SPG-60 fire control radar
AN/SPS-55 surface search radar
AN/SPQ-9 gun fire control radar
Mk 23 TAS automatic detection and tracking radar
AN/SPS-65 Missile fire control radar
AN/SQS-53 bow mounted Active sonar
AN/SQR-19 TACTAS towed array Passive sonar
Naval Tactical Data System
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare System
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie Torpedo Countermeasures
Mark 36 SRBOC Decoy Launching System
AN/SLQ-49 Inflatable Decoys
AN/WLR1 in DD-971 & DD-975.
Armament: 2 5-inch (127mm) 54 calibre Mark 45 dual purpose guns
2 20mm Phalanx CIWS Mark 15 guns
1 8 cell ASROC launcher
1 8 cell NATO Sea Sparrow Mark 29 missile launcher
2 quadruple Harpoon missile canisters
2 Mark 32 triple 12.75in (324mm) torpedo tubes (Mk46 torpedoes)
2 quadruple ABL Mark 43 Tomahawk missile launchers (some ships of the class)
1 21 cell Rolling Airframe Missile launcher in some ships.
A 61-cell Mark 41 VLS launcher for Tomahawk/ASROC missiles was fitted to 24 ships in place of the 8-cell
ASROC launcher.
Aircraft carried: 2 x Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk LAMPS III helicopters.
Aviation facilities: Flight deck and enclosed hangar for up to two medium-lift helicopters
The Spruance-class destroyer was developed by the United States to replace a large number of World War II-built
Allen M. Sumner- and Gearing-class destroyers and was the primary destroyer built for the U.S. Navy during the
1970s.
First commissioned in 1975, the class was designed with gas-turbine propulsion, all-digital weapons systems, and
automated 5-inch guns. Serving for three decades, the Spruance class was designed to escort a carrier group with a
primary ASW mission, though in the 1990s 24 members of the class were upgraded with the Mark 41 Vertical
Launching System (VLS) for the Tomahawk surface-to-surface missile. Rather than extend the life of the class, the
navy accelerated its retirement. The last ship of the class was decommissioned in 2005, with most examples broken
up or destroyed as targets.
[1]
History
Design
The class was designed for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) with point defense anti-aircraft warfare (AAW) missiles;
upgrades provided anti-ship and land attack capabilities. The ships were initially controversial, especially among
members of the United States Congress who believed that their unimposing looks, with only two guns and an
ASROC or Armored Box Launcher (ABL) missile launcher per ship implied that the vessels were weak compared to
Soviet or older US designs which had more visible guns or launchers for the Standard medium range missiles.
Despite the criticism they were successful in their intended ASW role.
[2]
The Spruances were comparable in size to cruisers (CG) under the U.S. Navy's hull classification symbol
system.Wikipedia:Citation needed. Despite their "DD" designation indicating gun destroyers, their primary
armament was missiles. However the Spruance class as designed carried anti-aircraft missiles only sufficient for
point defense, compared to other American destroyers designated as DDG which were designed to provide
Spruance-class destroyer
77
anti-aircraft warfare screening to the fleet while also having surface-to-surface capabilities. A major update in the
1990s would add a Vertical Launch Missile System (VLS) for the Tomahawk surface-to-surface missile which
effectively made the modernized vessels up to DDG standard, although this class still lacked the stealth and missile
capabilities of later Aegis equipped cruisers and destroyers.
Six Spruance-class destroyers fitting out, c. May
1975.
The "Spru-cans" were the first large U.S. Navy ships to use gas turbine
propulsion; they had four General Electric LM2500 gas turbines to
generate about 80,000 horsepower (60MW). This configuration
(developed in the 1960s by the Royal Navy and known as COmbined
Gas And Gas, or COGAG) was very successful and used on most
subsequent U.S. warships. A slightly lengthened version of the hull
was also used for the Ticonderoga-class cruisers. As of 2010, all US
Navy surface combatants (except nuclear aircraft carriers and the
LCS-1) use the LM2500 COGAG arrangement, usually with two such
turbines per shaft.
The entire class of 30 ships was contracted on 23 June 1970 to the
Litton-Ingalls shipyard in Pascagoula, Mississippi, under the Total
Package Procurement concept originated by the Whiz Kids of Robert McNamara's Pentagon. The idea was to reap
the benefits of mass construction, but labor and technical problems caused cost overruns and delayed
construction.Wikipedia:Citation needed One additional ship, USS Hayler, was ordered on 29 September 1979.
Hayler was originally planned as a DDH (Destroyer, Helicopter) design, which would carry more anti-submarine
helicopters than the standard design of the Spruance class. Eventually this plan to build a DDH was scrapped and a
slightly modified DD-963 class hull was put in commission. Four additional ships were built for the Iranian Navy
with the Mark 26/Standard AAW missile system but were completed as Kidds for the U.S. Navy. The Kidds were
nearly identical to the Spruances but they were more advanced general-purpose ships. It was once planned to build
all of the Spruance class up to this standard, but it was too expensive.
An air-capable mini V/STOL aircraft carrier with fighters and ASW helicopters based on the Spruance hull was
seriously considered but not produced.
Upgrades
The Spruance design is modular in nature, allowing for easy installation of entire subsystems within the ship.
Although originally designed for anti-submarine warfare, 24 ships of this class were upgraded with the installation of
a 61 cell Vertical Launch Missile System (VLS) capable of launching Tomahawk missiles. The remaining seven
ships not upgraded were decommissioned early. At least ten VLS ships, including Cushing, O'Bannon, and Thorn,
had a 21 cell RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launcher mounted on the starboard fantail.
David R. Ray tested the RAM system in the 1980s, but had the system removed after the tests.
Oldendorf was the test platform for the AN/SPQ-9B Anti-ship Missile Defense (ASMD) Firecontrol Radar to be
outfitted on the San Antonio class amphibious transport dock. The AN/SPQ-9B is used to detect all known and
projected sea skimming missiles.
Arthur W. Radford tested the Advanced Enclosed Mast/Sensor system which helped in the mast design of San
Antonio class amphibious transport dock ships.
Merrill served as the Navy's test platform for the Tomahawk Cruise Missile Program receiving armored box
launchers and test launching a Tomahawk 19 March 1980. Merrill carried two ABLs and an ASROC launcher
into the 1990s until the ASROC launcher was removed.
Spruance-class destroyers fired 112 land attack Tomahawks during Operation Desert Storm.
Spruance-class destroyer
78
Fate
The US Navy planned to replace its current destroyers and cruisers with the new Zumwalt class destroyer
(DDG-1000) ships. In order to save $28 million a year the navy accelerated retirement of the ships, though they
could have served to 2019 had they been maintained and updated. The last Spruance-class destroyer on active
service, USSCushing, was decommissioned on 21 September 2005. It was then offered to the Pakistan Navy, but
was sunk as a target 29 April 2009. Per the 2010 U.S. Defense budget, only three DDG-1000s are being built.
[3]
The
Arleigh Burke class is the navy's only operational class of destroyers.
Some Spruance destroyers were broken up, but rather than being preserved in storage like some older classes, the
majority of the class finished their lives as targets. Most were deliberately sunk in various fleet exercises. One
notable exception was the four ships of the Kidd class that were transferred to the Republic of China Navy (Taiwan).
They are active and referred to as the Kee Lung class.
The USSPaul F. Foster replaced the USSDecatur in 2005 as the Self Defense Test Ship. It is a refurbished ship,
operated by remote control which avoids the safety constraints and other problems associated with manned ships
being targeted by or towing targets by live weapons. The prearranged attack is in practice aimed at a decoy barge
pulled 150 feet behind the SDTS in case of damage.
Ships in class
Ship Name Hull
No.
Commission
Decommission
Disposition Link
Spruance DD-963 19752005 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[4]
PaulF.Foster DD-964 19762003 Struck 6 April 2004; in use as a Self Defense Test Ship
[5]
[6]
Kinkaid DD-965 19762003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[7]
Hewitt DD-966 19762001 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling
[8]
Elliot DD-967 19772003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[9]
ArthurW.Radford DD-968 19772003 Disposed of as artificial reef on 10 August 2011 off coast of
Delaware
[10]
Peterson DD-969 19772002 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[11]
Caron DD-970 19772001 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[12]
DavidR.Ray DD-971 19772002 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[13]
Oldendorf DD-972 19782003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[14]
JohnYoung DD-973 19782002 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[15]
ComtedeGrasse DD-974 19781998 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[16]
O'Brien DD-975 19772004 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[17]
Merrill DD-976 19781998 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[18]
Briscoe DD-977 19782003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[19]
Stump DD-978 19782004 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[20]
Conolly DD-979 19781998 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[21]
Spruance-class destroyer
79
Moosbrugger DD-980 19782000 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling
[22]
JohnHancock DD-981 19782000 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling
[23]
Nicholson DD-982 19792002 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[24]
JohnRodgers DD-983 19791998 Disposed of by scrapping, dismantling
[25]
Leftwich DD-984 19791998 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[26]
Cushing DD-985 19792005 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[27]
HarryW.Hill DD-986 19791998 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[28]
O'Bannon DD-987 19792005 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[29]
Thorn DD-988 19802004 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[30]
Deyo DD-989 19802003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[31]
Ingersoll DD-990 19801998 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[32]
Fife DD-991 19802003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[33]
Fletcher DD-992 19802004 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[34]
Hayler DD-997 19832003 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise
[35]
Gallery
starboard quarter
view of Fife
Ingersoll with only
ASROC launcher forward,
as all destroyers were
initially built. Image also
shows an example of black
masts and no Phalanx
CIWS
Deyo with ASROC and ABL's
forward.
starboard bow
view of Deyo,
VLS equipped
Kidd class compared to Spruance
class
Ticonderoga class cruiser
compared to the Spruance class
Arthur W. Radford with
experimental mast
Cushing with VLS forward
and RAM launcher on fantail
Spruance-class destroyer
80
Hayler, the last Spruance
destroyer, is sunk
References
[1] Military Officer Greyhounds of the Sea By Gina DiNicolo (http:/ / www. moaa. org/ Magazine/ October2005/ f_greyhounds. asp)
[2] [2] Bishop, Chris. Encyclopedia of World Sea Power. 1988. ISBN 0-517-65342-7. Page 94-95
[3] Bennett, John T. and Kris Osborn. "Gates Reveals DoD Program Overhaul" (http:/ / www. defensenews. com/ story. php?i=4026294&
c=AME& s=LAN). Defense News, 6 April 2009.
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD963.htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD964.htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ EDD964. htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD965.htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD966.htm
[9] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD967.htm
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD968.htm
[11] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD969.htm
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD970.htm
[13] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD971.htm
[14] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD972.htm
[15] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD973.htm
[16] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD974.htm
[17] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD975.htm
[18] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD976.htm
[19] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD977.htm
[20] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD978.htm
[21] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD979.htm
[22] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD980.htm
[23] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD981.htm
[24] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD982.htm
[25] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD983.htm
[26] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD984.htm
[27] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD985.htm
[28] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD986.htm
[29] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD987.htm
[30] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD988.htm
[31] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD989.htm
[32] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD990.htm
[33] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD991.htm
[34] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD992.htm
[35] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ DD997.htm
Spruance-class destroyer
81
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Spruance class destroyers.
Spruance-class destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ spruanceclass/ ) at Destroyer History
Foundation (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
News story: "Last Spruance-Class Destroyer Decommissioned" (http:/ / www. military. com/ NewsContent/
0,13319,77803,00. html)
Kidd-class destroyer
82
Kidd-class destroyer
Kidd-class destroyer
USS Kidd (DDG-993) in 1984
Class overview
Name: Kidd-class destroyer
Builders: Ingalls Shipbuilding, Pascagoula, Mississippi
Operators: United States Navy
Republic of China Navy (as Kee Lungclass)
Preceded by: Spruance-class destroyer
Succeededby: Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
Built: 1978
In commission: 19811999
Completed: 4
Active: 4
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: Light: 7,289t (7,174 long tons; 8,035 short tons)
Full: 9,783t (9,628 long tons; 10,784 short tons)
Dead Weight: 2,494t (2,455 long tons; 2,749 short tons)
Length: 563ft (172m)
Beam: 55ft (17m)
Draught: 31.5ft (9.6m)
Propulsion: 4 General Electric LM2500 gas turbines, 2 shafts, 80,000shp (60MW)
Speed: 33 knots (61km/h; 38mph)
Range: 6,000 nautical miles (11,000km; 6,900mi) at 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph)
3,300 nautical miles (6,100km; 3,800mi) at 30 knots (56km/h; 35mph)
Sensors and
processing systems:
SPS-48E Air Search Radar
SPG-60 Gun Fire Control Radar
SPS-55 Surface Search Radar
SPQ-9A Gun Fire Control Radar
SQS-53 Sonar
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32(V)3 OUTBOARD II EW Suite
Mark 36 SRBOC
Kidd-class destroyer
83
Armament: 2 5-inch (127mm) 54 calibre Mark 45 dual purpose guns
2 Mk 26 launchers for RIM-66 Standard Missile
2 20mm Phalanx CIWS Mark 15 cannons (Varies from ship to ship, Block
0/1/1A/1B)
2 MK 141 quadruple Harpoon missile canisters
2 Mark 32 triple 12.75in (324mm) torpedo tubes (Mk46 torpedoes)
Aircraft carried: 2 SH-60B/S-70C(M)-1/2 LAMPS III helicopters
Aviation facilities: Flight deck and enclosed hangar for up to two medium-lift helicopters
The Kidd-class guided missile destroyers (DDGs) were a series of four warships based on the Spruance class
destroyers. The Kidds were designed as more advanced multipurpose ships, in contrast to their predecessor's focus
on anti-submarine warfare, adding considerably enhanced anti-aircraft capabilities. Originally ordered for the former
Imperial Iranian Navy, the contracts were canceled when the 1979 Iranian Revolution began, and the ships were
completed for the U.S. Navy. Because they were equipped with heavy-duty air conditioning and other features that
made them suitable in hot climates, they tended to be used in the Middle East, specifically the Persian Gulf itself.
During their service with the U.S. Navy from the 1980s to the late 1990s, the ships were popularly known as the
"Ayatollah" or "dead admiral" class. They were decommissioned and sold to Taiwan, now being known as the Kee
Lung-class.
History
These ships were originally ordered by the last Shah (king) of Iran for service in the Persian Gulf, in an air defence
role. The Shah was overthrown in the Iranian Revolution, prior to Iran accepting delivery of the ships, causing the
United States Navy to integrate the vessels into its own fleet.
Each ship in the class was named after a U.S. Navy Admiral who had died in combat in the Pacific in World War II:
USSKidd(DDG-993) was named after Rear Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, who died on the bridge of his flagship, the
USSArizona(BB-39), during the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941.
USSCallaghan(DDG-994) was named after Rear Admiral Daniel Callaghan, who was killed during a surface
action at the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, 13 November 1942, aboard the USSSan Francisco(CA-38).
USSScott(DDG-995) was named after Rear Admiral Norman Scott, who was killed during the same surface
action that killed Admiral Callaghan at the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, aboard the USSAtlanta(CL-51).
USSChandler(DDG-996) was named after Rear Admiral Theodore Chandler, who died on 7 January 1945, as a
result of burns received from a kamikaze crashing into his flagship, the USSLouisville(CA-28), the previous day.
In 198890, the Kidds received the New Threat Upgrade, including a new superstructure and heavier mainmast
cooperative engagement with Aegis Ticonderoga-class cruisers, which could control the Kidds surface-to-air
missiles while they remained electronically silent. However, the arrival of the Aegis-equipped Arleigh Burke-class
destroyers, which were more effective and cost-efficient, led to the accelerated retirement of the Spruance and Kidd
classes, despite their recent modifications (including 24 members of the Spruance class receiving a 61-cell Vertical
Launch System for Tomahawk missiles).
All four ships were decommissioned from the U.S. Navy in the late 1990s, and were initially offered for sale to
Australia in 1997 for A$30million each. In 1999, the offer was rejected, based on extensive problems the Royal
Australian Navy had encountered during the acquisition of two surplus Newport class tank landing ships from the
U.S. Navy in 1994. After the Australian refusal, the four ships were offered to Greece, which also refused.
Kidd-class destroyer
84
Sale and reactivation
In 2001, the U.S. authorized the reactivation and sale of all four ships to Taiwan. All four have been transferred to
the Republic of China (Taiwan) Navy under the Kuang Hua VII program. They were sold for a total price of
US$732million with upgraded hardware, overhaul, activation, and training, included a reduced missile loadout of
148 SM-2 Block IIIA and 32 RGM-84L Block II Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The reactivation was done in
Charleston, South Carolina, by VSE/BAV.
Kee Lung-class destroyers
The first two ships, ex-Scott and ex-Callaghan, arrived at Su-ao, a military port in eastern Taiwan, in December
2005, and were named Kee Lung (DDG-1801) and Su Ao (DDG-1802) in a commissioning ceremony on 17
December 2005. Following the tradition of ship class naming, ROCN has referred these vessels as Kee Lung class
destroyers. The remaining two units, ex-Kidd and ex-Chandler, were delivered in 2006, and named Tso Ying
(DDG-1803) and Ma Kong (DDG-1805), respectively.
The opposition-led Legislature Yuan originally allocated only enough money to purchase half of the SM-2 missiles
that the destroyers can carry; a further purchase of 100 supplemental SM-2MRs was included in the 2007 annual
budget to ensure all four ships had a full load of SM-2.
By end of 2008, DDG-1802 Su Ao was spotted to have eight HF-3 AShMs installed in place of eight Harpoon
AShMs.
[1]
From 2014 on, Standard Missile system will gradually be replaced by Sky Bow missile system.
Ships in class
Original name: USSKidd(DDG-993)
Tentative Iranian name: Kouroush
Present name: Tso Ying ( , DDG-1803); was to be Tung Teh ( ); commissioned on 3 November
2006
Original name: USSCallaghan(DDG-994)
Tentative Iranian name: Daryush
Present name: Su Ao ( , DDG-1802); was to be Ming Teh ( ); commissioned on 17 December 2005
Original name: USSScott(DDG-995)
Tentative Iranian name: Nader
Present name: Kee Lung ( , DDG-1801); was to be Chi Teh ( ); commissioned on 17 December
2005
Original name: USSChandler(DDG-996)
Tentative Iranian name: Anoshirvan
Present name: Ma Kong ( , DDG-1805); was to be Wu Teh ( ); commissioned on 3 November 2006
Kidd-class destroyer
85
References
[1] Photo of ship-mounted Hsiung Feng-III Anti-ship missiles taken at Su Ao Harbour (http:/ / www. wretch. cc/ album/ show. php?i=luke822&
b=109& f=1088515480& p=35)
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Kidd class destroyers.
Kidd-class destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ kiddclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation (http:/ /
destroyerhistory. org/ )
"World Navies Today: Taiwan (Republic of China)" (http:/ / www. hazegray. org/ worldnav/ asiapac/ taiwan.
htm#1), Haze Gray & Underway.
"DDG-993 KIDD-class" (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ ddg-993. htm)
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
86
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
Arleigh Burkeclass destroyer
The USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51), the lead ship of her class, underway in the Mediterranean Sea in March 2003.
Class overview
Name: Arleigh Burkeclass destroyer
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Kidd-class guided missile destroyer
Succeededby: Zumwalt-class guided missile destroyer
Cost: US$1,843 million (DDG114116,FY2011/12)
Planned: 75
Completed: 62
Active: 62
General characteristics
Type: Destroyer
Displacement: Fully loaded:
Flight I: 8,315t (8,184 long tons; 9,166 short tons)
Flight II: 8,400t (8,300 long tons; 9,300 short tons)
Flight IIA: 9,200t (9,100 long tons; 10,100 short tons)
Flight III: 9,800t (9,600 long tons; 10,800 short tons)
Length: 505ft (154m) (Flights I and II)
509ft (155m) (Flight IIA)
Beam: 66ft (20m)
Draft: 30.5ft (9.3m)
Installed power: 3 Allison AG9140 Generators (2500kW each, 440V)
Propulsion: 4 General Electric LM2500-30 gas turbines each generating 29,500shp (22,000kW);
coupled to two shafts, each driving a five-bladed reversible controllable pitch propeller;
Total output: 118,000shp (88,000kW)
Speed: In excess of 30kn (56km/h; 35mph)
Range: 4,400nmi (8,100km) at 20kn (37km/h; 23mph)
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
87
Boats & landing
craft carried:
2 Rigid hull inflatable boats
Complement: Flight I: 303 total
Flight IIA: 23 officers, 300 enlisted
Sensors and
processing
systems:
AN/SPY-1D 3D Radar
AN/SPS-67(V)2 Surface Search Radar
AN/SPS-73(V)12 Surface Search Radar
AN/SQS-53C Sonar Array
AN/SQR-19 Tactical Towed Array Sonar
AN/SQQ-28 LAMPS III Shipboard System
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32(V)2 Electronic Warfare System
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie Torpedo Countermeasures
MK 36 MOD 12 Decoy Launching System
AN/SLQ-39 CHAFF Buoys
Armament:
Missiles:
Flight I: 90 cell Mk 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS)
Flights II and IIA: 96 cell Mk 41 VLS
BGM-109 Tomahawk
RIM-66M Standard medium range SAM (has an ASuW mode)Wikipedia:Citation needed
RIM-161 Standard Ballistic missile defense missile for Aegis BMD (15 ships as of March 2009[1])
RIM-162 ESSM (4 per cell) SAM (DDG-79 onward)
RUM-139 Vertical Launch ASROC
RIM-174A Standard ERAM to be added in 2011
RGM-84 Harpoon SSM (not in Flight IIA units)
[2]
Guns:
1 5-inch (127-mm)/54 Mk-45 Mod 1/2 (lightweight gun) (DDG-51 through 80); or
1 5-inch (127-mm)/62 Mk-45 mod 4 (lightweight gun) (DDG-81 onwards)
2 (DDG-51 through 84); or
1 (DDG-85 onwards) 20 mm Phalanx CIWS
2 25 mm M242 Bushmaster cannons
Torpedoes:
2 Mark 32 triple torpedo tubes (six Mk-46 or Mk-50 torpedoes, Mk-54 in the near future)
Aircraft carried: Flights I and II: None
Flight IIA onwards: up to two MH-60R Seahawk LAMPS III helicopters
Aviation facilities: Flights I and II: Flight deck only, but LAMPS III electronics installed on landing deck for coordinated
DDG-51/helo ASW operations
Flight IIA onwards: Flight deck and enclosed hangars for two MH-60R LAMPS III helicopters
The Arleigh Burke-class of guided missile destroyers (DDGs) is the United States Navy's first class of destroyer
built around the Aegis Combat System and the SPY-1D multi-function phased array radar. The class is named for
Admiral Arleigh Burke, the most famous American destroyer officer of World War II, and later Chief of Naval
Operations. The class leader, USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during Admiral Burke's lifetime.
They were designed as multi-role destroyers
[3]
to fit the AAW (Anti-Aircraft Warfare) role with their powerful Aegis
radar and anti-aircraft missiles; ASW (Anti-submarine warfare) role, with their towed sonar array, anti-submarine
rockets, and ASW helicopter; ASUW (Anti-surface warfare) role with their Harpoon missile launcher; and strategic
land strike role with their Tomahawk missiles. Some versions of the class no longer have the towed sonar, or
Harpoon missile launcher. Their hull and superstructure were designed to have a reduced radar cross section
[4]
The
first ship of the class was commissioned on 4 July 1991. With the decommissioning of the last Spruance-class
destroyer, Cushing, on 21 September 2005, the Arleigh Burkeclass ships became the U.S. Navy's only active
destroyers; the class has the longest production run for any postwar U.S. Navy surface combatant.
[5]
The Arleigh
Burke-class is planned to be the third most numerous class of destroyer to serve in the U.S. Navy, after the Fletcher
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
88
and Gearingclasses; besides the 62 vessels of this class (comprising 21 of Flight I, 7 of Flight II and 34 of Flight
IIA) in service by 2013, up to a further 42 (of Flight III) have been envisaged.
With an overall length of 505 feet (154m) to 509 feet (155m), displacement ranging from 8,315 to 9,200 tons, and
weaponry including over 90 missiles, the Arleigh Burkeclass ships are larger and more heavily armed than most
previous ships classified as guided missile cruisers.
[6]
Characteristics
USS Cole and two other Arleigh Burkeclass vessels
docked in Norfolk, Virginia
The Arleigh Burke-class is among the largest destroyers built
in the United States. Only the Spruance and Kiddclasses were
longer (563ft). The Arleigh Burke-class are multi-mission
ships with a "combination of... an advanced anti-submarine
warfare system, land attack cruise missiles, ship-to-ship
missiles, and advanced anti-aircraft missiles," The larger
Ticonderoga-class ships were constructed on Spruance-class
hullforms, but are designated as cruisers due to their radically
different mission and weapons systems. The Arleigh
Burke-class on the other hand were designed with a new, large,
water-plane area-hull form characterized by a wide flaring bow
which significantly improves sea-keeping ability. The hull form is designed to permit high speed in high sea states.
The Arleigh Burke's designers incorporated lessons learned from the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers; with
the Arleigh Burke-class, the U.S. Navy also returned to all-steel construction. An earlier generation had combined a
steel hull with an innovative superstructure made of lighter aluminum to reduce topweight, but the lighter metal
proved vulnerable to cracking. Aluminum is also less fire-resistant than steel.
[7]
A 1975 fire aboard USSBelknap
gutted her aluminum superstructure.
[8]
Battle damage to Royal Navy ships exacerbated by their aluminum
superstructures during the 1982 Falklands War supported the decision to use steel. Another lesson from the
Falklands War
[]
led the navy to protect the ship's vital spaces with double-spaced steel armor (creating a buffer for
modern rockets), and kevlar spall liners.
The Ticonderoga-class cruisers were deemed too expensive to continue building and too difficult to further
upgrade.Wikipedia:Citation needed The angled rather than traditional vertical surfaces and the tripod mainmast of
the Arleigh Burke design are stealth techniques,
[9][10]
which make the ship more difficult to detect, in particular by
anti-ship missiles.
A Collective Protection System makes the Arleigh Burke-class the first U.S. warships designed with an air-filtration
system against nuclear, biological and chemical warfare. Other NBC defenses include a "countermeasure wash down
system".
[11]
Their Aegis radar differs from a traditional rotating radar that mechanically rotates 360 degrees for each "sweep"
scan of the airspace which allows continual tracking of targets. The system's computer control also allows
centralization of the previously separate tracking and targeting functions. The system is also resistant to electronic
counter-measures. Their standalone Harpoon anti-ship missile launchers give them an anti-ship capability with a
range in excess of 64nm. "The 5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun, in conjunction with the Mark 34 Gun Weapon System, is
an anti-ship weapon which can also be used for close-in air contacts or to support forces ashore with Naval Gun-Fire
Support (NGF), with a range of up to 20 miles and capable of firing 20 rounds per minute." The class's RIM-7 Sea
Sparrow missiles provide point defense against missiles and aircraft while the Standard Missile provides area
anti-aircraft defense, additionally the ship has an electronics warfare suite that provides passive detection and decoy
countermeasures.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
89
The class's Light Airborne Multipurpose System, or LAMPS helicopter system improves the ship's capabilities
against submarines and surface ships, a helicopter able to serve as a platform to monitor submarines and surface
ships, and launch torpedoes and missiles against them, as well as being able to support ground assaults with machine
guns and Hellfire anti-armor guided missiles.
[12]
The helicopters also serve in a utility role, able to perform ship
replenishment, search and rescue, medical evacuation, communications relay, and naval gunfire spotting and
controlling.
Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers have many combat systems. Burkes have the Navy's latest anti-submarine combat
system with active sonar, a towed sonar array, and anti-submarine rockets. They support strategic land strikes with
their VLS launched Tomahawks. They are able to detect anti-ship mines at a range of 1400 yards.
[13]
So vital has the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMD) role of the class become that all ships of the class are
being updated with BMD capability.
[14]
Burke production is being restarted in place of additional Zumwalt-class
destroyers.
Development
In 1980, the U.S. Navy initiated design studies with seven contractors. By 1983 the number of competitors had been
reduced to three: Bath Iron Works, Todd Shipyards and Ingalls Shipbuilding. On 3 April 1985 Bath Iron Works
received a US$321.9 million contract to build the first of class, USSArleigh Burke. Gibbs & Cox was awarded the
contract to be the lead ship design agent. The total cost of the first ship was put at US$1.1 billion, the other US$778
million being for the ship's weapons systems. She was laid down by the Bath Iron Works at Bath, Maine, on 6
December 1988, and launched on 16 September 1989 by Mrs. Arleigh Burke. The Admiral himself was present at
her commissioning ceremony on 4 July 1991, held on the waterfront in downtown Norfolk, Virginia.
Profile of Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer.
The "Flight IIA Arleigh Burke" ships have several new
features, beginning with the USSOscar Austin(DDG-79).
Among the changes are the addition of two hangars for ASW
helicopters, and a new, longer Mark 45 Mod 4
5-inch/62-caliber naval gun (fitted on USSWinston S.
Churchill(DDG-81) and later ships). Later Flight IIA ships
starting with USSMustin(DDG-89) have a modified funnel
design that buries the funnels within the superstructure as a signature-reduction measure. TACTAS towed array
sonar was omitted from Flight IIA ships and they also lack Harpoon missile launchers. Ships from DDG-68 to
DDG-84 have AN/SLQ-32 antennas that resemble V3 configuration similar to those deployed on Ticonderoga-class
cruisers, while the remainder have V2 variants externally resembling those deployed on some Oliver Hazard
Perry-class frigates. V3 has an active electronic countermeasures component while V2 is passive only. A number of
Flight IIA ships were constructed without a Phalanx CIWS because of the planned Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile, but
later the Navy decided to retrofit all IIA ships to carry at least one Phalanx CIWS by 2013.
[15]
USSPinckney, USSMomsen, USSChung-Hoon, USSNitze, USSJames E. Williams and USSBainbridge
[16]
have
superstructure differences to accommodate the Remote Mine-hunting System (RMS). Mk 32 torpedo tubes were
moved to the missile deck from amidships as well.
Modernization
The U.S. Navy has begun a modernization program for the Arleigh Burke class aimed at improving the gun systems
on the ships in an effort to address congressional concerns over the retirement of the Iowa-class battleships. This
modernization was to include an extension of the range of the 5-inch (127mm) guns on the flight I Arleigh
Burkeclass destroyers (USSArleigh Burke to USSRoss) with extended range guided munitions (ERGMs) that
would have given the guns a range of 40 nautical miles (74km).
[17][18][19]
However, the ERGM was cancelled in
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
90
2008.
[20]
The modernization program is designed to provide a comprehensive mid-life upgrade to ensure that the class remains
effective. Reduced manning, increased mission effectiveness, and a reduced total cost including construction,
maintenance, and operation are the goals of the modernization program. Modernization technologies will be
integrated during new construction of DDG-111 and 112, then retrofitted into DDG flight I and II ships during
in-service overhaul periods.
[21]
The first phase will update the hull, mechanical, and electrical systems while the
second phase will introduce an open architecture computing environment (OACE). The result will be improved
capability in both ballistic missile defense (BMD) and littoral combat.
[22]
By 2018 all Burkes homeported in the
Western Pacific will have upgraded anti-submarine systems, including the new AN/SQR-20 Multifunction Towed
Array.
The Navy is also upgrading the ships' ability to process data. Beginning with USS Spruance, the Navy is installing
an internet protocol (IP) based data backbone, which enhances the ship's ability to handle video. Spruance is the first
destroyer to be fitted with the Boeing Company's gigabit Ethernet data multiplex system (GEDMS).
In July 2010 BAE Systems announced that it had been awarded a contract to modernize 11 ships. In May 2014 Sam
LaGrone reported that 21 of the 28 Flight I/II Burkes would not receive a mid-life upgrade that included electronics
and Aegis Baseline 9 software for SM-6 compatibility, instead they would retain the basic BMD 3.6.1 software in a
US$170m upgrade concentrating on mechanical systems and on some ships, the anti-submarine suite. Seven Flight I
ships - DDG 51-53, 57, 61, 65, 69 - will get the full US$270m Baseline 9 upgrade. Deputy of surface warfare Dave
McFarland said that this change was due to the budget cuts in the Budget Control Act of 2011.
Production restarted and further development
The class was scheduled to be replaced by Zumwalt-class destroyers beginning in 2020, but an increasing threat from
both long- and short-range missiles caused the Navy to restart production of the Arleigh Burkeclass and consider
placing littoral combat mission modules on the new ships.
[23]
In April 2009 the Navy announced a plan that limited the Zumwalt-class to three units while ordering another three
Arleigh Burkeclass ships from both Bath Iron Works and Ingalls Shipbuilding.
[]
In December 2009 Northrop
Grumman received a $170.7 million letter contract for DDG-113 long-lead-time materials.
[24]
Shipbuilding contracts
for DDG-113 to DDG-115 were awarded in mid-2011 for US$679.6m$783.6m; these do not include
government-furnished equipment such as weapons and sensors which will take the average cost of the FY2011/12
ships to US$1,842.7m per vessel.
[]
DDG-113 to DDG-115 will be "restart" ships, similar to previous Flight IIA
ships, but including modernization features such as Open Architecture Computing Environment; DDG-116 to
DDG-121 will be "Technology Insertion" ships with elements of Flight III, and Flight III proper will start with
DDG-122.
[25]
Flight III ships, construction starting in FY2016 in place of the canceled CG(X) program, have various design
improvements including radar antennas of mid-diameter increased to 14 feet (4.3m) from the previous 12 feet
(3.7m).
[26]
These Air and Missile Defense Radars (AMDR) use digital beamforming, instead of the earlier Passive
Electronically Scanned Array radars.
[27]
However, costs for the Flight III ships increased rapidly as expectations and requirements for the program have
grown. In particular, this was due to the changing requirements needed to carry the proposed Air and Missile
Defense Radar system required for the ships' ballistic missile defense role.
[28]
The Government Accountability
Office found that the design of the Flight IIIs was based on "a significantly reduced threat environment from other
Navy analyses" and that the new ships would be "at best marginally effective". The U.S. Navy disagrees with the
GAO findings, claiming the DDG-51 hull is "absolutely" capable of fitting a large enough radar to meet
requirements. Installation of the AMDR would require double the power and double the cooling, but there is room to
fit what is needed inside the hull.
[29]
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
91
In spite of the production restart, the U.S. Navy is expected to fall short of its requirement for 94
missile-defense-capable destroyer and cruiser platforms starting in FY 2025 and continuing past the end of the
30-year planning window. While this is a new requirement as of 2011, and the U.S. Navy has never had so many
large missile-armed surface combatants, the relative success of the Aegis ballistic missile defense system has shifted
this national security requirement onto the U.S. Navy. The shortfall will arise as older platforms that have been
refitted to be missile-defense-capable (particularly the cruisers) are retired in bulk before new destroyers are planned
to be built.
[30]
The U.S. Navy was considering extending the acquisition of Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers into the 2040s,
according to revised procurement tables sent to Congress, which have the U.S. Navy procuring Flight IV ships from
2032 through 2041.
[31]
However this was canceled to cover the cost of the Ohio Replacement Submarine, with the
air defense commander role retained on one cruiser per carrier battle group.
Future replacement
In April 2014, the U.S. Navy began the early stages of developing a new destroyer to replace the Arleigh
Burkeclass called the "Future Surface Combatant". The new class is expected to enter service in the early 2030s and
initially serve alongside the 22 Flight III DDGs. No hull design or shape has been speculated yet, although the
destroyer class will incorporate emerging technologies like lasers, on-board power-generation systems, increased
automation, and next-generation weapons, sensors, and electronics. They will leverage technologies in use on other
platforms such as the Zumwalt-class destroyer, Littoral Combat Ship, and Gerald Fordclass aircraft carriers. The
Future Surface Combatant may place importance on the Zumwalt-class destroyer's electric drive system that propels
the ship while generating 58 megawatts of on-board electrical power, levels required to operate future directed
energy weapons. Laser weapon systems are likely to become more prominent to engage threats without using
missiles that could potentially cost more than the target it is engaging. Less costly weapon systems may help keep
the destroyer class from becoming too expensive. Initial requirements for the Future Surface Combatant will
emphasize lethality and survivability, as well as being able to continue to protect aircraft carriers. The ships also
have to be modular to allow for inexpensive upgrades of weaponry, electronics, computing, and sensors over time as
threats evolve.
[32]
Operational history
See also: USS Cole bombing
Arleigh Burkeclass destroyer USSCole was damaged on 12 October 2000 in Aden, Yemen while docked, by an
attack in which an apparently shaped charge of 200300kg in a boat was placed against the hull and detonated by
suicide bombers, killing 17 crew members. The ship was repaired, and returned to duty in 2001.
In October 2011 it was announced that four Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers would be forward-deployed in Europe to
support the NATO missile defence system. The ships, to be based at Naval Station Rota, Spain, were named in
February 2012, as Ross, Donald Cook, Porter and Carney.
[33]
By reducing travel times to station, this forward
deployment will allow for six other destroyers to be shifted from the Atlantic in support of the Pivot to East Asia.
[34]
Russia has threatened to quit the New START treaty over this deployment, calling it a threat to their nuclear
deterrent.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
92
Contractors
Builders: 34 units constructed by General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works Division and 28 by Northrop Grumman
Ship Systems, Ingalls Shipbuilding
AN/SPY-1 Radar and Combat System Integrator: Lockheed Martin
Ships in class
Name Number Builder Launched Commissioned Home port Status
Flight I
Arleigh Burke DDG-51 Bath Iron Works 16 September 1989 4 July 1991 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Barry DDG-52 Ingalls Shipbuilding 8 June 1991 12 December 1992 Norfolk, Virginia Active
John Paul Jones DDG-53 Bath Iron Works 26 October 1991 18 December 1993 San Diego, California Active
Curtis Wilbur DDG-54 Bath Iron Works 16 May 1992 19 March 1994 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Stout DDG-55 Ingalls Shipbuilding 16 October 1992 13 August 1994 Norfolk, Virginia Active
John S. McCain DDG-56 Bath Iron Works 26 September 1992 2 July 1994 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Mitscher DDG-57 Ingalls Shipbuilding 7 May 1993 10 December 1994 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Laboon DDG-58 Bath Iron Works 20 February 1993 18 March 1995 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Russell DDG-59 Ingalls Shipbuilding 20 October 1993 20 May 1995 San Diego, California Active
Paul Hamilton DDG-60 Bath Iron Works 24 July 1993 27 May 1995 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Ramage DDG-61 Ingalls Shipbuilding 11 February 1994 22 July 1995 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Fitzgerald DDG-62 Bath Iron Works 29 January 1994 14 October 1995 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Stethem DDG-63 Ingalls Shipbuilding 17 July 1994 21 October 1995 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Carney DDG-64 Bath Iron Works 23 July 1994 13 April 1996 Mayport, Florida Active
Benfold DDG-65 Ingalls Shipbuilding 9 November 1994 30 March 1996 San Diego, California Active
Gonzalez DDG-66 Bath Iron Works 18 February 1995 12 October 1996 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Cole DDG-67 Ingalls Shipbuilding 10 February 1995 8 June 1996 Norfolk, Virginia Active
The Sullivans DDG-68 Bath Iron Works 12 August 1995 19 April 1997 Mayport, Florida Active
Milius DDG-69 Ingalls Shipbuilding 1 August 1995 23 November 1996 San Diego, California Active
Hopper DDG-70 Bath Iron Works 6 January 1996 6 September 1997 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Ross DDG-71 Ingalls Shipbuilding 22 March 1996 28 June 1997 Rota, Spain Active
Flight II
Mahan DDG-72 Bath Iron Works 29 June 1996 14 February 1998 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Decatur DDG-73 Bath Iron Works 10 November 1996 29 August 1998 San Diego, California Active
McFaul DDG-74 Ingalls Shipbuilding 18 January 1997 25 April 1998 Norfolk, Virginia Active
DonaldCook DDG-75 Bath Iron Works 3 May 1997 4 December 1998 Rota, Spain Active
Higgins DDG-76 Bath Iron Works 4 October 1997 24 April 1999 San Diego, California Active
O'Kane DDG-77 Bath Iron Works 28 March 1998 23 October 1999 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Porter DDG-78 Ingalls Shipbuilding 12 November 1997 20 March 1999 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Flight IIA: 5"/54 variant
OscarAustin DDG-79 Bath Iron Works 7 November 1998 19 August 2000 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
93
Roosevelt DDG-80 Ingalls Shipbuilding 10 January 1999 14 October 2000 Mayport, Florida Active
Flight IIA: 5"/62variant
WinstonS.Churchill DDG-81 Bath Iron Works 17 April 1999 10 March 2001 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Lassen DDG-82 Ingalls Shipbuilding 16 October 1999 21 April 2001 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Howard DDG-83 Bath Iron Works 20 November 1999 20 October 2001 San Diego, California Active
Bulkeley DDG-84 Ingalls Shipbuilding 21 June 2000 8 December 2001 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Flight IIA: 5"/62, one 20mm CIWS variant
McCampbell DDG-85 Bath Iron Works 2 July 2000 17 August 2002 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Shoup DDG-86 Ingalls Shipbuilding 22 November 2000 22 June 2002 Everett, Washington Active
Mason DDG-87 Bath Iron Works 23 June 2001 12 April 2003 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Preble DDG-88 Ingalls Shipbuilding 1 June 2001 9 November 2002 San Diego, California Active
Mustin DDG-89 Ingalls Shipbuilding 12 December 2001 26 July 2003 Yokosuka, Japan Active
Chafee DDG-90 Bath Iron Works 2 November 2002 18 October 2003 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Pinckney DDG-91 Ingalls Shipbuilding 26 June 2002 29 May 2004 San Diego, California Active
Momsen DDG-92 Bath Iron Works 19 July 2003 28 August 2004 Everett, Washington Active
Chung-Hoon DDG-93 Ingalls Shipbuilding 15 December 2002 18 September 2004 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Nitze DDG-94 Bath Iron Works 3 April 2004 5 March 2005 Norfolk, Virginia Active
JamesE.Williams DDG-95 Ingalls Shipbuilding 25 June 2003 11 December 2004 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Bainbridge DDG-96 Bath Iron Works 13 November 2004 12 November 2005 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Halsey DDG-97 Ingalls Shipbuilding 9 January 2004 30 July 2005 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
ForrestSherman DDG-98 Ingalls Shipbuilding 2 October 2004 28 January 2006 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Farragut DDG-99 Bath Iron Works 23 July 2005 10 June 2006 Mayport, Florida Active
Kidd DDG-100 Ingalls Shipbuilding 22 January 2005 9 June 2007 San Diego, California Active
Gridley DDG-101 Bath Iron Works 28 December 2005 10 February 2007 San Diego, California Active
Sampson DDG-102 Bath Iron Works 16 September 2006 3 November 2007 San Diego, California Active
Truxtun DDG-103 Ingalls Shipbuilding 2 June 2007 25 April 2009 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Sterett DDG-104 Bath Iron Works 19 May 2007 9 August 2008 San Diego, California Active
Dewey DDG-105 Ingalls Shipbuilding 26 January 2008 6 March 2010 San Diego, California Active
Stockdale DDG-106 Bath Iron Works 10 May 2008 18 April 2009 San Diego, California Active
Gravely DDG-107 Ingalls Shipbuilding 30 March 2009 20 November 2010 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Wayne E. Meyer DDG-108 Bath Iron Works 18 October 2008 10 October 2009 San Diego, California Active
Jason Dunham DDG-109 Bath Iron Works 1 August 2009 13 November 2010 Norfolk, Virginia Active
William P. Lawrence DDG-110 Ingalls Shipbuilding 15 December 2009 4 June 2011 San Diego, California Active
Spruance DDG-111 Bath Iron Works 6 June 2010 1 October 2011 San Diego, California Active
Michael Murphy DDG-112 Bath Iron Works 7 May 2011 6 October 2012 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Active
Flight IIA: Restart
John Finn DDG-113 Ingalls Shipbuilding Laid down
Ralph Johnson DDG-114 Ingalls Shipbuilding Construction on contract
Rafael Peralta DDG-115 Bath Iron Works Construction on contract
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
94
Flight IIA: Technology Insertion
Thomas Hudner DDG-116 Bath Iron Works Construction on contract
Paul Ignatius DDG-117 Ingalls Shipbuilding Contract awarded(MYP)
Daniel Inouye DDG-118 Bath Iron Works Contract awarded(MYP)
DDG-119 Ingalls Shipbuilding Contract awarded(MYP)
DDG-120 Bath Iron Works Contract awarded(MYP)
DDG-121 MYP
DDG-122 MYP
DDG-123 MYP
Flight III
DDG-124 MYP
DDG-125 MYP
DDG-126 MYP
USS Michael Murphy was originally intended to be the last of the Arleigh Burke-class. However with reduction of
the Zumwalt-class production, the U.S. Navy requested new DDG-51-class ships.
[35]
Long-lead materials contracts
were awarded to Northrop Grumman in December 2009 for DDG-113 and in April 2010 for DDG-114.
[36]
General
Dynamics received a long-lead materials contract for DDG-115 in February 2010.
[37][38]
It is anticipated that in
FY2012 or FY2013, the U.S. Navy will commence detailed work for a Flight III design and request 24 ships to be
built from 2016 to 2031.
[39]
In May 2013, a total of 77 Burke-class ships was planned. The Flight III variant is in the
design phase as of 2013. In June 2013, the U.S. Navy awarded $6.2 billion in destroyer contracts.
[40]
Up to 42 Flight
III ships are expected to be procured by the U.S. Navy with the first ship entering service in 2023.
[41]
Foreign interest
In May 2011 Saudi Arabia received a price estimate for the purchase of Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers.
[42]
Gallery
In this image of , a Flight I ship, note
TACTAS in center of fantail, lack of
helicopter hangars, and design of stacks.
In this image of , a Flight IIA ship, note lack
of TACTAS in center of fantail, aft helicopter
hangars, Phalanx CIWS mount and different
design of exhaust stacks.
Starboard side of , note torpedo tubes
mounted on missile deck vs earlier
mounted amidships. Also note
superstructure changes to
accommodate a Remote Minehunting
System (RMS) holding bay.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
95
Notes
[1] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer& action=edit
[2] DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Flight IIA (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ ddg-51-flt2a. htm)
[3] url=http:/ / www. public. navy. mil/ surfor/ pages/ Destroyer. aspx |title=US Navy Ship - Destroyer |publisher=United States Navy
[4] http:/ / www. fas.org/ programs/ ssp/ man/ uswpns/ navy/ surfacewarfare/ ddg51_arleighburke. html
[5] After 2-plus decades, Navy destroyer breaks record (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/ ap/ financialnews/ D9CUFPFO0. htm)
[6] "Northrop Grumman-Built William P. Lawrence Christened; Legacy of Former POW Honored" (http:/ / www. irconnect. com/ noc/ press/
pages/ news_releases. html?d=188999). Northrop Grumman, 17 April 2010.
[7] "Navy Reverting To Steel In Shipbuilding After Cracks In Aluminum" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 1987/ 08/ 11/ us/
navy-reverting-to-steel-in-shipbuilding-after-cracks-in-aluminum. html). The New York Times, 11 August 1987.
[8] Section F.7: Aluminum in warship construction (http:/ / www. hazegray. org/ faq/ smn6. htm#F7). hazegray.org, 30 March 2000.
[9] [9] Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p.592.
[10] [10] Baker 1998, p.1020.
[11] "Countermeasure washdown system test" (http:/ / www. dvidshub. net/ image/ 1024607/ countermeasure-washdown-system-test)
[12] http:/ / www.fas.org/ programs/ ssp/ man/ uswpns/ air/ rotary/ sh60seahawk. html#lamps
[13] "Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) DDG 51" (http:/ / www. dod. mil/ pubs/ foi/ logistics_material_readiness/ acq_bud_fin/ SARs/ DEC
2011 SAR/ DDG 51 - SAR - 31 DEC 2011.pdf)
[14] Sea-Based Ballistic Missile Defense Background and Issues for Congress (http:/ / opencrs. com/ document/ RL33745/ )
[15] Analyst: DDGs without CIWS vulnerable (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2008/ 09/ navy_ciws_091508w/ ). Navy Times. 16
September 2008.
[16] DN-SD-07-24674 (up to DDG-96) (http:/ / www.dodmedia. osd. mil/ Assets/ Still/ 2007/ Navy/ DN-SD-07-24674. JPEG)
[17] Taken from the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, pages 6768 (http:/ / armedservices. house. gov/ NDAA2007CommiteeReport.
pdf)
[18] Taken from the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, p. 193 (http:/ / armedservices. house. gov/ NDAA2007CommiteeReport. pdf)
[19] Federation of American Scientists report on the MK 45 5-inch gun and ammunition payload for the US Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
(http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ weaps/ mk-45. htm)
[20] Navy ends ERGM funding (http:/ / www.navytimes. com/ news/ 2008/ 03/ defense_ergm_032408/ ) Navy Times
[21] The US Navy Fact File (http:/ / www.navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200& tid=900& ct=4)
[22] DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-Class Aegis Guided-Missile Destroyer Modernization (http:/ / peoships. crane. navy. mil/ Modernization/
ModDDG51. htm)
[23] Navy's future linked to flexible weapons: chief (http:/ / www. reuters. com/ article/ idUSTRE60G1U920100117)
[24] [24] Contract N00024-10-C-2308.
[25] [25] Presentation summarising the restart program.
[26] RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress (http:/ / opencrs. com/ document/
RL32109/ 2010-02-26/ ?24684). CRS, 26 February 2010.
[27] GAO-10-388SP, "Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs" (http:/ / www. gao. gov/ pdfs/
GAO-10-388SP?source=ra). GAO, 30 March 2010
[28] Fabey, Michael. "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms." (http:/ / www. aviationweek. com/ aw/ generic/ story_channel.
jsp?channel=defense& id=news/ asd/ 2011/ 06/ 10/ 01.xml) Aviation Week, 10 June 2011.
[29] Freedberg, Sydney J. Jr. "Navy Bets On Arleigh Burkes To Sail Until 2072; 40 Years Afloat For Some." (http:/ / defense. aol. com/ 2012/
10/ 05/ navy-bets-on-arleigh-burkes-to-sail-until-2072-40-years-afloat/ ) 5 October 2012.
[30] O'Rourke, Ronald. "CRS-RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress." (https:/ /
opencrs.com/ document/ RL32109/ 2012-03-02/ ?26751) Congressional Research Service, 2 March 2012.
[31] "US proposes Flight IV Arleigh Burke and life extension for command ships" (http:/ / www. janes. com/ products/ janes/
defence-security-report. aspx?ID=1065929797). Jane's Information Group, 14 June 2011.
[32] Navy Makes Plans for New Destroyer for 2030s (http:/ / www. military. com/ daily-news/ 2014/ 04/ 09/
navy-makes-plans-for-new-destroyer-for-2030s.html?ESRC=todayinmil. sm) - Military.com, 9 April 2014
[33] Navy, Navy Names Forward Deployed Ships to Rota, Spain (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ search/ display. asp?story_id=65393)
[34] "NavWeek: Keeping Asian Waters Pacific." (http:/ / www. aviationweek. com/ Blogs.
aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&
plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:038fade9-083d-4ca9-8212-b44b043e9a1f)
[35] RL32109, Navy DDG-1000 and DDG-51 Destroyer Programs: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for Congress (http:/ / opencrs.
com/ document/ RL32109). Congressional Research Service, 23 December 2009.
[36] "Northrop Grumman awarded $114M contract; Navy orders 30th DDG 51 ship" (http:/ / blog. gulflive. com/ mississippi-press-business/
2010/ 04/ northrop_grumman_awarded_114m_contract_navy_orders_30th_ddg_51_ship. html), www.gulflive.com, 24 April 2010.
[37] "General Dynamics wins over $900 mln in Navy deals" (http:/ / uk. reuters. com/ article/ idUKN2621639720100226), Reuters, 26 February
2010.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
96
[38] "BIW to purchase DDG 115 material" (http:/ / www.upi. com/ Business_News/ Security-Industry/ 2010/ 03/ 02/
BIW-to-purchase-DDG-115-material/ UPI-17471267548431/ ), UPI.com, 2 March 2010.
[39] CRS RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress 14 June 2010 (http:/ / opencrs.
com/ document/ RL32109/ 2010-06-14/ download/ 1013/ )
[40] http:/ / www.defense.gov/ contracts/ contract. aspx?contractid=5056
[41] http:/ / www.usni. org/ print/ 25780
[42] Cavas, Christopher P. "Saudi Arabia Mulling BMD-Capable Destroyers". (http:/ / www. defensenews. com/ story. php?i=6799195&
c=SEA& s=TOP) Defense News, 13 June 2011.
References
Baker, A.D. The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 19981999. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval
Institute Press, 1998. ISBN 1-55750-111-4.
Gardiner, Robert and Chumbley, Stephen. Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 19471995. Annapolis,
Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1995. ISBN 1-55750-132-7.
Further reading
Sanders, Michael S. (1999). The Yard: Building a Destroyer at the Bath Iron Works. New York: HarperCollins.
ISBN0-06-019246-1. (Describes the construction of Donald Cook (DDG-75) at Bath Iron Works.)
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Arleigh Burke class destroyers.
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ arleighburkeclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation
(http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
Arleigh Burke unit list on globalsecurity.org (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/
ddg-51-unit. htm)
Arleigh Burke-class (Aegis) page on naval-technology.com (http:/ / www. naval-technology. com/ projects/
burke)
Zumwalt-class destroyer
97
Zumwalt-class destroyer
Artist rendering of the Zumwalt-class destroyer
Class overview
Name: Zumwalt
Builders: Huntington Ingalls, Bath Iron Works
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
Cost: US$3.45 billion (unit cost), US$12.07 billion (total program cost including R&D)
In commission: March 2015 (forecast)
Building: 2
Planned: USSZumwalt
USSMichael Monsoor
USSLyndon B. Johnson
Completed: 1
General characteristics
Class & type: Zumwalt
Type: Multi-mission destroyer, emphasis on land attack
Displacement:
14,564 long tons (14,798t)
[1]
Length: 600ft (180m)
Beam: 80.7ft (24.6m)
Draft: 27.6ft (8.4m)
Propulsion: 2 Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbines driving Curtiss-Wright generators plus 2 Rolls-Royce RR4500
gas turbine generator sets, 78MW (105,000shp); 2 propellers driven by electric motors
Speed: In excess of 30kn (56km/h; 35mph)
Complement: 140
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar (MFR) (X-band, scanned array)
[2]
Zumwalt-class destroyer
98
Armament:
20 MK 57 VLS modules, with a total of 80 launch cells
[3]
RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM), 4 per cell
Tactical Tomahawk, 1 per cell
Vertical Launch Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC), 1 per cell
2 155mm/62 caliber Advanced Gun System; 920 155mm rounds, 70100 LRLAP rounds
2 Mk 46 30mm Gun System
[4]
Aircraft carried: 1 SH-60 LAMPS or MH-60R helicopter
3 MQ-8 Fire Scout VT-UAVs
Aviation facilities: Flight deck and enclosed hangar for up to two medium-lift helicopters
The Zumwalt-class destroyers are a class of United States Navy destroyers designed as multi-mission stealth ships
with a focus on land attack. The class is a scaled-back project that emerged after funding cuts to the larger DD-21
vessel program. The program was previously known as the "DD(X)". The class is multi-role and designed for surface
warfare, anti-aircraft, and naval fire support. They take the place of battleships in filling the former congressional
mandate for naval fire support,
[5]
though the requirement was reduced to allow them to fill this role. The vessels'
appearance has been compared to that of the historic ironclad warship.
The class has a low radar profile; an integrated power system, which can send electricity to the electric drive motors
or weapons, which may someday include a railgun or free-electron lasers; total ship computing environment
infrastructure, serving as the ship's primary LAN and as the hardware-independent platform for all of the ship's
software ensembles; automated fire-fighting systems and automated piping rupture isolation. The class is designed to
require a smaller crew and be less expensive to operate than comparable warships. It will have a wave-piercing
tumblehome hull form whose sides slope inward above the waterline. This will reduce the radar cross-section,
returning much less energy than a more hard-angled hull form. As of January 2009, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) found that only four out of 12 of the critical technologies were mature.
[6]
The lead ship will be named Zumwalt for Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, and carries the hull number DDG-1000.
Originally 32 ships were planned, with the $9.6 billion research and development costs spread across the class, but as
the quantity was reduced to 10, then 3, the cost-per-ship increased dramatically. The cost increase caused the U.S.
Navy to identify the program as being in breach of the NunnMcCurdy Amendment on 1 February 2010.
[7]
History
Background and funding
Many of the features were developed under the DD21 program ("21st Century Destroyer"), which was originally
designed around the Vertical Gun for Advanced Ships (VGAS, see below). In 2001, Congress cut the DD-21
program by half as part of the SC21 program; to save it, the acquisition program was renamed as DD(X) and heavily
reworked.
Originally the navy had hoped to build 32 destroyers. That number was reduced to 24, then to 7, due to the high cost
of new and experimental technologies.
[]
On 23 November 2005, the Defense Acquisition Board approved a plan for
simultaneous construction of the first two ships at Northrops Ingalls yard in Pascagoula, Mississippi and General
Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine. However at that date funding had yet to be authorized by Congress.
In late December 2005, the House and Senate agreed to continue funding the program. The U.S. House of
Representatives allotted the navy only enough money to begin construction on one destroyer, as a "technology
demonstrator." The initial funding allocation was included in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007.
However, this was increased to two ships by the 2007 appropriations bill approved in September 2006, which
allotted US$2,568m to the DDG-1000 program.
On 31 July 2008, U.S. Navy acquisition officials told Congress that the service needed to purchase more Arleigh
Burke-class destroyers, and no longer needs the next-generation DDG-1000 class, Only the two approved destroyers
Zumwalt-class destroyer
99
would be built. The navy said the world threat picture had changed in such a way that it now makes more sense to
build at least eight more Burkes, rather than DDG-1000s. The navy concluded from fifteen classified intelligence
reports that the DDG-1000s would be vulnerable to forms of missile attacks.
[8]
Many Congressional subcommittee
members appeared incredulous that the navy could have conducted such a sweeping re-evaluation of the world threat
picture in just a few weeks, after spending some 13 years and $10 billion on the surface ship program known as
DD-21, then DD(X) and finally, DDG-1000. That figure does not include the money spent for the two hulls
(DDG-1000 and DDG-1001). Subsequently Chief of Naval Operations Gary Roughead has cited the need to provide
area air defense and specific new threats such as ballistic missiles and the possession of anti-ship missiles by groups
such as Hezbollah. The mooted structural problems have not been discussed in public. Navy Secretary Donald
Winter said on 4 September that "Making certain that we have Ill just say, a destroyer in the 09 budget is more
important than whether thats a DDG 1000 or a DDG 51".
On 19 August 2008, Secretary Winter was reported as saying that a third Zumwalt would be built at Bath Iron
Works, citing concerns about maintaining shipbuilding capacity. House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee
Chairman John Murtha said on 23 September 2008 that he had agreed to partial funding of the third DDG-1000 in
the 2009 Defense authorization bill.
A 26 January 2009 memo from John Young, the US DoD's top acquisition official, stated that the per ship price for
the Zumwalt-class destroyers had reached $5.964 billion, 81 percent over the Navy's original estimate used in
proposing the program. If true, that means that the program has breached the NunnMcCurdy Amendment, requiring
the Navy to recertify and rejustify the program to Congress.
[9]
On 6 April 2009, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that DoD's proposed 2010 budget will end the
DDG-1000 program at a maximum of three ships.
[10]
Also in April, the Pentagon awarded a fixed-price contract with
General Dynamics to build the three destroyers, replacing a cost-plus-fee contract that had been awarded to Northrop
Grumman. The first DDG-1000 destroyer is expected to cost $3.5 billion, the second is to cost approximately $2.5
billion, and the third even less.
[11]
What had once been seen as the backbone of the navy's future surface fleet with a planned production run of 32, has
since been replaced by destroyer production reverting to the Arleigh Burkeclass after ordering three Zumwalts. The
Zumwalt's failure is a result of a negative feedback loop of spiraling costs and plummeting productions numbers
described by Chuck Spinney as the death spiral, joining other projects such as the F-22, F-35, and Future Combat
System.
Construction
Representatives from Naval Sea Systems
Command and Bath Iron Works sign a
construction contract at the Pentagon, February
2008.
In late 2005, the program entered the detailed design and integration
phase, for which Raytheon is the Mission Systems Integrator. Both
Northrop Grumman Ship Systems and General Dynamics Bath Iron
Works share dual-lead for the hull, mechanical, and electrical detailed
design. BAE Systems Inc. has the advanced gun system and the MK57
VLS. Almost every major defense contractor (including Lockheed
Martin, Northrop Grumman Sperry Marine, L-3 Communications) and
subcontractors from nearly every state in the U.S. are involved to some
extent in this project, which is the largest single line item in the Navy's
budget. During the previous contract, development and testing of 11
Engineering Development Models (EDMs) took place: Advanced Gun
System, Autonomic Fire Suppression System, Dual Band Radar
[X-band and L-band], Infrared, Integrated Deckhouse & Apertures, Integrated Power System, Integrated Undersea
Warfare, Peripheral Vertical Launch System, Total Ship Computing Environment, Tumblehome Hull Form.
Zumwalt-class destroyer
100
The decision in September 2006 to fund two ships meant that one could be built by the Bath Iron Works in Maine
and one by Northrop Grumman's Ingalls Shipbuilding in Mississippi.
Northrop Grumman was awarded a $90M contract modification for materials and production planning on 13
November 2007. On 14 February 2008, Bath Iron Works was awarded a contract for the construction of the
USSZumwalt(DDG-1000), and Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding was awarded a contract for the construction of
USSMichael Monsoor(DDG-1001), at a cost of $1.4 billion each.
On 11 February 2009, full-rate production officially began on the first Zumwalt-class destroyer. Construction on the
second ship of the class, Michael Monsoor, began in March 2010.
[12]
The keel for the first Zumwalt-class destroyer
was laid on 17 November 2011. This first vessel was launched from the shipyard at Bath, Maine on 29 October
2013.
USS Zumwalt after floating out of drydock, 28 October 2013
The construction timetable in July 2008 was:
October 2008: DDG-1000 starts construction at Bath
Iron Works
September 2009: DDG-1001 starts construction at
Bath Iron Works
April 2012: DDG-1002 starts construction at Bath
Iron Works
April 2013: DDG-1000 initial delivery
May 2014: DDG-1001 delivery
March 2015: Initial operating capability
Fiscal 2018: DDG-1002 delivery
The Navy plans for the USS Zumwalt to reach initial
operating capability (IOC) in 2016. The second ship, the USS Michael Monsoor, is to reach IOC in 2018, and the
third ship, the USS Lyndon B Johnson, is to reach IOC in 2021.
[13]
Names and hull numbers
In April 2006, the navy announced plans to name the first ship of the class Zumwalt after former Chief of Naval
Operations Admiral Elmo R. "Bud" Zumwalt Jr. Its hull number will be DDG-1000, which abandons the guided
missile destroyer sequence used by the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (DDG-51 ), and continues the previous "gun
destroyer" sequence from the last of Spruance-class, USSHayler (DD-997).
DDG-1001 will be named for Master-at-Arms 2nd Class (SEAL) Michael A. Monsoor, the second SEAL to receive
the Medal of Honor in the Global War on Terror (GWOT), the navy announced on 29 October 2008.
On 16 April 2012, the Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced that DDG-1002 will be named for former naval
officer and U.S. President, Lyndon B. Johnson.
Zumwalt-class destroyer
101
Design elements
Planned features of the DDG-1000
Stealth
Despite being 40% larger than an Arleigh Burke-class
destroyer the radar signature is more akin to a fishing boat,
according to a spokesman for Naval Sea Systems Command;
sound levels are compared to the Los Angeles-class
submarines. The tumblehome hull reduces radar return and
the composite material deckhouse also has a low radar
return. Water sleeting along the sides, along with passive
cool air induction in the mack reduces thermal emissions.
Overall, the destroyer's angular build makes it "50 times harder to spot on radar than an ordinary destroyer.
The U.S. Navy solicited bids for a lower cost steel deckhouse as an option for DDG-1002, the last Zumwalt destroyer
in January 2013. On 2 August 2013, the US Navy announced it was awarding a $212 million contract to General
Dynamics Bath Iron Works to build a steel deckhouse for destroyer Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002).
[]
Tumblehome wave piercing hull
A return to a hull form not seen since the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, the Zumwalt-class destroyer reintroduces the
tumblehome hull form. Originally put forth in modern steel battleship designs by the French shipyard Forges et
Chantiers de la Mditerrane in La Seyne in Toulon, French naval architects believed that tumblehome, in which the
beam of the vessel narrowed from the water-line to the upper deck, would create better freeboard, greater
seaworthiness, and, as Russian battleships were to find, would be ideal for navigating through narrow constraints
(canals).
[14]
On the down side, the tumblehome battleships experienced losses in watertight integrity and/or stability
problems (especially in high speed turns).
[15]
21st century tumblehome is being reintroduced to reduce the radar
return of the hull. The bow is designed to cut through waves rather than ride over them. As mentioned above, the
stability of this hull form in high sea states has caused debate among naval architects. The tumblehome has not been
featured in USN concept designs since the Zumwalt class.
Advanced Gun System
Main article: Advanced Gun System
There has been research on extending the range of naval gunfire for many years. Canadian engineer Gerald Bull and
Naval Ordnance Station Indian Head tested an 11inch (279mm) sub-caliber saboted long-range round
[16]
in a
stretched 16-inch/45 (406mm) Mark 6 battleship gun in 1967. The Advanced Gun Weapon System Technology
Program (AGWSTP) evaluated a similar projectile with longer range in the 1980s. After the battleships were
decommissioned in 1992, the AGWSTP became a 5-inch (127mm) gun with an intended range of 180 kilometers
(110mi), which then led to the Vertical Gun for Advanced Ships (VGAS). The original DD-21 was designed around
this "vertical gun", but the project ran into serious technology/cost problems and was radically scaled back to a more
conventional 6.1inch (155mm) Advanced Gun System (AGS). One advantage of this move was that the gun was no
longer restricted to guided munitions.
The Advanced Gun System is a 155mm naval gun, two of which would be installed in each ship. This system
consists of an advanced 155mm gun and the Long Range Land Attack Projectile. This projectile is a rocket with a
warhead fired from the AGS gun; the warhead weighs 11kg / 24lb and has a circular error of probability of 50
meters. This weapon system will have a range of 83 nautical miles (154km);
[17]
the fully automated storage system
will have room for up to 750 rounds. The barrel is water-cooled to prevent overheating and allows a rate of fire of 10
rounds per minute per gun. The combined firepower from a pair of turrets gives each Zumwalt-class destroyer
Zumwalt-class destroyer
102
firepower equivalent to 12 conventional M198 field guns.
In order to provide sufficient stability to fire these guns, the Zumwalt will use ballast tanks to lower itself into the
water.
[18]
Peripheral Vertical Launch System
The Peripheral Vertical Launch System (PVLS) is an attempt to reclaim the prized center space of the hull while
increasing the safety of the ship from the loss of the entire missile battery and the loss of the ship in the case of a
magazine explosion. The system scatters pods of VLS around the outer shell of the ship having a thin steel outer
shell and a thick inner shell. The design of the PVLS would direct the force of the explosion outward rather than
ripping the ship in half. Additionally this design keeps the loss of missile capacity down to just the pod being hit.
Boat and helicopter arrangements
Two spots will be available on a large aviation deck with a hangar capable of housing two full size SH-60
helicopters. Boat handling is to be dealt within a stern mounted boat hangar with ramp. The boat hangars stern
location meets high sea state requirements for boat operations.
Dual-band radar
Originally, the AN/SPY-3 active electronically scanned array primarily X-band radar was to be married with
Lockheed Martin's AN/SPY-4 S-band volume search radar. Raytheons X-band, active-array SPY-3 Multi-Function
Radar (MFR) offers superior medium to high altitude performance over other radar bands, and its pencil beams give
it an excellent ability to focus in on targets. SPY-3 will be the primary radar used for missile engagements. A 2005
report by Congress' investigative arm, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), questioned that the technology
leap for the Dual Band Radar would be too much.
On 2 June 2010, Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter announced that they will be removing the SPY-4 S-band
Volume Search Radar from the DDG-1000's dual-band radar to reduce costs as part of the NunnMcCurdy
certification process. Due to the SBY-4 removal, the SPY-3 radar is to have software modifications so as to perform
a volume search functionality. Shipboard operators will be able to optimize the SPY-3 for either horizon search or
volume search. While optimized for volume search, the horizon search capability is limited. The DDG-1000 is still
expected to perform local area air defense.
[][19]
This system is thought to provide high detection and excellent
anti-jamming capabilities particularly when used in conjunction with the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC).
It is however not reported if the CEC system will be installed on the Zumwalt-class destroyers upon commissioning
but it is scheduled for eventual incorporation in the ship type.
[20]
The Dual Band Radar in its entirety (SPY-3 & SPY-4) is to be installed only on the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78).
With the development of the AMDR (Air and Missile Defense Radar), it is not known whether the DBR is to be
installed on any other platforms separately, as it is on the DDG-1000 class, or in total, as it is on the
CVN-78.Wikipedia:Citation needed
AMDR (Air and Missile Defense Radar) was originally proposed to be installed in the hull of DDG-1000 type under
the CG(X) program. However, due to cost growth, the CG(X) program was canceled. The AMDR has continued in
fully funded development for installation on the DDG 51 Flight III ships. However, a smaller than optimal planned
aperture of 14 feet (4.3m), the AMDR for the Flight III ships is to be less sensitive than the 22ft variant that had
been planned for CG(X).Wikipedia:Citation needed
A study to place the AMDR on a DDG-1000 hull was done with the 22-foot (6.7m) aperture primarily for Ballistic
Missile Defense (BMD) purposes. In that the DDG-1000 does not have an Aegis combat system, as does the
DDG-51 class ships, but rather the Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE) Infrastructure, the Radar/Hull Study
stated:
Zumwalt-class destroyer
103
...that developing a BMD capability "from scratch" for TSCE was not considered viable enough by the
study team to warrant further analysis, particularly because of the investment already made in the Aegis
program. The Navy concluded that developing IAMD software and hardware specifically for TSCE
would be more expensive and present higher risk. Ultimately, the Navy determined that Aegis was its
preferred combat system option. Navy officials stated that Aegis had proven some BMD capability and
was widely used across the fleet, and that the Navy wanted to leverage the investments it had made over
the years in this combat system, especially in its current development of a version that provides a new,
limited IAMD capability.
Common Display System
The ship's Common Display System, nicknamed "keds": Sailors operate keds via "trackballs and specialized button
panels," with the option to "interface by using touchscreens". The technology array allowing sailors to monitor
multiple weapons systems or sensors, saving manpower, and allowing it to be steered from the ops center.
Sonar
A dual-band sonar controlled by a highly automated computer system will be used to detect mines and submarines. It
is claimed that it is superior to the Burke's sonar in littoral ASW, but less effective in blue water/deep sea areas.
Hull-mounted mid-frequency sonar (AN/SQS-60)
Hull-mounted high-frequency sonar (AN/SQS-61)
Multi-function towed array sonar and handling system (AN/SQR-20)
Although Zumwalt ships have an integrated suite of undersea sensors and a multi-function towed array, they are not
equipped with onboard torpedo tubes, so they rely on their helicopters to destroy submarines that the sonar picks up.
Propulsion
The DDX proposed to use a permanent-magnet motor (PMM) within the hull. An alternate twin pod arrangement
was rejected as the ramifications of pod drives would require too much development and validation cost to the
vessel. The PMM is considered to be another technology leap and is the cause of some concern (along with the radar
system) from Congress. As part of the design phase, Northrop Grumman had built the world's largest permanent
magnet motor, designed and fabricated by DRS Technologies. This proposal was dropped when the PMM motor
failed to demonstrate that it was ready to be installed in time.
Zumwalt will have Converteam's Advanced Induction Motors (AIM), rather than DRS Technologies' Permanent
Magnet-Synchronous Motors (PMM).
...The exact choice of engine systems remains somewhat controversial at this point. The concept was
originally for an integrated power system (IPS) based on in-hull permanent magnet synchronous motors
(PMMs), with Advanced Induction Motors (AIM) as a possible backup solution. The design was shifted
to the AIM system in February 2005 in order to meet scheduled milestones; PMM technical issues were
subsequently fixed, but the program has moved on. The downside is that AIM technology has a heavier
motor, requires more space, requires a "separate controller" to be developed to meet noise requirements,
and produces one-third the amount of voltage. On the other hand, these very differences will force time
and cost penalties from design and construction changes if the program wishes to "design AIM out"...
[21]
Zumwalt-class destroyer
104
Integrated Power System (IPS)
The Integrated Power System (IPS) is, in some ways, similar to the old turbo-electric drive, the addition of PMMs
and integration of all electrical power systems gives ten times the power available on current destroyers. It also
reduces the ship's thermal and sound signature. The IPS has added to weight growth in the Zumwalt-class destroyer
as noted by the GAO.
Automation
Automation reduces crew size on these ships: the Zumwalt-class destroyer's minimum compliment is 130, less than
half of needed by "similar warships", Smaller crews reduce a major component of operating costs. Ammunition,
food, and other stores, are all mounted in containers able to be struck below to magazine/storage areas by an
automated cargo handling system.
Water spray or mist systems are proposed for deployment in the Zumwalt-class destroyer but the electronic spaces
remains problematic to the designers. Halon/Nitrogen dump systems are preferred but do not work when the space
has been compromised by a hull breach. The GAO has noted this system as a potential problem yet to be addressed.
Computer network
The Total Ship Computing Environment Infrastructure (TSCEI) is based on GE Fanuc Embedded Systems' PPC7A
and PPC7D single-board computers running LynuxWorks' LynxOS RTOS. These are contained in 16 shock,
vibration and electromagnetic protected Electronic Modular Enclosures.
Controversy
Lawmakers and others have questioned whether the Zumwalt-class costs too much and whether it provides the
capabilities the U.S. military needs. In 2005 the Congressional Budget Office estimated the acquisition cost of a
DD(X) at $3.84.0bn in 2007 dollars, $1.1bn more than the navy's estimate.
The National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2007 (Report of the Committee On Armed Services House
of Representatives On H.R. 5122 Together With Additional And Dissenting Views) stated the following: The
committee understands there is no prospect of being able to design and build the two lead ships for the $6.6 billion
budgeted. The committee is concerned that the Navy is attempting to insert too much capability into a single
platform. As a result, the DD(X) is now expected to displace over 14,000 tons and by the Navys estimate, cost
almost $3.3 billion each. Originally, the Navy proposed building 32 next generation destroyers, reduced that to 24,
then finally to 7 in order to make the program affordable. In such small numbers, the committee struggles to see how
the original requirements for the next generation destroyer, for example providing naval surface fire support, can be
met.Wikipedia:Citation needed
Concerns have been raised about the design. These are described below.
Ballistic missile/air defense capability
In January 2005, John Young, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, was so
confident of the DD(X)'s improved air defense over the Burke class that between its new radar and ability to fire
SM-1, SM-2, and SM-6, "I don't see as much urgency for [moving to] CG(X)" a dedicated air defense cruiser.
On 31 July 2008, Vice Admiral Barry McCullough (deputy chief of naval operations for integration of resources and
capabilities) and Allison Stiller (deputy assistant secretary of the navy for ship programs) stated that "the DDG 1000
cannot perform area air defense; specifically, it cannot successfully employ the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2), SM-3 or
SM-6 and is incapable of conducting Ballistic Missile Defense." Dan Smith, president of Raytheons Integrated
Defense Systems division, has countered that the radar and combat system are essentially the same as other
SM-2-capable ships, "I cant answer the question as to why the Navy is now asserting...that Zumwalt is not equipped
Zumwalt-class destroyer
105
with an SM-2 capability". The lack of anti-ballistic missile capability may represent a lack of compatibility with
SM-2/SM-3. The Arleigh Burke-class ships have BMD systems with their Lockheed-Martin AEGIS tracking and
targeting software, unlike the DDG-1000's Raytheon TSCE-I targeting and tracking software, which does not, as it is
not yet complete, so while the DDG-1000, with its TSCE-I combat system, does have the SM-2/SM-3 missile system
installed, it does not yet have the BMD/IAMD upgrade planned for the derived CG(X). The Aegis system, on the
other hand was used in the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. Since the Aegis system has been the navy's chief
combat system for the past 30 years when the navy started a BMD program, the combat system it was tested on was
the Aegis combat system. So while the DDG-51 platform and the DDG-1000 platform are both SM-2/SM3 capable,
as a legacy of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System only the DDG-51 with the Aegis combat system is BMD
capable, although the DDG-1000's TSCE-I combat system had both BMD and IAMD upgrades planned. And in
view of recent intelligence that China is developing targetable anti-ship ballistic missiles based on the DF-21, this
could be a fatal flaw.
On 22 February 2009 James "Ace" Lyons, the former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, stated that the
DDG-1000's technology was essential to a future "boost phase anti-ballistic missile intercept capability".
[22]
In 2010, the Congressional Research Service reported that the DDG-1000 cannot currently be used for BMD because
the BMD role was deferred to the DDG-1000 derived CG(X) program (The DDG's had the strike role, the CG had
the BMD role, but they shared both the SM3 missile, and the TSCE-I), the proposed radar of the CG(X) was much
larger (22')
[23]
and used much more energy and cooling capacity than the DDG-1000's. Since then, the 22' (6.7 m)
radar system has been canceled with the CG(X) and it has been determined that a 14' (4.2 m) radar could be used
either on DDG-51 or on DDG-1000, though it would not have the performance the Navy predicts would be needed
"to address the most challenging threats". Were the CG(X)'s BMD requirement adopted by the DDG-1000, the
DDG-1000 would have to get the TSCE-I upgrade slated for the CG(X) to support that mission.
The study that showed a cost benefit to building Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyer with enhanced radars
instead of adding BMD to the Zumwalt-class destroyers assumed very limited changes from the Flight II to the Flight
III Burkes. However costs for the Flight III Burkes have increased rapidly "as the possible requirements and
expectations continue to grow."
[24]
While the Flight III design and costs have been studied by the Navy, there is very
little reliable data available on what the cost would be to modify a DDG-1000class ship to provide a BMD
capability. However if the Air Missile Defense Radar is adopted in common on both the Flight III Burkes and the
Zumwalts and if they were both upgraded to the same combat system then the only limitation of the Zumwalts in this
role would be their limited missile magazines.Wikipedia:Verifiability
[25]
With the awarding of the development contract to the next generation Air and Missile Defense S-Band Radar to
Raytheon, deliberation to put in place this radar on the Zumwalt-class destroyer is no longer being actively discussed.
It is possible for the Zumwalt-class destroyers get the more limited BMD hardware and software modifications that
would allow them using their existing SPY-3 radar and Cooperative Engagement Capability to utilize the SM-3
missile and have a BMD capability similar to the BMD-capable Ticonderoga-class cruisers and Burke-class Flight
IIa destroyers. Procurement of a BMD specific version of the Zumwalt-class destroyer is also being proposed.
Zumwalt PLAS cells can launch the SM-2 Standard missile, but the ships have no requirement for ballistic missile
defense. The tubes are long and wide enough to incorporate future interceptors, and although the ships' immediate
role is littoral dominance and land attack, Raytheon contends that they could become BMD-capable with few
modifications.
Zumwalt-class destroyer
106
Missile capacity
The original DD21 design, displacing around 16,000 tons, would have accommodated between 117 and 128 VLS
cells. However, the final DDG-1000 design was considerably smaller than that of the DD21, resulting in room for
only 80 VLS cells. Given the vessel's expected role, the Zumwalt-class destroyers will likely carry many more
Tomahawk missiles than either the Ticonderoga- or Arleigh Burke-class ships.
Each VLS cell can be quad packed with RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM). This gives a maximum
theoretical ESSM load out of 320 missiles. The ESSM is considered a point defense weapon not generally used for
fleet area defense, although the ESSM has a range (27 NM) exceeding that of the earlier Naval Tartar anti-aircraft
missile (17.5 NM RIM-24C).
Vice Admiral Barry McCullough On 31 July 2008 (deputy chief of naval operations for integration of resources and
capabilities) and Allison Stiller (deputy assistant secretary of the navy for ship programs) stated that "the DDG 1000
cannot perform area air defense; specifically, it cannot successfully employ the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2), SM-3 or
SM-6. It is not clear if the Standard Missile capability will be integrated into the Zumwalt-class destroyer or not.
The Zumwalt-class destroyer is not an Aegis system. It uses instead the class-unique total ship computing
environment (TSCE) integrated mission system. The peripheral vertical launch system (PVLS) VLS is capable of
accommodating all Standard missile types it has not been publicly stated if the TSCE will be modified to support the
Standard missile or the ballistic missile defense mission.
Naval fire support role
Main article: United States Naval Gunfire Support debate
In summary, the committee is concerned that the navy has foregone the long range fire support capability of
the battleship, has given little cause for optimism with regard to meeting near-term developmental objectives,
and appears unrealistic in planning to support expeditionary warfare in the mid-term. The committee views the
navy's strategy for providing naval surface fire support as 'high risk', and will continue to monitor progress
accordingly.
Evaluation of the United States Navy's naval surface fire support program in the National Defense
Authorization Act of 2007,
A controversial point of the DD(X) destroyer(s) is their planned naval surface fire support (NSFS) role. The original
DD21 and the Arsenal Ship had more serious NSFS capabilities, which would meet a Congress-mandated
requirement related to the Iowa-class battleships. The requirement was eventually relaxed, the battleships stricken
from the registry, and the navy left with small tonnage ships for NSFS or alternative methods such as air support.
The official position of the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Navy is that the Zumwalt-class destroyer(s) will be
adequate as naval surface gunfire support ships, although there are dissenters.
Zumwalt-class destroyer
107
AGS being fired in September 2009 to test a new
coating intended to extend barrel life at Dugway
Proving Ground, Utah
While smaller caliber guns (and missiles) have been used for centuries
in naval fire support, very large guns have special capabilities beyond
that of mid-range calibers. US battleships were re-activated three times
after WWII specifically for naval fire support, and their 16inch (406
mm) gunfire was used in every major engagement of the U.S. from
WWII through Operation Desert Storm in January/February 1991.
[26]
The Zumwalt-class will have two 6.1inch (155mm) guns with limited
ammunition. The ships will fire a specially designed "guided" artillery
shell some 63 nautical miles (117km) inland. However, this shell has a
reduced warhead size and uses new technology, so most of the shells
carried on the DDG would have vastly shorter
range.Wikipedia:Citation needed
In March 2006, Iowa and Wisconsin were stricken from the Naval
Vessel Register, having been kept on in part to fill a naval fire support
role. However, Congress was "deeply concerned" over the loss of naval
surface gunfire support they could provide and noted that "navy efforts to improve upon, much less replace, this
capability have been highly problematic",
[27]
The U.S. House of Representatives asked that the battleships be kept in
a state of readiness should they ever be needed again
[28]
and directed the navy to increase the number of Arleigh
Burke-class destroyers that are currently being modernized. The modernization includes extending the range of the
5-inch guns on the Flight 1 ships with extended range guided munitions (ERGMs) that would enable the ships to fire
projectiles about forty nautical miles inland;
[29]
However the ERGM was canceled after it failed firing tests in
February 2008. The Navy is studying future options for naval fire support; Alliant Techsystems ballistic trajectory
extended range munition may be one possibility. Adapting the 155mm LRLAP to the 5"/54 Mk 45 gun is another
option the navy is pursuing with BAE and Lockheed Martin as contractors.
Structural problems
Zumwalt has a deckhouse made from composite material which encloses much of the sensors and electronics. In
2008, Defense News reported there had been problems sealing the composite construction panels of this area, but
Northrop Grumman has denied this.
Tumblehome design stability
Sea Jet, out of the water and showing the unique
hull design
The stability of the DDG-1000 hull design in heavy seas has been a
matter of controversy. In April 2007, naval architect Ken Brower said,
"As a ship pitches and heaves at sea, if you have tumblehome instead
of flare, you have no righting energy to make the ship come back up.
On the DDG 1000, with the waves coming at you from behind, when a
ship pitches down, it can lose transverse stability as the stern comes out
of the water and basically roll over."
[30]
The decision to not use a
tumblehome hull in the CG(X) cruiser, before the program was
canceled, may suggest that there were concerns regarding Zumwalt's
seakeeping. However, in a 1/4 scale test of the hull design, named Sea
Jet, the tumblehome hull proved seaworthy.
Zumwalt-class destroyer
108
Sea Jet, an Advanced Electric Ship Demonstrator
The Advanced Electric Ship Demonstrator (AESD), Sea Jet, funded by
the Office of Naval Research (ONR), is a 133-foot (40-meter) vessel
located at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division,
Acoustic Research Detachment in Bayview, Idaho. Sea Jet was
operated on Lake Pend Oreille, where it was used for test and
demonstration of various technologies. Among the first technologies
tested was an underwater discharge water jet from Rolls-Royce Naval
Marine, Inc., called AWJ-21, a propulsion concept with the goals of
providing increased propulsive efficiency, reduced acoustic signature,
and improved maneuverability over previous destroyer-class
combatants.Wikipedia:Citation needed
Footnotes
[1] Destroyers DDG fact file (http:/ / www.navy.mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200& tid=900& ct=4). U.S. Navy, 28 October 2009.
[2] CRS RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress (http:/ / opencrs. com/ document/
RL32109/ 2010-06-14/ download/ 1013/ ). CRS, 14 June 2010.
[3] " MK 57 Vertical Launch System (http:/ / www. raytheon. com/ businesses/ rtnwcm/ groups/ public/ documents/ content/
rtn_bus_ids_prod_mk57_pdf. pdf)". Raytheon
[4] Navy Swaps Out Anti-Swarm Boat Guns on DDG-1000s (http:/ / news. usni. org/ 2014/ 08/ 05/
navy-swaps-anti-swarm-boat-guns-ddg-1000s) - News.USNI.org, 5 August 2014
[5] [5] Section 1011 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 421)
[6] " GAO Assessments of Major Weapon Programs. (http:/ / www. gao. gov/ new. items/ d09326sp. pdf)". Government Accountability Office
[7] " Managing Affordability Industry Death Spiral UKUS (http:/ / www. booz. com/ media/ file/
Managing_Affordability_Industry_Death_Spiral_UKUS_FINAL. pdf)." www.booz.com
[8] R. Jeffrey Smith and Ellen Nakashima. "Pentagon's Unwanted Projects in Earmarks" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/
article/ 2009/ 03/ 07/ AR2009030702216.html?hpid=topnews). Washington Post, 8 March 2009. p. A01.
[9] Cavas, Christopher P., "New Destroyer Emerges in US Plans". Defense News, 2 February 2009, p. 1.
[10] Bennett, John T. and Kris Osborn. "Gates Reveals DoD Program Overhaul" (http:/ / www. defensenews. com/ story. php?i=4026294&
c=AME& s=LAN). Defense News, 6 April 2009.
[11] Drew, Christopher. " General Dynamics To Build New Destroyer (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 04/ 18/ business/ 18ships. html)", New
York Times, 18 April 2009.
[12] http:/ / www.navsea. navy.mil/ Newswire2011/ 17NOV11-01. aspx
[13] DDG 1000 Preps for Heavy Weather Trials (http:/ / www. dodbuzz. com/ 2014/ 01/ 14/ ddg-1000-preps-for-heavy-weather-trials/ ) -
DoDBuzz.com, 14 January 2014
[14] [14] Forczyk. p. 18, 76
[15] [15] Forczyk p. 32, 76
[16] [16] , citing a letter from Major Tracy Ralphs to Senator John Warner on 25 February 1999.
[17] As of June 2014, the AGS the Zumwalt "can fire rocket-powered, computer-guided shells that can destroy targets away,... three times farther
than ordinary destroyer guns can fire."
[18] Ewing, Philip "SAS12: Approach of the Gray Elephant." (http:/ / www. dodbuzz. com/ 2012/ 04/ 16/ sas12-approach-of-the-gray-elephant/ )
DoD Buzz. 16 April 2012.
[19] http:/ / www.navsea. navy.mil/ nswc/ dahlgren/ Leading%20Edge/ Sensors/ 03_Development. pdf
[20] http:/ / www.dote. osd. mil/ pub/ reports/ FY2011/ pdf/ navy/ 2011ssds. pdf
[21] Needs subscription can someone find another reference?
[22] LYONS: Naval shipbuilders sinking (http:/ / www.washingtontimes. com/ news/ 2009/ feb/ 22/ naval-shipbuilders-sinking/ ). Washington
Times, 22 February 2009
[23] http:/ / www.fas.org/ sgp/ crs/ weapons/ RL34179.pdf
[24] Fabey, Michael. "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms." (http:/ / www. aviationweek. com/ aw/ generic/ story_channel.
jsp?channel=defense& id=news/ asd/ 2011/ 06/ 10/ 01.xml) Aviation Week, 10 June 2011.
[25] Cavas, Christopher P. "Axing DDG 1000 Radar May Save Cash, Enable BMD." (http:/ / www. defensenews. com/ article/ 20100604/
DEFSECT04/ 6040314/ Axing-DDG-1000-Radar-May-Save-Cash-Enable-BMD) Defense News, 4 June 2010.
[26] AR 600-8-27 p. 26 paragraph 914
[27] [27] NDAA 2007 p193
[28] [28] NDAA 2007 p68
[29] [29] NDAA 2007 pp67-8,193
Zumwalt-class destroyer
109
[30] [30] , quoting
References
Citations
Bibliography
Army Regulations 600-8-27 dated 2006
Forczyk, Robert. Russian Battleship vs Japanese battleship, Yellow Sea 190405. 2009 Osprey. ISBN
978-1-84603-330-8.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Zumwalt class destroyer.
General Information about DD(X) Class Destroyers
Raytheon's official DDG 1000 Program web page (http:/ / www. raytheon. com/ products/ ddg_1000/ )
Eaglen, Mackenzie (7 October 2008). "Changing Course on Navy Shipbuilding: Questions Congress Should Ask
Before Funding" (http:/ / www. heritage. org/ Research/ NationalSecurity/ bg2193. cfm). The Heritage
Foundation. Excellent recent overview of Zumwalts versus Burkes
Sea Jet Advanced Electric Ship Demonstrator (AESD) (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/
dd-x-sea-jet. htm)
Description of the DD numbering system for ships in the U.S. Navy (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ photos/
shusn-no/ dd-no. htm)
Video Advanced Gun System (AGS) Employment in Asymmetric Warfare Simulation Scenario (http:/ /
youtube. com/ watch?v=pg1uHRVx8-I)
Video Navy Advanced Gun System (AGS) Non-combatant Evacuation Simulation Scenario (http:/ / youtube.
com/ watch?v=ilwIhIwf5yI)
General DD(X) Destroyer page (http:/ / peoships. crane. navy. mil/ DDG1000/ default. htm)
globalsecurity.org report on the DD(X) Destroyer program (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/
ship/ dd-x. htm)
Overview of the DD(X) Destroyer program and its capabilities (http:/ / www. naval-technology. com/ projects/
dd21/ )
Zumwalt class Destroyer (Navy Recognition) (http:/ / www. navyrecognition. com/ index.
php?option=com_content& task=view& id=189)
Concept of employment for naval surface fire support (near term capability) (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/
dod-101/ sys/ ship/ weaps/ docs/ C1031. htm)
Information on the Advanced Gun System set to be installed on the DD(X) destroyers (http:/ / www. navweaps.
com/ Weapons/ WNUS_61-62_ags. htm)
Government reports regarding the DD(X) Destroyer program
DoD press release: Navy Designates Next-Generation Zumwalt Destroyer (http:/ / www. defenselink. mil/
releases/ 2006/ nr20060407-12772. html)
House letter recommending against a "winner take all" construction strategy for the DD(X) destroyer program
(http:/ / www. house. gov/ apps/ list/ press/ va01_davis/ pr_050316_ddx. html)
1995 US General Accounting Office report on the US Navys Naval Surface Fire Support program (http:/ / www.
fas. org/ man/ gao/ gao95160. htm)
Zumwalt-class destroyer
110
2004 US Government Accountability Office Report: Challenges Facing the DD(X) Destroyer Program (http:/ /
www. gao. gov/ new. items/ d04973. pdf)
2005 US Government Accountability Office Report: Issues Related to Navy Battleships (http:/ / www. gao. gov/
new. items/ d06279r. pdf)
2005 CRS Report for Congress: Navy DD(X) and CG(X) Programs: Background and Issues for Congress (http:/ /
www. fas. org/ sgp/ crs/ weapons/ RS21059. pdf)
Boston-class cruiser
111
Boston-class cruiser
USS Canberra
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: N/A, First guided missile cruiser line authorized
Succeededby: Galveston class cruiser
Completed: 2
Retired: 2
Preserved: 0
General characteristics
Type: Boston Class Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 13,600 tons
Length: 673ft 3in (205.2m)
Beam: 71ft 10in (21.9m)
Draft: 26ft 10in (8.2m)
Propulsion: 4 615psi boilers, steam turbines, 4 shafts
Speed: 33 knots (61km/h; 38mph)
Complement: 1,142 officers and enlisted
Armament: 6 8 inch /55 caliber guns
10 5 in/38 cal guns
8 3/50 caliber guns
2 twin-rail Mark 4 RIM-2 Terrier Surface to air missile launchers
The United States Navy's Boston class were the first guided missile cruisers in the world. Both ships in this
experimental class were originally Baltimore class heavy cruisers that had been decommissioned after World War II,
but were redesignated as guided missile heavy cruisers (CAGs) and entered refit in 1952. The lengthy conversion
and modernization project involved removing the aft triple 8-inch gun turret and its supporting structure and
installation of two twin launchers for Terrier anti-aircraft guided missiles. The forward two 8-inch gun turrets
remained unchanged. The forward superstructure was modified to include the Terrier's associated radars and
electronics, the aft superstructure was completely replaced, and Baltimore class's two funnels were trunked to one.
Owing to the Boston class's experimental nature, the ships were only partially converted, with a full conversion to be
carried out if the new weapon systems were successful. Had the ships been fully converted, the forward 8-inch
turrets would have been replaced with additional Terrier launchers.
Boston-class cruiser
112
In 1968 both Boston class guided missile heavy cruisers were reclassified back to heavy cruisers (CAs), in part due
to the extensive use of their 8-inch guns for shore bombardment during the Vietnam War. While they had retained
their Terrier missiles, the swift advance of technology had made these pioneering weapons obsolete after little more
than a dozen years' service, and the ships' main battery were once again their six remaining 8-inch guns in the
forward turrets.
Various proposals for limited modernization or complete reconstruction were considered but ultimately rejected. In
1970 both Boston class ships were decommissioned for the final time, eventually struck from the Naval Vessel
Register, and sold for scrap.
Ships in class
Name Keel laid Launched Commissioned Decommissioned
Boston (CAG-1) June 1941 Aug. 1942 Nov. 1955 May 1970
Canberra (CAG-2) Sep. 1941 Apr. 1943 June 1956 Feb. 1970
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Boston class cruiser.
hazegray.org
[1]
US Naval Historical Center
[2]
References
[1] http:/ / www. hazegray. org
[2] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil
Galveston-class cruiser
113
Galveston-class cruiser
USS Oklahoma City
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Boston-class cruiser
Succeededby: Providence-class cruiser
Completed: 3
Retired: 3
Preserved: 1
General characteristics
Type: Galveston class guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 15,205 tons
Length: 610ft (185.9m)
Beam: 66ft (20.1m)
Draft: 25ft (7.6m)
Propulsion: 4 634psi boilers, steam turbines, 4 shafts
Speed: 32.5 knots (60.2km/h; 37.4mph)
Complement: 1,395 officers and enlisted
Armament: Little Rock and Oklahoma City (fleet flagship)
3 6 in (152 mm) guns in 1 Mark 16 turret
2 5 in/38 cal guns in 1 Mark 32 mount
1 twin-rail Mark 7 RIM-8 Talos missile launcher
Galveston (non-flagship)
6 6 in (152 mm) guns in 2 Mark 16 turrets
6 5 in/38 cal guns in 3 Mark 32 mounts
1 twin-rail Mark 7 RIM-8 Talos missile launcher
Originally built as Cleveland-class light cruisers (CL) in the United States Navy during World War II, in 1957 three
ships were re-designated as Galveston-class guided missile light cruisers (CLG) and fitted with the Talos long-range
surface-to-air missile system. During the two year refit, the aft superstructure was completely replaced and all aft
guns were removed to make room for the twin-arm Talos launcher and a 46-missile storage magazine. Three large
masts were also installed in order to hold a variety of radars, missile guidance, and communications systems. Little
Galveston-class cruiser
114
Rock and Oklahoma City were simultaneously converted into fleet flagships, which involved removing two forward
dual 5-inch (127mm) and one triple 6-inch (152mm) turrets, and replacing them with a massively rebuilt and
expanded forward superstructure. Galveston, in the non-flagship configuration, retained the Cleveland-class's
standard forward weapons: three dual 5-inch (127mm) and two triple 6-inch (152mm) turrets.
A similar pattern was followed in converting three other Cleveland-class ships (Providence, Springfield, and Topeka)
to operate the Terrier surface-to-air missile system, creating the Providenceclass. Providence and Springfield were
outfitted as fleet flagships, but Topeka was not.
Like the Providence class cruisers, the Galveston class ships suffered from serious stability problems caused by the
topweight of the missile system. Indeed, the Galveston class ships were more affected by heavy Talos missile system
than the Terrier equipped ships. Weight reduction measures and the use of ballast were necessary to improve
stability. The cruisers, particularly Galveston, also suffered from hogging of the hull.
All three Galveston-class ships were decommissioned to the reserve fleet between 1970 and 1979. In the 1975
cruiser realignment, Little Rock and Oklahoma City were reclassified as guided missile cruisers (CG). The ships
were stricken from the Naval Vessel Register between 1973 and 1979. Galveston was scrapped in the mid-1970s,
Oklahoma City was sunk as a target in 1999, and Little Rock is a museum ship in Buffalo, NY.
Ships in class
Keel laid Launched Commissioned Decommissioned
Galveston (CLG-3) August 1943 April 1945 May 1958 May 1970
Little Rock (CLG-4) March 1943 August 1944 June 1960 May 1976
Oklahoma City (CLG-5) December 1942 February 1944 September 1960 December 1979
External links
hazegray.org
[1]
US Naval Historical Center
[2]
Providence-class cruiser
115
Providence-class cruiser
USS Providence
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Galveston-class cruiser
Succeededby: Long Beach-class cruiser
Completed: 3
Retired: 3
Preserved: 0
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 15,025 tons
Length: 608ft (185.3m)
Beam: 64ft (19.5m)
Draft: 23ft 6in (7.1m)
Propulsion: 4 634psi boilers
steam turbines
4 shafts
100,000shp
Speed: 32.5knots (60km/h)
Complement: 1,120 officers and enlisted
Armament: Providence and Springfield (fleet flagship)
3 6 in (152 mm) guns in 1 Mark 16 turret
2 5 in/38 cal guns in 1 Mark 32 mount
1 twin-rail Mark 9 RIM-2 Terrier missile launcher
Topeka (non-flagship)
6 6 in (152 mm) guns in 2 Mark 16 turrets
6 5 in/38 cal guns in 3 Mark 32 mounts
1 twin-rail Mark 9 RIM-2 Terrier missile launcher
Originally built as Cleveland-class light cruisers (CL) in the United States Navy during World War II, in 1957 three
ships were re-designated as Providence-class guided missile light cruisers (CLG) and fitted with the Terrier
surface-to-air missile system. During the two year refit, the aft superstructure was completely replaced and all aft
guns were removed to make room for the twin-arm Terrier launcher and a 120 missile storage magazine. Three large
masts were also installed in order to hold a variety of radars, missile guidance, and communications systems.
Providence-class cruiser
116
Providence and Springfield were simultaneously converted into fleet flagships, which involved removing two
forward dual 5-inch (127mm) and one triple 6-inch (152mm) turrets, and replacing them with a massively rebuilt
and expanded forward superstructure. Topeka, in the non-flagship configuration, retained the Cleveland-class's
standard forward weapons: three dual 5-inch (127mm) and two triple 6-inch (152mm) turrets.
A similar pattern was followed in converting three other Cleveland-class ships (Galveston, Little Rock, and
Oklahoma City) to operate the Talos surface-to-air missile system, creating the Galvestonclass. Little Rock and
Oklahoma City were outfitted as fleet flagships, but Galveston was not.
Like the Galveston class cruisers, the Providence class ships suffered from serious stability problems caused by the
topweight of the missile system, requiring the use of ballast to improve stability. The cruisers also suffered from
hogging of the hull.
All three Providence-class ships were decommissioned to the reserve fleet between 1969 and 1974. In the 1975
cruiser realignment, Providence and Springfield were reclassified as guided missile cruisers (CG). The ships were
stricken from the Naval Vessel Register between 1974 and 1980, and eventually sold for scrap.
Ships in class
Keel laid Launched Commissioned Decommissioned
Providence (CLG-6) July 1943 December 1944 September 1959 August 1973
Springfield (CLG-7) February 1943 March 1944 July 1960 May 1974
Topeka (CLG-8) April. 1943 August 1944 March 1959 June 1969
External links
hazegray.org
[1]
US Naval Historical Center
[2]
Long Beach-class cruiser
117
Long Beach-class cruiser
USS Long Beach (CGN-9)
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Providence-class cruiser
Succeededby: Albany-class cruiser
Completed: 1
Active: 0
Retired: 1
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 15,025 tons
Length: 721ft 3in (219.84m)
Beam: 73ft 3in (22.33m)
Draft: 31ft (9.4m)
Propulsion: 2 C1W Westinghouse nuclear reactors
2 screws
80,000 SHP
Speed: 32.5 knots (60km/h)
Complement: 1,100 officers and enlisted
Armament: 1 twin-rail Talos SAM launcher
2 twin-rail Terrier launcher
2 5in guns
6 ASROCs
The Long Beach class cruiser is a single-ship class (sole member, USSLong Beach(CGN-9), ex-CGN-160,
ex-CLGN-160) of the United States Navy. The class is noted as the world's first nuclear-powered surface combatant,
and the last cruiser built in the US Navy to a cruiser design; all subsequent cruiser classes were built on scaled-up
destroyer hulls, or, in the case of the Albany class, converted from already existent cruisers.
During the design phase, the only ship of the Long Beach class was initially classified as CLGN-160, then
reclassified CGN-160 on 6 December 1956. The keel of the USS Long Beach was laid by Bethlehem Steel on 2
December 1957 at the Fore River Shipyard in Quincy, Massachusetts. On 1 July 1958 she received her third and
final classification, this time as CGN-9. The ship was launched on 14 July 1959 and commissioned on 9 September
1961. The Long Beach class under overhaul from 6 October 1980 until 26 March 1983. She was both
decommissioned and stricken on 1 May 1995.
Long Beach-class cruiser
118
Ships in class
Keel laid Launched Commissioned Decommissioned
USSLong Beach(CGN-9) 2 December 1957 14 July 1959 9 September 1961 1 May 1995
External links
hazegray.org
[1]
US Naval Historical Center
[2]
Albany-class cruiser
119
Albany-class cruiser
USS Albany, lead ship of her class
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Long Beach-class cruiser
Succeededby: Leahy-class cruiser
Built: 1959-1964 (conversions)
In commission: 1962-1980
Planned: 5
Completed: 3
Retired: 3
Preserved: 0 (Anchor of USS Chicago given to the city of Chicago and placed as a memorial at Navy Pier to remember
all ships to bear the same name)
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 13,700 std, 17,500 full load
Length: 664ft (202m) waterline, 674ft (205m) overall
Beam: 70ft (21m)
Draft: 30ft (9.1m)
Propulsion: four Babcock and Wilcox boilers, four General Electric geared turbines, 120,000 shaft horsepower, w. four
shafts
Speed: 32kn (59km/h)
Complement: 1,222 (72 officers, 1,150 enlisted men)
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-48 3D air search radar, AN/SPS-43, AN/SPS-30, AN/SPS-10 surface search radar, AN/SPG-49 fire
control radar for Talos, AN/SPG-51 fire control radar for Tartar, AN/SQS-23 bow mounted sonar
Armament: Two Mk 12 twin RIM-8 Talos SAM launchers (104 missiles)
Two Mk 11 twin RIM-24 Tartar SAM launchers (84 missiles)
One Mk 112 ASROC octuple-tube missile launcher
2 5-inch (130mm) gun
2 triple Mk-32 torpedo tubes
Aircraft carried: Flight deck only
The Albany Class guided missile cruisers were converted Baltimore and Oregon City class heavy cruisers of the
United States Navy. All original superstructure and weapons were removed and replaced. The converted ships had
Albany-class cruiser
120
new very high superstructures and relied heavily on aluminum to save weight.
Class description
The conversion was extensive, stripping the ships down to their hulls, removing all armament and the ship's
superstructure. USSAlbany(CA-123), an Oregon City class cruiser, was converted at Boston Naval Shipyard
starting in January 1959 and recommissioned as CG-10 on November 3, 1962. USSChicago(CA-136), a Baltimore
class cruiser, was converted at San Francisco Naval Shipyard starting in July 1959 and was recommissioning as
CG-11 on May 2, 1964. USSFall River(CA-131) was originally slated to be CG-12, but USSColumbus(CA-74)
was converted instead. Columbus was converted at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard beginning in September 1959 and
recommissioning as CG-12 on December 1, 1962. USSRochester(CA-124) and USSBremerton(CA-130) were
also proposed for conversion to CG-13 and CG-14, but those plans were dropped because of the high cost of the
conversion and capabilities of newer guided missile frigates.
[1]
Weapons and systems
The weapon systems carried included the Mk 77 missile fire-control system with four AN/SPG-49 fire-control radars
and two Mk 12 twin launchers for their armament of 104 Talos long-range surface-to-air missiles, one forward and
one aft. These cruisers also carried an armament of 84 shorter-ranged Tartar missiles launched from two Mk 11 twin
launchers, one to the port of and one to the starboard of the cruiser's main superstructure. The Tartar missiles were
controlled by the Mk 74 missile fire-control system with four AN/SPG-51 fire-control radars. Some space was
allocated amidships on these cruisers for the possible installation of eight Polaris missiles, but the concept to add
these ballistic missiles were dropped in mid-1959.
For anti-submarine warfare (ASW), one eight-cell Mk 112 "matchbox" ASROC missile launcher was installed
amidships on each of these cruisers, located between their two stacks. Also for ASW purposes, two triple Mk 32
torpedo tubes for the Mk 46 ASW torpedo were installed.
These cruisers were initially converted into all-missile warships with no naval guns, but later on, two open-mount
Mk 24 5-inch 38 calibre guns were added to the port side and the starboard side, near their aft exhaust stacks.
In the late 1960s Chicago and Albany underwent major engineering overhauls and both the missile systems (Talos
and Tartar) had new digital fire control system upgrades to handle the increasing threat from Soviet Navy anti-ship
cruise missiles and aircraft. Columbus did not receive these missile system upgrades due to lack of funding. The
Talos system was deactivated on the Albany class (leaving them with the Tartar as the only SAM system
operational) and all other ships in the fleet that carried it during 1976.
In late 1979 the two surviving ships (Chicago and Albany) were scheduled for massive overhauls. SM-1 (MR)
missiles (which were to replace the Tartar system), as well as 2 Phalanx CIWS and 2 four-cell Harpoon missile
launchers were planned to be installed, as well as a major refitting of the ships machinery, structure, and electronics.
The funding appropriated for this work was diverted however, to other ships and both cruisers were finally
decommissioned in 1980.
Service history
All three ships served extensively through the 60's and 70's with Chicago being a long time flagship for the Third
Fleet in the Pacific, and the Albany serving likewise as the Second Fleet flagship in the Western Atlantic and as the
Sixth Fleet flagship in the Mediterranean. Columbus did not receive the extensive Talos fire-control upgrades and
extensive refits that the other two ships received in the late 60's, though she did receive engineering overhauls to
allow her remain active until she was decommissioned early in 1976, and then immediately sold for scrap. Albany
and Chicago soldiered on until 1980, and while funding for massive overhauls for both was appropriated for 1979,
the funds were diverted to other projects, and both ships were laid up in 1980.
Albany-class cruiser
121
Ships in class
Ship
Name
Hull No. Builder Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
Albany CA-123/CG-10 Bethlehem Steel, Quincy 19461980 Disposed of, sold by DRMS for scrapping,
08/12/1990
NVR
[2]
DANFS
[3]
Chicago CA-136/CG-11 Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard
19451980 Disposed of, sold by DRMS for scrapping,
10/24/1991
NVR
[4]
DANFS
[5]
Columbus CA-74/CG-12 Bethlehem Steel, Quincy 19451975 Disposed of, sold by DRMS for scrapping,
11/01/1977
NVR
[6]
Gallery
Albany firing Talos and Tartar
missiles, 1963
Talos launcher on
Columbus, 1962
Columbus firing Tartar
missile - Mediterranean,
1965
USS Columbus' 8-tube Mk
112 ASROC, 1962
Elevated port side view of
Columbus
Albany prior to conversion, 1955
References
[1] Moore, John. Janes American Fighting Ships of the 20th Century. p126. Mallard Press, 1991. ISBN 0-7924-5626-2.
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CG10. htm
[3] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ a5/ albany-iv.htm
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CG11. htm
[5] http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ danfs/ c7/ chicago-iii.htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CG12. htm
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Albany class cruiser.
RIM-24 Tartar Surface-to-Air Missile (http:/ / www. designation-systems. net/ dusrm/ m-24. html)
RIM-8 Talos Surface-to-Air Missile (http:/ / www. designation-systems. net/ dusrm/ m-8. html)
Albany-class cruiser
122
ASROC Anti-Submarine Rocket (http:/ / www. gyrodynehelicopters. com/ asroc. htm)
Leahy-class cruiser
USS Leahy (CG-16)
Class overview
Name: Leahy class destroyer leader / cruiser
Builders: Several
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Albany-class cruiser
Succeededby: Belknap-class cruiser
Subclasses: Bainbridge-class cruiser
Built: 19591964
In commission: 19621995
Completed: 9
Active: 0
Retired: 9
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 7,800 tons (full load)
Propulsion: 2 steam turbines providing 85,000shp (63MW); 2 shafts
4 boilers
Speed: 32 knots
Range: 8,000 nm @ 20 knots
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-39 followed by AN/SPS-48 3D air search radar
AN/SPS-43 followed by AN/SPS-49 2D air search radar
AN/SPS-10 surface search radar
AN/SPG-55 missile fire control radar
AN/SQS-23 bow mounted sonar
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32
Mark 36 SRBOC
Leahy-class cruiser
123
Armament: 2 Mark 10 Terrier SAM
1 ASROC ASW system
4 3in(76mm)guns (replaced by Harpoon missiles during
1980s)
6 12.75in(324mm)ASW TT
2 x Phalanx CIWS
Aircraft carried: None
Leahy class cruisers were a class of guided missile cruisers built for the United States Navy. They were originally
designated as Destroyer Leaders (DLG), but in the 1975 cruiser realignment, they were reclassified as guided missile
cruisers (CG).
They were a new "double-ender" class fitted with Terrier (later Standard ER) missile launchers fore and aft, and the
first and only frigate class designed without a main gun battery for shore bombardment or ship-vs.-ship
engagementsthe gun armament was reduced in order to carry a larger missile load. One of the principal missions
of these ships, like their predecessors the Farragut class, was to form part of the anti-air and antisubmarine screen for
carrier task forces, while also controlling aircraft from the carrier by providing vectors to assigned targets.
The ships carried over the propulsion plant of the Farragut class, fitted into a longer hull designed with a knuckled
hurricane bow that reduced plunging in a rough sea, thus keeping the forecastle dry as needed to operate the
forward missile launcher. Other features included an expanded electrical plant and increased endurance. A major
design innovation was the use of "macks"combined masts and stackson which the radars could be mounted
without smoke interference.
Description
The first three ships were constructed at Bath Iron Works, the next two at New York Shipbulding Corp, and the rest
at Puget Sound Bridge and Dry Dock Company, Todd Shipyards, San Pedro, CA, San Francisco Naval Shipyard and
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.
Modernizations were accomplished between 1967 and 1972, upgrading air warfare capabilities. Nearly all
modernizations were completed at Bath Iron Works, but Leahy received the modernization at Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard at a cost of $36.1 million.
[1]
All Leahy class ships were modernized again in the late 1980s New Threat Upgrade program. This program added
advanced air search and track radars (AN/SPS-49 and AN/SPS-48E), updated targeting radars (AN/SPG-55), and
combat direction systems. The upgrade included massive remodeling of the ship from food service space
rehabilitation to a main propulsion system overhaul.
[2]
Entire systems were removed and replaced, for example the
AN/SPS-40 air-search radar was replaced with the AN/SPS-49 air-search radar. The upgrade was also quite
expensive and the ships didn't serve much longer after the modification. For example, USS Gridley (CG-21) received
NTU in 1991 at a cost of $55 million, but was decommissioned in early 1994.
The Leahy class was taken out of service in the early 1990s, stricken from the naval register, and transferred to the
maritime administration for disposal.
Leahy-class cruiser
124
USS Bainbridge
USS Bainbridge (CGN-25)
Class overview
Name: Bainbridge class destroyer leader / cruiser
Builders: Bethlehem Steel Corporation
Operators: United States Navy
Built: 19591962
In commission: 19621996
Completed: 1
Active: 0
Retired: 1
General characteristics
Class & type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 9100tons
Length: 172.1m (565ft)
Beam: 17.6m (57ft 8in)
Draft: 3.2m (8ft 29in)
Propulsion: 60,000shp; 2 G.E. Reactors (D2G), Geared Turbines, 2 screws
Speed: 34knots (55km/h)
Range: Unlimited
Complement: 475
Sensors and
processing systems:
1 AN/SPS-10 surface search RADAR
[3]
AN/SPS-37 search RADAR
AN/SPS-52 3D air search RADAR
4 AN/SPG-55 Terrier fire control RADAR
[4]
AN/SQS-26 SONAR
Armament: As Leahy-class
Main article: USS Bainbridge (CGN-25)
Leahy-class cruiser
125
USSBainbridge(CGN-25) was a nuclear-powered development of the Leahy-class. Originally a guided missile
destroyer leader, the class was re-designated guided missile cruiser in 1975. As with USS Long Beach (CGN-9) and
USS Enterprise (CVN-65), Bainbridge was the only member of its single-ship class.
Bainbridge (DLGN-25) was largely identical to the Leahy-class
:329
except for the replacement of the conventional
design's four 1200 lb/in
2
steam boilers with two D2G reactors, and related increases in displacement, length and
beam.
:331
Bainbridge's engineering department carried 7 officers and 156 enlisted menrespectively 3 and 42 more
than a contemporary steam-powered vessel.
:331
The lessons learned on Bainbridge were later adapted to the next nuclear-powered ship, USSTruxtun(CGN-35) and
the California and Virginia classes of nuclear-powered cruiser.Wikipedia:Citation needed
Ships in class
Name Pennant Builder Laid Down Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Fate
Leahy class conventional cruiser
Leahy CG-16 Bath Iron Works, Bath 3 December
1959
1 July 1961 4 August 1962 1 October 1993 Broken up at Brownsville,
2005
Harry E.
Yarnell
CG-17 31 May
1960
9 December
1961
2 February
1963
29 October 1993 Broken up at Philadelphia,
2002
Worden CG-18 9
September
1961
2 June 1962 3 August 1963 1 October 1993 Sunk as target, 17 June 2000
Dale CG-19 New York
Shipbuilding
Corporation, Camden
6
September
1960
28 June
1962
23 November
1963
27 September
1994
Sunk as target, 6 April 2000
Richmond K.
Turner
CG-20 9 January
1961
6 April
1963
13 June 1964 13 April 1995 Sunk as target, 9 August 1998
Gridley CG-21 Lockheed Shipbuilding
and Construction
Company, Seattle
15 July
1960
31 July
1961
25 May 1963 21 January 1994 Broken up at Brownsville,
2005
England CG-22 Todd Shipyards, San
Pedro
4 October
1960
6 March
1962
7 December
1963
21 January 1994 Broken up at Brownsville,
2004
Halsey CG-23 San Francisco Naval
Shipyard
26 August
1960
15 January
1962
20 July 1963 28 January 1994 Broken up at Brownsville,
2003
Reeves CG-24 Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, Bremerton
1 July 1960 12 May
1962
15 May 1964 12 November
1993
Sunk as target, 1 June 2001
Bainbridge class nuclear powered cruiser
Bainbridge CGN-25 Bethlehem Steel
Corporation, Quincy
5 May 1959 15 April
1961
6 October 1962 13 September
1996
Disposed of through
Ship-Submarine Recycling
Program at Bremerton, 1999
Leahy-class cruiser
126
Gallery
Worden prior to modernization in late 1960s
or early 1970s.
Gridley after modernization, but prior to
NTU.
Bainbridge in 1991
References
[1] [1] Jane's American fighting ships of the 20th century / compiled and edited by John Moore; preface by M. Staser Holcomb. New York, N.Y.
Mallard Press, 1991. ISBN 0-7924-5626-2
[2] CG-16 Leahy class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cg-16. htm)
[3] Blackman, Raymond V. B. Jane's Fighting Ships (1970/71) p.430
[4] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Shipboard Radars" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1978 p.144
External links
Leahy-class frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ leahyclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation (http:/ /
destroyerhistory. org/ )
Belknap-class cruiser
127
Belknap-class cruiser
USS Belknap, lead ship of her class
Class overview
Name: In honor of Rear Admiral George Eugene Belknap
Builders: Several
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Leahy class cruiser
Succeededby: California class cruiser
Subclasses: Truxtun-class cruiser
Built: 1962-1967
In commission: 1964-1995
Completed: 9
Retired: 9
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 7,930tons (8,057metric tons)
Length: 547ft (167m)
Beam: 55ft (17m)
Draft: 29ft (8.8m)
Propulsion: four 1200psi (8300kPa) boilers, two geared steam turbines, two shafts. 85,000 shp (63,384 kW)
Speed: 32knots (59km/h)
Complement: 27 officers, 450 enlisted
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-10 surface search RADAR
[1]
AN/SPS-48 3D air search radar
AN/SPS-49 2D air search radar
2 AN/SPG-55 Terrier missile fire control radar
[2]
AN/SQS-26 SONAR
[3]
Belknap-class cruiser
128
Armament: (final configuration)
1 Mk 10 Mod 7 Guided Missile Launching System with 40 SM-2ER Standard missiles
20 RUR-5 ASROC Antisubmarine Missiles Fired From Mk 10 launcher
2 4 Harpoon missile launchers
2 3 Mark 46 torpedo launchers
1 5 Inch/54-caliber Mk. 42 gun
2 Phalanx CIWS.
Armor: none
Aircraft carried: (final configuration) 1 SH-2H Seasprite
The Belknap class cruiser was a class of single-ended guided missile cruisers (their missile armament was installed
only forward, unlike "double-ended" missile cruisers with missile armament installed both forward and aft) built for
the United States Navy during the 1960s. They were originally designated as DLG frigates (destroyer leaders; the
USN use of the term frigate from 1950 to 1975 was intended to evoke the power of the sailing frigates of old), but in
the 1975 fleet realignment, they were reclassified as guided missile cruisers (CG).
Description
When commissioned, the main armament of the Belknap class was a 5-inch/54-caliber Mk. 42 gun on the
quarterdeck and a twin-rail RIM-2 Terrier Mk 10 Missile Launcher on the foredeck. The class was also equipped
with two twin 3"/50 caliber guns for defence against sub-sonic aircraft. In the early 1980s, the Terrier missiles were
replaced with RIM-67 Standard missiles; and during the NTU program in the late 1980s and early 1990s the class
had its Standard SM-1 system upgraded to utilize SM-2ER Block II, the 3inch guns were replaced with two 4 cell
Harpoon Surface-to-surface missile launchers, and two Phalanx CIWS systems were installed.
The derivative USS Truxtun shared the weapons systems outfit of the Belknap class, but was nuclear-powered, larger
and substantially unrelated in design (for example, many weapons systems in different locations, such as the
aft-facing GMLS). Most information related to nuclear cruisers is still classified, but Truxtun appears to be more a
Belknap-like derivative of the nuclear cruiser Bainbridge than the other way around.
Ships in class
Name Pennant Builder Laid Down Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Fate
Belknap class conventional cruiser
Belknap CG-26 Bath Iron Works,
Bath
5 February
1962
20 July
1963
7 November
1964
15 February 1995 Sunk as target, 24 September
1998
Josephus
Daniels
CG-27 23 April
1962
2 December
1963
8 May 1965 21 January 1994 Broken up at Brownsville,
1999
Wainwright CG-28 2 July 1962 25 April
1965
8 January 1966 15 November
1993
Sunk as target, 12 June 2002
Jouett CG-29 Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, Bremerton
25
September
1962
30 June
1964
3 December
1966
28 January 1994 Sunk as target, 10 August
2007
Horne CG-30 San Francisco Naval
Shipyard, San
Francisco
12
December
1962
30 October
1964
15 April 1967 4 February 1994 Sunk as target, 29 June 2008
Sterett CG-31 Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, Bremerton
25
September
1962
30 June
1964
8 April 1967 24 March 1994 Broken up at Brownsville,
2005
Belknap-class cruiser
129
William H.
Standley
CG-32 Bath Iron Works,
Bath
29 July
1963
19
December
1964
9 July 1966 11 February 1994 Sunk as target, 25 June 2005
Fox CG-33 Todd Shipyard, San
Pedro
15 January
1963
21
November
1964
8 May 1966 15 April 1994 Broken up at Brownsville,
2008
Biddle CG-34 Bath Iron Works,
Bath
9 December
1963
2 July 1965 21 January
1967
30 November
1993
Broken up at Philadelphia,
2001
Truxtun class nuclear powered cruiser
Truxtun CGN-35 New York
Shipbuilding
Corporation,
Camden
17 June
1963
19
December
1964
27 May 1967 11 September
1995
Disposed of through
Ship-Submarine Recycling
Program at Bremerton, 1999
References
[1] Blackman, Raymond V. B. Jane's Fighting Ships (1970/71) p.429
[2] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Shipboard Radars" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1978 p.144
[3] Polmar, Norman "The U.S. Navy: Sonars, Part 1" United States Naval Institute Proceedings July 1981 p.119
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Belknap class cruiser.
Belknap-class frigates (http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ coldwar/ belknapclass/ ) at Destroyer History Foundation
(http:/ / destroyerhistory. org/ )
FAS (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ cg-26. htm) write-up
Coordinates: 38.0812N 122.0885W (http:/ / tools. wmflabs. org/ geohack/ geohack.
php?pagename=Belknap-class_cruiser& params=38. 0812_N_-122.
0885_E_type:landmark_source:enwiki-googlemaplink)
California-class cruiser
130
California-class cruiser
USS California
Class overview
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Truxtun-class cruiser
Belknap-class cruiser
Succeededby: Virginia-class cruiser
Built: 19701974
In commission: 19741999
Completed: 2
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: 10,600 long tons (10,800t)
Length: 587ft (179m)
Beam: 61ft (19m)
Draft: 31ft 6in (9.60m)
Propulsion: 2 General Electric D2G reactors generating 60,000shp (45,000kW)
Speed: In excess of 30 knots (56km/h)
Complement: 40 officers and 544 enlisted
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-48E 3-D Air search radar
AN/SPS-49 2-D Air search radar NTU
AN/SPS-55 Surface search radar
AN/SPG-51 Missile fire control radar
Mk 86 Gun Fire Control System
AN/SPQ-9 Search and fire control radar
AN/SPG-60 Gun fire control radar
AN/SQS-26 Bow mounted sonar
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32
Mark 36 SRBOC
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie
California-class cruiser
131
Armament: 2 Mk 141 Harpoon missile launchers
2 5 inch/54 caliber Mk 45 lightweight guns
2 20 mm Phalanx CIWS
1 ASROC missile launcher
2 Mk 13 missile launchers for RIM-66D Standard missiles (MR)
6 12.75" torpedo tubes for Mark 46 torpedoes
4 .50 caliber machine guns
Aviation facilities: Helicopter deck aft able to accommodate SH-2 Seasprite LAMPS Mk1, SH-3 Sea King, and CH-46 Sea
Knight helicopters. No hangar facility.
The California class cruisers were a set of two of nuclear-powered guided missile cruisers operated by the United
States Navy between 1974 and 1998. Other than their nuclear power supply and lack of helicopter hangars, ships of
the California class were comparable to other guided missile cruisers of their era, such as the Belknap class. The
class was built as a follow-up to the nuclear-powered Long Beach, Bainbridge, and Truxtun classes. Like all of the
nuclear cruisers, which could steam for years between refuelings, the California class was designed in part to
provide high endurance escort for the navy's nuclear aircraft carriers, which were often limited in range due to their
conventionally powered escorts continuously needing to be refueled.
Overview
The USSCalifornia(CGN-36) was the fourth nuclear-powered cruiser in the U.S. Navy; the previous three were the
USSLong Beach(CGN-9), USSBainbridge(CGN-25) and USSTruxtun(CGN-35). The second California class
cruiser, USSSouth Carolina(CGN-37), was the fifth nuclear-powered cruiser in the United States Navy. Other than
the four ships of the Soviet Navy's Kirov class, which were actually built with a combination of nuclear and
fossil-fuel propulsion, no other country has launched nuclear-powered cruisers.
Only two ships of the class were built, the California and the South Carolina, and both were decommissioned in the
autumn of 1999. These ships were followed on by the four nuclear-powered cruisers of the Virginia class. These
cruisers were named for states because they were seen as quite large, powerful, capable, and survivable ships. Also,
in the meantime, the names of cities had been given to the nuclear submarines in the very large Los Angeles class,
which eventually expanded to 62 boats, all (but one) named for American cities.
The USS California and her sister ship the USS South Carolina were equipped with two Mk-13 launchers, fore and
aft, capable of firing the Standard SM-1MR or SM-2MR surface-to-air missiles, one Mk-112 launcher for ASROC
missiles, and eight Mk-141 launch tubes for Harpoon missiles. They were equipped with two Mk-45 5" rapid-fire
guns, fore and aft. Four 12.75" torpedo launchers (two on each side, protruding from their magazine space on the
main deck) were fitted for light weight anti-submarine torpedoes. Two Mk-15 Phalanx 20 mm gun systems were
fitted in the 1980s.
The ships were originally designed to carry and launch the Mark 48 torpedo from a large space beneath the flight
deck aft. Although a surface-launched version of the Mk 48 was never produced, the ships retained this large
magazine space until their retirement.
Both ships underwent a mid-life refueling overhaul in the early 1990s to give them a further 18 years active service.
This modernization upgraded their two 150 MW D2G reactor plants with new 165 MW D2W reactor cores, installed
the New Threat Upgrade (NTU) to improve their AAW capability, and removed their ASW capability, which
involved disabling their SQS-26 sonar and removing their ASROC anti-submarine weapons, though the 2 triple
Mk-32 ASW torpedo launchers were retained. External differences resulting from this modernization included the
removal of the ASROC launcher and the large deckhouse forward of it that served as the ASROC magazine,
replacement of the SPS-40 radar antenna with the SPS-49 antenna, and replacement of the SPS-48C with the larger
SPS-48E antenna. Both ships retained the bulbous sonar domes at the forefoot (beneath the waterline) until
retirement, even after their sonar systems were disabled. While the ships were as modernized as much as possible,
California-class cruiser
132
and were capable of service until 2010; they still were only capable of firing SM-2MR missiles from their Mk-13
launchers, and their high cost of operation made them targets for early retirement, and were both decommissioned in
1999.
Ships in class
Keellaid Launched Commissioned Decommissioned
California (CGN-36) 23 January 1970 22 September 1971 16 February 1974 9 July 1999
South Carolina (CGN-37) 1 December 1970 1 July 1972 25 January 1975 30 July 1999
External links
FAS: CGN-36 California class
[1]
References
[1] http:/ / www. fas.org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ cgn-36. htm
Virginia-class cruiser
133
Virginia-class cruiser
USS Virginia (CGN-38)
Class overview
Name: Virginia for Virginia
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: California-class cruiser
Succeededby: Ticonderoga-class cruiser
Cost: $675 million (1990 dollars)
Built: 1972-1980
In commission: 1976-1998
Planned: 11
Completed: 4
Cancelled: 7
Retired: 4
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile cruiser
Displacement: Light Displacement: 10,663 tons
Full Displacement: 11,666 tons
Length: Overall Length: 586 ft (179 m)
Beam: Extreme Beam: 63 ft (19 m)
Draft: Maximum Navigational Draft: 32 ft (10 m)
Propulsion: 2 D2G General Electric nuclear reactors, two shafts, 60,000 shp
Speed: 30+ knots (55+ km/h)
Range: unlimited
Complement: 39 Officers, 540 Enlisted men
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-48E 3-D Air search radar
AN/SPS-49 2-D Air search radar
AN/SPS-55 surface search radar
AN/SPQ-9A gun fire control radar
AN/SPG-60 fire control radar
AN/SPG-51 Missile fire control radar
AN/SQS-26 Bow mounted sonar
Virginia-class cruiser
134
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32
Mark 36 SRBOC
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie
Armament: 2 Mk26 missile launchers for 68 missiles
RIM-66 Standard Missiles (MR) / RUR-5 ASROC
8x Tomahawk missile (from 2 armored-box launchers after a refitting)
8x RGM-84 Harpoon (from two Mk-141 quad launchers)
4x Mk-46 torpedoes (from fixed single tubes)
2x Mk-45 5-inch/54 caliber rapid-fire gun
2x 20mm Phalanx CIWS (post-refit)
Aircraft carried: As built: below-deck hangar for one SH-2F Seasprite helicopter
Flight deck occupied by Tomahawk missile storage & launcher after refitting
The Virginia-class nuclear guided-missile cruisers, also known as the CGN-38-class, were a series of four
double-ended (with armament carried both fore and aft) guided-missile cruisers commissioned in the late 1970s,
which served in the United States Navy until the mid-to-late 1990s. With their nuclear powerplants, and the resulting
capability of steaming at high speeds for long periods of time, these were excellent escorts for the fast
nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, such as the Nimitz-class. Their main mission was as air-defense ships, though they
did have capabilities as anti-submarine (ASW) ships, surface-to-surface warfare (SSW) ships, and in gun and missile
bombardment of shore targets.
Class description
The USS Mississippi (CGN-40) and USS Texas
(CGN-39) (second and third from left) underway
with the USSNimitz(CVN-68) and the
USSBiddle(CG-34) in the Mediterranean Sea,
August 1981.
The ships were derived from the earlier California class nuclear cruiser
(CGN-36 class). They were decommissioned as part of the early 1990s
"peace dividend" after the Cold War ended. A fifth warship, the
CGN-42, was canceled before being named or laid down. It was found
that, while it was possible to mass-produce nuclear-powered warships,
the ships were less cost-efficient than conventionally powered
warships and the new gas-turbine-powered ships then entering the fleet
-(the Spruance class destroyers) - required much less manpower.
Following the end of production of this class, the U.S. Navy continued
conventional destroyer/cruiser production, and it redesignated the
DDG-47 class of guided missile destroyers as the CG-47 Ticonderoga
class cruisers. Three of the four Virginia-class ships were authorized as
guided missile frigates (in the pre-1975 definition), and they were
redesignated as cruisers either before commissioning or before their
launching. The last warship, the USS Arkansas, was authorized, laid down, launched, and commissioned as a
guided-missile cruiser.
Virginia-class cruiser
135
Early decommissioning
A shock trial of Arkansas.
The early retirement of the Virginia class cruisers has been criticized
by some.Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch#Unsupported
attributions They were new, modern ships; given a New Threat
Upgrade electronics overhaul, they would have been well-suited to
modern threats. They had rapid-fire Mk26 launchers that could fire the
powerful Standard SM-2MR medium-range surface-to-air missile -
earlier decommissioned cruisers used the slower-firing Mk-10
launchers, which required manual fitting of the missiles' fins prior to
launch.
Nevertheless, the CGN-38-class cruisers, with their missile magazines
and Mk-26 missile launchers, were incapable of carrying the SM-2ER
long-range surface-to-air missile, being restricted to the SM-2MR medium-range surface-to-air missile. This was a
significant limitation in their capabilities. Another weakness was the loss of LAMPS helicopters, due to the
installation of Tomahawk cruise missile launchers.
Virginia in drydock at Norfolk; the ship's
superstructure has been removed and replaced by
containment vessels to allow the safe removal of
her nuclear reactors
In the end, what really doomed the Virginia nuclear-powered cruisers
was economics. They were coming due for their first nuclear
refuelings, mid-life overhauls, and NTU refittings, which were all
expensive projects, together costing about half the price of a new ship.
Further, they required relatively large crews, straining Navy personnel
resources. The 1996 Navy Visibility and Management of Operating
and Support Costs (VAMOSC) study determined the annual operating
cost of a Virginia class cruiser at $40 million, compared to $28 million
for a Ticonderoga class cruiser, or $20 million for an Arleigh Burke
class destroyer, the latter two classes designed with the much more
capable Aegis Combat System.
[1]
Given a lower requirement for
cruisers, it was decided to retire (this decision was made while Texas
was in the middle of her refueling overhaul) these nuclear ships as a money-saving measure. The early Ticonderoga
class cruisers which lacked the Vertical Launch System had equally short careers, serving between 18 and 21
years.
[2]
Ships in class
Ship
Name
Hull
No.
Builder Ordered Laid
Down
Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Fate NVR
link
Virginia-class cruiser
136
Virginia CGN-38 Newport News
Shipbuilding &
Dry Dock
Company,
Newport News
21
December
1971
19
August
1972
14
December
1974
11 September
1976
10 November
1994
Disposed of through
Ship-Submarine
Recycling Program at
Bremerton, 1999
[3]
Texas CGN-39 18
August
1973
9 August
1975
10 September
1977
16 July 1993 Disposed of through
Ship-Submarine
Recycling Program at
Bremerton, 1999
[4]
Mississippi CGN-40 21
January
1972
22
February
1975
31 July
1976
5 August 1978 28 July 1997 Disposed of through
Ship-Submarine
Recycling Program at
Bremerton, 2004
[5]
Arkansas CGN-41 31
January
1975
17
January
1977
21 October
1978
18 October
1980
7 July 1998 Disposed of by
recycling, 1 November
1999 Disposed of
through
Ship-Submarine
Recycling Program at
Bremerton, 1998
[6]
CGN-42
N/A
Intended
nuclear-powered
AEGIS cruiser;
cancelled 1983
[7]
References
An example of an inconvenient helicopter
operation on Mississippi after flight deck was
occupied by Tomahawk ABL's (at left and right).
[1] CG-47 Ticonderoga-class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/
cg-47-specs. htm)
[2] CG-51 (http:/ / www.nvr. navy. mil/ nvrships/ details/ CG51. htm) - 18 years.
CG-47 (http:/ / www. nvr. navy. mil/ nvrships/ details/ CG47. htm) - 21 years.
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CGN38.htm
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CGN39.htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CGN40.htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CGN41.htm
[7] http:/ / www. globalsecurity.org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cgn-42. htm
(This entry includes information from the [news:sci.military.naval
sci.military.naval] newsgroup FAQ)Wikipedia:Identifying reliable
sources
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Virginia class cruisers.
Globalsecurity.org Virginia class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cgn-38. htm)
Plans for an Aegis modified Virginia class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cgn-42.
htm)
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
137
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
This article is about an American guided-missile cruiser class authorized in 1978. For other uses, see Ticonderoga
(disambiguation).
The USSPort Royal(CG-73) in Hawaiian waters in September 2003.
Class overview
Builders: Ingalls Shipbuilding
Bath Iron Works
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Virginia-class cruiser
Succeededby:
N/A
[1]
Built: 19801994
In commission: 1983present
Completed: 27
Active: 22
Laid up: 4
Retired: 5 (CG-47 to 51)
General characteristics
Type: Guided-missile cruiser
Displacement: Approx. 9,600 long tons (9,800t) full load
Length: 567 feet (173 m)
Beam: 55 feet (16.8 meters)
Draft: 34 feet (10.2 meters)
Propulsion: 4 General Electric LM2500 gas turbine engines, 80,000 shaft horsepower
(60,000kW)
2 controllable-reversible pitch propellers
2 rudders
Speed: 32.5knots (60km/h)
Range: 6,000nmi (11,000km) at 20kn (37km/h); 3,300nmi (6,100km) at 30kn (56km/h).
Complement: 33 officers, 27 Chief Petty Officers, and approx. 340 enlisted
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
138
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPY-1A/B multi-function radar
AN/SPS-49 air search radar
AN/SPG-62 fire control radar
AN/SPS-73 surface search radar
AN/SPQ-9 gun fire control radar
AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare Suite
AN/SQQ-89(V)1/3 - A(V)15 Sonar suite, consisting of:
AN/SQS-53B/C/D active sonar
AN/SQR-19 TACTAS, AN/SQR-19B ITASS, & MFTA passive sonar
AN/SQQ-28 light airborne multi-purpose system
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
Mark 36 SRBOC
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie
Armament: cruiser mark 26
2 Mk26 missile launchers
68 RIM-66 SM-2, and 20 RUR-5 ASROC
8 RGM-84 Harpoon missiles
2 Mark 45 5in / 54cal lightweight gun
24 .50cal (12.7mm) gun
2 Phalanx CIWS
2 Mk32 12.75in (324mm) triple torpedo tubes
cruiser mark 41
2 61 cell Mk41 vertical launch systems containing
122 mix of:
RIM-66M-5 Standard SM-2MR Block IIIB
RIM-156A SM-2ER Block IV
RIM-161 SM-3
RIM-162A ESSM
RIM-174A Standard ERAM
BGM-109 Tomahawk
RUM-139A VL-ASROC
8 RGM-84 Harpoon missiles
2 Mk 45 Mod2 5-in/54-cal lightweight gun
2 25mm Mk38 gun
24 .50cal (12.7mm) gun
2 Phalanx CIWS Block 1B
2 Mk32 12.75-in (324mm) triple torpedo tubes for lightweight torpedoes
Armor: limited Kevlar splinter protection in critical areas
Aircraft carried: 2 Sikorsky SH-60B or MH-60R Seahawk LAMPS III helicopters.
The Ticonderoga-class of guided-missile cruisers is a class of warships in the United States Navy, first ordered and
authorized in the 1978 fiscal year. The class uses passive phased-array radar and was originally planned as a class of
destroyers. However, the increased combat capability offered by the Aegis combat system and the AN/SPY-1 radar
system was used to justify the change of the classification from DDG (guided missile destroyer) to CG
(guided-missile cruiser) shortly before the keels were laid down for Ticonderoga and Yorktown.
Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers are multi-role warships. Their Mk 41 VLS can launch Tomahawk cruise
missiles to strike strategic or tactical targets, or fire long-range antiaircraft Standard Missiles for defense against
aircraft or antiship missiles. Their LAMPS III helicopters and sonar systems allow them to perform antisubmarine
missions. Ticonderoga-class ships are designed to be elements of carrier battle groups, amphibious assault groups, as
well as performing missions such as interdiction or escort.
[2]
Of the 27 completed vessels, 19 were built by Ingalls Shipbuilding and eight by Bath Iron Works (BIW). All but one
(Thomas S. Gates) of the ships in the class are named for noteworthy events in U.S. military history, and at least
twelve; Ticonderoga, Cowpens, Anzio, Yorktown, Valley Forge, Bunker Hill, Antietam, San Jacinto, Lake
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
139
Champlain, Philippine Sea, Princeton, Monterey, and Vella Gulf; share their names with World War II aircraft
carriers.
History
Shoot down of Iran Air Flight 655
Main article: Iran Air Flight 655
One ship of the class, the USSVincennes(CG-49), became infamous in 1988 when she shot down Iran Air Flight
655, resulting in 290 civilian deaths. The commanding officer of the USS Vincennes, William C. Rogers III, had
believed the airliner was an Iranian Air Force F-14 Tomcat fighter jet on an attack vector, based on reports of radar
returns, revealed to be misinterpreted. The investigation report recommended that the AEGIS large screen display be
changed to allow the display of altitude information on plots, and that stress factors on personnel using AEGIS be
studied.
Interception of United States satellite USA-193
Main article: Operation Burnt Frost
On 14 February 2008, the United States Department of Defense announced that the USSShiloh(CG-67) and
USSLake Erie(CG-70) would attempt to hit the dead satellite USA-193 over the North Pacific Ocean just before it
would burn up on reentry. On 20 February 2008, at approximately 22:30 EST (21 Feb, 03:30 UTC), an SM-3 missile
was fired from the Lake Erie and struck the satellite. The military intended that the missile's kinetic energy would
rupture the hydrazine fuel tank allowing the toxic fuel to be consumed during re-entry. The Department of Defense
confirmed that the fuel tank had been directly hit by the missile.
Possible early retirement
Due to Budget Control Act of 2011 requirements to cut the Defense Budget for FY2013 and subsequent years, plans
are being considered to decommission some of the Ticonderoga-class cruisers.
[3]
For the U.S. Defense 2013 Budget
Proposal, the U.S. Navy is to decommission seven cruisers early in fiscal years 2013 and 2014.
Because of these retirements, the U.S. Navy is expected to fall short of its requirement for 94 missile defense
cruisers and destroyers beginning in FY 2025 and continuing past the end of the 30-year planning period. While this
is a new requirement as of 2011, and the U.S. Navy has historically never had so many large missile-armed surface
combatants, the relative success of the AEGIS ballistic missile defense system has shifted this national security
requirement onto the U.S. Navy.
[4]
Critics have charged that the early retirement of these cruisers will leave the
Navy's ship fleet too small for the nation's defense tasks as the U.S. enacts a policy of "pivot" to the Western Pacific,
a predominantly maritime theater. The U.S. House has passed a budget bill to require that these cruisers instead be
refitted to handle the missile defense role.
[5]
By October 2012, the U.S. Navy had decided not to retire four of the cruisers early in order to maintain the size of
the fleet. Four Ticonderoga-class cruisers, plus 21 Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers, are scheduled to be equipped to
be capable of antiballistic missile and antisatellite operations.
[6]
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
140
Design
Ticonderogaclass cruisers were
built on the same hull as the
Spruance-classdestroyer.
The Ticonderoga-class cruiser's design was based on that of the Spruance-class
destroyer. The Ticonderoga class introduced a new generation of guided missile
warships based on the AEGIS phased array radar that is capable of
simultaneously scanning for threats, tracking targets, and guiding missiles to
interception. When they were designed, they had the most powerful electronic
warfare equipment in the U.S. Navy, as well as the most advanced underwater
surveillance system. These ships were one of the first classes of warships to be
built in modules, rather than being assembled from the bottom up.
Operations research was used to study manpower requirements on the
Ticonderoga class. It was found that four officers and 44 enlisted sailors could be removed from the ship's
complement by removing traditional posts that had been made obsolete.
Vertical Launching System
An overhead view of the
Ticonderoga-class USSLake
Champlain(CG-57), with VLS
visible fore and aft as the gray boxes
near the bow and stern of the ship.
The older USSTiconderoga(CG-47)
with the pre-VLS twin-arm launchers
visible fore and aft.
See also: Vertical Launching System
In addition to the added radar capability, the Ticonderoga-class ships
subsequently built after the USS Thomas S. Gates included two Mark 41 Vertical
Launching Systems (VLS). The two VLS allow the ship to have 122 missile
storage and launching tubes that can carry a wide variety of missiles, including
the Tomahawk cruise missile, Standard surface-to-air missile, Evolved Sea
Sparrow surface-to-air missile, and ASROC antisubmarine warfare (ASW)
guided rockets. More importantly, the VLS enables all missiles to be on full
stand-by at any given time, shortening the warship's response time before firing.
The original five ships (Ticonderoga, Yorktown, Vincennes, Valley Forge, and
Thomas S. Gates) had Mark 26 twin-arm launchers that limited their missile
capacity to a total of 88 missiles, and that could not fire the Tomahawk missile.
After the end of the Cold War, the lower capabilities of the original five warships
limited them to duties close to the home waters of the United States. These ship's
cluttered superstructure, inherited from the Spruance-class destroyers, required
two of their external radar units to be mounted on a special pallet on the portside
aft corner of the superstructure, with the other two mounted on the forward
starboard corner. The later AEGIS warships, designed from-the-keel-up to carry
the SPY-1 radars, have them all clustered together.
The high weight of these warships - about 1,500 tons heavier than the Spruance
class, resulted in a highly stressed hull and some structural problems in early
service, which were generally corrected in the late 1980s and mid-1990s. Several ships had superstructure cracks
which had to be repaired.
Upgrades
Originally, the U.S. Navy had intended to replace its fleet of Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers with cruisers
produced as part of the CG(X) missile cruiser program; however, severe budget cuts from the 21st century surface
combatant program coupled with the increasing cost of the Zumwalt-class guided missile destroyer program resulted
in the CG(X) program being canceled. The Ticonderoga-class cruisers were instead to be replaced by Flight III
Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers.
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
141
All five of the twin-arm (Mk-26) cruisers have been decommissioned. In 2003, the newer 22 of the 27 ships (CG-52
to CG-73) in the class were upgraded to keep them combat-relevant, giving the ships a service life of 35 years
each.
[7]
In the years leading up to their decommissioning, the five twin-arm ships had been assigned primarily
home-waters duties, acting as command ships for destroyer squadrons assigned to the eastern Pacific and western
Atlantic areas.
As of July 2013[8], 12 cruisers have completed hull, mechanical, and electrical (HM&E) upgrades and 8 cruisers
have had combat systems upgrades. These include an upgrade of the AEGIS computing infrastructure with the
SPQ-9B radar system, incorporating computing technology, fiber optics, and software upgrades, and modifications
to the vertical launch system to fire the RIM-162 ESSM. Another upgrade is improving the SQQ-89A(V)15 sonar
with a multi-function towed array. Hull, sonar, radar, electrical, computer, and weapons systems upgrades can cost
up to $250 million per ship.
[9]
In its 2015 budget request, the Navy outlined a plan to operate 11 cruisers while 11 cruisers were upgraded to a new
standard. The upgraded cruisers would then start replacing the older ships which would be retired starting in 2019.
This would retain one cruiser per CVN group to host the group's air warfare commander, a role for which the DDGs
do not have sufficient facilities. Flight III Arleigh Burke destroyers equipped with the Air Missile Defense Radar
give enhanced coverage, but putting the radar on standard DDG hulls does not allow enough room for extra staff and
command and control facilities for the air warfare commander; DDGs can be used tactically for air defense, but they
augment CGs that provide command and control in a battle group and are more used for other missions such as
defending other fleet units and keeping sea lanes open. Congress is opposed to the plan, claiming it makes it easier
for Navy officials to completely retire the ships once out of service; the Navy would have to retire all cruisers from
the fleet by 2028 if all are kept in service, while deactivating half and gradually returning them into service could
make 11 cruisers last from 2035 to 2045. There is not current CG replacement program, as most funding is
committed to the Ohio Replacement Submarine, so work on a new cruiser is expected to begin in the mid-2020s, and
begin fielding by the mid-2030s.
Ships in class
Name Number Builder Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Status Link
Mark-26 Twin-Arm Missile Launcher Variant
Ticonderoga CG-47 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
25 April 1981 22 January 1983 30 September 2004 Stricken, available for donation
as a museum and memorial
[10]
Yorktown CG-48 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
17 January
1983
4 July 1984 10 December 2004 Stricken, scrapping in progress as
of fall 2013
[11]
Vincennes CG-49 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
14 January
1984
6 July 1985 29 June 2005 Stricken, scrapped Nov.
2010-Apr. 2011
[12]
Valley Forge CG-50 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
23 June 1984 18 January 1986 30 August 2004 Disposed of in support of Fleet
training exercise, sunk in a target
practice
[13]
Thomas S.
Gates
CG-51 Bath Iron
Works
14 December
1985
22 August 1987 16 December 2005 Stricken, to be disposed of
[14]
Name Number Builder Launched Commissioned Home port Status Link
Mark-41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) Variant
Bunker Hill CG-52 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
11 March
1985
20 September
1986
San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [15]
Mobile Bay CG-53 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
22 August
1985
21 February 1987 San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [16]
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
142
Antietam CG-54 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
14 February
1986
6 June 1987 Yokosuka, Japan
in active service, as of 2014[8] [17]
Leyte Gulf CG-55 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
20 June 1986 26 September
1987
Norfolk, Virginia
in active service, as of 2014[8] [18]
San Jacinto CG-56 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
14 November
1986
23 January 1988 Norfolk, Virginia
in active service, as of 2014[8] [19]
Lake Champlain CG-57 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
3 April 1987 12 August 1988 San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [20]
Philippine Sea CG-58 Bath Iron
Works
12 July 1987 18 March 1989 Mayport, Florida
in active service, as of 2014[8] [21]
Princeton CG-59 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
2 October
1987
11 February 1989 San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [22]
Normandy CG-60 Bath Iron
Works
19 March
1988
9 December 1989 Norfolk, Virginia
in active service, as of 2014[8] [23]
Monterey CG-61 Bath Iron
Works
23 October
1988
16 June 1990 Norfolk, Virginia
in active service, as of 2014[8] [24]
Chancellorsville CG-62 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
15 July 1988 4 November
1989
San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [25]
Cowpens CG-63 Bath Iron
Works
11 March
1989
9 March 1991 San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [26]
Gettysburg CG-64 Bath Iron
Works
22 July 1989 22 June 1991 Mayport, Florida
in active service, as of 2014[8] [27]
Chosin CG-65 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
1 September
1989
12 January 1991 Pearl Harbor,
Hawaii
in active service, as of 2014[8] [28]
Hu City CG-66 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
1 June 1990 14 September
1991
Mayport, Florida
in active service, as of 2014[8] [29]
Shiloh CG-67 Bath Iron
Works
8 September
1990
18 July 1992 Yokosuka, Japan
in active service, as of 2014[8] [30]
Anzio CG-68 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
2 November
1990
2 May 1992 Norfolk, Virginia
in active service, as of 2014[8] [31]
Vicksburg CG-69 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
2 August
1991
14 November
1992
Mayport, Florida
in active service, as of 2014[8] [32]
Lake Erie CG-70 Bath Iron
Works
13 July 1991 10 May 1993 San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [33]
Cape St. George CG-71 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
10 January
1992
12 June 1993 San Diego,
California
in active service, as of 2014[8] [34]
Vella Gulf CG-72 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
13 June 1992 18 September
1993
Norfolk, Virginia
in active service, as of 2014[8] [35]
Port Royal CG-73 Ingalls
Shipbuilding
20 November
1992
4 July 1994 Pearl Harbor,
Hawaii
in active service, as of 2014[8] [36]
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
143
Notes
[1] Originally the replacement class for the Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers was to come out of the CG(X) development program,
however the CG(X) program was cancelled in 2010, and the original mission of the CG(X) cruisers has been taken up by Flight III Arleigh
Burke-class guided missile destroyers, leaving this class without a replacement cruiser program.
[2] http:/ / www. fas.org/ programs/ ssp/ man/ uswpns/ navy/ surfacewarfare/ cg47. html
[3] (http:/ / www.navytimes.com/ news/ 2012/ 01/ defense-navy-avoids-most-pentagon-cuts-012612w/ ). Navy Times
[4] O'Rourke, Ronald. "CRS-RL32109 Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress." (https:/ /
opencrs.com/ document/ RL32109/ 2012-03-02/ ?26751) Congressional Research Service, 2 March 2012.
[5] Dutton, Nick. "US Navy: Hollow force or the best in the world?" (http:/ / wtvr. com/ 2012/ 05/ 28/
us-navy-hollow-force-or-the-best-in-the-world/ ) CNN, May 28, 2012.
[6] American Cruisers Not Allowed To Retire (http:/ / strategypage. com/ htmw/ htsurf/ articles/ 20121002. aspx) Strategypage.com, October 2,
2012
[7] The Ticonderoga (CG 47) - Class (http:/ / www. navysite. de/ cg/ cg47class. htm)
[8] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=Ticonderoga-class_cruiser& action=edit
[9] Navy Upgrades More Than a Third of Cruisers (http:/ / www. dodbuzz. com/ 2013/ 07/ 09/ navy-upgrades-more-than-a-third-of-cruisers/ ) -
DoDBuzz.com, 9 July 2013
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg47.htm
[11] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg48.htm
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg49.htm
[13] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg50.htm
[14] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg51.htm
[15] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg52.htm
[16] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg53.htm
[17] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg54.htm
[18] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg55.htm
[19] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg56.htm
[20] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg57.htm
[21] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg58.htm
[22] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg59.htm
[23] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg60.htm
[24] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg61.htm
[25] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg62.htm
[26] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg63.htm
[27] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg64.htm
[28] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg65.htm
[29] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg66.htm
[30] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg67.htm
[31] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg68.htm
[32] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg69.htm
[33] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg70.htm
[34] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg71.htm
[35] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg72.htm
[36] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ cg73.htm
Ticonderoga-class cruiser
144
References
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Ticonderoga-class cruiser.
U.S. Navy Fact File (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200& tid=800& ct=4US)
Federation of American Scientists Report: Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/
dod-101/ sys/ ship/ cg-47. htm)
Global Security Article (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cg-47. htm)
Iowa-class battleship
145
Iowa-class battleship
USSIowa(BB-61) fires a full broadside on 15 August 1984 during a firepower demonstration after her recommissioning.
Class overview
Name: Iowa-class battleship
Builders: New York Naval Shipyard
(BB-61 & BB-63)
Philadelphia Naval Shipyard
(BB-62, BB-64, & BB-65)
Norfolk Naval Shipyard
(BB-66)
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: South Dakotaclass
Succeededby: Montanaclass (planned)
Cost: US$100 million per ship
In commission: 194358, 196869, 198292
Planned: 6
Completed: 4
Cancelled: 2
Retired: 4
Preserved: 4
General characteristics
Type: Battleship
Displacement: 45,000tons (Standard)
52,000tons (mean war service)
57,000tons (pre 1980s full load); 58,000tons (post 1980s full load)
Length: 861ft (262.5m) pp
887ft (270m) oa
Beam: 108ft (33m)
Draft: 36ft (11m) maximum
Installed power: 212,000shp (158,000kW)
8 water-tube boilers
Propulsion: 4 screws;
General Electric geared steam turbines
Speed: 32.5 knots (60.2km/h; 37.4mph) (Up to 35.2 knots on light load.)
Iowa-class battleship
146
Range: 14,890miles (23,960km) @ 15 knots (28km/h; 17mph)
Complement: ~2,700 officers and men (WWII, Korea)
~1,800 officers and men (1980s)
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
1980s:
AN/SLQ-32(V)
AN/SLQ-25 Nixie
Mark 36 SRBOC
Armament: World War II, Korea:
9 16-inch (406mm)/50cal. Mark 7 guns
20 5-inch (127mm)/38cal. Mark 12 guns
80 40mm/56cal. Bofors
49 20mm/70cal. Oerlikon
Vietnam:
9 16-inch/50cal. Mark7 guns
20 5-inch/38cal. Mark 12 guns Cold War, Gulf War:
9 16-inch / 50cal. Mark7 guns
12 5-inch/38cal. Mark 12 guns
32 BGM-109 Tomahawk
16 RGM-84 Harpoon
4 20mm (.78inch).Phalanx CIWS
Armor: Belt: 12.1in (310mm)
Bulkheads: 11.3in (290mm)
Barbettes: 11.6to 17.3in (295 to 439mm)
Turrets: 19.7in (500mm)
Decks: 7.5in (190mm)
Aircraft carried: World War II: 3 Vought OS2U Kingfisher/Curtiss SC Seahawk
floatplanes
Korea/Vietnam: 3 helicopters
Cold War/Gulf War: 5 RQ-2 Pioneer Unmanned aerial vehicles
Notes: Final battleship class completed by the United States
The Iowa-class battleships were a class of fast battleships ordered by the United States Navy in 1939 and 1940 to
escort the Fast Carrier Task Forces that would operate in the Pacific Theater of World War II. Four were completed;
two more were laid down but canceled at war's end and scrapped. Like other third-generation American battleships,
the Iowa class followed the design pattern set forth in the preceding North Carolina-class and South Dakota-class
battleships, which emphasized speed and the secondary and anti-aircraft batteries.
[1]
Between the mid-1940s and the early 1990s, the Iowa-class battleships fought in four major U.S. wars. In World
War II, they defended aircraft carriers and shelled Japanese positions. During the Korean War, the battleships
provided seaborne artillery support for United Nations forces fighting North Korea, and in 1968, New Jersey shelled
Viet Cong and Vietnam People's Army forces in the Vietnam War. All four were reactivated and armed with missiles
during the 1980s as part of the 600-ship Navy initiative; during 1991's Operation Desert Storm, Missouri and
Wisconsin fired missiles and 16-inch (406mm) guns at Iraqi targets.
Costly to maintain, the battleships were decommissioned during the post-Cold War drawdown in the early 1990s. All
four were initially removed from the Naval Vessel Register; however, the United States Congress compelled the
Navy to reinstate two of them on the grounds that existing naval gunfire support would be inadequate for amphibious
operations. This resulted in a lengthy debate over whether battleships should have a role in the modern navy.
Ultimately, all four ships were stricken from the Naval Vessel Register and released for donation to non-profit
organizations. With the transfer of Iowa in 2012, all four are part of various non-profit maritime museums across the
U.S.
Iowa-class battleship
147
Background
Work on what would eventually become the Iowa-class battleships began on the first study in early 1938 at the
direction of Admiral Thomas C. Hart, head of the General Board. It was an expanded South Dakota, carrying either
twelve 16-inch/45 caliber Mark 6 guns or nine 18-inch (460mm) gunsthe latter armament being dropped after the
31 March agreementwith more armor and a power plant large enough to drive the larger ship through the water at
the same speed as the South Dakotas, 27 knots (50km/h; 31mph).
[2]
These studies had no further impact on the
design of the Iowa class, but development of this design continued and eventually evolved into the design for the
Montanaclass.
[3]
Another design, pursued by the Design Division section of the Bureau of Construction and Repair, was a
"cruiser-killer." Beginning on 17 January 1938 under Captain A.J. Chantry, the group drew up plans for ships with
twelve 16-inch and twenty 5-inch guns, Panamax capability but otherwise unlimited displacement, a top speed of 35
knots (65km/h; 40mph) and a range of 20,000 nautical miles (37,000km; 23,000mi) when traveling at the more
economical speed of 15 knots (28km/h; 17mph). Their plan fulfilled these requirements with a ship of 50,940 long
tons (51,760t), but Chantry believed that more could be done if the ship were to be this large; with a displacement
greater than that of most battleships, its armor would only have protected it against the 8-inch (203mm) weapons
carried by heavy cruisers.
[4]
Three improved plans"A", "B", and "C"were designed at the end of January. An increase in draft, vast additions
to the armor,
[5]
and the substitution of twelve 6-inch (150mm) guns in the secondary battery was common between
the three designs. "A" was the largest, at 59,060 long tons (60,010t), and was the only one to still carry the twelve
16-inch guns in four triple turrets. It required 277,000shaft horsepower (shp) to make 32.5 knots (60.2km/h;
37.4mph). "B" was the smallest at 52,707 long tons (53,553t); like "A" it had a top speed of 32.5knots, but "B"
only required 225,000shp to make this speed. It also carried only nine 16-inch guns, in three triple turrets. "C" was
similar but it added 75,000shp (for a total of 300,000shp), to make the original requirement of 35knots. The weight
required for this and a longer belt512 feet (156m), compared with 496 feet (151m) for "B"meant that the ship
was 55,771 long tons (56,666t).
[6]
In March 1938, the General Board followed the recommendations of the Battleship Design Advisory Board, which
was composed of the naval architect William Francis Gibbs, William Hovgaard (then president of New York
Shipbuilding), John Metten, Joseph W. Powell, and the long-retired Admiral and former Chief of the Bureau of
Ordnance Joseph Strauss. The board requested an entirely new design study, focusing on increasing the size of the
35,000ton South Dakota class. The first plans made for this indicated that 30 knots (35mph; 56km/h) was possible
on a displacement of about 37,600 long tons (38,200t). 33 knots (38mph; 61km/h) could be bought with
220,000shafthorsepower and a displacement of around 39,230 long tons (39,860t), which was well below the
Second London Naval Treaty's maximum limit of 45,000 long tons (46,000t).
[7]
These designs were able to convince the General Board that a reasonably well-designed and balanced 33-knot
(61km/h) battleship was possible within the terms of the "escalator clause". However, further studies revealed major
problems with the estimates. The speed of the ships meant that more freeboard would be needed both fore and
amidships, the latter requiring an additional foot of armored freeboard. Along with this came the associated weight
in supporting these new strains: the structure of the ship had to be reinforced and the power plant enlarged to avoid a
drop in speed. In all, about 2,400 long tons (2,400t) had to be added, and the large margin the navy designers had
previously thought they hadroughly 5,000 long tons (5,100t)was suddenly vanishing.
[8]
With the additional displacement, the General Board was incredulous that a tonnage increase of 10,000 long tons
(10,000t) would only allow the addition of 6 knots (11km/h; 6.9mph)s over the South Dakotas. Rather than
retaining the 16"/45 caliber Mark 6 gun used in the South Dakotas, they ordered that future studies would have to
include the more powerful (but heavier) 16"/50 caliber Mark 2 guns left over from the canceled
Lexington-classbattlecruisers and South Dakota-class battleships of the early 1920s. It also allowed the draft of the
ships to be increased, meaning that the ships could be shortened (lowering weight) and the power reduced (since a
Iowa-class battleship
148
narrower beam reduces drag).
[9]
The 50-caliber gun weighed some 400 long tons (410t) more than the 45caliber did; the barbette size also had to be
increased so the total weight gain was about 2,000 long tons (2,000t), putting the ship at a total of 46,551 long tons
(47,298t)well over the 45,000longton limit. An apparent savior appeared in a Bureau of Ordnance preliminary
design for a turret that could carry the 50caliber guns in a smaller barbette. This breakthrough was shown to the
General Board as part of a series of designs on 2 June 1938.
[10]
However, the Bureau of Ordnance continued working on a larger barbette design, while the Bureau of Construction
and Repair utilized the smaller barbettes in the final planning of the new battleships. As the bureaus were
independent of one another, they did not realize that the two plans could not go together until November 1938, when
the design was in the final stages of refinement. By this time, the ships could not use the larger barbette, as it would
require massive alterations to the design and would result in substantial weight penalties. The General Board was
astounded; one member asked the head of the Bureau of Ordnance if it had occurred to him that Construction and
Repair would have wanted to know what turret his subordinates were working on "as a matter of common sense". A
complete scrapping of plans was only avoided when designers within the Bureau of Ordnance were able to design a
new 50-caliber gun, the Mark 7, that was both lighter and smaller in outside diameter; this allowed it to be placed in
a turret that would fit in the smaller barbette.
[11]
The redesigned 3-gun turret, equipped as it was with the Mark 7
naval gun, provided an overall weight saving of nearly 850 long tons (860t) to the overall design of the Iowa
class.
[12]
In May 1938 the United States Congress passed the Second Vinson Act which "mandated a 20% increase in strength
of the United States Navy".
[13]
The act was sponsored by Carl Vinson, a Democratic Congressman from Georgia
who was Chairman of the House Naval Affairs and Armed Services Committee.
[14]
The Second Vinson Act updated
the provisions of the Vinson-Trammell Act of 1934 and the Naval Act (1936), which had "authorized the
construction of the first American battleships in 17 years", based on the provisions of the London Naval Treaty of
1930; this act provided the funding to build the Iowa class. Each ship cost approximately US$100 million.
[15]
As 1938 drew to a close the design of the Iowas was nearly complete, but it would continuously evolve as the
battleships were under construction. These revisions included changing the design of the foremast, replacing the
original 1.1"/75-caliber guns that were to be used for anti-aircraft work with 20mm and 40mm guns, and moving
the combat information center into the armored hull.
[16]
Additionally, in November 1939 the New York Navy Yard
greatly modified the internal subdivision of the machinery rooms, as tests had shown the underwater protection in
these rooms to be inadequate. The result of this was clearly beneficial: "The prospective effect of flooding was
roughly halved and the number of uptakes and hence of openings in the third deck greatly reduced."
[17]
Although the
changes meant extra weight and added 1 foot (0.30m) to the beam, this was no longer a major issue; the United
Kingdom and France had renounced the Second London Naval Treaty soon after the beginning of the Second World
War.
[18]
For half a century prior to laying [the Iowa class] down, the U.S. Navy had consistently advocated armor and firepower at the
expense of speed. Even in adopting fast battleships of the North Carolinaclass, it had preferred the slower of two alternative
designs. Great and expensive improvements in machinery design had been used to minimize the increased power on the designs
rather than make extraordinary powerful machinery (hence much higher speed) practical. Yet the four largest battleships the U.S.
Navy produced were not much more than 33-knot versions of the 27-knot, 35,000tonners that had preceded them. The Iowas
showed no advance at all in protection over the South Dakotas. The principal armament improvement was a more powerful 16-inch
gun, 5calibers longer. Ten thousand tons was a very great deal to pay for 6knots.
[19]
Norman Friedman
Iowa-class battleship
149
Design
Armor
A view of the door and 17-inch (430mm) thick
armored citadel of the battleship New Jersey
Like all battleships, the Iowas carried heavy armor protection against
shellfire and bombs with significant underwater protection against
torpedoes. The Iowas' armor scheme was modeled on that of the
preceding South Dakota class, and designed to give a zone of
immunity against fire from 16-inch/45-caliber guns between 18,000
and 30,000 yards (16,000 and 27,000m) away. The magazines and
engine rooms were protected by an armored belt 12.2 inches (310mm)
thick, which sloped to give an effective vertical thickness of 13.5
inches (340mm). Their armor was not sufficient to protect against
guns equivalent to their own 16-inch/50-caliber guns; increasing the
armor would have increased weight and reduced speed.
[20]
Missouri
and Wisconsin incorporated the most significant change in armor from the South Dakota class: the increase from
11.3 inches (290mm) to 14.5 inches (370mm) of the vertical armor on the forward armored bulkhead, the conning
tower, and the turret barbettes. The extra armor provided protection from fire directly ahead, which was considered
more likely given the high speed of the Iowa class. The installation of armor on the Iowa-class battleships also
differed from those of earlier battleships in that the armor was installed while the ships were still "on the way" rather
than after the ships had been launched.
[21]
The Iowa-class torpedo defense was virtually the same as the South Dakota's. Each side of the ship was protected
below the waterline by two tanks mounted outside the belt armor, and separated by a bulkhead. These tanks were
initially planned to be empty, but in practice were filled with water or fuel oil. The armored belt tapered to a
thickness of 4 inches (100mm) below the waterline. Behind the armored belt there was a void, and then another
bulkhead. The outer hull was intended to detonate a torpedo, with the outer two compartments absorbing the shock
and with any splinters or debris being stopped by the armored belt and the empty compartment behind it. In 1939 the
Navy discovered that this system was considerably less effective than earlier torpedo defense systems, but by then it
was too late to change the design.
[22]
Based on hard-learned lessons in the Pacific theater concerns were also raised
over the ability of the armor on these battleships to withstand the effects of aerial bombing, but at the time these
concerns surfaced nothing could be done to adequately address the problem.
Armament
Main article: Armament of the Iowa-class battleship
Cutaway of a 16"/50 gun turret.
Iowa-class battleship
150
USSIowa fires a full broadside of nine 16-inch (406mm) / 50-caliber and six 5-inch (127mm) / 38-caliber guns
during a target exercise.
The primary guns used on these battleships are the nine 16-inch (406mm) / 50-caliber Mark 7 naval guns, a
compromise design developed to fit inside the barbettes. These guns fire explosive and armor-piercing shells, and
can fire a 16-inch (406mm) shell approximately 23.4 nautical miles (40km).
[23]
The guns are housed in three 3-gun
turrets: two forward and one aft, in a configuration known as "2-A-1". The guns are 66 feet (20m) long (50 times
their 16-inch (410mm) bore, or 50 calibers from breechface to muzzle). About 43 feet (13m) protrudes from the
gun house. Each gun weighs about 239,000pounds (108,000kg) without the breech, or 267,900 pounds
(121,500kg) with the breech. They fire projectiles weighing from 1,900 to 2,700pounds (850 to 1,200kg) at a
maximum speed of 2,960ft/s (820m/s) up to 20miles (32km). At maximum range, the projectile spends almost
1minutes in flight. The maximum firing rate for each gun is two rounds per minute.
[24]
Each gun rests within an armored turret, but only the top of the turret protrudes above the main deck. The turret
extends either four decks (Turrets 1 and 3) or five decks (Turret 2) down. The lower spaces contain rooms for
handling the projectiles and storing the powder bags used to fire them. Each turret required a crew of between 85 and
110 men to operate. The turrets are not actually attached to the ship but sit on rollers, although they do have retaining
clips. The original cost for each turret was US$1.4million, but this figure does not take into account the cost of the
guns themselves. The turrets are "three-gun", not "triple", because each barrel can be elevated independently; they
can also be fired independently. The ship could fire any combination of its guns, including a broadside of all nine.
The large-caliber guns were designed to fire two different conventional 16-inch (406mm) shells: the armor-piercing
Mk. 8 round for anti-ship and anti-structure work, and the Mk. 13 high-explosive round designed for use against
unarmored targets and shore bombardment.
[25]
Interestingly, when firing the same conventional shell, the 16"/45
caliber Mark 6 gun used by the fast battleships of the North Carolina and South Dakotaclasses had a slight
advantage over the 16"/50caliber Mark 7 gun when hitting deck armora shell from a 45cal gun would be slower,
meaning that it would have a steeper trajectory as it descended. At 35,000 yards (20mi; 32km), a shell from a 45cal
would strike a ship at an angle of 45.2degrees, as opposed to 36degrees with the 50cal.
[26]
The Mark 7 had a
greater maximum range over the Mark 6: 23.64 miles (38.04km) vs 22.829 miles (36.740km).
In the 1950s, the W23, an adaptation of the W19 nuclear artillery shell was developed specifically for the 16-inch
(406mm) guns. The shell had an estimated yield of 15 to 20 kilotons of TNT (63,000 to 84,000GJ),
[27]
and its
introduction made the Iowa-class battleship's 16in guns the world's largest nuclear artillery,
[28]
and made these four
battleships the only U.S. Navy ships ever to have nuclear shells for naval guns. Although developed for exclusive
use by the battleship's guns it is not known if any of the Iowa-class battleships actually carried these shells while in
active service due to the United States Navy's policy of refusing to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear
weaponry aboard its ships.
[29]
</ref> In 1991 the United States unilaterally withdrew all of its nuclear artillery shells
from service, and dismantling of the U.S. nuclear artillery inventory is said to have been completed in 2004.
[30]
Iowa-class battleship
151
A 5-inch (127mm) gun mount emblazoned with
the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor of the United States
Marine Corps aboard the battleship New Jersey.
In keeping with tradition, a 5-inch gun mount on
each Iowa-class battleship was manned by the
ship's Marine Detachment.
The Iowas carried ten twin enclosed base ring mounts supporting
5in/38 caliber Mark 28 Mod 0 guns. Originally designed to be
mounted upon destroyers built in the 1930s, these guns were so
successful that they were added to a myriad of American ships during
the Second World War, including every major ship type and many
smaller warships constructed between 1934 and 1945. They were
considered to be "highly reliable, robust and accurate" by the Navy's
Bureau of Ordnance.
[31]
Each 5in/38 weighed almost 4,000 pounds (1,800kg) without the
breech; the entire mount weighed 156,295 pounds (70,894kg). It was
223.8 inches (5,680mm) long overall, had a bore length of 190 inches
(4,800mm) and a rifling length of 157.2 inches (3,990mm). The gun
could fire shells at about 2,5002,600ft/s (762792m/s); about 4,600
could be fired before the barrel needed to be replaced. Minimum and
maximum elevations were 15 and 85degrees respectively. The guns' elevation could be raised or lowered at about
15degrees per second. The mounts closest to the bow and stern could aim from 150 to 150degrees; the others were
restricted to 80 to 80degrees. They could be turned at about 25degrees per second.
The 5in/38 functioned as a dual purpose gun; that is, it was able to fire at both surface and air targets with a
reasonable degree of success. However, this did not mean that it possessed inferior anti-air abilities. As proven
during 1941 gunnery tests conducted aboard North Carolina the gun could consistently shoot down aircraft flying at
12,00013,000 feet (2.32.5mi; 3.74.0km), twice the effective range of the earlier single purpose 5"/25 caliber
anti-air gun. As Japanese airplanes became faster, the gun lost some of its effectiveness in the anti-aircraft role;
however, toward the end of the war its usefulness as an anti-aircraft weapon increased again because of an upgrade
to the Mark37 Fire Control System and proximity-fused 5-inch (130mm) shells.
[32][33]
A 40 mm quadruple gun mount on
board USS New Jersey in 1944
The 5in/38 gun would remain on the battleships for the ships' entire service life;
however, the total number of guns and gun mounts was reduced from 20 guns in
ten mounts to 12 guns in 6 mounts during the 1980s' modernization of the four
Iowas. The removal of four of the gun mounts was required for the battleships to
be outfitted with the armored box launchers needed to carry and fire Tomahawk
missiles. At the time of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, these guns had been largely
relegated to littoral defense for the battleships. Since each battleship carried a
small detachment of Marines aboard, the Marines would man one of the 5in gun
mounts.
[34]
At the time of their commissioning, all four of the Iowa-class battleships were
equipped with 20 quad 40mm mounts and 49 single 20mm mounts.
[35]
The Oerlikon 20 mm anti-aircraft gun, one of the most heavily produced anti-aircraft guns of the Second World War,
entered service in 1941 and replaced the 0.50"/90 (12.7mm) M2 Browning MG on a one-for-one basis. Between
December 1941 and September 1944, 32% of all Japanese aircraft downed were credited to this weapon, with the
high point being 48.3% for the second half of 1942; however, the 20mm guns were found to be ineffective against
the Japanese Kamikaze attacks used during the latter half of World War II and were subsequently phased out in favor
of the heavier 40mm Bofors AA guns.
[36]
When the Iowa-class battleships were commissioned in 1943 and 1944 they carried twenty quad Bofors 40 mm
anti-aircraft gun mounts, which they used for defense against enemy aircraft. These heavy guns were also employed
in the protection of allied aircraft carriers operating in the Pacific Theater of World War II, and accounted for
Iowa-class battleship
152
roughly half of all Japanese aircraft shot down between 1 October 1944 and 1 February 1945.
[37][38]
</ref> Although
successful in this role, the guns were stripped from the battleshipsinitially from New Jersey when reactivated in
1968
[39]
and later from Iowa, Missouri, and Wisconsin when they were reactivated for service in the 1980s.
[40]
</ref>
Propulsion and size
A crewman operates the ship's throttle in the main engine room aboard New Jersey.
Crewmen operate the electrical generators in the upper-level engine room aboard New Jersey.
When the Second Vinson Act was passed by the United States Congress in 1938, the U.S. Navy moved quickly to
develop a 45,000-ton battleship that would pass through the 110ft (34m) wide Panama Canal. Drawing on a 1935
empirical formula for predicting a ship's maximum speed based on scale-model studies in flumes of various hull
forms and propellers
[41]
</ref> and a newly developed empirical theorem that related waterline length to maximum
beam, the Navy drafted plans for a battleship class with a maximum beam of 108ft (33m) which, when multiplied
by 7.96, produced a waterline length of 860ft (262m)permitting a maximum speed of 34.9 knots
(64.6km/h).
[42]
</ref> The Navy also called for the class to have a lengthened forecastle and amidship, which would
increase speed, and a bulbous bow.
[43]
The Iowas were to be outfitted with four screws: the outer pair consisting of
two four-bladed propellers roughly 18 feet (5.5m) in diameter and the inboard screws that have five blades and are
roughly 17.5 feet (5.3m) in diameter. The propeller designs were adopted after earlier testing had determined that
propeller cavitation caused a drop in efficiency at speeds over 30 knots (56km/h).
[44]
The engineering plant on Iowa
and Missouri consisted of four General Electric cross-compound steam turbine engines, each driving a single shaft.
The equivalent machinery on New Jersey and Wisconsin was provided by Westinghouse.
[45]
Four fire rooms contained eight Babcock & Wilcox M-Type boilers operating at 600 pounds per square inch
(4,137kPa; 42kgf/cm
2
)
[46]
with a maximum superheater outlet temperature of 875F (468C). Steam was normally
transmitted to four engine rooms numbered 1 to 4. Each engine room was aft of its associated fire room. In normal
steaming four boilers were operated; this was sufficient to power the ships at speeds up to 27 knots (50km/h;
31mph).Wikipedia:Citation needed For higher speeds, all eight boilers were lit.
Electricity drove many systems aboard ship, including rotating the turrets and elevating the guns. Each of the four
engine rooms had a pair of Ship's Service Turbine Generators (SSTGs)
[47]
manufactured by Westinghouse. Each
SSTG generated 1.25MW for a total of 10MW of electricity. The SSTGs were powered by steam from the same
boilers that fed the engines. To allow battle-damaged electrical circuits to be repaired or bypassed, the lower decks
of the ship had a Casualty Power System whose large three-wire cables and wall outlets (called "biscuits") could be
used to re-route power.
Iowa-class battleship
153
Aircraft (19431969)
When they were commissioned during World War II, the Iowa-class battleships came equipped with two aircraft
catapults designed to launch floatplanes. Initially, the Iowas carried the Vought OS2U Kingfisher
[48]
and Curtiss SC
Seahawk,
[49]
both of which were employed to spot for the battleship's main gun batteriesand, in a secondary
capacity, perform search-and-rescue missions. By the time of the Korean War, helicopters had replaced floatplanes
and the Sikorsky HO3S-1 helicopter; in time, the newer UH-1 Iroquois, SH-2 Seasprites, CH-46 Sea Knight, CH-53
Sea Stallion and the LAMPS III SH-60B Seahawk would serve aboard the battleships. In addition, New Jersey made
use of the Gyrodyne QH-50 DASH drone for her Vietnam war deployment in 19681969.
Conversion proposals
Line drawings of the proposed aircraft carrier conversion for hulls BB-65 and BB-66. Plans to move forward with
this conversion were ultimately dropped, and both hulls were eventually scrapped.
The Iowa class were the only battleships with the speed required for post-war operations based around fast aircraft
carrier task forces.
[50]
There were a number of proposals in the early Cold War to convert the class to take into
account changes in technology and doctrine. These included plans to equip the class with nuclear missiles, add
aircraft capability andin the case of Illinois and Kentuckya proposal to rebuild both as aircraft carriers instead of
battleships.
Initially, the Iowa class was to consist of only four battleships: Iowa, New Jersey, Missouri, and Wisconsin.
However, changing priorities during World War II resulted in the battleships Montana and Ohio being reordered as
Illinois and Kentucky respectively. At the time these two battleships were to be built a proposal was put forth to have
them constructed as aircraft carriers rather than fast battleships. The plan called for the ships to be rebuilt to include a
flight deck and an armament suite similar to that placed aboard the Essex-class aircraft carriers that were at the time
under construction in the United States. Ultimately, nothing came of the design proposal to rebuild these two ships as
aircraft carriers and they were cleared for construction as fast battleships to conform to the Iowa-class design, though
they differed from the earlier four that were built. Eventually, the Cleveland-class light cruisers were selected for the
aircraft-carrier conversion. Nine of these light cruisers would be rebuilt as Independence-class light aircraft
carriers.
[51]
After the surrender of the Empire of Japan, construction on Illinois and Kentucky stopped. Illinois was eventually
scrapped, but Kentucky's construction had advanced enough that several plans were proposed to complete Kentucky
as a guided missile battleship (BBG) by removing the aft turret and installing a missile system. A similar conversion
had already been performed on the battleship Mississippi (BB-41/AG-128) to test the RIM-2 Terrier missile after
World War II. One such proposal came from Rear Admiral W. K. Mendenhall, Chairman of the Ship[s]
Characteristics Board (SCB); Mendehall proposed a plan that called for $15$30million to be spent to allow
Kentucky to be completed as a guided-missile battleship (BBG) carrying eight SSM-N-8 Regulus II guided missiles
with a range of 1,000 nautical miles (1,900km; 1,200mi). He also suggested Terrier or RIM-8 Talos launchers to
supplement the AA guns and proposed nuclear (instead of conventional) shells for the 16-inch guns.
[52]
This never
materialized,
[53]
and Kentucky was ultimately sold for scrap in 1958, although her bow was used to repair her sister
Wisconsin after a collision.
In 1954 the Long Range Objectives Group of the United States Navy suggested converting the Iowa-class ships to
BBGs. In 1958 the Bureau of Ships offered a proposal based on this idea. This replaced the 5-inch and 16-inch gun
batteries with "two Talos twin missile systems, two RIM-24 Tartar twin missile systems, an RUR-5 ASROC
Iowa-class battleship
154
antisubmarine missile launcher, and a Regulus II installation with four missiles",
[54]
as well as flagship facilities,
sonar, helicopters, and fire-control systems for the Talos and Tartar missiles. In addition to these upgrades, 8,600
additional [long] tons of fuel oil was also suggested to serve in part as ballast for the battleships and for use in
refueling destroyers and cruisers. Due to the estimated cost of the overhaul ($178$193 million) this proposal was
rejected as too expensive; instead, the SCB suggested a design with one Talos, one Tartar, one ASROC and two
Regulus launchers and changes to the superstructure, at a cost of up to $85million. This design was later revised to
accommodate the Polaris Fleet Ballistic Missile, which in turn resulted in a study of two schemes by the SCB. In the
end, none of these proposed conversions for the battleships were ever authorized.
[55]
Interest in converting the
Iowa-class battleships into guided-missile battleships began to deteriorate in 1960, because the hulls were considered
too old and the conversion costs too high.
[56]
Nonetheless, additional conversion proposalsincluding one to install
the AN/SPY-1 Aegis Combat System radar on the battleshipswere suggested in 1962, 1974 and 1977 but as
before, these proposals failed to gain the needed authorization.
[57]
This was due, in part, to the fact that sensitive
electronics within 200ft of any 16-inch gun muzzle were likely to be damaged.
1980s refit
Iowa at the head of Battle Group Alpha, centered
around the aircraft carrier Midway with escorts
and supply ships, in 1987.
In 1980, Ronald Reagan was elected President, with a plan to rebuild
the U.S. military as a counter to the increasing military power of the
Soviet Union as one of his benchmark commitments. At the time, the
Soviet Navy was in the process of commissioning a class of missile
cruiser the like of which had not been seen for decades - the
Kirov-class was the largest type of surface warship (other than aircraft
carriers or amphibious assault vessels) built since the Second World
War, and the Americans had not envisaged building anything like it.
As a consequence, as part of Reagan's 600-ship Navy policy and to act
as a counter to the Kirov-class, the US Navy began the process of
reactivating the four Iowa class units and modernising them for service
in the 1980s. During this reactivation, several concepts entailing removal of the aft 16turret were considered by the
Navy, including Martin Marietta's proposal to replace the turret with servicing facilities for 12 AV-8B Harrier
STOVL jumpjets, Charles Myers' proposal for replacement of the turret with vertical launch systems for missiles and
a flight deck for Marine helicopters. Naval Institute Proceedings proposed a canted flight deck (complete with a
steam catapult) and arrestor wires to operate F/A-18 Hornet fighters. Plans for these conversions were dropped in
1984,
[58]
but each battleship was overhauled to burn navy distillate fuel and modernized to carry electronic warfare
suites, close-in weapon systems (CIWS) for self-defense, and missiles. It was determined that the total cost of
reactivating and modernising one battleship was roughly the same as the cost of building a new Oliver Hazard
Perry-class frigate.
After recommissioning, the modernized battleships operated as centerpieces of their own battle group (termed as a
Battleship Battle Group or Surface Action Group), consisting of one Ticonderoga-class cruiser, one Kidd-class
destroyer or Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, one Spruance-class destroyer, three Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates
and one support ship, such as a fleet oiler.
[59]
Iowa-class battleship
155
Armament
During their modernization in the 1980s each Iowa-class battleship was equipped with four of the US Navy's
Phalanx CIWS mounts, two of which sat just behind the bridge and two which were next to the after ship's funnel.
Iowa, New Jersey, and Missouri were equipped with the Block 0 version of the Phalanx, while Wisconsin received
the first operational Block 1 version in 1988. The Phalanx system is intended to serve as a last line of defense against
enemy missiles and aircraft, and when activated can engage a target with a 20mm (0.79in) M61 Vulcan 6-barreled
Gatling cannon
[60]
at a distance of approximately 4,000 yards (3.7km).
A close-up look at an Armored Box Launcher unit, this one aboard New Jersey
A Mk 141 Harpoon Missile Launcher aboard the German frigate Bremen
As part of their modernization in the 1980s, each of the Iowa-class battleships received a complement of Armored
Box Launchers and "shock hardened" Mk. 141 quad cell launchers. The former was used by the battleships to carry
and fire the BGM-109 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs) for use against enemy targets on land, while the
latter system enabled the ships to carry a complement of RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles for use against enemy
ships. With an estimated range of 675 nautical miles (1,250km; 777mi) to 1,500 nautical miles (2,800km;
1,700mi) for the Tomahawk missile and 64.5 nautical miles (119.5km; 74.2mi) to 85.5 nautical miles (158.3km;
98.4mi) for the Harpoon missile system, these two missile systems displaced the sixteen-inch guns and their
maximum range of 42,345 yards (38,720m) (24.06mi) to become the longest-ranged weapons on the battleships
during the 1980s. It has been alleged by members of the environmental group Greenpeace
[61][62][63]
that the
battleships carried the TLAM-A (also cited, incorrectly, as the TLAM-N)a Tomahawk missile with a variable
yield W80 nuclear warheadduring their 1980s service with the United States Navy, but owing to the United States
Navy's policy of refusing to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weaponry aboard its ships, these claims can not
be conclusively proved.
Owing to the original 1938 design of the battleships, the Tomahawk missiles could not be fitted to the Iowa class
unless the battleships were rebuilt in such a way as to accommodate the missile mounts that would be needed to store
and launch the Tomahawks. This realization prompted the removal of the anti-aircraft guns previously installed on
the Iowas and the removal of four of each of the battleships' ten 5"/38DP mounts. The mid and aft end of the
battleships were then rebuilt to accommodate the missile magazines. At one point, the NATO Sea Sparrow was to be
installed on the reactivated battleships; however, it was determined that the system could not withstand the
overpressure effects from firing the main battery. To supplement the anti-aircraft capabilities of the Iowas, five
FIM-92 Stinger surface-to-air missile firing positions were installed. These secured the shoulder-launched weapons
and their rounds for ready use by the crew.
[]
Iowa-class battleship
156
Electronics
An AN/SPS-49 anntenna.
Gunfire-control radars aboard USS Iowa
The earliest search radars installed were the SK air-search radar and SG surface-search radar during World War II.
They were located on the mainmast and forward fire-control tower of the battleships, respectively. As the war drew
to a close, the United States introduced the SK-2 air-search radar and SG surface-search radar; the Iowa class was
updated to make use of these systems between 1945 and 1952. At the same time, the ships' radar systems were
augmented with the installation of the SP height finder on the main mast. In 1952, AN/SPS-10 surface-search radar
and AN/SPS-6 air-search radar replaced the SK and SG radar systems, respectively. Two years later the SP height
finder was replaced by the AN/SPS-8 height finder, which was installed on the main mast of the battleships. During
their brief period of activity under the 600-ship Navy program, the battleships' radar systems were again upgraded.
The AN/SPS-6 air-search radar system was replaced with the AN/SPS-49 radar set (which also augmented the
existing navigation capabilities on the battleships), and the AN/SPS-8 ground-search radar set was replaced by the
AN/SPS-67 search radar.
In addition to these search and navigational radars, the Iowa class were also outfitted with a variety of fire control
systems for their gun systems, and later for their missile systems. Beginning with their commissioning, the
battleships made use of a trio of Mk 38 gun fire control systems to direct the 16in guns and a quartet of Mk 37 gun
fire control systems to direct the 5in gun batteries. These systems were upgraded over time, but remained the
cornerstones of the combat radar systems on the Iowa class during their careers. The range estimation of these
gunfire control systems provided a significant accuracy advantage over earlier ships with optical rangefinders; this
was demonstrated off Truk Atoll on 16 February 1944 when Iowa engaged the Japanese destroyerNowaki at a range
of 35,700 yards (32.6km) and straddled her, setting the record for the longest-ranged straddle in history.
Initially, the battleships made use of a mass collection of 20mm and 40mm guns for anti-aircraft (AA) operations;
these guns were respectively augmented with the Mk14 range sight and Mk51 fire control system to improve
accuracy. By the Korean War, jet engines had replaced propellers on aircraft, which severely limited the ability of
the AA batteries and their gun systems to track and shoot down enemy planes. Consequently, the AA guns and their
associated fire-control systems were removed when reactivated. New Jersey received this treatment in 1967, and the
others followed in their 1980s modernizations. In the 1980s, each ship also received a quartet of Phalanx Close in
Weapon System (CIWS) mounts which made use of a radar system to locate incoming enemy projectiles and destroy
them with a 20mm Gatling gun before they could strike the ship.
[][64]
Iowa-class battleship
157
The RQ-2 Pioneer UAV was used aboard the
Iowa class ships for gunnery spotting
With the added missile capacity of the battleships in the 1980s came
additional fire-support systems to launch and guide the ordnance. To
fire the Harpoon anti-ship missiles, the battleships were equipped with
the SWG-1 fire-control system, and to fire the Tomahawk missiles the
battleships used either the SWG-2 or SWG-3 fire-control system. In
addition to these offensive-weapon systems, the battleships were
outfitted with the AN/SLQ-25 Nixie to be used as a lure against enemy
torpedoes, an SLQ-32 electronic warfare system that can detect, jam,
and deceive an opponent's radar and a Mark 36 SRBOC system to fire
chaff rockets intended to confuse enemy missiles.
Aside from the electronics added for weaponry control, all four
battleships were outfitted with a communications suite used by both
cruisers and guided missile cruisers in service at the time. This
communication suite included the OE-82 antenna for satellite
communications,
[65]
but did not include the Naval Tactical Data
System.
Aircraft (19821992)
Crewmen recover an RQ-2 Pioneer unmanned
aerial vehicle aboard Iowa.
During the 1980s these battleships made use of the RQ-2 Pioneer, an
unmanned aerial vehicle employed in spotting for the guns. Launched
from the fantail using a rocket-assist booster that was discarded shortly
after takeoff, the Pioneer carried a video camera in a pod under the
belly of the aircraft which transmitted live video to the ship so
operators could observe enemy actions or fall of shot during naval
gunnery. To land the UAV a large net was deployed at the back of the
ship; the aircraft was flown into it. Missouri and Wisconsin both used
the Pioneer UAVs successfully during Operation Desert Storm, and in
one particularly memorable incident,
[66]
a Pioneer UAV operated by
Wisconsin received the surrender of Iraqi troops during combat
operations. This particular Pioneer was later donated to the Smithsonian Institution, and is now on public display.
During Operation Desert Storm these Pioneers were operated by detachments of VC-6. In addition to the Pioneer
UAVs, the recommissioned Iowas could support six types of helicopters: the Sikorsky HO3S-1, UH-1 Iroquois,
SH-2 Seasprites, CH-46 Sea Knight, CH-53 Sea Stallion and the LAMPS III SH-60B Seahawk.
Gunfire support role
Main article: United States Naval Gunfire Support debate
Following the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union, the United States Navy began to
decommission and mothball many of the ships it had brought out of its reserve fleet in the drive to attain a 600-ship
Navy. At the height of Navy Secretary John F. Lehman's 600-ship Navy plan, nearly 600ships of all types were
active within the Navy. This included fifteen aircraft carriers, four battleships and over 100submarines, along with
various other types of ships the overall plan specified. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 the Navy sought to
return to its traditional, 313-ship composition.
[67]
While reducing the fleet created under the 600-ship Navy program,
the decision was made to deactivate the four recommissioned Iowa-class battleships and return them to the reserve
fleet.
[68]
</ref>
Iowa-class battleship
158
New Jersey fires a six gun salvo of 16 in shells
into an enemy troop concentration near Kaesong,
Korea.
In 1995, the decommissioned battleships were removed from the Naval
Vessel Register (NVR) after it was determined by ranking US Navy
officials that there was no place for a battleship in the modern navy.
[]
In response to the striking of the battleships from the Naval Vessel
Register a movement began to reinstate the battleships, on the grounds
that these vessels had superior firepower over the then-existing 5in
guns found on the Spruance-class destroyers, Kidd-class destroyers,
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and Ticonderoga-class cruisers.
[69]
Citing concern over the lack of available gunfire to support amphibious
operations, Congress demanded that the United States Navy reinstate
two battleships to the naval vessel register and maintain them with the
mothball fleet, until the Navy could certify it had gunfire support
within the current fleet that would meet or exceed the battleship's
capability.
[70]
The debate over battleships in the modern navy continued until 2006, when the two reinstated battleships were
stricken after naval officials submitted a two-part plan that called for the near-term goal of increasing the range of
the guns currently in use on the Flight I Arleigh Burke-class destroyers with specially designed ammunition intended
to allow a five-inch projectile fired from these guns to travel an estimated 40 nautical miles (70km) inland.
[71]
The
long-term goal calls for the replacement of the two battleships with vessels of the as-yet-unconstructed
Zumwaltclass of guided-missile destroyers. These ships are to be outfitted with an advanced gun system (AGS) that
will fire specially developed 6in Long Range Land Attack Projectiles for shore bombardment; however, the
long-term goal for the Zumwalt class is to have the ships mount railguns or free-electron lasers.
[72]
</ref>
Cultural significance
Missouri enters Pearl Harbor to become a
museum ship
The Iowa class has become culturally symbolic in the United States in
many different ways, to the point where certain elements of the
American publicsuch as the United States Naval Fire Support
Associationare unwilling to part with the battleships despite their
apparent obsolescence in the face of modern naval combat doctrine
that places great emphasis on air supremacy and missile firepower.
Although all have been officially struck from the Naval Vessel
Register they have been spared scrapping and were donated for use as
museum ships.
Their service records have added to their fame, ranging from their
work as carrier escorts in World War II to their shore bombardment duties in North Korea, North Vietnam, and the
Middle East, as well as their service in the Cold War against the expanded Soviet Navy.
[73]
When reactivated in the
1980s Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Sergey Gorshkov stated that the battleships "...are in fact the most to
be feared in [America's] entire naval arsenal..." and that the Soviet's weaponry "...would bounce off or be of little
effect..." against the Iowa-class battleships.</ref> Their reputation combined with the stories told concerning the
firepower of these battleships' 16inch guns
[74]
are such that when they were brought out of retirement in the 1980s
in response to increased Soviet Naval activityand in particular, in response to the commissioning of the
Kirov-class battlecruisersthe United States Navy was inundated with requests from former sailors pleading for a
recall to active duty so they could serve aboard one of the battleships.
[75]
In part because of the service length and record of the class, members have made numerous appearances in television
shows, video games, movies, and other media, including appearances in the anime series Neon Genesis Evangelion,
Iowa-class battleship
159
the History Channel documentary series Battle 360: USS Enterprise, the Discovery Channel documentary The Top
10 Fighting Ships, the stealth action game Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, the Real Time Tactics game
World in Conflict, the book turned movie A Glimpse of Hell, the 1989 song by Cher If I Could Turn Back Time,
[76]
the 1992 film Under Siege, and the 2012 film Battleship, among other appearances. Japanese rock band Vamps
performed the finale of their 2009 US tour on board the USS Missouri on 19 September 2009.
Ships
When brought into service during the final years of World War II, the Iowa-class battleships were assigned to
operate in the Pacific Theatre of World War II. By this point in the war, aircraft carriers had displaced battleships as
the primary striking arm of both the United States Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy. As a result of this shift in
tactics, U.S. fast battleships of all classes were relegated to the secondary role of carrier escorts and assigned to the
Fast Carrier Task Force to provide anti-aircraft screening for U.S. aircraft carriers and perform shore
bombardment.
[77]
They were recalled in 1950 with the outbreak of the Korean War, and provided naval artillery
support for U.N. forces for the entire duration of the war before being returned to mothballs in 1955 after hostilities
ceased. In 1968, to help alleviate U.S. air losses over North Vietnam,
[78]
New Jersey was summoned to Vietnam, but
was decommissioned a year after arriving.
[79][80][81]
All four returned in the 1980s during the drive for a 600-ship
Navy to counter the new Soviet Kirov-class battlecruisers,
[][]
only to be retired after the collapse of the Soviet Union
on the grounds that they were too expensive to maintain.
[82]
Name Hull
number
Builder Ordered Laid down Launched Commissioned Fate
Iowa BB-61 Brooklyn Navy Yard,
New York City
1 July 1939 27 June 1940 27 August
1942
22 February
1943
Preserved as museum ship in
Los Angeles, California
New
Jersey
BB-62 Navy Yard,
Philadelphia
16 September
1940
7 December
1942
23 May 1943 Preserved as museum ship in
Camden, New Jersey
Missouri BB-63 Brooklyn Navy Yard,
New York City
12 June 1940 6 January
1941
29 January
1944
11 June 1944 Preserved as museum ship in
Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
Wisconsin BB-64 Navy Yard,
Philadelphia
25 January
1941
7 December
1943
16 April 1944 Preserved as museum ship in
Norfolk, Virginia
Illinois BB-65 9 September
1940
6 December
1942 N/A
Cancelled 11 August 1945
Broken up at Philadelphia,
1958
Kentucky BB-66
BBG-1
Norfolk Navy Yard,
Portsmouth
7 March 1942
20 January
1950[83]
N/A
Broken up at Baltimore, 1959
1. ^ Kentucky was not officially launched; her hull was moved from drydock to allow Missouri to be admitted for repairs following her grounding.
Iowa-class battleship
160
Iowa
Main article: USS Iowa (BB-61)
Iowa during the Korean War
Iowa was ordered 1 July 1939, laid down 27 June 1940, launched 27
August 1942, and commissioned 22 February 1943. She conducted a
shakedown cruise in Chesapeake Bay before sailing to Naval Station
Argentia, Newfoundland, to be ready in case the German
battleshipTirpitz entered the Atlantic.
[84]
Transferred to the Pacific
Fleet in 1944, Iowa made her combat debut in February and
participated in the campaign for the Marshall Islands.
[85]
The ship later
escorted U.S. aircraft carriers conducting air raids in the Marianas
campaign, and then was present at the Battle of Leyte Gulf. During the
Korean War, Iowa bombarded enemy targets at Songjin, Hngnam,
and Kojo, North Korea. Iowa returned to the U.S. for operational and
training exercises before being decommissioned on 24 February 1958. Reactivated in the early 1980s, Iowa operated
in the Atlantic Fleet, cruising in North American and European waters for most of the decade and participating in
joint military exercises with European ships.
[86]
On 19 April 1989, 47 sailors were killed following an explosion in
her No. 2 turret.
[87]
In 1990, Iowa was decommissioned for the last time and placed in the mothball fleet. She was
stricken from the Naval Vessel Register on 17 March 2006. Iowa was anchored as part of the National Defense
Reserve Fleet in Suisun Bay, California until October 2011, when she was towed from her mooring to Richmond,
California for renovation as a museum ship. She was towed from Richmond in the San Francisco Bay on 26 May
2012, to San Pedro at the Los Angeles Waterfront to serve as a museum ship run by Pacific Battleship Center and
opened to the public on 7 July 2012.
New Jersey
Main article: USS New Jersey (BB-62)
New Jersey bombarding positions during the
Vietnam War.
New Jersey was ordered 4 July 1939, laid down 16 September 1940,
launched 7 December 1942, and commissioned 23 May 1943. New
Jersey completed fitting out and trained her initial crew in the Western
Atlantic and Caribbean before transferring to the Pacific Theatre in
advance of the planned assault on the Marshall Islands, where she
screened the U.S. fleet of aircraft carriers from enemy air raids. At the
Battle of Leyte Gulf, the ship protected carriers with her anti-aircraft
guns. New Jersey then bombarded Iwo Jima and Okinawa. During the
Korean War, the ship pounded targets at Wonsan, Yangyang, and
Kansong. Following the Armistice, New Jersey conducted training and
operation cruises until she was decommissioned. Recalled to duty in
1968, New Jersey reported to the gunline off the Vietnamese coast, and shelled North Vietnamese targets before
departing the line in December 1968. She was decommissioned the following year. Reactivated in 1982 under the
600-ship Navy program,
[88]
New Jersey was sent to Lebanon to protect U.S. interests and U.S. Marines, firing her
main guns at Druze and Syrian positions in the Beqaa Valley east of Beirut.
[89]
Decommissioned for the last time 8
February 1991, New Jersey was briefly retained on the Naval Vessel Register before being donated to the Home Port
Alliance of Camden, New Jersey for use as a museum ship in October 2001.
[90]
Iowa-class battleship
161
Missouri
Main article: USS Missouri (BB-63)
Missouri fires 16in guns at Chong Jin, Korea, 21
October 1950
The Missouri was the last of the four Iowa-class battleships to be
completed. She was ordered 12 June 1940, laid down 6 January 1941,
launched 29 January 1944, and commissioned 11 June 1944. Missouri
conducted her trials off New York with shakedown and battle practice
in Chesapeake Bay before transferring to the Pacific Fleet, where she
screened U.S. aircraft carriers involved in offensive operations against
the Japanese before reporting to Okinawa to shell the island in advance
of the planned landings. Following the bombardment of Okinawa,
Missouri turned her attention to the Japanese homeland islands of
Honshu and Hokkaido, performing shore bombardment and screening
U.S. carriers involved in combat operations. She became a symbol of
the U.S. Navy's victory in the Pacific when representatives of the
Empire of Japan boarded the battleship to sign the documents of unconditional surrender to the Allied powers in
September 1945. After World War II, Missouri conducted largely uneventful training and operational cruises until
suffering a grounding accident. In 1950 she was dispatched to Korea in response to the outbreak of the Korean War.
Missouri served two tours of duty in Korea providing shore bombardment. She was decommissioned in 1956. She
spent many years at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, Washington. Reactivated in 1984 as part of the
600-ship Navy plan, Missouri was sent on operational cruises until being assigned to Operation Earnest Will in 1988.
In 1991, Missouri participated in Operation Desert Storm, firing 28 Tomahawk Missiles and 759 sixteen-inch
(406mm) shells at Iraqi targets along the coast.
[91]
Decommissioned for the last time in 1992, Missouri was donated
to the USS Missouri Memorial Association of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, for use as a museum ship in 1999.
[92]
Wisconsin
Main article: USS Wisconsin (BB-64)
Wisconsin fires a Tomahawk missile
Wisconsin was ordered 12 June 1940, laid down 25 January 1942,
launched 7 December 1943, and commissioned 16 April 1944. After
trials and initial training in Chesapeake Bay, she transferred to the
Pacific Fleet in 1944 and was assigned to protect the U.S. fleet of
aircraft carriers involved in operations in the Philippines until
summoned to Iwo Jima to bombard the island in advance of the Marine
landings. Afterward, she proceeded to Okinawa, bombarding the island
in advance of the allied amphibious assault. In mid-1945 Wisconsin
turned her attention to bombarding the Japanese home islands until the
surrender of Japan in August. Reactivated in 1950 for the Korean War,
Wisconsin served two tours of duty, assisting South Korean and UN forces by providing call fire support and shelling
targets. In 1956, the bow of the uncompleted USS Kentucky was removed and grafted on Wisconsin, which had
collided with the destroyer USSEaton.
[93]
Decommissioned in 1958, Wisconsin was placed in the reserve fleet at the
Philadelphia Naval Shipyard until reactivated in 1986 as part of the 600-ship Navy plan.
[94]
In 1991, Wisconsin
participated in Operation Desert Storm, firing 24 Tomahawk Missiles at Iraqi targets, and expending 319 16-inch
(406mm) shells at Iraqi troop formations along the coast. Decommissioned for the last time 30 September 1991,
Wisconsin was placed in the reserve fleet until struck from the Naval Vessel Register on 17 March 2006 so she could
be transferred for use as a museum ship. Wisconsin is currently berthed at the Nauticus maritime museum in Norfolk,
Virginia.
Iowa-class battleship
162
Illinois and Kentucky
Main articles: USS Illinois (BB-65) and USS Kentucky (BB-66)
Illinois under construction on the slipway at Philadelphia, just prior to her cancellation
The hull of Kentucky is floated out of drydock to allow Missouri to drydock for repairs.
Hull numbers BB-65 and BB-66 were originally intended as the first and second ships of the Montana-class of
battleships;
[95]
however the passage of an emergency war building program on 19 July 1940 resulted in both hulls
being reordered as Iowa-class units to save time on construction.
[96][97]
The war ended before the ships could be
completed, and work on them was eventually stopped. Initially, proposals were made to complete these two
battleships as aircraft carriers, similar in design to the Essex-class aircraft carriers under construction at the time in
the United States, however nothing came of this idea.
[][]
Illinois was ordered on 9 September 1940 and initially laid down on 6 December 1942. However, the work was
suspended pending a decision on whether to convert the hull to an aircraft carrier. Eventually, it was determined that
the conversion of the Iowa class hull would be more expensive and not as capable as the contemporary Essex-class,
and construction on Illinois as a battleship resumed. Ultimately, construction was canceled on 11 August 1945, when
Illinois was judged to be about-one quarter completed;
[98]
she was sold for scrap and broken up on the slipway in
September 1958.
Kentucky was ordered on 9 September 1940 and laid down on 7 March 1942. Work on the ship was suspended in
June 1942, and the hull floated out to make room for the construction of LSTs. This suspension lasted for two and a
half years while it was debated whether to convert the ship to an aircraft carrier. Work resumed in December 1944,
with completition projected for mid-1946. Further suggestions were made to convert Kentucky into a specialist
anti-aircraft ship, with work again suspended. Eventually, with the hull approximately three-quarters completed, she
was floated on 20 January 1950 to clear a dry-dock for repairs to Missouri, which had run aground. During this
period, plans were mooted to convert Kentucky as a guided missile battleship, which saw her reclassified from
BB-66 to BBG-1. In the event, these plans were never realised, and the ship came to be used as a parts hulk; in 1956,
her bow was removed and shipped in one piece across Hampton Roads, where it was grafted onto Wisconsin, which
had collided with the destroyer Eaton. In 1958, Kentucky's engines were salvaged and installed on the fast combat
support ships Sacramento and Camden. Ultimately, Kentucky was sold for scrap on 31 October 1958.
[]
Iowa-class battleship
163
Notes
[1] Hough, pp. 214216.
[2] [2] Garzke and Dulin, p. 107.
[3] [3] Friedman, pp. 309, 311.
[4] [4] Friedman, p. 309.
[5] The belt armor was increased from 8.1 inches (210mm) to 12.6 inches (320mm); the deck from 2.3 inches (58mm) to 5 inches (130mm);
the splinter armor to 3.9 inches (99mm); the turret armor from 9 inches (230mm) on the front, 6 inches (150mm) on the side, and 5 inches
(130mm) on the rear to 18 inches (460mm), 10 inches (250mm) and 8 inches (200mm), respectively.Hough, pp. 214216.
[6] [6] Friedman, p. 310.
[7] [7] Friedman, pp. 271, 309.
[8] Friedman, pp. 309310.
[9] Friedman, pp. 310311.
[10] [10] Friedman, p. 311.
[11] Friedman, pp. 311312.
[12] [12] Lyon, p. 240.
[13] [13] Rogers: Fastest Battleships
[14] [14] Vinson: Congressional biography
[15] [15] Newhart, p. 92.
[16] [16] Stillwell, p. 16.
[17] [17] Friedman, p. 313.
[18] Friedman, pp. 313314.
[19] [19] Friedman, p. 307.
[20] [20] Friedman, p. 314.
[21] [21] Stillwell, p. 15.
[22] [22] Friedman, p. 285.
[23] Thompson, pp. 7081.
[24] Poyer, pp. 5053.
[25] Sumrall, pp. 7376.
[26] [26] DiGiulian, "United States of America 16"/45 (40.6cm) Mark 6"
[27] Yenne, pp. 132133.
[28] [28] Polmar, p. 490.
[29] "Military members and civilian employees of the Department of the Navy shall not reveal, report to reveal, or cause to be revealed any
information, rumor, or speculation with respect to the presence or absence of nuclear weapons or components aboard any specific ship, station
or aircraft, either on their own initiative or in response, direct or indirect, to any inquiry. [...] The Operations Coordinating Board (part of
President Eisenhower's National Security Council) established the U.S. policy in 1958 of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) the
presence or absence of nuclear weapons at any general or specific location, including aboard any U.S. military station, ship, vehicle, or
aircraft."<ref>
[30] [30] DeVolpi, p. VA-13.
[31] [31] DiGiulian, "United States of America 5"/38 (12.7cm) Mark 12"
[32] [32] Stillwell, 1996, p. 256.
[33] [33] Sumrall, p. 80.
[34] [34] Wass, p. 27.
[35] Terzibaschitsch, pp. 147153.
[36] DiGiulian, "United States of America 20 mm/70 (0.79") Marks 2, 3 & 4"
[37] [37] Digiulian, "United States of America 40 mm/56 (1.57") Mark 1, Mark 2, and M1"
[38] In early 1945, the United States Navy determined that these 40mm guns were also inadequate for defense against Japanese kamikaze attacks
in the Pacific Theater, and subsequently began to replace the Bofors guns with a 3"/50 caliber gun capable of using variable time (VT)
charges.Garzke and Dulin, p. 107.<ref>DiGiulian, "United States of America 3"/50 (7.62cm) Marks 27, 33 and 34"
[39] [39] Garzke and Dulin, p. 139.
[40] "As part of their modernizations, the Iowa-class vessels lost their antiaircraft batteries in favor of Phalanx Close in Weapon Systems and
several of their 5in/38cal guns to make room for the launchers for the TLAMs and Harpoons."<ref>
[41] These mathematical formulas still stand today, and have been used to design hulls for U.S. ships and to predict the speed of those hulls for
the ships when commissioned, including nuclear powered ships like the U.S. fleet of Nimitz-class supercarriers.<ref>Davis, p. 15.
[42] The actual speed of the Iowa-class battleships varies from source to source. The most commonly cited figures for the battleship class are 32
or 33 knots (61km/h), but it appears that such speeds have never actually been attained in speed tests. Theoretically, the battleships of the
Iowa class should be able to cruise at nearly 35 knots (65km/h), but this speed appears to be abnormally high and does not take into account
factors like ocean resistance and weight. The fastest confirmed speed for the class is just over 31 knots (57km/h), a speed attained by New
Jersey during tests.<ref name="Friedman449">Friedman, p. 317.
Iowa-class battleship
164
[43] [43] Davis, p. 10.
[44] Davis, pp. 56.
[45] [45] Preston, p. 259.
[46] [46] Stillwell, p. 22.
[47] [47] For a diagram and statistics of SSTGs, see:
[48] [48] Stillwell, p. 296.
[49] Bridgeman, pp. 22122.
[50] [50] Friedman, p. 390.
[51] Friedman, U.S. Aircraft Carriers, p. 191.
[52] [52] Garzke, p. 204.
[53] [53] Polmar, p. 128.
[54] [54] Garzke, p. 209.
[55] [55] Garzke, p. 210.
[56] [56] Garzke, p. 212.
[57] [57] Garzke, p. 213.
[58] [58] Muir, p. 130.
[59] Lightbody and Poyer, pp. 338339.
[60] Thomas, Vincent C. (1987). The Almanac of Seapower, p. 191. Navy League of the United States. ISBN 0-9610724-8-2.
[61] Noris & Arkin, p. 48.
[62] [62] Pugh, p. 194.
[63] Walsh & Arkin, pp. 89.
[64] [64] Stillwell, p. 304.
[65] [65] Sumrall, p. 122.
[66] [66] Camp, p. 144.
[67] [67] Holland, p. 184
[68] "As stated in our testimony, there is current pressure to greatly reduce the defense budget, which led to the decision to retire two battleships.
Because the battleships are costly to maintain (about $58 million to operate annually, according to the Navy) and difficult to man, and because
of the unanswered safety and missions-related questions, the two remaining battleships seem to be top candidates for decommissioning as the
United States looks for ways to scale back its forces. If the Navy also decommissions the remaining two battleships, the Navys entire $33
million request for 16-inch ammunition could be denied, and the $4.4 million request for 5inch/38caliber gun ammunition could reduced by
$3.6 million."<ref name="GAO_Potential_Reductions">
[69] Government Accountability Office. Information on Options for Naval Surface Fire Support (GAO-05-39R).
[70] [70] . 104th Congress, House of Representatives. p. 237. Retrieved on 17 December 2006.
[71] " National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 (http:/ / www. gpoaccess. gov/ serialset/ creports/ pdf/ hr109-452/ title2. pdf)" (pdf) 109th
Congress, United States Senate and House of Representatives. pp. 193194. Retrieved on 16 December 2010.
[72] The expected performance of the current rail gun design is a muzzle velocity over 5,800m/s, accurate enough to hit a 5meter target over
200nautical miles (370.4 kilometres (370,400m)) away while firing at 10shots per minute.<ref>
[73] Praise for the service of these battleships include comments from shore parties observing the battleships' bombardments during their wartime
service, such as those received by New Jersey in the Korean War and the Vietnam War.<ref name="DANFSNJ">
[74] [74] Nelson, p. 142
[75] [75] Nelson, p. 73
[76] [76] Stillwell, p. 295
[77] [77] Johnston, p. 161.
[78] [78] Neubeck, p. 42.
[79] [79] Polmar, p. 129.
[80] [80] Stillwell, 1986, p. 222
[81] [81] Stillwell, 1986, p. 230.
[82] A Government Accountability Office report on the operating cost for each individual Iowa-class battleship in 1991 reported that it cost the
United States Navy $58 million to operate each individual battleship.Friedman, pp. 309, 311.
[83] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ wiki/ Iowa-class_battleship#endnote_a
[84] [84] Garzke and Dulin, p. 115.
[85] [85] Garzke and Dulin, p. 120.
[86] Garzke and Dulin, pp. 218222.
[87] [87] Thompson, p. 261.
[88] Stillwell, 1986, pp. 243251.
[89] Stillwell, 1986, pp. 261273.
[90] [90] Hore, p. 217
[91] [91] Stillwell 1996, p. 327
[92] [92] Hore, p. 219.
Iowa-class battleship
165
[93] [93] Hore, p. 220
[94] [94] Hore, p. 221
[95] [95] Hore, p. 222.
[96] [96] Gardiner, p. 99.
[97] Johnston, pp. 108123.
[98] [98] Garzke and Dulin, p. 137
References
Bibliography
Bishop, Chris (1988). The Encyclopedia of World Sea Power. New York: Crescent Books. ISBN0-517-65342-7.
OCLC 18199237 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 18199237).
Bridgeman, Leonard (1946). Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II. London: Studio. ISBN1-85170-493-0.
Bureau of Naval Personnel (April 1987). "Back on the battle line" (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ media/ allhands/
acrobat/ ah198704. pdf) (PDF). All Hands (Washington, D.C.: United States Navy) 841: 2829. ISSN 0002-5577
(http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ issn/ 0002-5577). OCLC 2555618 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 2555618).
Retrieved 30 May 2010.
Camp, Dick (2009). Operation Phantom Fury: The Assault and Capture of Fallujah, Iraq. Minneapolis,
Minnesota: Zenith Press. p.144.
DiGiulian, Tony (September 2006). "United States of America 20 mm/70 (0.79") Marks 2, 3 & 4" (http:/ / www.
navweaps. com/ Weapons/ WNUS_2cm-70_mk234. htm). navweaps.com. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
DiGiulian, Tony (November 2006). "United States of America 40 mm/56 (1.57") Mark 1, Mark 2 and M1" (http:/
/ www. navweaps. com/ Weapons/ WNUS_4cm-56_mk12. htm). navweaps.com. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
DeVolpi, A., V.E. Minkov, G.S. Stanford, V.A. Simonenko, Vadim Simonenko, and George Stanford. Nuclear
Shadowboxing: Legacies and Challenges. 2005.
Friedman, Norman (1986). U.S. Battleships: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN0-87021-715-1. OCLC 12214729 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 12214729).
Garzke, William H.; Robert O. Dulin, Jr. (1995). Battleships: United States Battleships 19351992 (Rev. and
updated ed.). Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. ISBN978-0-87021-099-0. OCLC 29387525 (http:/ / www.
worldcat. org/ oclc/ 29387525).
Gardiner, Robert (1980). Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships, 19221946. Great Britain: Conway Maritime
Press. ISBN0870219138. OCLC 18121784 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 18121784).
Hore, Peter (2005). The World Encyclopedia of Battleships. London: Hermes House. ISBN1-84681-278-X.
Hough, Richard (1964). A History of the Modern Battleship Dreadnought. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Library of Congress Catalog #64-22602.
Johnston, Ian C.; McAuley, Rob (2002). The Battleships. London: Channel 4. ISBN0-7522-6188-6. OCLC
59495980 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 59495980).
Keegan, John (2000). World War II: A Visual Encyclopedia. London: PRC Publishing. ISBN1-85585-878-9.
OCLC 45188820 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 45188820).
Lightbody, Andy; Poyer, Joe (1990). The Complete Book of U.S. Fighting Power. New York: Beekman House.
ISBN0-517-03298-8. OCLC 24047998 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 24047998).
Lyon, Hugh; Moore, J. E. (1978). The Encyclopedia of the World's Warships: A technical directory of major
fighting ships from 1900 to the present day. London, England: Salamander Books, Ltd. ISBN0-86101-007-8.
Miller, David; Miller, Chris (1986). Modern Naval Combat. London: Salamander Books. ISBN0-86101-231-3.
OCLC 17397400 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 17397400).
Muir, Malcolm (1989). The Iowa Class Battleships. Avon, Great Britain: The Bath Press. ISBN0-7137-1732-7.
Nelson, Robin (1982). "The Born Again Battlewagon" (http:/ / books. google. com/
books?id=LdkDAAAAMBAJ& pg=PA73& lpg=PA73& dq=Popular+ Mechanics+ Iowa+ class+ battleship+
Iowa-class battleship
166
Robin+ Nelson#v=onepage& q& f=false). Popular Mechanics (The Hearst Corporation) 157 (6): p. 7374, p.
141143. Retrieved 10 January 2011.
Neubeck, Ken (2002). F-105 Thunderchief in Action. Carrollton: Squadron/Signal Publishing No. 185.
ISBN0-89747-447-3. OCLC 475321332 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 475321332).
Newhart, Max R. (2007). American Battleships: A Pictorial History of BB-1 to BB-71 with Prototypes main and
Texas. Missoula, Montana: Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, Inc. ISBN1-57510-004-5.
Norris, Robert S.; Arkin, William N. (1989). "Nuclear Notebook: Nuclear Weapons at Sea, 1989". Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists (Johns Hopkins University Press) 45 (7): 48.
Norman, Polmar (2001). The Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the US Fleet. Annapolis,
Maryland: Naval Institute Press. ISBN1-55750-656-6.
Pugh, Charles (1989). The ANZUS crisis, nuclear visiting and deterrence. New York City: Press Syndicate of the
University of Cambridge. p.194. ISBN0-521-34355-0.
Sharpe, Richard (1991). Jane's Fighting Ships 199192. London, United Kingdom: Bulter & Tanner Ltd.
ISBN0-7106-0960-4.
Stillwell, Paul (1986). Battleship New Jersey: An Illustrated History. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN0-87021-029-7.
(1996). Battleship Missouri: An Illustrated History. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN1-55750-780-5. OCLC 32589816 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 32589816).
Sumrall, Robert F. (1988). Iowa Class Battleships. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN0-87021-298-2.
Thompson II, Charles C. (1999). A Glimpse of Hell: The Explosion on the USS Iowa and Its Cover-Up. W. W.
Norton. ISBN0-393-04714-8.
Terzibaschitsch, Stefan (1977). Battleships of the U.S. Navy in World War II. Bonanza Books.
ISBN0-517-23451-3.
Walsh, Jaquleyn; Arkin, William M. (1991). The Current Iraq Nuclear Crisis: Background Briefing (http:/ / web.
archive. org/ web/ 20110628235415/ http:/ / www. greenpeace. org/ raw/ content/ international/ press/ reports/
digest-of-greenpeace-documents. pdf) (Report). Greenpeace. Retrieved 22 November 2012.
Wass, Becki (1984). "Iowa gets new Marine Guard Chief". All Hands (813) (Alexandria, VA: United States
Navy, published November 1984).
Yenne, Bill (2005). Secret Weapons of the Cold War. New York: Berkley Books. ISBN0-425-20149-X.
This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
This article includes information collected from the Naval Vessel Register, which, as a U.S. government
publication, is in the public domain.
Further reading
Bonner, Kit; Bonner, Carolyn (1998). Great Naval Disasters: U.S. Naval Accidents in the 20th Century. Osceola,
Wisconsin: MBI Publishing. ISBN0-7603-0594-3. OCLC 39545709 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/
39545709).
Butler, John A. (1995). Strike Able-Peter: The Stranding and Salvage of the USS Missouri. Annapolis, Maryland:
Naval Institute Press. ISBN1-55750-094-0.
Holland, W. J.; Naval Historical Foundation (2004) [2000]. The Navy. New York: Barnes & Noble Books.
ISBN0-7607-6218-X. OCLC 57136923 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 57136923).
Hoskins, Lawrence E., LT USNR (September 1983). "Comment and Discussion". United States Naval Institute
Proceedings.
Newcome, Laurence R. (2004). Unmanned Aviation: A Brief History of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Reston,
Virginia: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. ISBN978-1-56347-644-0. OCLC 55078813 (http:/
/ www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 55078813).
Iowa-class battleship
167
Newell, Gordon; Smith, Allen E., Vice Admiral (USN), Ret. (1969). Mighty Mo: The U.S.S. Missouri: A
Biography of the Last Battleship. Seattle, Washington: Superior Publishing Company. LCCN 72-87802 (http:/ /
lccn. loc. gov/ 72-87802) Check |lccn= value (help).
Poyer, Joe (1991) [1984]. "Are These the Last Battleships?". In Andy Lightbody and Blaine Taylor, eds.
Battleships at War: America's Century Long Romance with the Big Guns of the Fleet. Canoga Park, California:
Challenge Publications.
Reilly, John C., Jr. (1989). Operational Experience of Fast Battleships: World War II, Korea, Vietnam.
Washington, D.C.: Naval Historical Center. OCLC 19547740 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 19547740).
Sumrall, Robert F. (1999). USS Missouri (BB-63). Missoula, Montana: Pictorial Histories. ISBN1-57510-050-9.
OCLC 43607533 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 43607533).
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Iowa class battleship.
A comparison of seven battleship classes during WWII (http:/ / www. combinedfleet. com/ baddest. htm)
War Service Fuel Consumption of U.S. Naval Surface Vessels FTP 218 (http:/ / www. ibiblio. org/ hyperwar/
USN/ ref/ Fuel/ index. html)
Firing Procedure for the 16"/50 (40.6cm) Mark 7 (http:/ / www. navweaps. com/ Weapons/
WNUS_16-50_mk7_firing. htm)
Operating Instructions for Five Inch, 38 Caliber, Gun Crews (http:/ / www. hnsa. org/ doc/ destroyer/ fiveinch/
index. htm)
Pegasus-class hydrofoil
168
Pegasus-class hydrofoil
USSPegasus(PHM-1)
Class overview
Name: Pegasus-class hydrofoil
Builders: Boeing Marine Systems, Renton, Washington
Operators: United States Navy
Built: 19731982
In commission: 19771993
Completed: 6
Retired: 6
Preserved: 1
General characteristics
Displacement: 237.2 long tons (241t)
Length: 132ft (40m)
Beam: 28ft (8.5m)
Propulsion: 2 Mercedes-Benz MTU marine diesels (hullborne), 1,600bhp (1,193kW)
1 General Electric LM2500 gas turbine (Foilborne), 18,000shp (13,423kW)
Speed: 12 knots (22km/h; 14mph) hullborne
48 knots (89km/h; 55mph) foilborne
Complement: 4 officers, 17 enlisted
Sensors and
processing systems:
LN-66 navigation radar
MK 94 Mod 1 (PHM-1), MK 92 Mod 1 (PHM 2-6) fire-control system
Armament: 2 quad RGM-84 Harpoon
1 Mk 75 76 mm OTO Melara, 62 cal. gun
Pegasus-class hydrofoil
169
All six members of the Pegasus class of armed
hydrofoils.
The Pegasus-class hydrofoils were a series of fast attack patrol boats
employed by the U.S. Navy. They were in service from 1977 through
1993. These hydrofoils carried the designation "PHM" for "Patrol,
Hydrofoil, Missile." The Pegasus class vessels were originally
intended for NATO operations in the North Sea and Baltic Sea.
Subsequently, participation by other NATO navies, including Germany
and Italy, ceased and the U.S. Navy proceeded to procure six PHMs,
which were highly successful in conducting coastal operations, such as
narcotics interdiction and coastal patrol, in the Caribbean basin.
History
In the late 1960s, NATO developed a requirement for a small, fast warship to counter large numbers of Warsaw Pact
missile boats, such as the Komar and Osa class missile boats, deciding that a hydrofoil would be the best way to
meet this requirement. In 1970 Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, the new Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), keen to increase
the Navy's number of surface vessels in a cost-effective manner, committed the United States to the NATO program
for a hydrofoil. The U.S. Navy proposed the PHM design as a NATO standard, with the program being led by the
U.S. Navy, and an order placed for two prototypes in 1972.
[1]
The Italian Marina Militare and the German
Bundesmarine signed letters of intent to participate in the programme, with other NATO navies, including the Royal
Navy and Canadian Forces studying the project.
[2]
The U.S. Navy planned to buy up to 30 PHMs, with 10 to be
purchased by Germany and four by Italy.
[3][4]
After Zumwalt's retirement, the Navy chose to funnel most of the money for the PHMs into larger vessels. This
delayed the ongoing construction of Pegasus, and the other vessels were not started. Congress eventually forced the
Navy to complete the vessels. The difficulties in project progression forced the other involved navies to abort their
participation.
The Pegasus class ships were powered by two 800 horsepower (600 kW) twin turbo-charged Mercedes-Benz Diesel
enginess when waterborne, using water jets, giving them a speed of 12 knots. When foilborne, the ships were
powered by a General Electric LM2500 gas turbine and a very large water jet, giving them a speed of over 48 knots.
Pegasus ships were well armed for their size, carrying two four-rack RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles and an Oto
Melara 76 mm gun. The Harpoons, specifically, were capable of sinking far larger ships at distances in excess of 60
nautical miles (110km). The German version would have carried the MM38 Exocet.
As Pegasus was constructed several years before the rest of the series, there are some slight differences, such as the
fire-control system.
All six vessels were constructed by Boeing, in Seattle at the Renton plant at the south end of Lake Washington. They
were stationed at NAS Key West.
The technology was first pioneered by the USSTucumcari(PGH-2), where it successfully operated in Vietnam, but
ultimately ran aground off Puerto Rico. It was judged to be more advanced than the Grumman Flagstaff which was
built at the same time to the same requirements. The primary technology, also used in the Boeing Jetfoil ferries, used
submerged flying foils with waterjet propulsion.
The ships were retired because they were not judged cost effective for their mission in a Navy with primarily
offensive missions rather than coastal patrol. USS Aries PHM-5 Hydrofoil Memorial, Inc. obtained Aries for
rehabilitation as a memorial located on the Grand River in Brunswick, Missouri at 392515N 93747W
[5]
. All
other PHMs in the class have been scrapped, except for Gemini, which was converted into a yacht.
Pegasus-class hydrofoil
170
List of ships
Pegasus(PHM-1) (July 9, 1977July 30, 1993), formerly Delphinus
Hercules(PHM-2) (December 18, 1982July 30, 1993)
Taurus(PHM-3) (October 10, 1981July 30, 1993)
Aquila(PHM-4) (June 26, 1982July 30, 1993)
Aries(PHM-5) (September 18, 1982July 30, 1993)
Gemini(PHM-6) (November 13, 1982July 30, 1993)
References
[1] Jenkins 2000, p. 12.
[2] McLeavy 1975, pp. 279280.
[3] [3] Jenkins 2000, p. 2.
[4] [4] Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p. 625.
[5] http:/ / tools.wmflabs. org/ geohack/ geohack. php?pagename=Pegasus-class_hydrofoil& params=39_25_15_N_93_7_47_W_region:US
Gardiner, Robert and Stephen Chumbley. Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 19471995. Annapolis,
Maryland, USA: Naval Institute Press, 1995. ISBN 1-55750-132-7.
McLeavy, Roy. Jane's Surface Skimmers: Hovercraft and Hydrofoils 197576. Jane's Yearbooks, 1975. ISBN 0
354 00525 1.
Jenkins, George. "Patrol Combatant Missile (Hydrofoil): PHM History 19731995" (http:/ / www. foils. org/
phmhist. pdf) (pdf). Foils.com, 1 November 2000. Retrieved 5 September 2012.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Pegasus class hydrofoil.
Navysite.de PHM page (http:/ / navysite. de/ pboats/ phm. htm)
Boeing page (http:/ / www. boeing. com/ history/ boeing/ hydro. html)
USS Aries PHM-5 Hydrofoil Memorial, Inc. (http:/ / www. ussaries. org/ ) - Brunswick, Missouri
Essex-class aircraft carrier
171
Essex-class aircraft carrier
USS Philippine Sea in 1955
Class overview
Name: Essex-class aircraft carrier
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding
Fore River Shipyard
Brooklyn Navy Yard
Philadelphia Naval Shipyard
Norfolk Naval Shipyard
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Yorktownclass
USSWasp(CV-7)
Succeededby: Midwayclass
Cost:
6878 million USD (1942),
[1]
~1 billion USD (2011)
Built: 194150
In commission: 194291
Planned: 32
Completed: 24
Cancelled: 8
Active: 0
Retired: 24
Preserved: USSYorktown(CV-10)
USSIntrepid(CV-11)
USSHornet(CV-12)
USSLexington(CV-16)
General characteristics (all stats as built)
Type: Aircraft carrier
Displacement: Design: 27,100 long tons (27,500t) std, 33,000 long tons (34,000t) full
Actual: 30,800 long tons (31,300t) std, 36,380 long tons (36,960t) full
Length: 820ft (249.9m) pp
870ft (265.2m) oa (short-bow units); 888ft (270.7m) oa (long-bow units)
862ft (262.7m) flight deck (short-bow units); 844ft (257.3m) flight deck (long-bow units).
Beam: 93ft (28.3m) wl; 147.5ft (45.0m) max
Essex-class aircraft carrier
172
Draught: 23ft (7.0m) std; 27.5ft (8.4m) fl
Installed power: 150,000shp (110,000kW)
Propulsion: Westinghouse geared turbines connected to 4 shafts; 8 Babcock & Wilcox boilers
Speed: 32.7 knots (60.6km/h)
Range: 20,000nmi (37,000km) at 15kn (28km/h)
Crew: ca. 2,170 (ship), 870 (air wing), 160 (flag)
Sensors and
processing systems:
1 SK air-search radar
1 SC air-search radar
2 SG surface-search radar
1 SM fighter-direction radar (later units)
2 Mk 4 fire-control radar (earlier units)
2 Mk 12 fire-control radar (later units)
2 Mk 22 height-finding radar (later units)
1017 Mk 51 AA directors
Armament: 12 5-inch (127 mm) /38 caliber guns (4 2 and 4 1)
32 to 72 40 mm Bofors guns (8 to 18 4)
55 to 76 20 mm Oerlikon cannon
Armor: 2.5in (64mm) STS hangar deck; 1.5in (38mm) STS 4th deck; 3.5 to 4in (88 to 100mm) Class B + .75in
(13mm) STS belt; 4in (100mm) Class B transverse bulkheads
Aircraft carried: 90100 (Lexington 110 aircraft)
Notes: Basic class design was repeatedly modified, chiefly by additional AA and radar. Transverse hangar-deck
catapult in CV-10, 11, 12, 17, 18 (later removed). CV-9 commissioned with no flight deck catapults; CV-10,
11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20 with one; all others with two. CV-34 completed postwar to much-altered design.
The Essex class was a class of aircraft carriers of the United States Navy, which constituted the 20th century's most
numerous class of capital ships with 24 vessels built in both "short-hull" and "long-hull" versions. Thirty-two were
originally ordered; however as World War II wound down, six were canceled before construction, and two were
canceled after construction had begun. No Essex class ships were lost to enemy action, despite several vessels
sustaining very heavy damage. The Essex-class carriers were the backbone of the U.S. Navy's combat strength
during World War II from mid-1943 on, and along with the addition of the three Midwayclass carriers just after the
war continued to be the heart of U.S. Naval strength until the supercarriers began to come into the fleet in numbers
during the 1960s and 1970s.
Overview
The preceding Yorktown-classaircraft carriers and the designers' list of trade offs and limitations forced by arms
control treaty obligations shaped the formative basis from which the Essex class was developed a design
formulation sparked into being when the Japanese and Italians repudiated the limitations proposed in the 1936
revision of the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 (as updated in October 1930 in the London Naval Treaty) in
effect providing a free pass for all five signatories to resume the interrupted naval arms race of the 1920s in early
1937.
At the time of the repudiations, both Italy and Japan had colonial ambitions intending or were already conducting
military conquests. With the demise of the treaty limitations and the growing tensions in Europe, naval planners were
free to apply both the lessons they had learned operating carriers for fifteen years and those of operating the
Yorktown class carriers to the newer design.
Designed to carry a larger air group, and unencumbered by the latest in a succession of pre-war naval treaty limits,
Essex was over sixty feet longer, nearly ten feet wider in beam, and more than a third heavier. A longer, wider flight
deck and a deck-edge elevator (which had proven successful in the one-of-a-kind USSWasp(CV-7)) facilitated
Essex-class aircraft carrier
173
more efficient aviation operations, enhancing the ship's offensive and defensive air power.
Machinery arrangement and armor protection was greatly improved from previous designs. These features, plus the
provision of more anti-aircraft guns, gave the ships much enhanced survivability. In fact, during the war, none of the
Essex-class carriers were lost and two, USSFranklin(CV-13) and USSBunker Hill(CV-17), came home under their
own power even after receiving extremely heavy damage and were successfully repaired. Some ships in the class
would serve until well after the end of the Vietnam War as the class was retired by newer build classes.
Debates raged, and continue to this day, regarding the effect of strength deck location. British designers' comments
tended to disparage the use of hangar deck armor, but some historians, such as D.K. Brown in Nelson to Vanguard,
see the American arrangement to have been superior. In the late 1930s, locating the strength deck at hangar deck
level in the proposed Essex-class ships reduced the weight located high in the ship, resulting in smaller supporting
structures and more aircraft capacity for the desired displacement. Subsequently, the larger size of the first
supercarriers necessitated a deeper hull and shifted the center of gravity and center of stability lower, enabling
moving the strength deck to the flight deck thus freeing US Naval design architects to move the armor higher and
remain within compliance of US Navy stability specifications without imperiling sea worthiness.
[2]
One of the
design studies prepared for the Essex project, "Design 9G", included an armored flight deck but reduced aircraft
capacity, and displaced 27,200 tons or about 1,200 tons more than "Design 9F", which formed the basis of the actual
Essex design;
[3]
9G became the ancestor of the 45,000-ton Midway class.
Development
After the abrogation of disarmament treaties by Japan in 1936, the U.S. took a realistic look at its naval strength.
With the Naval Expansion Act of Congress passed on 17 May 1938, an increase of 40,000tons in aircraft carriers
was authorized. This permitted the building of Hornet and Essex, which became the lead ship of her class.
1941 design plans for the Essex-class.
CV-9 was to be the prototype of the 27,000-ton (standard
displacement) aircraft carrier, considerably larger than Enterprise, yet
smaller than Saratoga (a battlecruiser converted to a carrier). The Navy
ordered the first three of the new design, CV-9, CV-10 and CV-11,
from Newport News Shipbuilding & Drydock on 3 July 1940. These
were to become known as Essex-class carriers.
[4]
Under the terms of
the Two-Ocean Navy Act, ten more of these carriers were
programmed. Eight were ordered on 9 September, CV-12 through 15
from Newport News, and CV-16 through 19 from Bethlehem Steel's Fore River Shipyard; the last two, CV-20 and
CV-21, were ordered eight days after Pearl Harbor from the Brooklyn Navy Yard and Newport News respectively.
After the US declaration of war, Congress appropriated funds for nineteen more Essexes. Ten were ordered in
August 1942 (CV-31 and 33-35 from Brooklyn, CV-32 from Newport News, CV-36 and -37 from the Philadelphia
Navy Yard, CV-38 through -40 from the Norfolk Navy Yard) and three more in June 1943 (CV-45 from
Philadelphia, -46 from Newport News and -47 from Fore River). Ironically, only two of these were completed in
time to see active World War II service. Six ships ordered in 1944 (CV-50 through -55) were canceled before
construction was begun.
The first eight hulls were originally assigned names from historic Navy ships (Essex, Bon Homme Richard, Intrepid,
Kearsarge, Franklin, Hancock, Randolph, Cabot). Lexington was originally laid down as Cabot, but was renamed
during construction after the original Lexington was lost in the Battle of the Coral Sea in May 1942. Yorktown,
originally to be named Bon Homme Richard, was renamed after the original Yorktown was lost at the Battle of
Midway on 7 June 1942. Wasp's name was changed from Oriskany after the original Wasp was sunk in September
1942 in the South Pacific near Guadalcanal, and Hornet's name was changed from Kearsarge after the original
Hornet was lost in October 1942 in the Battle of Santa Cruz Islands. The erstwhile Valley Forge was renamed
Essex-class aircraft carrier
174
Princeton after the light carrier of that name was sunk in the Battle of Leyte Gulf in October 1944. The names of the
Ticonderoga and the Hancock were swapped while they were under construction: the John Hancock life insurance
company had offered to conduct a bond drive to raise money for the Hancock if that name was used for the carrier
under construction in the companys home state of Massachusetts.
[5]
At the conclusion of the war, the six ships ordered but never laid down (CV-50 through 55) were canceled. Of the
nine still unfinished six were completed and two (Reprisal and Iwo Jima) scrapped; Oriskany was taken in hand for
modification to an improved design, completing in 1950. In summary, during World War II and until its conclusion,
the US Navy ordered 32 aircraft carriers of the Essex class, including the Ticonderoga subgroup, of which 26 were
laid down and 24 actually commissioned.
Leyte
Design
Yorktown at sea in 1943
In drawing up the preliminary design for Essex, particular attention
was directed at the size of both the flight and hangar decks. Aircraft
design had come a long way from the comparatively light planes used
in carriers during the 1930s. Flight decks now required more takeoff
space for the heavier aircraft being developed. Most of the first-line
carriers of the pre-war years were equipped with flush deck catapults,
but owing to the speed and size of these ships very little catapulting
was done except for experimental purposes.
With the advent of war, airplane weights began to go up as armor and
armament got heavier; aircrew complements also increased. By the
war's end in 1945, catapult launches would become more common
under these circumstances, with some carrier commanding officers reporting up to 40% of launches by catapult.
The hangar area design came in for many design conferences between the naval bureaus. Not only were the
supporting structures to the flight deck required to carry the increased weight of landing and parked aircraft, but they
were to have sufficient strength to support the storing of spare fuselages and parts (50% of each plane type aboard)
under the flight deck and still provide adequate working space for the men using the area below.
One innovation in Essex was a portside deck-edge elevator in addition to two inboard elevators. The deck-edge
elevator was adopted in the design after it proved successful on the Wasp.
[6]
Experiments had also been made with
hauling aircraft by crane up a ramp between the hangar and flight decks, but this method proved too slow. The
Navy's Bureau of Ships and the Chief Engineer of A.B.C. Elevator Co. designed the engine for the side elevator. It
was a standard elevator, 60 by 34ft (18 by 10m) in platform surface, which traveled vertically on the port side of the
ship. There would be no large hole in the flight deck when the elevator was in the "down" position, a critical factor if
the elevator ever became inoperable during combat operations. Its new position made it easier to continue normal
Essex-class aircraft carrier
175
operations on deck, irrespective of the position of the elevator. The elevator also increased the effective deck space
when it was in the "up" position by providing additional parking room outside the normal contours of the flight deck,
and increased the effective area on the hangar deck by the absence of elevator pits. In addition, its machinery was
less complex than the two inboard elevators, requiring about 20% fewer man-hours of maintenance.
Yorktown aft view
Intrepid, in the Philippine Sea, November 1944
Ongoing improvements to the class were made, particularly with
regards to the ventilation system, lighting systems, and the trash burner
design and implementation.
These carriers had better armor protection than their predecessors,
better facilities for handling ammunition, safer and greater fueling
capacity, and more effective damage control equipment. Yet, these
ships were also designed to limit weight and the complexity of
construction, for instance incorporating extensive use of flat and
straight metal pieces,
[7]
and of Special Treatment Steel (STS), a
nickel-chrome steel alloy that provided the same protective qualities as
Class B armor plate, but which was fully structural rather than
deadweight.
[8]
The original design for the class assumed a complement of 215 officers
and 2,171 enlisted men. However, by the end of World War II, most
crews were 50% larger than that.
[9]
The tactical employment of U.S. carriers changed as the war
progressed. In early operations, through 1942, the doctrine was to
operate singly or in pairs, joining together for the offense and
separating when on the defensethe theory being that a separation of
carriers under attack not only provided a protective screen for each, but
also dispersed the targets and divided the enemy's attack. Combat
experience in those early operations did not bear out the theory, and
new proposals for tactical deployment were the subject of much discussion.
As the new Essex- and Independence-class carriers became available, tactics changed. Experience taught the wisdom
of combined strength. Under attack, the combined anti-aircraft fire of a task group's carriers and their screen
provided a more effective umbrella of protection against marauding enemy aircraft than was possible when the
carriers separated.
When two or more of these task groups supported each other, they constituted a fast carrier task force. Lessons
learned from operating the carriers as a single group of six, as two groups of three, and three groups of two, provided
the basis for many tactics that later characterized carrier task force operations, with the evolution of the fast carrier
task force and its successful employment in future operations.
Armaments
"Sunday Punch"
The pride of the carrier, known as the "Sunday Punch",
[10]
was the offensive power of 36fighters, 36dive bombers
and 18torpedo planes. The F6F Hellcat would be the standard fighter, the SB2C-1 Helldiver the standard scout
aircraft and dive-bomber, and the TBF Avenger was designed as a torpedo plane but often used in other attack roles.
Later in the war some Essexes, such as Bunker Hill, also included F4U Corsairs in fighter-bomber squadrons (VBFs),
the precursor to modern fighter-attack squadrons (VFAs).
[11]
In the last year of the Pacific War, all of the
carrier-based combat aircraft could mount several 5-inch High Velocity Aircraft Rockets (HVARs), which greatly
Essex-class aircraft carrier
176
improved their effectiveness against ground targets.
Ordnancemen working on bombs amid F6F-3
Hellcats parked on the carrier's hangar deck, c.
OctoberDecember 1943. Other crewmen are
watching a movie in the background.
Guns, radar and radios
The defensive plan was to use radio and radar in a combined effort to
concentrate anti-aircraft fire.
The design boasted twelve 5in (127mm)/38 caliber gun turrets (4 twin
mounts located near the island on the starboard side and 4 single open
mounts located on the port side forward and port side aft), seventeen
quadruple 40mm Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft guns and 65 single 20 mm
Oerlikon close-in defense guns. With a range of ten miles and a rate of
fire of fifteen rounds per minute, the 5-inch guns fired the deadly VT
shells. The VT shells, known as proximity fuzed-shells, would
detonate when they came within 70 feet (21m) of an enemy aircraft.
The 5-inch guns could also aim into the water, creating waterspouts
which could bring down low flying aircraft such as torpedo planes. The
Bofors 40mm guns were a significant improvement over the 1.1 in/75 caliber guns mounted in the earlier Lexington
and Yorktown classes.
The Essex class also made use of advanced technological and communications equipment. All units were
commissioned with SK air-search and SC and SG surface-search radars. Several of the class received SM
fighter-direction radar. Two Mark37 fire control directors fitted with FD Mark4 tracking radar for the 5"/38 battery
were installed; the Mk4 proved inadequate at distinguishing low-level intruders from surface clutter and was quickly
replaced with the improved Mark12/Mark22 combination. 40mm AA batteries were controlled by Mark51 optical
directors with integrated gyro gun-sight lead-angle calculators. A Plan Position Indicator (PPI) display was used to
keep track of ships and enabled a multi-carrier force to maintain a high-speed formation at night or in foul weather.
The new navigational tool known as the Dead Reckoning Tracer was also implemented for navigation and tracking
of surface ships. Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) was used to identify hostile ships and aircraft, especially at night
or in adverse weather. The four-channel Very High Frequency (VHF) radio permitted channel variation in an effort
to prevent enemy interception of transmissions. It also allowed for simultaneous radio contact with other ships and
planes in the task force.
The "long-hull" Essexes
Boxer
Beginning in March 1943, one visually very significant change was
authorized for ships then in the early stages of construction. This
involved lengthening the bow above the waterline into a "clipper"
form. The increased rake and flare provided deck space for two
quadruple 40mm mounts; these units also had the flight deck slightly
shortened forward to provide better arcs of fire.
[12]
Of the Essex-class
ships laid down after 1942, only Bon Homme Richard followed the
original "short bow" design. The later ships have been variously
referred to as the "long-bow units",
[13][14]
the "long-hull group",
[15][16]
or the "Ticonderoga class".
[17]
However, the U.S. Navy never
maintained any institutional distinction between the long-hull and
short-hull members of the Essex class, and postwar refits and upgrades were applied to both groups equally. Less
immediately visible aspects of the March 1943 design modification included safer ventilation and aviation-fuel
systems, moving the Combat Information Center below the armored deck, the addition of a second flight-deck
Essex-class aircraft carrier
177
catapult, the elimination of the hangar deck catapult, and a third Mk 37 fire-control director; some of these changes
were also made to short-bow ships nearing completion or as they returned to the yards.
Modifications were made throughout the Essex building program. The number of 20mm and 40mm anti-aircraft guns
was greatly increased, new and improved radars were added, the original hangar deck catapult was removed, the
ventilation system was substantially revised, details of protection were altered, and hundreds of other large and small
changes were executed. In the meantime, earlier ships were continually modified as they returned to the yard for
repair and overhaul. For example, Intrepid, one of the first to be commissioned, by the end of the war had received
two H-4B flight deck catapults on place of her original single H-4A; three quad 40mm mounts below the island to
starboard, three more on the port side and one additional on both the starboard quarter and the stern; 21 additional
20mm mounts; SM fighter-control radar; FD Mk 4 radar replaced with Mk 12/22; and an enlarged flag bridge.
[18]
In
fact, to the skilled observer, no two ships of the class looked exactly the same.
Post-war rebuilds
The straight-deck Lake Champlain
Ticonderoga with angled flight deck.
The large numbers of new ships, coupled with their larger
Midway-class contemporaries, sustained the Navy's air power through
the rest of the 1940s, the Korean War era, and beyond. While the
spacious hangars accommodated the introduction of jets, various
modifications significantly improved the capability of fifteen of the
ships to handle the jets increased weight and speed. These
modifications included jet-blast deflectors (JBDs); mirror and then
Fresnel-lens landing light systems (a British innovation); greater
aviation fuel capacity; stronger decks, elevators, and catapults; and
ultimately an angled flight deck.
[19]
Five of the long-hulls were laid up in 194647, along with all of the
short-hulls. Eight of the last nine completed stayed on active duty to
form, with three Midways, the backbone of the post-war Navy's combat
strength. Though the Truman administration's defense economies sent
three of the active Essexes into "mothballs" in 1949, these soon came
back into commission after the Korean War began. Ultimately, nine
short-hulls and all thirteen long-hulls had active Cold War service.
Oriskany, which had been left unfinished at the end of the war, was
completed to an improved design between August 1948 and September
1950, with a much stronger (straight) flight deck and a reconfigured
island. Eight earlier ships were thoroughly rebuilt to the Oriskany
design under the SCB-27A program in the early 1950s.
[20]
Six more of
the earlier ships were rebuilt to an improved 27C design as the last stage of the SCB-27 program; these ships
received steam catapults instead of the less powerful hydraulic units. The otherwise unmodified Antietam received
an experimental 10.5 degree angled deck in 1952. An angled flight deck and enclosed hurricane bow became the
distinctive features of the SCB-125 program, which was undertaken concurrently with the last three 27C conversions
and later applied to all 27A and 27C ships except Lake Champlain. Shangri-La became the first operational United
States angled deck aircraft carrier in 1955.
Essex-class aircraft carrier
178
The Essex in heavy seas with a postWorld War
II angled deck.
Hancock
Oriskany, the first of the modernized ships but the last angled-deck
conversion, received a unique SCB-125A refit which upgraded her to
27C standard, and included steam catapults and an aluminum flight
deck.
Korean War and subsequent Cold War needs ensured twenty-two of
the twenty-four ships had extensive postWorld War II service
(Bunker Hill and Franklin had suffered heavy damage and were never
recommissioned).
[21]
All initially carried attack air groups; however by
1955 seven unconverted Essexes were operating under the
anti-submarine warfare carrier (CVS) designation established in
August 1953. As the Forrestal-class "supercarriers" entered the fleet,
the eight 27A conversions were designated CVS to replace the original
unconverted ships; the latter began to leave active service in the late
1950s. Two 27C conversions were designated CVS in 1962 (although
CVS-11 Intrepid would operate as an attack carrier off Vietnam) and
two more in 1969. The seven angle-deck 27As and one 27C received
specialized CVS modifications including bow-mounted SQS-23 sonar
under the SCB-144 program in the early 1960s. The updated units
remained active until age and the growing number of supercarriers
made them obsolete, from the late 1960s into the middle 1970s.
However, one of the very first of the type, Lexington, served until 1991
as a training ship.
Of the unmodernized Essexes, Boxer, Princeton, and Valley Forge were redesignated Landing Platform Helicopter
(LPH) amphibious assault ships for the Marine Corps, and remained in commission with their original straight decks
until about 1970. The remainder decommissioned in the late 1950s and early 1960s and were promptly reclassified
as aircraft transports (AVT), reflecting their very limited ability to operate modern aircraft safely. An unmodernised
Essex was offered to the Royal Australian Navy in 1960 as a replacement for HMAS Melbourne but the offer was
declined due to the expense of modifications required to make it operationally compatible with the RAN's primarily
British-designed fleet. All were scrapped, most in the 1970s.
Evolution of the air wing
For a typical attack carrier (CVA) configuration in 195657 aboard Bennington, the air wing consisted of one
squadron each of the following: FJ3 Furies, F2H Banshees, F9F Cougars, AD-6, AD-5N, and AD-5W Skyraiders,
AJ2 Savages, and F9F-8P photo Cougars.
[22]
By the mid-to-late 1960s, the attack air wing had evolved. Oriskany deployed with two squadrons of F-8J Crusaders,
three squadrons of A-4E Skyhawks, E-1 Tracers, EKA-3B Skywarriors, and RF-8G photo Crusaders. In 1970, the
three A-4 squadrons were replaced by two squadrons of A-7A Corsair IIs.
[23]
The F-4 Phantom II and A-6 Intruder
were considered too heavy to operate from the Essex-class.
Tasked and fitted out as an ASW carrier (CVS), the air wing of an Essex such as Bennington in the 1960s consisted
of two squadrons of S2F Trackers and one squadron of SH-34 Seabat ASW helicopters (replaced in 1964 by SH-3A
Sea Kings). Airborne early warning was first provided by modified EA-1Es; these were upgraded in 1965 to E-1Bs.
A small detachment of A-4B's or A-4C's (4 aircraft) were also embarked to provide daylight fighter protection for
the ASW aircraft.
[24]
Landing Platform Helicopter converted ships such as the USS Boxer never had an angled landing deck installed and
flew only helicopters such as the UH-34 Seahorse and CH-46 Sea Knight. Four converted Essex class ships served
Essex-class aircraft carrier
179
alongside the purpose built Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ships providing floating helicopter bases for US
Marines. The LPHs were sometimes also used as aircraft ferries for all branches of the U.S. armed forces. The
AV-8A arrived into Marine Corps inventory too late to see regular fixed wing operations return to these ships. It was
possible to launch and recover small aircraft like the OV-10 Bronco without need of catapult or arresting wires, but
this was very rarely permitted on these straight-deck ships for safety reasons and to avoid interruption of helicopter
operations.
Military contributions
One author called the Essex class "the most significant class of warships in American naval history", citing the large
number produced and "their role in making the aircraft carrier the backbone of the U.S. Navy."
[25]
Essex-class ships played a central role in the Pacific theater of World War II from 1943 through the end of the war,
beginning with raids in the central Pacific and the invasion of Tarawa in the Gilbert Islands. The ships successfully
performed a number of missions, included air superiority, attacking the Japanese fleet, supporting landings, fleet
protection, bombing the Japanese home islands, and transporting aircraft and troops. Along the way, the carriers
survived bombs, torpedoes, kamikazes, and typhoons without one ship being sunk.
Eleven of the Essex carriers participated in the Korean War.
[26]
These ships played a major role throughout the entire
war. Missions included attacks on all types of ground targets, air superiority, and antisubmarine patrols.
Thirteen of the 24 carriers originally built participated in the Vietnam War, including the prelude and follow-up.
However, their inability to support the latest aircraft constrained some of those ships to specialized roles as
helicopter carriers or antisubmarine platforms. The ships still performing an attack mission generally carried older
aircraft types than the supercarriers. Yet, the Essex class still made significant contributions to all aspects of the U.S.
war effort. In one notable event, during the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, aircraft from the Ticonderoga fired at North
Vietnamese torpedo boats that had attacked a U.S. destroyer.
[27]
The carriers also contributed between the wars, projecting U.S. power around the world and performing
antisubmarine patrols. When the Cold War heated up, the Essex carriers were often involved, including Quemoy and
the Matsu Islands, the Bay of Pigs Invasion, and the Cuban Missile Crisis.
[28]
Also, from 1957 through 1991 an
Essex-class ship served as the Navy's training carrierthe Antietam from 1957 through 1962 and the Lexington for
the remainder of the time.
[29]
The space program
Several Essex-class ships played a part in the United States' human spaceflight program, as recovery ships for
unmanned and manned spaceflights, between 1960 and 1973.
USS Valley Forge was the recovery ship for the unmanned flight of Mercury-Redstone 1A on 19 December 1960.
The first spaceflight by an American was on Mercury-Redstone 3 (Freedom 7), recovered by Lake Champlain on 5
May 1961. Randolph recovered the next flight, Mercury-Redstone 4 (Liberty Bell 7), on 21 July 1961, and she was
the primary recovery ship for Mercury-Atlas 6 (Friendship 7), the first orbital flight by an American. The next
manned flight, Mercury-Atlas 7 (Aurora 7), was picked up by Intrepid on 24 May 1962, and Kearsarge recovered
the last two Mercury spacecraft, Mercury-Atlas 8 (Sigma 7), on 3 October 1962, and Mercury-Atlas 9 (Faith 7), on
16 May 1963.
[30]
When the Mercury program's successor, Project Gemini, got underway, Essexes were again closely involved. Lake
Champlain recovered the second unmanned flight, Gemini 2, on 19 January 1965; and Intrepid recovered the first
manned flight, Gemini 3. Wasp recovered the crew of Gemini IV on 7 June, and on 29 August, Lake Champlain
picked up Gemini 5 after eight days in space. In December 1965, Wasp made history by picking up two spacecraft in
just over two days: Gemini VI-A on 16 December, and Gemini 7 on 18 December, after their orbital rendezvous test
flight. She also recovered Gemini 9A on 6 June 1966 and the final Gemini spaceflight, Gemini 12 on 15
Essex-class aircraft carrier
180
November.
[31]
The Apollo program exhibit aboard Hornet.
The successful use of the carriers as recovery ships continued into the
Apollo program. On 26 February 1966, Boxer recovered the command
module from AS-201, the first unmanned flight of a production Apollo
Command and Service Module. AS-202, another sub-orbital test flight
of the command module, was recovered in August by Hornet; the
command module from that flight is currently on display aboard
Hornet. Bennington recovered the command module of Apollo 4, the
first unmanned flight of the Saturn V launch vehicle, on 9 November
1967.
[32]
Eleven months later, Essex recovered the astronauts of Apollo 7, the
first manned mission in the Apollo program, after eleven days in orbit. Yorktown recovered the astronauts of Apollo
8, after their historic flight around the Moon in December 1968; and Princeton recovered the second crew to orbit
the Moon, aboard Apollo 10, in May 1969.
Hornet rejoined the program and recovered the astronauts from the first two moon landing missions, Apollo 11 in
July 1969 and Apollo 12 in November.
[33]
The first steps on Earth of returning astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz
Aldrin, and Mike Collins, are marked on her hangar deck, as part of her Apollo program exhibit. The three
subsequent missions utilized amphibious assault ships as support vessels; however, Ticonderoga recovered the
astronauts of the last two moon missions, Apollo 16
[34]
and Apollo 17 in April and December 1972.
[35]
In the post-Apollo era, Ticonderoga again acted as a recovery ship for the astronauts of Skylab 2, the first manned
mission to Skylab, the first U.S. orbital space station, in June 1973.
[36]
The ships today
Four Essex-class ships have been preserved, and opened to the public as museums:
Yorktown, at Patriot's Point, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina
Intrepid, in New York City
Hornet, in Alameda, California
Lexington, at Corpus Christi, Texas.
Until Midway opened at San Diego, every preserved aircraft carrier in the U.S. was an Essex.
Oriskany was scuttled in 2006 to form an artificial reef off the coast of Pensacola, Florida, and can be visited by
experienced divers.
[37]
Ships in class
Essex-class aircraft carrier
181
Hull
no. Ship Yard Ordered Keellaid Launched Commission Rebuild(s) Re-designations Decomm Fate
CV-9 Essex NNSD Feb
1940
Apr
1941
Jul 1942 Dec 1942
Jan 1951
SCB-27A,
1951
SCB-125,
1956
SCB-144,
1962
CVA-9, 1952
CVS-9, 1960
Jan 1947
Jun 1969
Scrapped
(Jun 1975)
CV-10 Yorktown
(ex-Bon Homme
Richard)
NNSD May
1940
Dec
1941
Jan 1943 Apr 1943
Jan 1953
SCB-27A,
1953
SCB-125,
1955
SCB-144,
1966
CVA-10, 1953
CVS-10, 1957
Jan 1947
Jun 1970
Museum at
Charleston,
SC (1975)
CV-11 Intrepid NNSD May
1940
Dec
1941
Apr 1943 Aug 1943
Feb 1952
Oct 1954
SCB-27C,
1954
SCB-125,
1957
SCB-144,
1965
CVA-11, 1952
CVS-11, 1961
Mar
1947
Apr
1952
Mar
1974
Museum at
New York
City (1982)
CV-12 Hornet
(ex-Kearsarge)
NNSD Sep
1940
Aug
1942
Aug 1943 Nov 1943
Mar 1951
Sep 1953
SCB-27A,
1953
SCB-125,
1956
SCB-144,
1965
CVA-12, 1953
CVS-12,1958
Jan 1947
May
1951
Jun 1970
Museum at
Alameda, CA
(1998)
CV-13 Franklin NNSD Sep
1940
Dec
1942
Oct 1943 Jan 1944 Feb 1947 Scrapped
(Aug 1966)
CV-14 Ticonderoga*
(ex-Hancock)
NNSD Sep
1940
Feb 1943 Feb 1944 May 1944
Oct 1954
SCB-27C,
1954
SCB-125,
1957
CVA-14, 1954
CVS-14, 1969
Jan 1947
Sep 1973
Scrapped
(Sep 1975)
CV-15 Randolph* NNSD Sep
1940
May
1943
Jun 1944 Oct 1944
Jul 1953
SCB-27A,
1953
SCB-125,
1956
SCB-144,
1961
CVA-15, 1953
CVS-15, 1959
Feb 1948
Feb 1969
Scrapped
(May 1975)
CV-16 Lexington
(ex-Cabot)
FRSY Sep
1940
Jul 1941 Sep 1942 Feb 1943
Aug 1955
SCB-27C/125,
1955
CVA-16,1955
CVS-16, 1962
CVT-16, 1969
AVT-16, 1978
Apr
1947
Nov
1991
Museum at
Corpus
Christi, TX
(1992)
CV-17 Bunker Hill FRSY Sep
1940
Sep 1941 Dec 1942 May 1943 Jan 1947 Scrapped
(May 1973)
CV-18 Wasp
(ex-Oriskany)
FRSY Sep
1940
Mar
1942
Aug 1943 Nov 1943
Sep 1951
SCB-27A,
1951
SCB-125,
1955
SCB-144,
1964
CVA-18, 1952
CVS-18, 1956
Feb 1947
Jul 1972
Scrapped
(May 1973)
Essex-class aircraft carrier
182
CV-19 Hancock*
(ex-Ticonderoga)
FRSY Sep
1940
Jan 1943 Jan 1944 April 1944
Feb 1954
Nov 1956
SCB-27C,
1954
SCB-125,
1956
CVA-19, 1952
CV-19, 1975
May
1947
Apr
1956
Jan 1976
Scrapped
(Sep 1976)
CV-20 Bennington BNY Dec
1941
Dec
1942
Feb 1944 Aug 1944
Nov 1952
SCB-27A,
1952
SCB-125,
1955
SCB-144,
1963
CVA-20, 1952
CVS-20, 1959
Nov
1946
Jan 1970
Scrapped (Jan
1994)
CV-21 Boxer* NNSD Dec
1941
Sep 1943 Dec 1944 Apr 1945 Amphib CVA-21, 1952
CVS-21, 1956
LPH-4, 1959
Dec
1969
Scrapped
(Feb 1971)
CV-31 Bon Homme
Richard
BNY Aug
1942
Feb 1943 Apr 1944 Nov 1944
Jan 1951
Sep 1955
SCB-27C/125,
1955
CVA-31, 1952 Jan 1947
May
1953
Jul 1971
Scrapped
(Mar 1992)
CV-32 Leyte*
(ex-Crown Point)
NNSD Aug
1942
Feb 1944 Aug 1945 Apr 1946 CVA-32, 1952
CVS-32, 1953
May
1959
Scrapped
(Mar 1970)
CV-33 Kearsarge* BNY Aug
1942
Mar
1944
May 1945 Mar 1946
Feb 1952
SCB-27A,
1952
SCB-125,
1957
SCB-144,
1962
CVA-33, 1952
CVS-33, 1958
Jun 1950
Feb 1970
Scrapped
(Feb 1974)
CV-34 Oriskany** BNY Aug
1942
May
1944
Oct 1945 Sep 1950
Mar 1959
SCB-27, 1950
SCB-125A,
1959
CVA-34, 1952
CV-34, 1975
Jan 1957
Sep 1976
Scuttled as an
artificial reef
in Gulf of
Mexico (May
2006)
CV-35 Reprisal BNY Aug
1942
July
1944
1946 Scrapped
(Nov 1949)
CV-36 Antietam* PNY Aug
1942
Mar
1943
Aug 1944 Jan 1945
Jan 1951
Experimental
angled deck,
1952
CVA-36, 1952
CVS-36, 1953
1949
May
1963
Scrapped
(Feb 1974)
CV-37 Princeton*
(ex-Valley
Forge)
PNY Aug
1942
Sep 1943 Jul 1945 Nov 1945
Aug 1950
Amphib CVA-37, 1952
CVS-37, 1954
LPH-5, 1959
Jun 1949
Jan 1970
Scrapped
(May 1971)
CV-38 Shangri-La* NNY Aug
1942
Jan 1943 Feb 1944 Sep 1944
May 1951
SCB-27C/125,
1955
CVA-38, 1952
CVS-38, 1969
Nov
1947
Jul 1971
Scrapped
(Aug 1988)
CV-39 Lake Champlain* NNY Aug
1942
Mar
1943
Nov 1944 Jun 1945
Sep 1952
SCB-27A,
1952
CVA-39, 1952
CVS-39, 1957
Feb 1947
May
1966
Scrapped
(Apr 1972)
CV-40 Tarawa* NNY Aug
1942
Mar
1944
May 1945 Nov 1945
Feb 1951
CVA-40, 1952
CVS-40, 1955
Jun 1949
May
1960
Scrapped
(Oct 1968)
CV-45 Valley Forge* PNY Jun 1943 Sep 1944 Nov 1945 Nov 1946 Amphib CVA-45, 1952
CVS-45, 1953
LPH-8, 1961
Jan 1970 Scrapped
(Oct 1971)
Essex-class aircraft carrier
183
CV-46 Iwo Jima NNSD Jun 1943 Jan 1945 Canceled
while under
construction.
Scrapped
1946
CV-47 Philippine Sea* FRSY Jun 1943 Aug
1944
Sep 1945 May 1946 CVA-47, 1952
CVS-47, 1955
Dec
1958
Scrapped
(Mar 1971)
* Long-bow units
** Completed to modified design
*** Never completed
NNSD = Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock, Newport News, Virginia
FRSY = Fore River Shipyard, Quincy, Massachusetts
BNY = New York Navy Yard, Brooklyn, New York
NNY = Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Virginia
PNY = Philadelphia Navy Yard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Hull numbers 2230 in the aircraft carrier sequence were assigned to the Independence-class light carriers (CVL);
hull numbers 4144 were assigned to the large carriers (CVB) of the Midway class.
Reprisal, laid down in July 1944 at the New York Navy Yard and launched in 1945, had her construction cancelled
due to an accident on 12 August 1945 when the ship was about half complete. She was scrapped incomplete after
tests. Iwo Jima(CV-46) was laid down at Newport News Shipbuilding yards in January 1945 but cancelled in
August 1945 and broken up on the slipway.
Six fiscal-year 1945 ships, none of which received names, were assigned to Fore River (CV-50), Brooklyn Navy
Yard (CV-51 and CV-52), Philadelphia Navy Yard (CV-53) and Norfolk Navy Yard (CV-54 and CV-55). Their
construction was canceled in March 1945.
Oriskany(CV-34) was ordered and laid down as an Essex-class vessel, was completed in 1950 to the much modified
SCB-27 design, and from commissioning until her reconstruction 195759 was listed as the lead ship of the separate
Oriskany class.
Later class assignments
Successive rebuildings and changing roles meant that the original unitary Essex class became divided by the Navy
into several classes, which went through many shifts and re-namings. According to the United States Naval Vessel
Register
[38]
the final class assignments were
CVS-10 Yorktown class (SCB-27A): Essex, Yorktown, Hornet, Randolph, Wasp, Bennington, Kearsarge, Lake
Champlain
CVS-11 Intrepid class (SCB-27C + SCB-144): Intrepid
CVA-19 Hancock class (SCB-27C): Ticonderoga, Hancock, Bon Homme Richard, Oriskany, Shangri-La
AVT-8 Franklin class (unreconstructed ships): Franklin, Bunker Hill, Leyte, Antietam, Tarawa, Philippine Sea
AVT-16 Lexington class (training carrier): Lexington
LPH-4 Boxer class (helicopter assault conversions): Boxer, Princeton, Valley Forge
Essex-class aircraft carrier
184
Notes
[1] [1] St. John 1999, p. 10.
[2] [2] Faltum 1996, p. 12.
[3] [3] Friedman, table 7-1. "Evolution of Schemes for the Essex Design, 1939-40". 9G had a 2.5 inch STS armored deck, a length on the waterline
of 830 ft and a beam of 96.3 ft compared to 820 ft by 91 ft for Design 9F.
[4] Although this classification was later dropped in the 1950s when Essex, after her SCB-27A reconstruction, joined what was then the Oriskany
class.
[5] [5] Faltum 1996, p. 28.
[6] [6] Faltum 1996, p. 6.
[7] [7] Faltum 1996, p. 29.
[8] [8] Roberts 1982, p. 11.
[9] [9] Faltum 1996, p. 39.
[10] Mark Stile and Tony Brian, "U.S. Navy Aircraft Carriers 194245: World War II-Built Ships," United Kingdom: Osprey, 2007. p. 48
[11] USS Bennington, Action Report, OPERATIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE OCCUPATION OF OKINAWA INCLUDING STRIKE AGAINST
KANOYA AIRFIELD, KYUSHU. 28 May to 10 June 1945, p.18. On June 05 1945, USS Bennington reported that her maximum hangar
capacity was 51 aircraft, 15 SB2Cs and 36 F4Us, and that 52 were carried as a deck park. At that time she carried 15 TBMs, 15 SB2Cs and the
rest were a mix of F6Fs and F4Us. She was prompted to utilize, and report on, her maximum hangar storage due to a Typhoon.
[12] [12] Sowinski 1980, p. 30.
[13] [13] Sowinski 1980, pp. 30, 97.
[14] [14] Raven 1988, pp. 42, 56.
[15] [15] Fahey 1950, p. 5.
[16] [16] Friedman 1983, p. 151.
[17] [17] St. John 2000, p. 11.
[18] [18] Roberts (1982)
[19] [19] Faltum 1996, pp. 116, 132.
[20] Cross, Richard F., III. "Essex: More than a Ship, More than a Class". United States Naval Institute Proceedings, September 1975, pp.5869.
[21] This was not in fact because they were in poor condition, but paradoxically because they were in excellent condition thanks to their having
been effectively rebuilt following battle damage; the Navy reserved them for a proposed "ultimate Essex conversion" which never came about.
[22] Air Groups Uss Bennington (http:/ / www. uss-bennington. org/ airgroups. html)
[23] History of Ship Page 3 (http:/ / www. ussoriskany. com/ id17. html)
[24] VA-93 Blue Blazers (http:/ / www. skyhawk. org/ 3e/ va93/ va93. htm). The Skyhawk Association Homepage. Accessed 10 July 2009.
[25] [25] Faltum 1996, p. 1.
[26] Faltum 1996, pp. 167174.
[27] [27] Faltum 1996, p. 141.
[28] Faltum 1996, pp. 139140.
[29] [29] Faltum 1996, pp. 134, 154, 169.
[30] This New Ocean: A History of Project Mercury (http:/ / www. hq. nasa. gov/ office/ pao/ History/ SP-4201/ toc. htm). NASA Special
Publication-4201. Loyd S. Swenson Jr., James M. Grimwood, Charles C. Alexander, 1989.
[31] On The Shoulders of Titans: A History of Project Gemini (http:/ / www. hq. nasa. gov/ office/ pao/ History/ SP-4203/ cover. htm). NASA
Special Publication-4203. Barton C. Hacker and James M. Grimwood, 1977.
[32] Chariots for Apollo: A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft (http:/ / www. hq. nasa. gov/ office/ pao/ History/ SP-4205/ contents. html).
NASA Special Publication-4205. Courtney G Brooks, James M. Grimwood, Loyd S. Swenson, 1979.
[33] Apollo 12 (http:/ / nssdc.gsfc.nasa. gov/ nmc/ spacecraftDisplay. do?id=1969-099A), NASA (NSSDC ID: 1969-099A)
[34] Apollo 16 (http:/ / nssdc.gsfc.nasa. gov/ nmc/ spacecraftDisplay. do?id=1972-031A), NASA (NSSDC ID: 1972-031A)
[35] Apollo 17 (http:/ / nssdc.gsfc.nasa. gov/ nmc/ spacecraftDisplay. do?id=1972-096A), NASA (NSSDC ID: 1972-096A)
[36] SP-4012 NASA HISTORICAL DATA BOOK: VOLUME III PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS 19691978 (http:/ / history. nasa. gov/ SP-4012/
vol3/ table2. 49.htm), Table 2-49, Skylab 2 Characteristics
[37] http:/ / www.mbtdivers. com/ Diving%20Oriskany.htm
[38] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/
Essex-class aircraft carrier
185
References
Donald, David; Daniel J. March (2001). Carrier Aviation Air Power Directory. Norwalk, CT: AIRtime
Publishing. ISBN1-880588-43-9.
Fahey, James (1950). The Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet (Sixth Edition). Washington, DC: Ships and
Aircraft. ISBN0-87021-645-7.
Faltum, Andrew (1996). The Essex Aircraft Carriers. Baltimore, MD: The Nautical and Aviation Publishing
Company of America. ISBN1-877853-26-7.
Friedman, Norman (1983). U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute
Press. ISBN0-87021-739-9.
Raven, Alan (1988). Essex-Class Carriers. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press. ISBN0-87021-021-1.
Roberts, John (1982). Anatomy of the Ship: The Aircraft Carrier Intrepid. London: Conway Maritime Press.
ISBN0-85177-251-X.
Sowinski, Lawrence (2000). "The Essex Class Carriers". Warship Volume II. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute
Press. ISBN 0-87021-976-6.
St. John, Philip (1999). USS Essex (CV/CVA/CVS-9). Nashville, TN: Turner Publishing Company. p.104.
ISBN1-56311-492-5.
St. John, Philip (2000). USS Randolph (CV/CVA/CVS-15). Nashville, TN: Turner Publishing Company.
ISBN1-56311-539-5.
This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
Midway-class aircraft carrier
186
Midway-class aircraft carrier
USS Midway before SCB-110 upgrade
Class overview
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding
New York Navy Yard
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Essexclass
Succeededby: Forrestalclass
In commission: 10 September 1945 11 April 1992
Planned: 6
Completed: 3
Active: 0
Preserved: USSMidway(CV-41)
General characteristics
Displacement: 45,000tons
Length: 968ft (295m)
Beam: 113ft (34m)
Draft: 33ft (10m)
Propulsion: Steam turbines
212,000shp
Speed: 33 knots (61km/h)
Complement: 4,104
Armament: Original armament:
18 5 in/54 caliber guns
21 quad 40 mm Bofors gun
28 20 mm Oerlikon cannon
Refit armament:
2 8-cell Sea Sparrow launchers
2 Mark 71 mod 0 Phalanx CIWS
Armor: Belt: 7.6inch
Deck: 3.5inch
Aircraft carried: Up to 130 (World War II), 4555 (1980s)
Midway-class aircraft carrier
187
Midway under way in 1983
The Midway class aircraft carrier was one of the longest-living
carrier designs in history. First commissioned in late 1945, the lead
ship of the class, USSMidway, was not decommissioned until 1992,
shortly after service in Operation Desert Storm in 1991.
[1]
History
The CVB-41 class vessels (then unnamed) were originally conceived
in 1940 as a design study to determine the effect of including an
armored flight deck on a carrier the size of the Essex class. The
resulting calculations showed that the effect would be a reduction of air
group size - the resulting ship would have an air group of 64,
[2]
compared to 72
[3][4]
for the standard Essex class fleet
carriers. The design was also heavily influenced by the wartime experience of the Royal Navy's armored carriers:
As a result of study of damage sustained by various British carriers prior to our entry into the war, two
important departures from traditional U.S. Navy carrier design were incorporated in the CVB Class, then still
under development. HMS ILLUSTRIOUS in an action off Malta on 1 January 1941 was hit by several bombs,
three of which detonated in the hangar space. Large fires swept fore and aft among parked planes thereby
demonstrating the desirability of attempting to confine the limits of such explosions and fires by structural
sectionalization of the hangar space. On the CVB Class the hangar was therefore divided into five
compartments separated by 40 and 50-pound STS division bulkheads extending from the hangar deck to the
flight deck, each fitted with a large door suitable for handling aircraft. It is hoped that this sectionalization, in
conjunction with sprinkler and fog foam systems, will effectively prevent fires from spreading throughout the
hangar spaces, as occurred on FRANKLIN on 30 October and 19 March. The damage experiences of several
British carriers, which unlike our own were fitted with armored flight decks, demonstrated the effectiveness of
such armor in shielding hangar spaces from GP bombs and vital spaces below the hangar deck from SAP
bombs. Accordingly, the CVB Class was designed with an armored flight deck consisting of 3-1/2-inch STS
from frames 46 to 175 with a hangar deck consisting of two courses of 40-pound STS between frames 36 and
192. Although none of the CVB Class carriers were completed in time to take part in war operations, the
effectiveness of armored flight decks against Kamikaze attacks was demonstrated by various carriers attached
to the British Pacific Fleet...

[5]
The concept went to finding a larger carrier that could support both deck armor and a sufficiently large air group.
Unlike the Royal Navy's aircraft carriers, for which the armored deck was part of the ship structure, the Midway class
retained their "strength deck" at the hangar deck level and the armored flight deck was part of the superstructure. The
weight-savings needed to armor the flight deck were achieved by removing the planned cruiser-caliber battery of
8-inch (203mm) guns and reducing the 5-inch antiaircraft battery from dual to single mounts. They would be the last
USN carriers to be so designed; the size of the Forrestal class supercarriers would require the strength deck to be
located at flight deck level.
The resulting carriers were very large, with the ability to accommodate more planes than any other carrier in the U.S.
fleet (3040 more aircraft than the Essex class). In their original configuration, the Midway class ships had an
airwing of almost 130 aircraft. Unfortunately, it was soon realized that the coordination of so many planes was
beyond the effective command and control ability of one ship.
While the resulting ships featured excellent protection and unprecedented airwing size, they also had several
undesirable characteristics. Internally, the ships were very cramped and crowded. Freeboard was unusually low for
such large carriers; in heavy seas, they shipped large amounts of water (only partially mitigated by the fitting of a
hurricane bow during the SCB-110/110A upgrades) and corkscrewed in a manner that hampered landing operations.
Midway-class aircraft carrier
188
In addition, in contrast with the earlier Lexington, Yorktown and Essex-classes, the beam (width) of the Midway-class
carriers meant that they could not pass through the Panama Canal.
Although they were intended to augment the US Pacific fleet during World War II, the lead ship of the class, USS
Midway (CV-41), was not commissioned until 10 September 1945 (eight days after the Surrender of Japan). None of
the class went on war cruises during the Korean War. They were mainly deployed to the Atlantic and Mediterranean.
During the 1950s, all three ships underwent the SCB-110 modernization program, which added angled decks, steam
catapults, mirror landing systems, and other modifications that allowed them to operate a new breed of large, heavy
naval jets.
All three of the Midway class made combat deployments in the Vietnam War. Coral Sea deployed to the Gulf of
Tonkin six times, Midway deployed on three occasions, and Franklin D. Roosevelt made one combat deployment
before returning to the Mediterranean.
In the late 1960s, Midway underwent an extensive modernization and reconstruction program, which proved to be
controversial and expensive and thus was not repeated on the other ships. By the 1970s, Franklin D. Roosevelt and
Coral Sea were showing their age. All three retained the F-4 Phantom II in their air wings, being too small to operate
the new F-14 Tomcat fleet defense fighter or the S-3 Viking anti-submarine jet. In 1977, Franklin D. Roosevelt was
decommissioned. On her final deployment, Roosevelt embarked AV-8 Harrier jump jets to test the concept of
including VSTOL aircraft in a carrier air wing.
Coral Sea was rescued from imminent decommissioning by the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. Reagan's
proposed 600-ship Navy gave the remaining ships a new lease on life. Coral Sea underwent extensive refits to
address the ship's poor condition. When the F/A-18 Hornet became operational in the mid-1980s, the Navy quickly
deployed them to the Midway and Coral Sea to replace the older F-4's. A 1986 refit for Midway removed her 6"
armor belt and bulged her hull to try to increase freeboard. While successful in this regard, the bulges also resulted in
a dangerously fast rolling period that prevented Midway from operating aircraft in heavy seas. The bulging was
therefore not repeated on Coral Sea.
The Reagan era reprieve could not last indefinitely. In 1990, Coral Sea, which had long since earned the nickname
"Ageless Warrior", was decommissioned. Midway had one last war in which to participate, and was one of the six
aircraft carriers deployed by the U.S. against Iraq during Operation Desert Storm.
[6]
A few months after the
campaign, the last of the class left Navy service.
Coral Sea was slowly scrapped in Baltimore as legal and environmental troubles continually delayed her fate.
Midway spent five years in the mothball fleet at Bremerton, Washington before being rescued by a museum group.
The ship is now open to the public as a museum in San Diego, California.
Ships in class
Name Builder Laid Down Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Fate
Midway Newport News Shipbuilding and
Dockyard Co., Newport News
27 October
1943
20 March
1945
10 September
1945
11 April 1992 Museum ship at
San Diego
Franklin D.
Roosevelt
(ex-Coral Sea)
New York Naval Shipyard, New
York City
1 December
1943
29 April
1945
27 October 1945 30 September
1977
Broken up at
Kearny, 1978
Coral Sea Newport News Shipbuilding and
Dockyard Co., Newport News
10 July 1944 2 April 1946 1 October 1947 26 April 1990 Broken up at
Baltimore, 2000
Midway-class aircraft carrier
189
References
[1] AR 600-8-27 p. 26 paragraph 914, p. 28 para 214
[2] Friedman, U.S. Aircraft Carriers,p.213: "Table 9-1. Evolution of Schemes for the Midway Design 1940-41". Design CV-D displaced 28000
tons and had a nominal complement of 64 aircraft.
[3] Roberts, John, The Aircraft Carrier Intrepid., p.8. London: Conway Maritime Press, 1982.
[4] Friedman, U.S. Aircraft Carriers,p.138: Friedman discusses how the proposed Essex class carriers were designed for a nominal complement
of 74 aircraft in 4 squadrons of aircraft, but these numbers were constantly revised due to changes in aircraft weight and dimensions, and the
perceived increased need for fighters which had smaller dimensions than strike aircraft.
[5] Bureau of Ships, Navy Dept CV13 Damage Report (http:/ / www. researcheratlarge. com/ Ships/ CV13/ 1946DamageReport. html)
[6] AR 600-8-27 p. 26 paragraph 914, p. 28 paragraph 214
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
190
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
USS Forrestal
Class overview
Name: Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
Builders: New York Navy Yard
Newport News Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Midwayclass
Succeededby: Kitty Hawkclass
In commission: 1 October 1955 30 September 1998
Completed: 4
Laid up: 4
General characteristics
Displacement: 60,000 tons
Length: 1,070ft (330m) 990ft (300m) waterline
Beam: 129ft 4in (39.42m) waterline
Draft: 35ft 9in (10.90m)
Propulsion: Steam turbines
280,000shp
Speed: 34 knots (63km/h)
Complement: 4,378
Armament: Original armament:
8 5 in/54 caliber Mark 42 guns
Refit armament:
3 8 cell NATO Sea Sparrow Mark 29 missile launcher launchers
3 20 mm Phalanx CIWS Mark 15 guns
Aircraft carried: Up to 90
Aviation facilities: 326 77m flight deck
The Forrestal-class aircraft carriers were a four-ship class designed and built for the United States Navy in the
1950s. It was the first class of so-called supercarriers, combining high tonnage, deck-edge elevators and an angled
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
191
deck. The first ship was commissioned in 1955, the last decommissioned in 1998.
Design
A 1952 design study.
The Forrestal class was the first completed class of "supercarriers" of
the Navy, so called because of their then-extraordinarily high tonnage
(75,000tons, 25% larger than the post-World War II-era Midway
class), full integration of the angled deck (Forrestal and Saratoga were
laid down as axial deck carriers and converted to angled deck ships
while under construction; Ranger and Independence were laid down as
angled deck ships and had various minor improvements compared to
the first two), a very large island and most importantly their extremely
strong air wing (80100 jet aircraft, compared to 6575 for the
Midway class and fewer than 50 for the Essex class). Compared to the
Midway class, the Forrestals were 100 feet (30m) longer and nearly
20 feet (6m) wider abeam, resulting in a far more stable and comfortable aircraft platform even in very rough
weather. When commissioned, the Forrestal-class ships had the roomiest hangar decks and largest flight decks of
any carrier ever built. Because of their immense size they were built to a new, deep-hulled design that incorporated
the armored flight deck
[1][2]
into the hull (previous American design practice was to design the flight deck as
superstructure). This was a very similar structural design as used on British "armored" carriers, and grew out of the
requirement for such a very large carrier, because carrying the strength deck at the flight deck level produced a
stronger and lighter hull.
[3]
The Midway-class ships sat very low in the water and were poor sea boats through their
long careers; they were very wet forward and their aviation characteristics were poor. The deeper Forrestal hull
allowed the ships more freeboard and better seakeeping. The Forrestal-class carriers, like the Midway class that
preceded it, were designed with armored flight decks.
[4][5][6][7]
1962 deck plan of the Forrestal class, showing
the port side elevator at the forward end of the
angled deck, in the path of both aircraft being
launched from the waist catapults, and aircraft
being recovered; and the arrangement of the
starboard elevators, with only one forward of the
island serving the two forward catapults.
Saratoga (top) cruising with John F. Kennedy;
note the arrangement of the elevators.
Forrestal-class ships were the first examples of supercarriers and thus
not quite a perfected design; their elevators in particular were badly
arranged for aircraft handling. The portside elevator, a relic of the
original axial-deck design, was especially poorly suited, as it was
located at the fore end of the angled deck, in the landing path as well as
the launch path of aircraft from the #3 and #4 catapults. The
subsequent Kitty Hawk class moved the portside elevator to the aft end
of the angle and reversed the position of the island and the second
starboard elevator, vastly improving aircraft handling. The
sponson-mounted guns suffered from poor range and complicated
firing arcs, and were located in very wet and thus nearly useless
positions in the bow and stern. They were removed after only a few
years and were later replaced by missiles and much later by close-in
weapon systems (CIWS). The aft guns in Forrestal lasted until the fire
in 1967, then were removed and eventually replaced by missiles in the
mid-70s.
The original design of the Forrestal-class ships would have had a very
small, retractable island; this design had numerous problems (the
mechanism to raise and lower the island was never perfected before the
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
192
angled deck was added to the design) and smoke fouling of the deck was expected to be a severe problem due to lack
of adequate venting. The redesign to an angled deck allowed a very large island, much larger than on previous
carriers, giving unprecedented flexibility and control in air operations.
All four ships have been struck from the Naval Vessel Register. One, ex-Ranger, was on donation hold as a potential
museum ship, but as of September 2012, all four have been designated for dismantling.
[8]
Ships in class
Name Builder Ordered Laid Down Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Fate Source
Forrestal Newport News
Shipbuilding and
Drydock Co., Newport
News
12 July
1951
14 July
1952
11
December
1954
1 October 1955 11 September
1993
Broken up at
Brownsville,
2014
Saratoga New York Naval
Shipyard, New York
City
23 July
1952
16
December
1952
8 October
1955
14 April 1956 20 August 1994 Broken up at
Brownsville,
2014
[9]
Ranger Newport News
Shipbuilding and
Drydock Co., Newport
News
1 February
1954
2 August
1954
29
September
1956
10 August
1957
10 July 1993 Awaiting
disposal
Independence New York Naval
Shipyard, New York
City
2 July
1954
1 July 1955 6 June 1958 10 January
1959
30 September
1998
Awaiting
disposal
Gallery
USS Forrestal (CVA-59) USS Saratoga (CVA-60) USS Ranger (CVA-61) USS Independence (CVA-62)
Forrestal (left) and Saratoga
(right) laid up awaiting disposal
at NS Newport in 2003
Forrestal-class aircraft carrier
193
References
This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
[1] USS FORRESTAL (CVA-59) (http:/ / www.virtualwall. org/ units/ forrestal. htm):"Over a dozen 1,000 and 500 pound bombs detonated
within the first few minutes of the fire, punching holes through the 3" armor plating of the flight deck."
[2] Cracknell, W.H, Cmdr USN, Warship Profile 15, USS Enterprise (CVAN 65) Nuclear Attack Carrier, p.56: "The main armor carried on
Enterprise is the heavy armored flight deck. This was to prove a significant factor in the catastrophic fire and explosions that occurred on
Enterprise's flight deck in 1969. The US Navy learned its lesson the hard way during World War II when all its carriers had only armored
hangar decks. All attack carriers built since the Midway class have had armored flight decks."
[3] Friedman, Norman, U.S. aircraft carriers: an illustrated design history, Naval Institute Press, ISBN 0-87021-739-9, P.250
[4] CV-59 FORRESTAL class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cv-59. htm):"As the first aircraft carrier designed
specifically for jet aircraft, she featured an armored flight deck."
[5] Forrestal class attack aircraft carriers (http:/ / www.hazegray. org/ navhist/ carriers/ us_super. htm#for-cl):"Armor: hangar, flight deck and
magazines protected"
[6] Forrestal Class (http:/ / www. nationalcoldwarexhibition. org/ explore/ ship. cfm?ship=Forrestal Class)
[7] USS Forrestal Memorial (CVA/CV/AVT-59) July 29, 1967 (http:/ / www. forrestalmemorial. com/ id6. html): "The explosions tore large
holes in the armored flight deck..."
[8] http:/ / www. navsea. navy.mil/ teamships/ Inactiveships/ pdf/ Inactive_Fleet_Inventory10Dec2012. pdf
[9] Navy pays 1 cent to scrap ex-carrier Saratoga (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ article/ 20140508/ NEWS04/ 305080053/
Navy-pays-1-cent-scrap-ex-carrier-Saratoga). Navy Times. May 8, 2014. Accessed May 8, 2014.
External links
http:/ / ban. org/ library/ ForrestalSubmission. pdf
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
194
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
USS Kitty Hawk
Class overview
Name: Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
Builders: New York Shipbuilding
New York Navy Yard
Newport News Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Forrestalclass
Succeededby: Enterpriseclass and Nimitzclass
Subclasses: John F. Kennedy class
In commission: 21 April 1961 31 January 2009
Completed: 4
Active: 0
Retired: USSKitty Hawk(CV-63)
USSConstellation(CV-64)
USSAmerica(CV-66)
USSJohn F. Kennedy(CV-67)
General characteristics
Displacement: 60,933tons light
81,780tons full load
Length: 1,069ft (326m) overall
990ft (300m) waterline
Beam: 130ft (40m) waterline
282ft (86m) extreme
Draft: 38ft (12m)
Installed power: 280,000 shaft horsepower
Propulsion: Westinghouse geared steam turbines, eight steam boilers, four shafts; 280,000 shp
Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h)
Range: 12,000miles (19,300 km)
Crew: 3150 - Air Wing Crew=2,480
Armament: 24 Sea Sparrows and RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles
3-4 Phalanx CIWSs
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
195
Aircraft carried: Up to 90 aircraft
The Kitty Hawk-class supercarriers of the United States Navy were an incremental improvement on the
Forrestal-class vessels. Four were built, all in the 1960s, Kitty Hawk(CV-63) (19612009), Constellation(CV-64)
(19612003), America(CV-66) (19651996) and John F. Kennedy(CV-67) (19672007). All are now
decommissioned.
Improved Forrestal carriers
The biggest differences from the Forrestals are greater length, and a different placement of elevators; two are
forward of the island, one is aft of the island and another on the portside stern. The movement of the #4 elevator
from the forward to the after end of the angle made it useful for aircraft movement, since the forward-end elevator
was useless as it was in both the landing path and in the launch path of the #3 and #4 catapults.
Three different shipyards were used to construct the ships. Kitty Hawk was built at New York Shipbuilding
Corporation, Constellation at New York Naval Shipyard, America and John F. Kennedy at Newport News
Shipbuilding. John F. Kennedy is similar to the earlier units in flightdeck arrangement and propulsion, but has
enough differences that she is often placed in her own class. Propulsion consisted of four Westinghouse geared
turbines, 280,000 shp, four shafts with eight 1,200 pounds per square inch (8,300kPa) Foster Wheeler boilers.
Construction and design differences
The first three units were constructed with a Terrier surface to air missile system. The supporting missile launchers
and AN/SPG-55 radars consumed a large amount of space, while at the same time duplicating the capabilities of the
air defence escorts, and were later removed. John F. Kennedy did not have Terrier and was built with the shorter
ranged Sea Sparrow, Basic Point Defense Missile System (BPDMS). All were eventually equipped with NATO Sea
Sparrow (NSSM) and Phalanx CIWS for self-defense.
[1]
In 2001, Kitty Hawk received two Rolling Airframe Missile
launchers replacing the forward Sea Sparrow and Phalanx CIWS equipment.
[2]
The SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare
Suite was added as part of the Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) on Kitty Hawk and Constellation.
[3]
America had several differences from the lead units of the class. Instead of two forward anchors, one on each side,
America had no starboard anchor and an additional anchor astern, a change made to accommodate the AN/SQS-23
sonar. America was the only post-World War II U.S. carrier to be built with sonar, though it was removed in the
early 1980s. She also had a narrow smokestack compared to prior units.
John F. Kennedy class
John F. Kennedy(CV-67) was originally scheduled to be the fourth Kitty Hawk-class carrier,
[4]
but because she
received so many modifications during construction, she formed her own ship class and is often listed as a
single-vessel class. Kennedy had similar design changes regarding the anchors to accommodate a sonar array, but the
sonar was never installed. There were also plans to make her nuclear powered, but since Congress would not
authorize it, Kennedy was constructed as a conventionally powered carrier. Her smokestack is also different and tilts
outboard to send stack gas away from the flight deck. The angled end of the waist is also different from the other
Kitty Hawks, bearing a closer resemblance to that of the Nimitz class. Kennedy is also 17 feet (5.2 m) shorter in
length than the other Kitty Hawk-class carriers.
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
196
Decommission
From 1987 to 1991 Kitty Hawk was overhauled for $785 million under the Service Life Extension Program (SLEP)
at Philadelphia Naval Shipyard.
[5]
From 1990 to 1992, Constellation received her $800 million service life extension
also in Philadelphia.
[6]
The program was intended to add 15 years to the life of the ships. John F. Kennedy was not
overhauled as part of SLEP. Instead, from 1993 to 1995, she received a $491 million overhaul. It was the final
project of Philadelphia Naval Shipyard prior to its closing.
[7]
America had been scheduled to be overhauled under the
service life extension program after Constellation, but she was decommissioned 9 August 1996 instead, during a
time of budget cuts after the Cold War. America was in very poor condition when she was decommissioned, and
therefore despite her historical significance was not held as a donation asset. She was expended as a live-fire target
and sunk on 14 May 2005.
Constellation was decommissioned 7August2003. John F. Kennedy was decommissioned on 23March2007. Only
Kitty Hawk remained in service as of early 2008 and was replaced by USSGeorge Washington (CVN-73) as the
forward-deployed carrier in Japan. Kitty Hawk returned to the United States after the turnover.
[8]
She was
decommissioned on 31 January 2009.
[9]
Ships in class
Name Builder Ordered Laid Down Launched Commissioned Decommissioned Fate Source
Kitty Hawk subclass
Kitty Hawk New York
Shipbuilding
Corporation, Camden,
New Jersey
1 October
1955
27
December
1956
21 May
1960
29 April 1961 31 Jan 2009 Awaiting
Disposal
[10]
Constellation New York Naval
Shipyard, New York
City
1 July 1956 14
September
1957
8 October
1960
27 October
1961
7 August 2003 Broken up at
Brownsville,
2014
[11]
America Newport News
Shipbuilding, Newport
News, Virginia
25
November
1960
9 January
1961
1 February
1964
23 January
1965
9 August 1996 Sunk as target,
14 May 2005
[12]
John F. Kennedy subclass
John F.
Kennedy
Newport News
Shipbuilding, Newport
News, Virginia
30 April
1964
22 October
1964
27 May
1967
7 September
1968
1 August 2007 On donation
hold
[13]
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
197
Gallery
John F.
Kennedy's
smokestack
tilts outboard
to send stack
gas away
from the
flight deck.
America's island in the mid
1970s, still equipped with
AN/SPG-55 radar for Terrier.
Constellation's island in the
early 1980s, note the different
stack configuration from
America and John F. Kennedy
and alternate mounting of
Terrier fire control radars
2007 bow view of Kitty Hawk.
Note the position of forward
anchors and Rolling Airframe
Missile launchers on either side
instead of CIWS and NSSM.
America showing bow anchor
which previous units did not
have.
Aerial view of
Constellation showing
flightdeck shape and
arrangement.
Stern view of the port side of
John F. Kennedy showing the
elevator and self defense
AAW equipment.
USS Independence (CV-62), left,
a Forrestal-class carrier next to
(right)
and , a Forrestal-class carrier.
Note the differences in aircraft
elevator configuration.
References
[1] Modern naval combat. David Miller, Chris Miller, pp. 11617. London; New York: Salamander Books, c1986. ISBN 0-86101-231-3.
[2] Doug Huddy. USS Kitty Hawk gets upgrade with Rolling Airframe Missile weapon system (http:/ / www. stripes. com/ 01/ jul01/ ed072501f.
html). Stars and Stripes. Wednesday, 25 July 2001.
[3] AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare (EW) system (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ weaps/ an-slq-32. htm)
[4] Navy Announces Availability of ex-John F. Kennedy for Donation (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ search/ display. asp?story_id=49825)
[5] A somber farewell to the Kitty Hawk; the job done, the carrier leaves. But clouds hang over the yard. Laurie Hollman. Philadelphia Inquirer.
Philadelphia, PA: 31 July 1991, p. B.1
[6] Revamped Aircraft Carrier Sails For 10-Day Sea Trial. Orlando Sentinel. Orlando, FL: 7 November 1992, p. A.14
[7] Shipyard's Closing Uproots 4,400 Workers: Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Scheduled To Close Sept. 15. Associated Press. The Plain Dealer.
Cleveland, Ohio: 2 May 1995, p. 12.C.
[8] United States Navy. Kitty Hawk Command FAQ (http:/ / www. kitty-hawk. navy. mil/ command/ faq. html). Accessed 12 January 2008.
[9] Fox News. Kitty Hawk decommissioning news (http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ story/ 0,2933,359065,00. html). Accessed 28 May 2008.
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CV63. htm
[11] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CV64. htm
Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
198
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CV66. htm
[13] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ CV67. htm
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Kitty Hawk class aircraft carriers.
Federation of American Scientists Kitty Hawk Class (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ cv-63.
htm)
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
For other ships of the same name, see USS Enterprise (disambiguation).
USS Enterprise underway in the Atlantic Ocean
Class overview
Name: Enterprise-class aircraft carrier
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier
Succeededby: Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier and Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
Built: 19581961
In service: 19622012
Completed: 1
Active: 0
Laid up: 1
Lost: 0
Retired: 1
Career (U.S.)
Name: USS Enterprise
Ordered: 15 November 1957
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
199
Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company
Cost: $451.3 million
Laid down: 4 February 1958
Launched: 24 September 1960
Christened: 24 September 1960
Acquired: 29 October 1961
Commissioned: 25 November 1961
In service: 12 January 1962
Out of service: 1 December 2012
Reclassified: CVN-65 from CVA(N)-65
Homeport: Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia
Motto: We are Legend;
Ready on Arrival;
The First, the Finest;
Eight Reactors, None Faster
Nickname: Big E
Status: Inactive, in commission- no longer fit for service due to inactivation process
Badge:
General characteristics
Class & type: Enterprise-class aircraft carrier
Displacement: 93,284 long tons (94,781t) Full Load
Length: 1,123ft (342m)
Beam: 132.8ft (40.5m) (waterline)
257.2ft (78.4m) (extreme)
Draft: 39ft (12m)
Propulsion: 8 Westinghouse A2W nuclear reactors
four sets Westinghouse geared steam turbines, 4 shafts
280,000shp (210MW)
Speed: 33.6kn (38.7mph; 62.2km/h)
Range: Unlimited distance; 20-25 years
Complement: 5,828 (maximum)
Ship's company: 3,000 (2,700 Sailors, 150 Chiefs, 150 Officers) Air wing: 1,800 (250 pilots, and 1,550 support
personnel)
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
200
Sensors and
processing
systems:
AN/SPS-48 3D air search radar
AN/SPS-49 2D air search radar
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32
Mark 36 SRBOC
Armament: 2 NATO Sea Sparrow launchers
2 20 mm Phalanx CIWS mounts
2 RAM launchers
Armor:
8in (20cm) aluminum belt (equivalent to 4in (10cm) rolled homogeneous steel armor), armored flight deck,
hangar, magazines and reactor
[1]
Aircraft carried: Hold up to 90
60+ (normally)
Aviation
facilities:
Flight deck: 1,123ft (342m)
Notes: The ship has 4 steam powered catapults.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65), formerly CVA(N)-65, is a retired United States Navy aircraft carrier. She was the
world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and the eighth United States naval vessel to bear the name. Like her
predecessor of World War II fame, she is nicknamed "Big E". At 1,123ft (342m), she was the longest naval vessel
in the world. Her 93,284-long-ton (94,781t) displacement ranked her as the 11th-heaviest supercarrier, after the 10
carriers of the Nimitzclass. Enterprise had a crew of some 4,600 service members.
The only ship of her class, Enterprise was the third oldest commissioned vessel in the United States Navy after the
wooden-hulled USSConstitution and USSPueblo. She was originally scheduled for decommissioning in 2014 or
2015, depending on the life of her reactors and completion of her replacement, USSGerald R. Ford, but the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 slated the ship's retirement for 2013, when she would have served
for 51 consecutive years, longer than any other U.S. aircraft carrier.
Enterprise's home port was Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia as of September 2012.
[2]
Her final deployment, the last
before her decommissioning, began on 10 March 2012 and ended 4 November 2012. She was inactivated on 1
December 2012, with her official decommissioning taking place sometime after the completion of an extensive
terminal offload program currently underway.
[3]
The name has been adopted by the future Gerald R. Ford-class
aircraft carrier USSEnterprise(CVN-80).
Enterprise is a commissioned navy ship, but is inactive.
[4]
She has undergone enough of the four-year long
inactivation process to render her unfit for further service. Inactivation removes fuel, fluids, furnishings, tools,
fittings, and oil and de-energizes the electrical system. Enterprise has already been cut open to allow the removal of
useable systems.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
201
Design
Enterprise (yellow) compared to large ships and
buildings:The Pentagon, 1,414 feet, 431mRMS Queen
Mary 2RMSQueen Mary 2, 1,132 feet, 345mUSS
Enterprise, 1,123 feet, 342mLZ 129
HindenburgHindenburg, 804 feet, 245mJapanese
battleship YamatoYamato, 863 feet, 263mEmpire State
Building, 1,454 feet, 443mKnock Nevis, ex-Seawise
Giant, 1,503 feet, 458m
Enterprise in 1967, showing the ship's
SCANFAR anntennae
Enterprise was meant to be the first of a class of six, but
construction costs ballooned and the remaining vessels were
never laid down. Because of the huge cost of her construction,
Enterprise was launched and commissioned without the
planned RIM-2 Terrier missile launchers. These were never
installed and the ship's self-defense suite instead consisted of
three shorter-range RIM-7 Sea Sparrow, Basic Point Defense
Missile System (BPDMS) launchers.
[5]
Later upgrades added
two NATO Sea Sparrow (NSSM) and three Mk 15 Phalanx
CIWS gun mounts.
[6]
One CIWS mount was later removed and
two 21-cell RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers were
added.
Enterprise is also the only aircraft carrier to house more than
two nuclear reactors, having an eight-reactor propulsion
design, with each A2W reactor taking the place of one of the
conventional boilers in earlier constructions. She is the only
carrier with four rudders, two more than other classes, and
features a more cruiser-like hull.
Enterprise also had a phased array radar system known as
SCANFAR. SCANFAR was intended to be better at tracking
multiple airborne targets than conventional rotating antenna
radars. SCANFAR consisted of two radars, the AN/SPS-32 and
the AN/SPS-33. The AN/SPS-32 was a long-range air search
and target acquisition radar developed by Hughes for the US
Navy. The AN/SPS-32 operated together with the AN/SPS-33,
which was the square array used for 3D tracking, into one
system. It was installed on only two vessels, Enterprise and the
cruiser USSLong Beach, placing a massive power drain on the
ship's electric system. The technology of the AN/SPS-32 was
based on vacuum tubes and the system required constant
repairs. The SPS-32 was a phased array radar which had a
range of 400 nautical miles against large targets, and 200
nautical miles against small, fighter-size targets. These early
phased arrays, replaced around 1980, were responsible for the distinctive square-looking island. The AN/SPS-32 and
AN/SPS-33 radars, while ahead of their time, suffered from issues relating to electrical beam steering mechanism
and were not pursued in further ship classes. While they are considered to be an early form of "phased array" radar,
they were ahead of their time and it would take the later technology of the Aegis phased array AN/SPY-1 with its
electronically controlled beam steering to make phased array radars both reliable and practical for the
USN.Wikipedia:Citation needed
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
202
History
Commissioning and trials
In 1958, Enterprise's keel was laid at Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company. On 24 September 1960,
the ship was launched, sponsored by Mrs. W. B. Franke, wife of the former Secretary of the Navy. On 25 November
1961, Enterprise was commissioned, with Captain Vincent P. de Poix, formerly of Fighting Squadron 6 on her
predecessor,
[7]
in command. On 12 January 1962, the ship made her maiden voyage conducting a three-month
shakedown cruise and a lengthy series of tests and training exercises designed to determine the full capabilities of the
nuclear powered super carrier.
1960s
On 20 February 1962, Enterprise was a tracking and measuring station for the flight of Friendship 7, the Project
Mercury space capsule in which Lieutenant Colonel John H. Glenn, Jr. made the first American orbital spaceflight.
In August, the carrier joined the 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean Sea, returning to Norfolk, Virginia in
October.Wikipedia:Citation needed
1962 Cuban missile crisis
Main article: Cuban missile crisis
In October 1962, Enterprise was dispatched to her first international crisis. Following revelations that the Soviet
Union was constructing nuclear missile launch sites on Cuba, President John F. Kennedy ordered the United States
Department of Defense to conduct a large-scale buildup. Among the preparations, the U.S. Atlantic Fleet readied
large numbers of its ships. On 22 October, President Kennedy ordered a naval and air "quarantine" (blockade) on
shipment of offensive military equipment to Cuba, and demanded the Soviets dismantle the missile sites there. Five
United States Second Fleet carriers participated in the blockade Enterprise (as part of Task Force 135),
Independence, Essex, Lake Champlain, and Randolph, backed by shore-based aircraft. By 28 October, the crisis was
averted, after the US secretly agreed to remove nuclear missiles from Italy and Turkey.
Second and third deployments
Task Force 1, the world's first nuclear-powered
task force. Enterprise, Long Beach and
Bainbridge in formation in the Mediterranean, 18
June 1964. Enterprise has Einstein's massenergy
equivalence formula E=mc spelled out on its
flight deck. Note the distinctive phased array
radars in the superstructures of Enterprise and
Long Beach.
On 19 December 1962, a Grumman E-2 Hawkeye was catapulted off
Enterprise in the first shipboard test of a nose-wheel launch bar
designed to replace the catapult bridle. Minutes later, a second launch
with a launch bar was made by a Grumman A-6A Intruder,
demonstrating one of the primary design goals of reducing launch
intervals.
In 19631964, Enterprise made her second and third deployments to
the Mediterranean. During her third deployment, the carrier was part of
Operation Sea Orbit, the world's first nuclear-powered task force with
the cruisers Long Beach and Bainbridge, together forming a convoy to
sail around the world. On 25 February 1964, a crewman of the Finnish
merchant ship Verna Paulin was injured in a fall while the ship was in
the vicinity of Souda Bay, Greece. Enterprise answered her call for
assistance. A surgeon was transferred to Verna Paulin by helicopter. In
October 1964, Enterprise returned to Newport News Shipbuilding and
Dry Dock Company for her first Refueling and Overhaul.
Vietnam deployments
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
203
In November 1965, the Big E was transferred to the Seventh Fleet, home-ported at NAS Alameda California. The
following month, on 2 December, she became the first nuclear-powered ship to engage in combat when she launched
aircraft against the Viet Cong near Bin Ha. The ship led Carrier Division Three, with Enterprise (redesignated
CVAN-65), which had Carrier Air Wing Nine aboard, Bainbridge; Barry; and Samuel B. Roberts. Enterprise
launched 125 sorties on the first day, unleashing 167 short tons (151t) of bombs and rockets on the enemy's supply
lines. On 3 December, she set a record of 165 strike sorties in a single day.Wikipedia:Citation needed
In January 1966, the carrier was continuing operations as a unit of Task Force 77 in the Gulf of Tonkin, as the flag
ship of Rear Admiral Henry L. Miller, Commander Carrier Division Three. Under the command of Captain James L.
Holloway III, she was carrying a complement of approximately 350 officers and 4,800 men. Four West coast
squadrons of Carrier Air Wing Nine, commanded by Commander FT Brown, were embarked; Fighter Squadron 92,
under Commander EA Rawsthorne, and Fighter Squadron 96, under Commander RD Norman, flying F-4B Phantom
IIs; Attack Squadron 93 under Commander AJ Monger, and Attack Squadron 94, under Commander OE Krueger,
flying A-4C Skyhawks. With these squadrons were three others based on the East Coast; Attack Squadron 36, under
Commander JE Marshall, Attack Squadron 76, under Commander J.B. Linder, flying A-4C Skyhawks; and
Reconnaissance Attack Squadron 7, under Commander K Enny, flying RA-5C Vigilantes. Rear Admiral Miller was
relieved as Commander Carrier Division Three by Rear Admiral TJ Walker on 16 February 1966. During the change
of command ceremony on the flight deck, Rear Admiral Miller praised the ship's performance in his farewell
remarks, and presented air medals to more than 100 pilots and flight officers.
The ship tied up at Leyte Pier, Subic Bay, on the evening of 8 December 1966. Loading of supplies for the first line
period was started immediately. Rear Admiral Walter L Curtis, Jr, Commander Carrier Division Nine, broke his flag
aboard. In company with Manley, Gridley and Bainbridge, Enterprise sailed for Yankee Station on 15 December,
and took up her position there three days later.
When Enterprise departed the Gulf of Tonkin on 20 June 1967, her pilots had flown more than 13,400 battle
missions during 132 combat days of operations.(Enterprise Command History 1967, 29) As Vice Admiral Hyland
stated in his congratulatory statement, "the entire Air Wing Nine has earned a resounding 'Well Done'." The carrier
had steamed 67,630 miles in operations with the Seventh Fleet. She arrived in Subic Bay 22 June and departed the
25th for return to Alameda 6 July 1967.
Sailors aboard Enterprise battle a massive
ordnance fire triggered by a Zuni rocket. 14
January 1969
At Alameda, Enterprise began an overhaul. Captain Kent L. Lee
relieved Captain James L. Holloway as commanding officer in
ceremonies on 11 July 1967. Shipyard work completed, Enterprise
steamed south from San Francisco Bay to San Diego to reembark
Carrier Air Wing Nine and get underway for refresher training off the
California coast.
In January 1968, the capture of Pueblo by a North Korean patrol boat
led to a diplomatic crisis. Enterprise was ordered to operate near South
Korean waters for almost a month.
During the morning of 14 January 1969, while being escorted by the
destroyers Benjamin Stoddert and Rogers, a MK-32 Zuni rocket loaded
on a parked F-4 Phantom exploded due to ordnance cook off after
being overheated by an aircraft start unit. The explosion set off fires and additional explosions across the flight deck.
The fires were brought under control relatively quickly (when compared with previous carrier flight deck fires), but
27 hands were lost and an additional 314 sailors were injured. The fire destroyed 15 aircraft, and the resulting
damage forced Enterprise to put in for repairs at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, primarily to repair the flight deck's
armored plating. On 1 March 1969, repairs to the ship were completed at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii and the ship
proceeded on her scheduled 'WestPac' deployment to Vietnam and the Tonkin Gulf. These destinations would be
delayed by events in the eastern Sea of Japan.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
204
View of Enterprise's stern during the fire, January
1969
On 14 April 1969, tensions with North Korea flared again as a North
Korean aircraft shot down a Lockheed EC-121 Warning Star that was
on a reconnaissance patrol over the eastern Sea of Japan from its base
at Atsugi, Japan. The entire 31-man crew was killed. The US
responded by activating Task Force 71 (TF 71) to protect future such
flights over those international waters. Initially, the Task Force was to
comprise Enterprise, Ticonderoga, Ranger, and Hornet with a screen
of cruisers and destroyers. Enterprise arrived on station with TF 71 in
late April after completion of repairs. The ships for TF 71 came mostly
from Southeast Asia duty. This deployment became one of the largest
shows of force in the area since the Korean War.Wikipedia:Citation
needed
In all, Enterprise made six combat deployments to Southeast Asia from 1965 to 1975.
1970s
In 19691970, Enterprise returned to Newport News Shipbuilding and went through an overhaul and her second
refitting. In January 1971, she completed sea trials with newly designed nuclear reactor cores that contained enough
energy for 10 years. Enterprise then left for Vietnam, again to provide air support for American and South
Vietnamese units.
Southeast Asia
In Vietnam, Enterprise, Oriskany and Midway launched a total of 2,001 strike sorties by 30 July 1971. Strike
operations in July were disrupted when the carriers on station evaded three typhoons: Harriet, Kim and Jean. A slight
increase in South Vietnam strike sorties occurred during the month. These were mainly visual strikes against enemy
troop positions and in support of U.S. helicopter operations. From AugustNovember 1971, Enterprise was in
operations on Yankee Station.
In December 1971 during the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971, Enterprise was deployed to the Bay of Bengal as
a show of strength against India's naval blockade by INS Vikrant. India tactically used INS Vikrant and Indian
Airbase at Andaman & Nikobar Islands to deter USS Enterprise. Later a Soviet Navy submarine was also trailing the
US task force. A confrontation was averted when the Americans moved towards South East Asia, away from the
Indian Ocean.
In October 1972, the U.S. ended tactical air sorties into North Vietnam above the 20th parallel and brought
Linebacker I operations to a close, a gesture designed to promote peace negotiations being held in Paris. Enterprise
and the other carriers had flown a total of 23,652 tactical air attack sorties into North Vietnam from MayOctober
and U.S. tactical air sorties during Linebacker I operations helped to stem the flow of supplies into North Vietnam,
thereby limiting the operating capabilities of the North Vietnamese Army.Wikipedia:Citation needed
From October to December, Enterprise alternated with other carriers on Yankee Station during the bombing halt and
remained on station. As a result of the bombing halt above the 20th parallel in North Vietnam, no MiG kills or U.S.
aircraft losses were recorded during this time.Wikipedia:Citation needed
On 18 December 1972, the U.S. resumed bombing campaigns above the 20th parallel under the name Linebacker II.
During Linebacker II operations, Enterprise and other carriers on station reseeded the mine fields in Haiphong
harbor and conducted concentrated strikes against surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery sites, enemy army
barracks, petroleum storage areas, Haiphong naval and shipyard areas, and railroad and truck stations. Navy tactical
air attack sorties under Linebacker II were centered in the coastal areas around Hanoi and Haiphong. There were 705
Navy sorties in this area during Linebacker II. Between 18 and 22 December, the Navy conducted 119 Linebacker II
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
205
strikes in North Vietnam, with the main limiting factor on airstrikes being bad weather.
In December 1972, the North Vietnamese returned to the peace table and Linebacker II ended. In January 1973, the
Vietnam cease fire was announced and American carriers ceased all combat sorties into North and South Vietnam.
From 28 January 1973, aircraft from Enterprise and Ranger flew 81 combat sorties against lines-of-communication
targets in Laos. The corridor for overflights was between Hu and Da Nang in South Vietnam. These combat support
sorties were flown in support of the Laotian government, which had requested this assistance. Laos had no
relationship with the cease-fire in Vietnam.
Post-Vietnam
After the cease-fire in Vietnam in 1973, Enterprise proceeded to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton,
Washington, where the carrier was altered and refitted to support the Navy's newest fighter aircraft the Grumman
F-14 Tomcat. Two of four jet blast deflectors were enlarged to accommodate the Tomcat. The No. 4 propulsion shaft
was replaced; it had been bent when its screw became fouled in a discarded arresting gear cable.
In the 1970s, Enterprise was refitted to handle Grumman
F-14 Tomcats, which operated from the ship from 1974
to 2001.
On 18 March 1974, the first operational Tomcats of VF-1
Wolfpack and VF-2 Bounty Hunters made their maiden takeoffs
and landings from the carrier. In September 1974, Enterprise
became the first carrier to deploy with the new fighter plane
when she made her seventh western Pacific (WESTPAC)
deployment.
In February 1975, Typhoon Gervaise struck the island nation of
Mauritius, and Enterprise was ordered to provide disaster relief.
Arriving at Port Louis, carrier personnel spent more than 10,000
man-hours rendering such assistance as restoring water, power
and telephone systems, clearing roads and debris, and providing
helicopter, medical, food and drinkable water support to the
stricken area.
Operation Frequent Wind
In April 1975, Enterprise, Midway, Coral Sea, Hancock, and
Okinawa were deployed to waters off Vietnam for possible
evacuation contingencies as North Vietnam, in violation of the
Paris Peace Accords, launched a conventional invasion of South
Vietnam. On 29 April, Operation Frequent Wind was carried out
by U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps helicopters from the 7th
Fleet. The Operation involved the evacuation of American
citizens and "at-risk' Vietnamese from Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam under heavy attack from the invading
forces of North Vietnam.
President Gerald Ford ordered helicopter evacuation when PAVN shelling forced the cessation of fixed-wing
evacuation from Tan Son Nhut Airport. With fighter cover provided by carrier aircraft, the helicopters landed at the
US Embassy, Saigon and the DAO Compound to pick up evacuees. The last helicopter lifted off the roof of the US
Embassy at 07:53 on 30 April 1975 carrying the last 11 Marine Security Guards. During Operation Frequent Wind,
aircraft from Enterprise flew 95 sorties.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
206
Eighth and ninth deployments
In July 1976, Enterprise began her eighth Western Pacific deployment.
In February 1977, Idi Amin, the President of Uganda, made derogatory remarks against the United States in public
and Americans in Uganda were taken hostage. This was several months after the Israeli raid at Entebbe airport.
Enterprise and her escort ships, having just left Mombasa after a port call, were directed to remain in the area and
operated off the east African coast for about one week. At that point, the ships were scheduled to transit home after a
seven-month deployment. The ship's Marine detachment and air wing prepared for a possible mission to rescue and
evacuate the Americans, but Amin eventually released all the hostages. The ships then steamed across the Indian
Ocean at high speed to make a previously scheduled final port call at NAS Cubi Point in the Philippines before
returning to NAS Alameda.
In 1978, Enterprise underwent her ninth Western Pacific deployment, including port calls in Hong Kong, Perth,
Australia, and Singapore. In January 1979, the carrier sailed into Puget Sound Naval Shipyard for a comprehensive
36-month overhaul. This overhaul modified the ship's superstructureremoving the SCANFAR radars and the
unique inverted cone-shaped top section, which was three stories high. During the lengthy overhaul, Navy and
shipyard personnel referred to Enterprise as Building 65.
1980s
In 1982, the carrier made her 10th WESTPAC deployment. In April 1983, Enterprise ran aground on a sandbar in
San Francisco Bay while returning from deployment and remained stuck there for several hours. Coincidentally,
George Takei, who played Mr. Sulu, helmsman of the fictional starship Enterprise, was aboard at the time as a
Distinguished Visitor of the Navy. Even though groundings and collisions are usually career-enders for U.S. warship
captains, the captain at the time, Robert J. Kelly, who had already been selected for promotion to commodore,
eventually became a four-star admiral and commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.
In 1984, the Enterprise began training for her 11th WESTPAC deployment. Late at night on 2 November 1985 with
Captain Robert Leuschner on the bridge, she struck Bishop Rock on the Cortes Bank during flight exercises,
damaging the outer hull with a gash more than 100 feet in length and knocking out of one propeller a chip whose
size was illustrated with a photograph of a Navy diver stretched out and reclining inside the notch. She took on water
and the ensuing list to port reached more than 20 degrees. Although there were no fatalities and miraculously few
injuries, the incident stands out as particularly embarrassing for the US Navy due to the breathtaking recklessness
demonstrated by one of its senior commanding officers. While driving a nuclear aircraft carrier with 6,500 sailor's
lives at risk and planes in the air around it he ignored ample, credible, warning that he was about to drive over a rock
which he knew was nearby. Well before the collision personnel operating on the side of the carrier began delivering
repeated strident warnings of lights on the water and imminent collision danger. At that time the Enterprise was
operating in the immediate vicinity of a shallow sea mount marked with lights. Those warnings were ignored, with
the expected result. After a several day delay to deploy divers and otherwise assess the damage, decisions were made
to save what was left of the Captains career and avoid a decidedly less than macho climb down for the Navy. Thus
the ship continued operations, exacerbating the damage for several weeks until completion of the peace time
pre-deployment training. She then proceeded to dry dock for in excess of $17 million of structural repairs. In the
days immediately after the collision hand drawn pictures titled Leuschners Landing were surreptitiously posted
around the ship, lampooning it as perched atop the sea mount. They were quickly snatched down lest they bring
embarrassment to the "chain of command".
In 1986, the carrier made her 12th WESTPAC deployment, leaving on 15 January 1986. She led Battle Group
FOXTROT, including Truxtun, Arkansas, O'Brien, Reasoner, Lewis B. Puller, McClusky, and David R. Ray. The
Battle Group sailed directly for the Indian Ocean, with stops in Hawaii, Naval Station Subic Bay, and Singapore. On
28 April 1986, Enterprise became the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to transit the Suez Canal. She went from
the Red Sea to the Mediterranean to relieve Coral Sea, on station with America off the coast of Libya. Enterprise
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
207
entered the Mediterranean to support "Operation El Dorado Canyon", the US bombing of Libya. It was the ship's
first visit to the Mediterranean in more than 22 years. During the deployment, Rear Admiral J.T. Howe was relieved
as Commander Cruiser-Destroyer Group 3 by Rear Admiral Paul David Miller.
In February 1988, Enterprise underwent her 13th deployment and was assigned to Operation Earnest Will, escorting
reflagged Kuwaiti oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. On 14 April, another Earnest Will ship, Samuel B. Roberts, struck
an Iranian mine in international waters. In response, the U.S. launched Operation Praying Mantis against Iranian
targets, starting with two Iranian oil platforms that were being used as support bases for Iranian attacks on merchant
shipping. Aircraft from Enterprise's CVW-11 bombed two Iranian frigates, helping to sink one and damaged the
other, and provided other air support for the strike.
In September 1989, Enterprise left Alameda and began her 14th overseas deployment, an around-the-world cruise
that would end at the ship's new homeport of Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. In early December 1989, Enterprise
and Midway participated in Operation Classic Resolve, President George H. W. Bush's response to Philippine
President Corazon Aquino's request for air support during the rebel coup attempt. Enterprise remained on station
conducting flight operations in the waters outside Manila Bay until the situation subsided.
1990s
In April 1990, Enterprise completed her around-the-world deployment, arriving in Norfolk, Virginia, after having
steamed more than 43,000mi (69,000km) (nautical). In October, the carrier moved to Newport News Shipbuilding
for refueling and the Navy's largest complex overhaul refit ever attempted. On 27 September 1994, Enterprise
returned to sea for sea trials, during which she performed an extended full power run as fast as when she was new.
On 28 June 1996, Enterprise began her 15th overseas deployment. The carrier enforced no-fly zones in Bosnia as
part of Operation Joint Endeavor and over Iraq as part of Operation Southern Watch. The deployment ended in
December 1996, which also marked the end of active service for the Grumman A-6 Intruder from the Navy. In
February 1997, Enterprise entered Newport News Shipbuilding for an extended selective restrictive availability
lasting four-and-a-half months.
Enterprise patrols the Persian Gulf in support of
Operation Desert Fox
In November 1998, following workups, Enterprise departed on her
16th overseas deployment, with CVW-3 embarked. On the night of 8
November, shortly after the start of the deployment, a Northrop
Grumman EA-6B Prowler crashed into a Lockheed S-3 Viking on the
carrier's flight deck. The mishap occurred as the EA-6B was landing
during night carrier qualifications, striking the folded wings of the S-3,
which had not yet cleared the landing area of the flight deck. The four
crew of the EA-6B perished when the aircraft hit the water, but the two
crew members of the S-3 ejected. A fire broke out on the flight deck,
but was quickly extinguished by the flight deck crew. Three of the four
members of the Prowler crew were lost at sea, and the remains of the
fourth were recovered shortly after the crash. The crew of the Viking were rushed to the Naval Medical Center
Portsmouth, Virginia. There were no other significant injuries. An exhaustive search for three missing EA-6B
Prowler crew members was suspended after nearly 24 hours.
On 23 November 1998, Enterprise relieved Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Persian Gulf. During a port call in Dubai,
the carrier hosted former President George H. W. Bush and a live concert by Grammy Award-winning rock group
Hootie & the Blowfish. In December 1998, Enterprise battlegroup spearheaded Operation Desert Fox, destroying
Iraqi military targets with more than 300 Tomahawk land attack missiles and 691,000lb (346 short tons; 313t) of
ordnance. The 70-hour assault was carried out by Enterprise, Gettysburg, Stout, Nicholson and Miami.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
208
Shortly after the Raak massacre and failure of Yugoslavian peace talks in Rambouillet, France, Enterprise quickly
left a port visit in Cannes, France to return to the Adriatic.
In early March 1999, Enterprise returned to the Persian Gulf to relieve Carl Vinson in support of Operation Southern
Watch, returning to Norfolk in May 1999.
During the 19981999 deployment, Enterprise steamed more than 50,000nmi (93,000km; 58,000mi) and spent
151 days underway. Enterprise Battle Group was the first to deploy with IT-21, which allowed unprecedented
internal and external communication capabilities, including Internet, email, and television.
2000s
Enterprise, the world's first nuclear-powered
carrier (left) with what was then the newest:
French carrier Charles de Gaulle, 16 May 2001
On 25 April 2001, Enterprise began her 17th overseas deployment
with CVW-8. From 1828 June, the carrier and four escorts
participated in an exercise with the Royal Navy in a joint and
combined warfare training exercise in the North Sea, near the Hebrides
and in Scotland.
Enterprise was beginning her voyage home from the Persian Gulf
when the September 11 attacks were carried out. Without orders, the
carrier returned to the waters off Southwest Asia near the Persian Gulf,
outrunning her escorts.Wikipedia:Citation needed In October 2001, the
United States launched air attacks against Al-Qaeda training camps and
Taliban military installations in Afghanistan. The actions were
designed to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a base for terrorist operations and to attack the military capability of the
Taliban regime. Over three weeks, aircraft from Enterprise flew nearly 700 missions and dropped over 800,000lb
(400 short tons; 360t) of ordnance over Afghanistan. On 10 November, the carrier arrived at her home port of
Norfolk, Virginia, 16 days later than originally planned. During her last day at sea, the ship hosted a live two-hour
broadcast of ABC's Good Morning America. Garth Brooks performed a concert with Jewel from Enterprise on 21
November while she was docked in Norfolk, Virginia. The concert was carried live on CBS. On Pearl Harbor Day
(December 7, 2001), President George W. Bush addressed the sailors of Enterprise from its flight deck.
In January 2002, Enterprise entered the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, Virginia for a scheduled one-year
Extended Dry Docking Selected Restricted Availability.
Iraq War
Operation Iraqi Freedom
Members assigned to USS Enterprise Damage
Control Team test their fire-fighting agent prior
to entering the simulator round of the Damage
Control Olympics during Fleet Week 2004.
From September 2003 to February 2004, the ship deployed to relieve
the four carriers that were on station during the invasion of Iraq.
Enterprise's role was to provide continued air support for Operation
Iraqi Freedom. This also was the last deployment for the F-14 Tomcat.
The fully repaired Cole was a member of her escort group at this time.
A USO tour was held aboard while at sea, with WWE superstar Kurt
Angle, NASCAR racer Mike Wallace, and comedian Robin Williams
giving talks and performances. The ship made several port-calls to
Jebel Ali, a stop in Bahrain (during which actor Ben Affleck visited the
ship), and Naples, Italy and Cartegna, Spain on the way home. Admiral
James Stavridis commanded the battle group at this time with Captain
Eric Neidlinger as Enterprise's commanding officer.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
209
In April 2004, Enterprise participated in the Fleet Week celebration in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Enterprise's
Damage Control team won the Damage Control Olympics at that event, setting several records in the process. In
June and July 2004, the ship participated in Summer Surge 2004 and several multinational exercises. She
participated in photo ops of a multinational battle group and was anchored at Portsmouth, England on 4 July.
USS Enterprise (CVN 65) Sailors of the Year
appeared on the set of the Paramount Television
series Enterprise to present the cast and crew
with an American flag in 2003. The flag was
flown in their honor as gratitude for the support
the cast, and crew of the TV series have given the
Sailors of the carrier.
2005 saw the ship in for another routine shipyard overhaul at Newport
News Shipyard in Newport News, Virginia. Departing the dock after
this yard period, Enterprise ran through a sand bar causing all eight
reactors to shutdown, leaving the ship adrift on emergency power for
nearly three hours before she was tugged back to her pier at Norfolk
Naval Base. It took approximately three days for the ship's nuclear
machinists to clear her condensers of river mud.
In May 2006, Enterprise departed for a six-month deployment,
operating in the 6th, 5th and 7th Fleet areas in a world-tour, supporting
Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom, and visiting ports in Dubai,
Hong Kong, and crossing the line. She returned to Norfolk 18
November 2006.
On 19 December 2007, the carrier returned home after a six-month
deployment in the Persian Gulf.
In April 2008, Enterprise entered the Northrop-Grumman Newport
News shipyard for a scheduled 18-month Extended Docking Selected Restricted Availability, with a projected
completion date of September 2009. As maintenance was performed, costs continued to rise above projections and
the completion date repeatedly slid. Enterprise, the oldest active combat vessel in the Navy, was scheduled to be
decommissioned as late as 2014. On 6 April 2009, Admiral Gary Roughead, Chief of Naval Operations, stated that
he was seeking a congressional dispensation to speed up the process to decommission Enterprise. Under this new
timetable, the ship would complete one final deployment before being decommissioned in late 2012 or early 2013.
This would temporarily reduce the U.S. Navy to having only ten active aircraft carriers through the launch of the
Gerald R. Ford in 2015. In October 2009, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees agreed with the
recommendation, approving the decommissioning of Enterprise in 2013 after 51 years of service.
2010s
In April 2010, the Navy announced that the cost of refurbishing the carrier had risen to $655 million and was
scheduled to be completed the same month.
[8]
On 19 April 2010, Enterprise left the Northrop Grumman shipyard to
conduct sea trials in preparation for return to the fleet. The total cost of refurbishing the carrier was $662 million,
which was 46% over budget. Also, it took eight months longer than scheduled. The Navy said it planned to use the
carrier for two six-month deployments before her scheduled 2013 decommissioning date.
[9]
On 1 January 2011, the Virginian-Pilot leaked highlights from the final video of a set entitled "XO Movie Night" that
was filmed on Enterprise and aired via closed circuit television on select Saturday evenings. The videos, which were
not meant for release outside the command, were produced by Captain Owen Honors when he was executive officer
(XO) of the ship in the 20067 timeframe and included profanity, anti-gay slurs, and sexually suggestive scenes.
Captain Honors received public support from Navy personnel, but on 4 January 2011, Admiral John C. Harvey, Jr.,
the commander of the United States Fleet Forces Command in Norfolk removed Honors for demonstrating poor
judgment. Captain Dee Mewbourne was appointed as replacement commander. Forty officers and enlisted sailors,
including six flag officers, were later disciplined to varying extents over the incident.
[10]
The carrier and her strike group deployed on 13 January 2011. Accompanying the carrier on the cruise to the Persian
Gulf and Mediterranean were Carrier Air Wing One, guided missile cruiser Leyte Gulf, and guided missile destroyers
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
210
Barry, Bulkeley, and Mason.
[11]
In February 2011, Enterprise was involved in an incident with Somali pirates, an
event that ended in the deaths of four American citizens and two pirates.
The carrier returned to Norfolk on 15 July 2011. During its deployment, it had participated in operations that
captured 75 Somali pirates and its strike group made missile strikes against the Libyan government.
[12]
On 9 April 2012, the Navy announced that Enterprise and her group, Carrier Strike Group Twelve, would be
assigned to join Abraham Lincoln in the Persian Gulf. The mission was described as routine, not a response to a
specific threat. Upon completion of this mission in fall 2012, Enterprise was scheduled to be deactivated.
In October 2012, Enterprise transited the Suez Canal for the final time. She paid her last foreign port call when she
visited Naples, Italy, between 1621 October, which had been the Big E's first foreign port-of-call fifty years earlier.
On 4 November 2012, Enterprise returned to her homeport at Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia, for the last time.
While on her last journey, the carrier cruised nearly 81,000 miles in a 238-day deployment to the Persian Gulf and
her aircraft flew more than 2,000 sorties in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
Decommissioning
Enterprise was inactivated on 1 December 2012 at Norfolk Naval Station, Virginia. The deactivation of Enterprise
will result in a one-time increase of approximately $857.3 million in depot maintenance costs for the U.S. Navy's
operation and maintenance budget for Fiscal Year 2013.
Enterprise will be the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to be decommissioned. Naval enthusiasts have requested
that Enterprise be converted into a museum. While the costs of doing so regarding her nuclear reactors has yet to be
calculated by the United States Department of Defense, by 2012 they had been deemed too expensive to make such
an effort practical. A petition had also been set up for the next carrier (CVN-80) to be named as the ninth USS
Enterprise. At her inactivation ceremony, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced in his taped message that the
next Ford Class Carrier, CVN-80 would indeed be named "Enterprise".
Speaking at the ceremony was Chaplain John Owen, CAPT William C. Hamilton, Jr. (CO), VADM David H. Buss
(Commander, Naval Air Force Pacific), ADM John Richardson (Director, Naval Reactors), Matt Mulherin
(President, Newport News Shipbuilding), ADM Jonathan W. Greenert (Chief of Naval Operations), a video speech
from Ray Mabus, and the M.C. was the ship's Executive Officer. SECNAV had to deliver his speech via taped video
as he was in China at the time. VIPs present for the ceremony included several former Commanding Officers, a
granddaughter of the ship's sponsor, and a former A-6 pilot who had been captured in North Vietnam returning to the
ship for the first time that day since he launched. He received a standing ovation at his introduction. Actor William
Shatner was scheduled to appear but canceled. During the ceremony, the representative of the ship's sponsor received
a flag flown from the ship during its last underway and a piece of wooden railing leading to the CO's inport cabin.
Also the CNO was presented with a time capsule produced by ship's crew with artifacts and pieces of the ship.
Enterprise crew and visitors were encouraged to add the items or messages the week before inactivation. While
presenting the capsule, Commanding Officer William C. "Boomer" Hamilton informed the CNO that the only
stipulation would be that the capsule could only be opened by the crew of the next ship to be named Enterprise.
When it was announced shortly after that CVN-80 would be the 9th Navy vessel to carry the name "Enterprise", the
entire crowd cheered and gave a standing ovation.
Newport News Shipbuilding will deactivate and de-fuel the ship, which will then be formally decommissioned once
all nuclear fuel has been removed. The process is scheduled to begin in mid-2013 and be completed in 2015. Once
the Navy dismantles and recycles the ship's reactors, there will be very little left to turn into a museum; virtually
everything two decks below the hangar bay would have to be cut apart. What remains of Enterprise following 2015
is currently scheduled to be taken to Washington state for scrapping. It remains possible the ship's island could be
removed and used as a memorial. As of June 2013[13], the ship has had all antennas, radars (including the
main-mast on top of the island), weapons launchers, anchors, and other miscellaneous items removed from her
exterior. Additionally, the inside of the ship has been removed of much gear that can be reused on other ships, and
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
211
all fluids systems drained. She has been towed to Newport News Shipyard for continued dismantling.
On 8 February 2013, the United States Department of Defense announced that a number of nuclear projects would
have to be postponed until the upcoming budget sequestration issue was resolved. These include the planned
de-fuelling of Enterprise as well as mid-life overhauls (including nuclear refuelling) for two Nimitz class ships.
[14]
Overhauls
April 1962 to June 1962 - Post Shakedown Availability
November 1964 to July 1965 - Refueling and Complex Overhaul - mast raised, second yardarm added.
June 1966 to September 1966 - Overhaul - waste catapult bridal catcher removed; 2 Mk-25 BPDM added.
July 1967 to September 1967 - Limited Availability
July 1968 to September 1968 - Overhaul
January 1969 to March 1969 - Repairs - repairs to explosion and fire damage.
August 1969 to January 1971 - Refueling and Complex Overhaul
March 1972 to May 1972 - Selected Restricted Availability
July 1973 to February 1974 - Selected Restricted Availability
July 1975 to November 1975 - Selected Restricted Availability
May 1977 to July 1977 - Selected Restricted Availability
January 1979 to February 1982 - Complex Overhaul - mast replaced; ECM dome removed; SPS-32/33 arrays
replaced with SPS-48/49; 3 CIWS added; forward port sponson added; forward starboard sponson with Mk-29
added; aft port BPDM replaced with Mk-29; aft starboard BPDM removed.
May 1983 to September 1983 - Selected Restricted Availability
November 1985 to January 1986 - Repairs - hull/keel/propeller repairs from collision with Cortes Bank, Channel
Islands, CA.
September 1986 to March 1987 - Selected Restricted Availability
October 1988 to April 1989 - Selected Restricted Availability
October 1990 to September 1994 - Refueling and Complex Overhaul - aft boarding dock added.
February 1997 to August 1997 - Selected Restricted Availability
June 1999 to December 1999 - Selected Restricted Availability
January 2002 to May 2003 - Selected Restricted Availability
September 2004 to October 2005 - Selected Restricted Availability - RAM replaces CIWS at forward port
sponson; RAM added to aft starboard sponson.
May 2006 to November 2006 - Selected Restricted Availability
April 2008 to April 2010 - Selected Restricted Availability
List of Commanding officers
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
212
Commanding Officers of the USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
Order Name Eventual Flag Rank Picture Assumed Command Relieved
1 Vincent Paul DePoix VADM 25 November 1961 20 July 1963
2 Frederick Hayes ("Mike") Michaelis ADM 20 July 1963 17 July 1965
3 James Lemuel Holloway III ADM 17 July 1965 11 July 1967
4 Kent Liston Lee VADM 11 July 1967 8 July 1969
5 Forrest Silas Petersen VADM 8 July 1969 3 December 1971
6 Ernest Eugene ("Gene") Tissot, Jr. RADM 3 December 1971 9 April 1974
7 Carol Castleman Smith, Jr. VADM 9 April 1974 10 December 1976
8 James Willis Austin RADM 10 December 1976 23 February 1980
9 Robert Joseph ("Barney") Kelly ADM 23 February 1980 17 June 1983
10 Robert Lee Leuschner, Jr. RADM 17 June 1983 27 January 1986
11 Robert Johnson Spane VADM 27 January 1986 28 October 1988
12 Harry Taylor Rittenour RADM 28 October 1988 7 August 1991
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
213
13 Daniel Clark Roper 7 August 1991 27 August 1993
14 Richard Joseph Naughton VADM 27 August 1993 2 February 1996
15 Michael Dennis Malone VADM 2 February 1996 10 November 1997
16 Evan Marthy ("Marty") Chanik VADM 10 November 1997 10 March 2000
17 James Alexander ("Sandy") Winnefeld, Jr. ADM 10 March 2000 15 February 2002
18 Eric Christian Neidlinger 15 February 2002 10 December 2004
19 Lawrence Scott ("Larry") Rice RADM 10 December 2004 17 May 2007
20 Ronald Horton RADM 17 May 2007 6 May 2010
21 Owen Paul Honors, Jr. 6 May 2010 4 January 2011
22 Dee Leon Mewbourne RADM 4 January 2011 17 August 2011
23 William Christopher Hamilton, Jr. 17 August 2011 1 December 2012
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
214
Awards and Decorations
Joint Meritorious Unit Award Navy Unit Commendation with three stars Meritorious Unit Commendation with
six stars
Navy E Ribbon with three Battle "E" devices Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal with nine stars Navy Expeditionary Medal with one star
Armed Forces Service Medal with one star Humanitarian Service Medal with one star Vietnam Service Medal with ten stars
Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal
with four stars
Republic of Vietnam Meritorious Unit Citation
(Gallantry Cross)
Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Unit
Citation
In popular culture
Enterprise first appeared in the 1968 movie Yours, Mine and Ours. Henry Fonda played the role of Frank Beardsley,
a U.S. Navy officer detached from the ship.
Enterprise was a principal setting of the popular movie Top Gun released in 1986. Director Tony Scott filmed actual
flight operations aboard ship and incorporated them into the film's plot. Some interior scenes taking place aboard
Enterprise were actually filmed on USSRanger(CV-61).
In 1986, Enterprise was a setting of scenes in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. The ship was unavailable for filming,
so scenes depicting Enterprise were again filmed aboard USS Ranger.
[15]
More important for Star Trek lore, the first
nuclear aircraft carrier was in position to inspire naming of Starship USSEnterprise(NCC-1701). The original
premise by Gene Roddenberry dated March 1964 describes a starship USS Yorktown. As USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
was then one of the newest and most celebrated ships of the US Navy, occupying a similar status as the fictional
Starship Enterprise, the aircraft carrier may have inspired a name change. One of Art Director Matt Jefferies' original
drawings depicts the Starship Enterprise with Enterprise (CVN-65) for scale.
[16]
Many of the subsequent Star Trek
television shows and movies have been set aboard a ship named Enterprise, and the USSEnterprise of the show Star
Trek: The Next Generation has a relief of five Enterprise starship models and a model of CVN-65 on the wall of its
observation lounge. In the subsequent prequel series Star Trek: Enterprise, a quartet of portraits depicting vessels
named Enterprise adorns the wall of Captain Jonathan Archer's ready room, the second of which is the CVN-65. A
similar display is seen on the recreation deck of the Enterprise in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. The Space Shuttle
Enterprise (OV-101), originally slated to be named Constitution, was renamed after the Starship Enterprise
following a write-in campaign to President Gerald Fordthus the Space Shuttle Enterprise is indirectly named after
the aircraft carrier.
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
215
References
Citations
[1] Cracknell, p. 56: "The main armor carried on Enterprise is the heavy armored flight deck. This was to prove a significant factor in the
catastrophic fire and explosions that occurred on Enterprise's flight deck in 1969. The US Navy learned its lesson the hard way during World
War II when all its carriers had only armored hangar decks. All attack carriers built since the Midway class have had armored flight decks."
[2] "USS Enterprise repair bill now $605 million" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20110713114608/ http:/ / www. dailypress. com/ topic/ ).
dailypress.com, 22 October 2009
[3] "World's First Nuclear-powered Aircraft Carrier, the Big E, makes final voyage" (http:/ / www. foxnews. com/ us/ 2012/ 03/ 10/
worlds-first-nuclear-powered-aircraft-carrier-big-e-makes-final-voyage). foxnews.com, 10 March 2012.
[4] http:/ / www. public. navy. mil/ bupers-npc/ reference/ messages/ Documents/ NAVADMINS/ NAV2012/ NAV12087. txt
[5] Jane's American fighting ships of the 20th century, p. 89. New York: Mallard Press, 1991. ISBN 0-7924-5626-2.
[6] Cullen, Tony. Encyclopedia of World Sea Power, p. 68. ISBN 0-517-65342-7.
[7] [7] Battle 360, "The Empire's Last Stand." Dir. Tony Long. History Channel. 2 May 2008 (2 May 2008)
[8] Frost, Peter, "USS Enterprise Delayed Again; Cost of Maintenance Balloons 44.5 Percent", Newport News Daily Press, 1 April 2010.
[9] Frost, Peter. "USS Enterprise: After Spending 2 Years in Newport News, Enterprise Returned to Navy" (http:/ / articles. dailypress. com/
2010-04-20/ news/ dp-local_enterprise_0420apr20_1_uss-enterprise-first-nuclear-powered-carrier-aircraft-carrier). Newport News Daily
Press, 20 April 2010.
[10] Military Times, " 40 faulted in Enterprise video investigation (http:/ / www. navytimes. com/ news/ 2011/ 03/
navy-harvey-honors-investigation-030311w/ )", 3 March 2011; Retrieved 4 March 2011.
[11] Lessig, Hugh, "Enterprise Carrier Group To Deploy Next Week", Newport News Daily Press, 8 January 2011.
[12] Wilson, Todd Allen, "USS Enterprise Returns To Norfolk", Newport News Daily Press, 16 July 2011.
[13] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=USS_Enterprise_(CVN-65)& action=edit
[14] [14] and
[15] Okuda, Denise & Michael (1999). The Star Trek Encyclopedia, p. 90. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-671-53609-5.
[16] Whitfield, Stephen and Roddenberry, Gene (1968). The Making of Star Trek, p. 167. New York, Ballantine Books. ISBN 345-24691-8-195.
Bibliography
Cracknell, WH, Warship Profile 15, USS Enterprise (CVAN 65) Nuclear Attack Carrier, USN.
United States Naval Aviation, 19101995, Naval Historical Center.
USS Enterprise (CVN 65) public affairs office
This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to:
USS Enterprise (CVN-65) (category)
External media
Images
"USS Enterprise (CVN-65)" (http:/ / www.maritimequest. com/ warship_directory/ us_navy_pages/ aircraft_carriers/ enterprise_cvn_65/
uss_enterprise_cvn_65_page_1.htm). Maritime quest.
Video
"Enterprise in War. Nuclear Carrier Joins 7th Fleet, 1965/08/30 (1965)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ details/ 1965-08-30_Enterprise_in_War).
Internet Archive (Universal Studios). 1965.
"Vietnam Action. Enterprise Planes Support Troops, 1965/12/09 (1965)" (http:/ / www. archive. org/ details/ 1965-12-09_Vietnam_Action).
Internet Archive (Universal Studios). 1965.
Official USS Enterprise website (http:/ / www. enterprise. navy. mil/ )
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
216
"Enterprise (CVN 65) (ex-CVAN 65)" (http:/ / www. nvr. navy. mil/ nvrships/ details/ CVN65. htm). Naval
Vessel Register.
"USS Enterprise (CVN 65) Story Archive" (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ local/ story_archive. asp?id=7). Navy News
Service.
"Enterprise" (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viii. htm). Dictionary of American Naval
Fighting Ships. Navy Department, Naval History & Heritage Command.
19611965 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiia. htm)
19661970 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiib. htm)
19711975 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiic. htm)
19761980 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiid. htm)
19811985 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiie. htm)
19861990 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiif. htm)
19911995 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiig. htm)
19962000 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiih. htm)
20012004 (http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ danfs/ e4/ enterprise-viiii. htm)
"USS Enterprise CVAN/CVN-65 Association" (http:/ / www. cvan-cvn-65. org/ ).
"AO3 Smitty's Enterprise Page" (http:/ / www. sizor. com/ cvn65/ ).
"USS Enterprise (CVN 65)" (http:/ / www. navysite. de/ cvn/ cvn65. html). Navy site.
"USS Enterprise CVN-65" (http:/ / www. uscarriers. net/ cvn65history. htm). US Carriers.
USS Enterprise (CVAN-65/CVN-65) command histories from Naval History & Heritage Command
1963 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1963. pdf)
1964 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1964. pdf)
1965 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1965. pdf)
1966 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1966. pdf)
1967 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1967. pdf)
1968 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1968. pdf)
1969 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1969. pdf)
1970 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1970. pdf)
1971 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1971. pdf)
1972 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1972. pdf)
1973 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1973. pdf)
1974 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1974. pdf)
1975 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1975. pdf)
1976 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1976. pdf)
1977 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1977. pdf)
1978 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1978. pdf)
1979 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1979. pdf)
1980 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1980. pdf)
1981 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1981. pdf)
1982 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1982. pdf)
1983 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1983. pdf)
1984 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1984. pdf)
1985 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1985. pdf)
1986 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1986. pdf)
1987 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1987. pdf)
1988 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1988. pdf)
USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
217
1989 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1989. pdf)
1990 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1990. pdf)
1991 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1991. pdf)
1992 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1992. pdf)
1993 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1993. pdf)
1994 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1994. pdf)
1995 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1995. pdf)
1996 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1996. pdf)
1997 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1997. pdf)
1998 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1998. pdf)
1999 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 1999. pdf)
2001 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 2001. pdf)
2003 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 2003. pdf)
2004 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 2004. pdf)
2005 (http:/ / liveweb. archive. org/ http:/ / www. history. navy. mil/ shiphist/ e/ cvn-65/ 2005. pdf)
Precededby
CV-6
USS
Enterprise
1961-2013
Succeededby
CVN-80
Precededby
USSKitty Hawk(CV-63)
Oldest active combat ship of the United States
Navy
2009 2012
Succeededby
USSNimitz(CVN-68)
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
218
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
"Nimitz Class" redirects here. For 1997 novel, see Nimitz Class (novel).
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
Nimitz sailing through Canadian waters
Class overview
Name: Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding Company
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Kitty Hawkclass and
Enterpriseclass
Succeededby: Gerald R. Fordclass
Subclasses: Theodore Roosevelt class and
Ronald Reagan class
In commission: 3 May 1975
Planned: 10
Completed: 10
Active: 9 (USS Abraham Lincoln undergoing RCOH)
General characteristics
Type: Aircraft carrier
Displacement:
100,000to 104,600 long tons (101,600106,300t)
[1]
Length: Overall: 1,092 feet (332.8m)
Waterline: 1,040 feet (317.0m)
Beam: Overall: 252 ft (76.8 m)
Waterline: 134 ft (40.8 m)
Draft: Maximum navigational: 37 ft (11.3 m)
Limit: 41 ft (12.5 m)
Propulsion: 2 Westinghouse A4W nuclear reactors
4 steam turbines
4 shafts
260,000 shp (194 MW)
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
219
Speed: 30+ knots (56+km/h; 35+mph)
Range: Unlimited distance; 20-25 years
Complement: Ship's company: 3,200
Air wing: 2,480
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-48E 3-D air search radar
AN/SPS-49(V)5 2-D air search radar
AN/SPQ-9B target acquisition radar
AN/SPN-46 air traffic control radars
AN/SPN-43C air traffic control radar
AN/SPN-41 landing aid radars
4 Mk 91 NSSM guidance systems
4 Mk 95 radars
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
SLQ-32A(V)4 Countermeasures suite
SLQ-25A Nixie torpedo countermeasures
Armament: 1624 RIM-7 Sea Sparrow or NATO Sea Sparrow missiles
3 or 4 Phalanx CIWSs or RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles
Armor: 2.5in (64mm) Kevlar over vital spaces
Aircraft carried: 8590 fixed wing and helicopters
The Nimitz-class supercarriers are a class of ten nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in service with the United States
Navy. The lead ship of the class is named for World War II United States Pacific Fleet commander Fleet Admiral
Chester W. Nimitz, the U.S. Navy's last fleet admiral. With an overall length of 1,092ft (333m) and full-load
displacements of over 100,000 long tons, they have been the largest warships built and in service, although they are
being eclipsed by the upcoming Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers. Instead of the gas turbines or diesel-electric
systems used for propulsion on many modern warships, the carriers use two A4W pressurized water reactors which
drive four propeller shafts and can produce a maximum speed of over 30 knots (56km/h) and maximum power of
around 260,000shp (190MW). As a result of the use of nuclear power, the ships are capable of operating for over 20
years without refueling and are predicted to have a service life of over 50 years. They are categorized as
nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and are numbered with consecutive hull numbers between CVN-68 and CVN-77.
[2]
All ten carriers were constructed by Newport News Shipbuilding Company in Virginia. USSNimitz, the lead ship of
the class, was commissioned on 3 May 1975, and USSGeorge H.W. Bush, the tenth and last of the class, was
commissioned on 10 January 2009. Since the 1970s, Nimitz-class carriers have participated in many conflicts and
operations across the world, including Operation Eagle Claw in Iran, the Gulf War, and more recently in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
The angled flight decks of the carriers use a CATOBAR arrangement to operate aircraft, with steam catapults and
arrestor wires for launch and recovery. As well as speeding up flight deck operations, this allows for a much wider
variety of aircraft than with the STOVL arrangement used on smaller carriers. An embarked carrier air wing
consisting of up to around 90 aircraft is normally deployed on board. After the retirement of the F-14 Tomcat, the air
wings' strike fighters are primarily F/A-18E and F/A-18F Super Hornets and F/A-18A+ and F/A-18C Hornets. In
addition to their aircraft, the vessels carry short-range defensive weaponry for anti-aircraft warfare and missile
defense.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
220
Description
The Nimitz-class carriers have an overall length of 1,092ft (333m) and a full-load displacement of about
100,000104,000 long tons (102,000106,000 metric tons). They have a beam at the waterline of 135ft (41m), and
the maximum width of their flight decks is 251ft 10in to 257ft 3in (77.76m to 78.41m) (depending on the
variant). The ships' companies can number up to 3,200, not including an air wing of 2,480.
Design
The Nimitz-class aircraft carriers were ordered to supplement the aircraft carriers of the Kitty Hawk class and
Enterprise class, maintaining the strength and capability of the U.S. Navy after the older carriers were
decommissioned. The ships were designed to be improvements on previous U.S. aircraft carriers, in particular the
Enterprise and Forrestal-class supercarriers, although the arrangement of the ships is relatively similar to that of the
Kitty Hawk class.
[3]
Among other design improvements, the two reactors on Nimitz-class carriers take up less space
than the eight reactors used on Enterprise. Along with a more generally improved design, this means that
Nimitz-class carriers can carry 90% more aviation fuel and 50% more ordnance when compared to the Forrestal
class.
The U.S. Navy has stated that the carriers could withstand three times the damage sustained by the Essex class
inflicted by Japanese air attacks during World War II. The hangars on the ships are divided into three fire bays by
thick steel doors that are designed to restrict the spread of fire. This addition has been present on U.S. aircraft
carriers since World War II, after the fires caused by Kamikaze attacks.
The first ships were designed around the time of the Vietnam War, and certain aspects of the design were influenced
by operations there. To a certain extent, the carrier operations in Vietnam demonstrated the need for increased
capabilities of aircraft carriers over their survivability, as they were used to send sorties into the war and were
therefore less subject to attack. As a result of this experience, Nimitz carriers were designed with larger stores of
aviation fuel and larger magazines in relation to previous carriers, although this was partly as a result of increased
space available by the new design of the ships' propulsion systems.
[4]
A major purpose of the ships was initially to support the U.S. military during the Cold War, and they were designed
with capabilities for that role, including using nuclear power instead of oil for greater endurance when deployed in
blue water, and the ability to make adjustments to the carriers' weapons systems on the basis of new intelligence and
technological developments.
[5]
They were initially categorized only as attack carriers, but ships have been
constructed with anti-submarine capabilities since USSCarl Vinson. As a result, the ships and their aircraft are now
able to participate in a wide range of operations, which can include sea and air blockades, mine laying, and missile
strikes on land, air and sea.
Because of a design flaw, ships of this class have inherent lists to starboard when under combat loads that exceed the
capability of their list control systems. The problem appears to be especially prevalent on some of the more modern
vessels. This problem has been previously rectified by using damage control voids for ballast, but a solution using
solid ballast which does not affect the ship's survivability has been proposed.
[]
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
221
Construction
All ten Nimitz-class aircraft carriers were constructed between 1968 and 2006 at Newport News Shipbuilding
Company, in Newport News, Virginia, in the largest drydock in the western hemisphere, dry dock 12, now 2,172 feet
(662m) long after a recent expansion.
Since USSTheodore Roosevelt, the carriers were manufactured in modular construction (USS George H.W. Bush
was constructed from 161 'super-lift' modules). This means that whole sections could be welded together with
plumbing and electrical equipment already fitted, improving efficiency. Using gantry cranes, the modules were lifted
into the dry dock and welded. In the case of the bow section, these can weigh over 1,500,000 pounds (680t). This
method was originally developed by Ingalls Shipbuilding and increases the rate of work because much of the fitting
out does not have to be carried out within the confines of the already finished hull.
The total cost of construction for each ship was around $4.5 billion.
[6]
Propulsion
One of 4 propellers of George
Washington
All ships of the class are powered by two A4W nuclear reactors, kept in
separate compartments. They power four propeller shafts and can produce a
maximum speed of over 30 knots (56km/h) and maximum power of
260,000bhp (190MW). The reactors produce heat through nuclear fission
which heats water. This is then passed through four turbines (manufactured by
General Electric) which are shared by the two reactors. The turbines power the
four bronze propellers, each with a diameter of 25 feet (7.6m) and a weight of
66,000 pounds (30t). Behind these are the two rudders which are 29 feet
(8.8m) high and 22 feet (6.7m) long, and each weigh 110,000 pounds (50t).
The Nimitz-class ships constructed since USSRonald Reagan also have
bulbous bows in order to improve speed and fuel efficiency by reducing
hydrodynamic drag. As a result of the use of nuclear power, the ships are
capable of operating continuously for over 20 years without refueling and are
predicted to have a service life of over 50 years.
Armament and protection
Firing of a Sea Sparrow missile from
Theodore Roosevelt. A Phalanx CIWS
is in the left of the image.
In addition to the aircraft carried on board, the ships carry defensive equipment
for use against missiles and hostile aircraft. These consist of either three or four
NATO RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missile launchers designed for defense against
aircraft and anti-ship missiles as well as either three or four 20mm Phalanx
CIWS missile defense cannon. USSRonald Reagan has none of these, having
been built with the RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile system, two of which
have also been installed on USSNimitz and USSGeorge Washington. These
will be installed on the other ships as they return for Refueling Complex
Overhaul (RCOH). Since USS Theodore Roosevelt, the carriers have been
constructed with 2.5in (64mm) Kevlar armor over vital spaces, and earlier
ships have been retrofitted with it: Nimitz in 19831984, Eisenhower from
19851987 and Vinson in 1989.
[7]
The other countermeasures the ships use are four Sippican SRBOC (super rapid bloom off-board chaff) six-barrel
MK36 decoy launchers, which deploy infrared flares and chaff to disrupt the sensors of incoming missiles; an
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
222
SSTDS torpedo defense system; and an AN/SLQ-25 Nixie torpedo countermeasures system. The carriers also use
AN/SLQ-32(V) electronic warfare systems to detect and disrupt hostile radar signals in addition to the electronic
warfare capabilities of some of the aircraft on board.
[8][9]
The presence of nuclear weapons on board U.S. aircraft carriers since the end of the Cold War has neither been
confirmed nor denied by the U.S. government. As a result of this, as well as concerns over the safety of nuclear
power, the presence of a U.S. aircraft carrier in a foreign port has occasionally provoked protest from local people,
for example when USS Nimitz docked in Chennai, India, in 2007. At that time, the Strike Group commander Rear
Admiral John Terence Blake stated that: "The U.S. policy is that we do not routinely deploy nuclear weapons on
board Nimitz."
Carrier air wing
The flight deck of Harry S. Truman
Main article: Carrier air wing
In order for a carrier to deploy, it must embark one of ten Carrier Air
Wings (CVW).
[10]
The carriers can accommodate a maximum of 130
F/A-18 Hornets
[11]
or 8590 aircraft of different types, but current
numbers are typically 64 aircraft. Although the air wings are integrated
with the operation of the carriers they are deployed to, they are
nevertheless regarded as a separate entity. As well as the aircrew, the
air wings are also made up of support personnel involved in roles
including maintenance, aircraft and ordnance handling and emergency
procedures. Each person on the flight deck wears color-coded clothing
to make their role easily identifiable.
A typical carrier air wing can include 1214 F/A-18E or F Super Hornets as strike fighters; two squadrons of 1012
F/A-18C Hornets, with one of these often provided by the U.S. Marine Corps (VMFA), also as strike fighters; 46
EA-6B Prowlers for electronic warfare; 46 E-2C Hawkeyes and ES.3 Sea Shadows used for airborne early warning;
C-2 Greyhounds used for logistics; and a Helicopter Antisubmarine Squadron of 68 SH-60F & HH-60H Seahawks.
Aircraft that have previously operated from Nimitz-class carriers include F-4 Phantoms, RA-5C Vigilantes, RF-8G
Crusaders, F-14 Tomcats, S-3 Vikings, A-7 Corsair II and A-6E Intruder aircraft.
[12]
Flight deck and aircraft facilities
Hangar of George Washington during a
replenishment at sea, 2009
The flight deck is angled at nine degrees, which allows for aircraft to
be launched and recovered simultaneously. This angle of the flight
deck was reduced slightly in relation to previous carriers, as the current
design improves the air flow around the carrier. Four steam catapults
are used to launch fixed-wing aircraft, and four arrestor wires are used
for recovery. The two newest carriers, Ronald Reagan and George
H.W. Bush, only have three arrestor wires each, as the fourth was used
infrequently on earlier ships and was therefore deemed unnecessary.
This CATOBAR arrangement allows for faster launching and recovery
as well as a much wider range of aircraft that can be used on board
compared with smaller aircraft carriers, most of which use a simpler
STOVL arrangement without catapults or arrestor wires. The ship's aircraft operations are controlled by the air boss
from Primary Flight Control or Pri-Fly. Four large elevators transport aircraft between the flight deck and the
hangars below. These hangars are divided into three bays by thick steel doors that are designed to restrict the spread
of fire.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
223
Strike groups
Main article: Carrier Strike Group
George Washington carrier strike group in the
Caribbean Sea in April 2006
When an aircraft carrier deploys, it takes a Strike Group, made up of
several other warships and supply vessels which allow the operation to
be carried out. The armament of the Nimitz class is made up only of
short range defensive weapons, used as a last line of defense against
enemy missiles and aircraft. The other vessels in the Strike Group
provide additional capabilities, such as long range Tomahawk missiles
or the Aegis Combat System, and also protect the carrier from attack.
A typical Strike Group may include, in addition to an aircraft carrier:
up to six surface combatants, including frigates, guided missile cruisers
and guided missile destroyers (used primarily for anti-aircraft warfare
and anti-submarine warfare); one or two attack submarines (for seeking
out and destroying hostile surface ships and submarines); and an ammunition, oiler, and supply ship of Military
Sealift Command to provide logistical support.
[13]
The precise structure and numbers of each type of ship can vary
between groups depending on the objectives of the deployment.
[14]
Design differences within the class
While the designs of the final seven ships (beginning with USSTheodore Roosevelt) are slightly different from those
of the earlier ships, the U.S. Navy considers all ten carriers as a single class. When the older carriers come in for
Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH), their nuclear power plants are refueled and they are upgraded to the
standards of the later carriers. Other modifications may be performed to update the ships' equipment. The ships were
initially classified only as attack carriers but have been constructed with anti-submarine capabilities since USS Carl
Vinson. These improvements include better radar systems and facilities which enable the ships to operate aircraft in a
more effective anti-submarine role, including the fitting of common undersea picture (CUP) technology which uses
sonar to allow for better assessment of the threat from submarines. The changes included better support for S-3
Viking ASW patrol planes and SH-60F Seahawk helicopters with dipping sonar systems.
Ronald Reagan in the Strait of Magellan in 2004
USS Theodore Roosevelt and later carriers have slight structural
differences from the earlier Nimitz carriers such as improved protection
for ordnance stored in their magazines. Other improvements include
upgraded flight deck ballistic protection, first installed on USS George
Washington, and the high-strength low-alloy steel (HSLA-100) used
for constructing ships starting with USS John C. Stennis. More
recently, older ships have had their flight decks upgraded with a
non-slip material fitted on new-build ships, to improve safety for both
crew members and aircraft.
The final carrier of the class, USS George H.W. Bush, was designed as a "transition ship" from the Nimitz class to
the replacement Gerald R. Ford class. Bush incorporates new technologies including improved propeller and
bulbous bow designs, a reduced radar signature and electronic and environmental upgrades. As a result, the ship's
cost was $6.2billion, higher than that of the earlier Nimitz-class ships which each cost around $4.5 billion. To lower
costs, some new technologies and design features were also incorporated into the USSRonald Reagan, the previous
carrier, including a redesigned island.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
224
Ships in class
The United States Navy lists the following ten ships in the Nimitz class:
Ship Hull
Number
Laid down Launched Commissioned Refuel,
Overhaul
Homeport References
Nimitz subclass
Nimitz CVN-68 22 June 1968 13 May 1972 3 May 1975 19982001 Naval Air Station North Island,
San Diego, California
Naval Station Everett, Everett,
Washington (2011)
Dwight D.
Eisenhower
(ex-Eisenhower)
CVN-69 15 August
1970
11 October
1975
18 October 1977 20012005 Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk,
Virginia
Carl Vinson CVN-70 11 October
1975
15 March
1980
13 March 1982 20052009 Naval Air Station North Island,
San Diego, California
Theodore Roosevelt subclass
Theodore
Roosevelt
CVN-71 31 October
1981
27 October
1984
25 October 1986 20092013 Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk,
Virginia
Abraham Lincoln CVN-72 3 November
1984
13 February
1988
11 November
1989
2013 Naval Station Everett, Everett,
Washington
Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk,
Virginia (2011)
George
Washington
CVN-73 25 August
1986
21 July 1990 4 July 1992 Yokosuka Naval Base,
Yokosuka, Japan
John C. Stennis CVN-74 13 March
1991
11 November
1993
9 December
1995
Naval Base Kitsap, Bremerton,
Washington
Harry S. Truman
(ex-United States)
CVN-75 29 November
1993
7 September
1996
25 July 1998 Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk,
Virginia
Ronald Reagan subclass
Ronald Reagan CVN-76 12 February
1998
4 March 2001 12 July 2003 Naval Air Station North Island,
San Diego, California
George H.W. Bush CVN-77 6 September
2003
9 October
2006
10 January 2009 Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk,
Virginia
Service history
19751989
One of the first major operations in which the ships were involved was Operation Eagle Claw launched by USS
Nimitz in 1980 after she had deployed to the Indian Ocean in response to the taking of hostages in the U.S. embassy
in Tehran. Although initially part of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet, Eisenhower relieved Nimitz in this operation after her
service in the Mediterranean Sea. Nimitz conducted a Freedom of Navigation exercise alongside the aircraft carrier
USS Forrestal in August 1981 in the Gulf of Sidra, near Libya. During this exercise, two of the ship's F-14 Tomcats
shot down two Libyan aircraft in what became known as the Gulf of Sidra incident. In 1987, Vinson participated in
the first U.S. carrier deployment in the Bering Sea,
[15]
and Nimitz provided security during the 1988 Olympic Games
in Seoul.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
225
19902000
USN RH-53D Sea Stallion helicopters aboard
Nimitz in early 1980, prior to execution of
Operation Eagle Claw
The two most significant deployments the Nimitz class was involved in
during the 1990s were the Gulf War and its aftermath, and Operation
Southern Watch in southern Iraq. All active vessels were engaged in
both of these to some extent, with Operation Southern Watch
continuing until 2003.
[16]
However, most carriers in operation in
Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm played supporting
roles, with only Roosevelt playing an active part in combat operations.
Throughout the 1990s and more recently, Nimitz-class carriers have
been deployed as part of humanitarian missions. While deployed in the
Gulf War, Lincoln was diverted to the Indian Ocean to participate
alongside 22 other ships in Operation Fiery Vigil, evacuating civilians
following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo on Luzon Island in the Philippines. In October 1993, Lincoln deployed to
Somalia to assist UN humanitarian operations there, spending four weeks flying patrols over the area around
Mogadishu while supporting U.S. troops during Operation Restore Hope. The same ship also participated in
Operation Vigilant Sentinel in the Persian Gulf in 1995. Roosevelt flew patrols in support of the Kurds over northern
Iraq as part of Operation Provide Comfort in 1991. In 1996, George Washington played a peacekeeping role in
Operation Decisive Endeavor in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 1999, Roosevelt was called to the Ionian Sea to support
Operation Allied Force alongside other NATO militaries.
2001present
Abraham Lincoln in drydock during
1990
Harry S. Truman's maiden deployment was in November 2000. The carrier's air
wing flew 869 combat sorties in support of Operation Southern Watch, including
a strike on Iraqi air defense sites on 16 February 2001, in response to Iraqi
surface-to-air missile fire against United Nations coalition forces.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
226
Crew of Abraham Lincoln filling water containers
while deployed to assist humanitarian efforts in
the aftermath of 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.
After the 11 September attacks, Carl Vinson and Theodore Roosevelt
were among the first warships to participate in Operation Enduring
Freedom in Afghanistan. Carl Vinson sailed towards the Persian Gulf
intending to support Operation Southern Watch in July 2001. This
changed in response to the attacks, and the ship changed course to
travel towards the North Arabian Sea, where she launched the first
airstrikes in support of the operation on 7 October 2001. Following the
attacks, John C. Stennis and George Washington participated in
Operation Noble Eagle, carrying out homeland security operations off
the West Coast of the United States. All active ships have been
involved to some extent in Iraq and Afghanistan since that time. This
included the invasion in 2003, as well as providing subsequent support
for Operation Iraqi Freedom since then.
The carriers have also provided aid after natural disasters; in 2005,
Abraham Lincoln supported Operation Unified Assistance in Indonesia
after the December 2004 tsunami, and Truman provided aid after
Hurricane Katrina later in 2005. The Reagan Carrier Strike Group
performed humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations in the
Philippines in June 2008 after Typhoon Fengshen, which killed
hundreds from the central island regions and the main island of Luzon. In January 2010 Vinson operated off Haiti,
providing aid and drinking water to earthquake survivors as part of the U.S. led Operation Unified Response,
alongside other major warships and hospital ship Comfort. In 2013, the USS Nimitz and other Nimitz class carriers
are near Syria.Wikipedia:Citation needed
Refueling Complex Overhaul
In order to refuel their nuclear power plants, the carriers each undergo a Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH) once
in their service lives. This is also the most substantial overhaul the ships undergo while in service and involves
bringing the vessels' equipment up to the standards of the newest ships. The ship is placed in dry dock, and essential
maintenance is carried out including painting of the hull below the waterline and replacement of electrical and
mechanical components such as valves. Because of the large time periods between the ships' constructions, the
armament and designs of the newer ships are more modern than those of the older ships. In RCOH, the older ships
are refitted to the standards of the newer ships, which can include major upgrades to the flight deck, aircraft catapults
and combat systems as well as other upgrades such as improved radar systems, although precise details can vary
significantly between the ships. The improvements normally take around four years to complete. The RCOH for
USS Theodore Roosevelt, which began in 2009, will reportedly cost US$2.4billion. Planned Incremental
Availability is a similar procedure, although it is less substantial and does not involve refueling of the nuclear power
plants.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
227
Symbolic and diplomatic roles
Senior officers of the Reagan strike
group in Busan, Korea.
Because of their status as the largest warships in the U.S. Navy, the deployment
of an aircraft carrier can fulfill a symbolic role, not just in terms of a deterrent to
an enemy, but often as a diplomatic tool, in strengthening relations with allies
and potential allies. The latter of these functions can take place either as a single
visit to a country, in which senior naval officers are allowed to observe the
operating of the carrier and to interact with its senior officers, or as part of an
international task force. This can be in combat operations, such as Operation
Allied Force in 1999, or other deployments involving training, such as RIMPAC.
In addition, carriers have participated in international Maritime Security
Operations, combating piracy in the Persian Gulf and off the coast of Somalia.
Accidents and incidents
As on most large warships, there have been several incidents involving the death or injury of one or more crew
members, although most have involved freak accidents or failures, such as a man overboard as a result of poor
weather. One of the highest-profile incidents was on 26 May 1981, when an EA-6B Prowler crashed on the flight
deck of Nimitz, killing 14 crewmen and injuring 45 others. Forensic testing of the personnel involved showed that
several tested positive for marijuana. While this was not in itself found to have directly caused the crash, the findings
of the investigation provoked the introduction of mandatory drug testing of all service personnel.
In cases of ditched aircraft, pilots have been able to eject safely in several cases. However, fatal aircraft crashes have
occurred; in 1994, Lt. Kara Hultgreen, the first female F-14 Tomcat pilot, was killed while attempting to land on
board Abraham Lincoln during a training exercise.
Fires have also caused damage to the ships; in May 2008, while rotating through to her new homeport at Yokosuka
Naval Base in Yokosuka, Japan, George Washington suffered a serious fire which cost $70million in repairs, injured
37 sailors and led to the ship undergoing three months of repairs at San Diego; this led to it having to miss the 2008
RIMPAC exercises and delayed the final withdrawal from service of USSKitty Hawk. The fire was caused by
unauthorized smoking in an area near improperly stored flammable refrigerant.
Future
Artist's impression of the Gerald R. Ford class
Nimitz-class carriers were designed to have a 50-year service life. At
the end of the service life, ships will be decommissioned. This process
will first take place on Nimitz and is estimated to cost from $750 to
$900million. This compares with an estimate of $53million for a
conventionally powered carrier. Most of the difference in cost is
attributed to the deactivation of the nuclear power plants and safe
removal of radioactive material and other contaminated equipment.
[17]
A new class of carriers, the Gerald R. Ford class, is being constructed
to replace previous vessels after decommissioning. Ten of these are
expected, and the first will enter service in 2016 to replace the previous
USS Enterprise (CVN-65). Most of the rest of these new carriers are to
replace the oldest Nimitz ships as they reach the end of their service lives. The new carriers will have a similar design
to George H.W. Bush (using an almost identical hull shape) and technological and structural improvements.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
228
Notes
Footnotes
[1] [1] Polmar, p. 112
[2] The letters CVN denote the type of ship: "CV" is the hull classification symbol for aircraft carriers, and "N" indicates nuclear-powered
propulsion. The number after the CVN means that this is the 68th "CV", or large aircraft carrier.
[3] [3] Polmar, p. 113
[4] [4] Friedman, p. 316
[5] Jim Wilson "21st Century Carrier Force" Popular Mechanics October 1998, pp. 5866
[6] [6] All monetary values are adjusted for inflation to 2000s figures
[7] [7] Wertheim, p. 884
[8] [8] Wertheim, p. 885
[9] [9] Polmar, p. 108
[10] Although there are ten carrier air wings in the U.S. Navy, they are numbered between CVW-1 (USS Enterprise) and CVW-17 (USS Carl
Vinson)
[11] " Navy Aircraft Carriers: Cost Effectiveness of Conventionally and Nuclear-powered Carriers (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ gao/ nsiad98001/
ns98001.pdf)
[12] [12] Lambeth, p. 89
[13] [13] Stevens, p. 24
[14] [14] Polmar, p. 37
[15] " 1987 Command History (http:/ / www. history.navy. mil/ shiphist/ c/ cvn-70/ 1987. pdf)" U.S. Navy report. 6 December 1988.
[16] [16] Lambeth, p. 6
[17] [17] Stevens, p. 10
Citations
References
Friedman, Norman (1983). U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval
Institute Press. ISBN978-0-87021-739-5.
Lambeth, Benjamin (2005). American Carrier Air Power at the Dawn of a New Century. Santa Monica,
California: RAND Corporation. ISBN978-0-8330-3842-5.
Polmar, Norman (2004). The Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet. Annapolis,
Maryland: Naval Institute Press. ISBN978-1-59114-685-8.
Stevens, Ted (1998). Navy Aircraft Carriers: Cost-effectiveness of Conventionally and Nuclear-powered
Carriers: Report to Congressional Requesters. Washington, D.C.: Government Accountability Office.
ISBN1-4289-7664-7.
Wertheim, Eric (2007). The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World: Their Ships, Aircraft and
Systems. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press. ISBN978-1-59114-955-2.
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
229
Further reading
Schank, John F.; Mark V. Arena; Denis Rushworth; John Birkler; James Chiesa (2002). Refueling and Complex
Overhaul of the USS Nimitz (CVN 68): Lessons for the Future (http:/ / www. rand. org/ pubs/
monograph_reports/ MR1632/ index. html). Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation. ISBN0-8330-3288-7.
Retrieved 2010-12-04.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Nimitz class aircraft carriers.
U.S. Navy website (http:/ / www. nvr. navy. mil/ nvrships/ active/ fleet_02. htm)
Discovery channel video (http:/ / military. discovery. com/ videos/ top-ten-fighting-ships-nimitz-aircraft-carrier.
html)
Naval Vessel Register page for USS Nimitz (http:/ / www. nvr. navy. mil/ nvrships/ details/ CVN68. htm)
Busting the speed myth of USS Enterprise and Nimitz-class nuclear-powered supercarrier (http:/ / www.
navweaps. com/ index_tech/ tech-028. htm), a special report by NavWeaps.Com
CVN-68 Nimitz-class Modernization (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ cvn-68-mods.
htm) GlobalSecurity.org
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
230
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
"Ford class" redirects here. For the 1950s Royal Navy vessels, see Ford-class seaward defence boat.
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
Gerald R. Ford on the James River in November 2013.
Class overview
Name: Gerald R. Fordclass aircraft carrier
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Nimitzclass
Cost:
$11.3384 billion (FY14)
[1]
Building: 2
Planned:
10
[2]
General characteristics
Type: Aircraft carrier
Displacement: Approximately 100,000 long tons (110,000 short tons; 100,000 tonnes) (full load)
Length: 1,106ft (337m)
Beam: 256ft (78m) (flight deck)
134ft (41m) (waterline)
Height: 250 feet (76m)
Draft: 39ft (12m)
Decks: 25
Installed power: Two A1B nuclear reactors
Propulsion: Four shafts
Speed: In excess of 30 knots (56km/h; 35mph)
Complement: 508 officers
3,789 enlisted
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
231
Armament: Anti-aircraft missiles:
2 RIM-162 ESSM
2 RIM-116 RAM
Guns:
2 Phalanx CIWS
4 M2 12.7mm machine guns
Aircraft carried: 75+
Aviation facilities: 1,092ft 256ft (333m 78m) flight deck
Gerald R. Ford class (or Ford class) is a class of supercarriers currently being built to replace some of the United
States Navy's existing Nimitz-class carriers. The new vessels will have a hull similar to the Nimitz carriers, but will
introduce technologies developed since the initial design of the previous class (such as the Electromagnetic Aircraft
Launch System), as well as other design features intended to improve efficiency and running costs, including
reduced crew requirement. The first ship of the class, the Gerald R. Ford, has hull number CVN-78.
[3]
Features summary
Carriers of the Ford-class will incorporate design features including:
Advanced arresting gear.
Automation, which reduces crew requirements by several hundred from the Nimitz-class carrier.
The updated RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missile system.
[4]
AN/SPY-3 dual-band radar (DBR), as developed for Zumwalt-class destroyers.
An Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) in place of traditional steam catapults for launching
aircraft.
A new nuclear reactor design (the A1B reactor) for greater power generation.
Stealth features to help reduce radar profile.
The ability to carry up to 90 aircraft, including the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Boeing EA-18G Growler,
Grumman C-2 Greyhound, Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye, and Lockheed Martin F-35C Lightning II,
Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk helicopters, and unmanned combat air vehicles such as the Northrop Grumman X-47B.
The navy believes that with the addition of the most modern equipment and extensive use of automation, it will be
able to reduce the crew requirement and the total cost of future aircraft carriers.
[5]
The primary recognition feature
compared to earlier supercarriers will be the more aft location of the navigation island to make aircraft movements
more efficient. The Ford class are intended to sustain 160 sorties per day for 30+ days, with a surge capability of 270
sorties/day, but the Director of Operational Testing Michael Gilmore has criticised the unrealistic assumptions used
in these forecasts and has indicated sortie rates similar to the 120/240 per day of the Nimitz class would be
acceptable.
Design and development
The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier has been an integral part of United States power projection strategy since Nimitz was
first commissioned. Displacing approximately 100,000 tons when fully loaded, a Nimitz-class carrier is capable of
steaming faster than thirty knots, self-sustaining for up to ninety days, and launching aircraft to strike targets
hundreds of miles away.
[6]
The endurance of this class is exemplified by USS Theodore Roosevelt, which spent
159days underway in support of Operation Enduring Freedom without the need to visit a port or be refueled.
[7]
Over
the lifespan of the class many new technologies have been successfully integrated into the design of this vessel.
However, with the technical advances made in the past decade the ability of the navy to make improvements to this
class of ship has become more limited. "The biggest problems facing the Nimitz class are the limited electrical power
generation capability and the upgrade-driven increase in ship weight and erosion of the center-of-gravity margin
needed to maintain ship stability."
[8]
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
232
With these constraints in mind the navy developed what was initially known as the "CVN-21" program, which
ultimately evolved into CVN-78, Gerald R. Ford. Improvements were made through developing technologies and
more efficient design. Major design changes include a larger flight deck, improvements in weapons and material
handling, a new propulsion plant design that requires fewer personnel to operate and maintain, and a new smaller
island that has been pushed aft. Technological advances in electromagnetics have led to the development of an
Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS), and an Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG). An integrated warfare
system, the Ship Self-Defense System (SSDS), has been developed to support flexibility in adapting the
infrastructure of the ship to future mission roles. The new Dual Band Radar (DBR) combines S-band and X-band
radar in a single system.
[9]
With new design and technology the Ford will have a 25% increase in sortie generation,
threefold increase in electrical generating capacity, increased operational availability, and a number of quality-of-life
improvements.
[10]
Requirements for a higher sortie rate of around 160 exits a day with surges to a maximum of 270
sorties a day in times of crisis and intense air warfare activity, have led to design changes in the flight deck, which
enable greater aircraft launch capabilities.
Flight deck
Artist's concept of CVN-78
Changes to the flight deck are the most visible of the differences
between the Nimitz and Gerald R. Ford classes. Several sections have
been altered from the layout of the Nimitz-class flight deck to improve
aircraft handling, storage, and flow. Catapult number four on the
Nimitz-class cannot launch fully loaded aircraft because of a deficiency
of wing clearance along the edge of the flight deck.
[11]
CVN-78 will
have no catapult-specific restrictions on launching aircraft, but still
retains four catapults, two bow and two waist,
[12]
and the number of
aircraft lifts from hangar deck to flight deck level was reduced from
the earlier ships from four to three. The design changes to the flight
deck are instrumental in the maximization of sorties launched.
The route of weapons to the aircraft stops on the flight deck has been replanned to accommodate higher rearming
rates, and in turn higher potential sortie rates.
Another major change: a smaller, redesigned island will be pushed further back relative to the older classes of
carriers. Moving the island creates deck space for a centralized rearming and refueling location. This reduces the
number of times that an aircraft will have to be moved after landing before it can be launched again. Fewer aircraft
movements require, in turn, fewer deck hands to accomplish them, reducing the size of the ship's crew. A similar
benefit is realized by altering the path and procedures for weapons movement by redshirts from storage to flight
deck, again potentially allowing the new ship to support a higher sortie rate than the Nimitz-class ship while using
fewer crew members than the Nimitz requires. On Nimitz-class carriers the time that it takes to launch a plane after it
has landed is set by the time needed to rearm and refuel it. To minimize this time, ordnance will be moved from
storage areas to the centralized rearming location via relocated, higher capacity weapons elevators, utilizing linear
motors.
[13]
The new path that ordnance follows does not cross any areas of aircraft movement, thereby reducing
traffic problems in the hangars and on the flight deck. According to Rear Admiral Dennis M. Dwyer, these changes
will make it hypothetically possible to rearm the airplanes in "minutes instead of hours".
[14]
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
233
Power generation
The propulsion and power plant of the Nimitz-class carriers was designed in the 1960s. Technological capabilities of
that time did not require the same quantity of electrical power that modern technologies do. "New technologies
added to the Nimitz-class ships have generated increased demands for electricity; the current base load leaves little
margin to meet expanding demands for power."
[15]
Increasing the capability of the U.S. Navy to improve the
technological level of the carrier fleet required a larger capacity power system.
The new A1B reactor plant is a smaller, more efficient design that provides approximately three times the electrical
power of the Nimitz-class A4W reactor plant. The modernization of the plant led to a higher core energy density,
lower demands for pumping power, a simpler construction, and the use of modern electronic controls and displays.
These changes resulted in a two-thirds reduction of watch standing requirements and a significant decrease of
required maintenance.
A larger power output is a major component to the integrated warfare system. Engineers took extra steps to ensure
that integrating unforeseen technological advances onto a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier would be possible.
The U.S. Navy projects that the Gerald R. Ford-class will be an integral component of the fleet for ninety years into
the future (the year 2105). One lesson learned from that is that for a ship design to be successful over the course of a
century, a great deal of foresight and flexibility is required. Integrating new technologies with the Nimitz-class is
becoming more difficult to do without any negative consequences. To bring the Gerald R. Ford-class into
dominance during the next century of naval warfare requires that the class be capable of seamlessly upgrading to
more advanced systems.
Launch and landing systems
The Nimitz-class aircraft carriers use steam-powered catapults to launch aircraft. Steam catapults were developed in
the 1950s and have been exceptionally reliable. For over fifty years at least one of the four catapults has been able to
launch an aircraft 99.5% of the time.
[16]
However, there are a number of drawbacks. "The foremost deficiency is that
the catapult operates without feedback control. With no feedback, there often occurs large transients in tow force that
can damage or reduce the life of the airframe."
[17]
The steam system is massive, inefficient (46%),
[18]
and hard to
control.
Control problems with the system results in minimum and maximum weight limits. The minimum weight limit is
above the weight of all UAVs. An inability to launch the latest additions to the Naval air forces is a restriction on
operations that cannot continue into the next generation of aircraft carriers. The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch
System (EMALS) provides solutions to all these problems .Wikipedia:Citation needed An electromagnetic system is
more efficient, smaller, lighter, more powerful, and easier to control. Increased control means that EMALS will be
able to launch both heavier and lighter aircraft than the steam catapult. Also, the use of a controlled force will reduce
the stress on airframes, resulting in less maintenance and a longer lifetime for the airframe. Unfortunately the power
limitations for the Nimitz class make the installation of the recently developed EMALS impossible.
Electromagnetics will also be used in the new Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) system. The current system relies on
hydraulics to slow and stop a landing aircraft. While effective, as demonstrated by more than fifty years of
implementation, the AAG system offers a number of improvements. The current system is unable to capture UAVs
without damaging them due to extreme stresses on the airframe. UAVs do not have the necessary mass to drive the
large hydraulic piston used to trap heavier manned planes. By using electromagnetics the energy absorption is
controlled by a turbo-electric engine. This makes the trap smoother and reduces shock on airframes. Even though the
system will look the same from the flight deck as its predecessor, it will be more flexible, safe, and reliable, and will
require less maintenance and manning.
[19]
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
234
Sensors
Another addition to the Gerald R. Ford-class is an integrated search and tracking radar system. The dual-band radar
was being developed for both the Zumwalt-class guided missile destroyers and the Ford-class aircraft carriers. The
island can be kept smaller by replacing six to ten radar antennas with a single six-faced radar. The DBR works by
combining the X-Band AN/SPY-3 multifunction radar with the S-band volume search radar.
[20]
The S-band radar
was later deleted from the Zumwalt class destroyers as a cost saving measure.
[21]
The three faces dedicated to the
X-band radar are responsible for low altitude tracking and target illumination, while the other three faces dedicated
to the S-band are responsible for target search and tracking regardless of weather. "Operating simultaneously over
two electromagnetic frequency ranges, the DBR marks the first time this functionality has been achieved using two
frequencies coordinated by a single resource manager." This new system has no moving parts, therefore minimizing
maintenance and manning requirements for operation.
Possible upgrades
Each new technology and design feature integrated into the Ford-class aircraft carrier improves sortie generation,
manning requirements, and operational capabilities. New defense systems, such as free-electron laser
directed-energy weapons, dynamic armor, and tracking systems will require more power. "Only half of the electrical
power-generation capability on CVN78 is needed to run currently planned systems, including EMALS. CVN78
will thus have the power reserves that the Nimitz-class lacks to run lasers and dynamic armor."
[22]
The addition of
new technologies, power systems, design layout, and better control systems results in an increased sortie rate of 25%
over the Nimitz-class and a 25% reduction in manpower required to operate.
[23]
Breakthrough waste management technology will be deployed on Gerald R. Ford. Co-developed with the Carderock
Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, PyroGenesis Canada Inc., was in 2008 awarded the contract to outfit
the ship with a Plasma Arc Waste Destruction System (PAWDS). This compact system will treat all combustible
solid waste generated on board the ship. After having completed factory acceptance testing in Montreal, the system
was scheduled to be shipped to the Huntington Ingalls shipyard in late 2011 for installation on the carrier.
[24]
Construction
Gerald R. Ford under construction at Newport News
Construction began on components of CVN-78 in
early 2007 and is planned to finish in 2015. It is
under construction at Newport News Shipbuilding,
a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries
(formerly Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding) in
Newport News, Virginia. This is the only shipyard
in the United States capable of building
nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. In 2005, it was
estimated to cost at least $8billion excluding the
$5billion spent on research and development
(though that was not expected to be representative
of the cost of future members of the class). A 2009
report said that the Ford would cost $14billion
including research and development, and the actual
cost of the carrier itself would be $9billion. The daily operating cost of a carrier strike group is estimated at $6.5
million.
[25]
A total of three carriers have been authorized for construction, but if the Nimitz-class carriers and Enterprise were to
be replaced on a one-for-one basis, eleven carriers would be required over the life of the program. However, the last
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
235
Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is not scheduled to be decommissioned until 2058.
In a speech on 6 April 2009, then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that the program would shift to a
five-year building program so as to place it on a "more fiscally sustainable path". Such a measure would result in ten
carriers after 2040.
In 2013 a GAO report cast doubts on the delivery schedule.
[26]
As of 2013, construction costs are estimated at $12.8
billion, 22% over the 2008 budget, plus $4.7 billion in research and development costs. Because of budget
difficulties, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan Greenert, has warned there may be a two year delay
beyond 2016 in completing the Ford.
Naming
There was a movement by the USSAmerica Carrier Veterans' Association to have CVN-78 named after America
rather than after President Ford. Eventually, the amphibious assault ship LHA-6 was named America.
On 27 May 2011, the Department of Defense announced the name of CVN-79 would be USS John F. Kennedy.
On 1 December 2012, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced that CVN-80 would be named USS Enterprise.
The information was delivered during a prerecorded speech as part of the deactivation ceremony for the previous
USS Enterprise (CVN-65). The future Enterprise (CVN-80) will be the ninth U.S. Navy ship to bear this name.
Ships in class
There are expected to be ten ships of this class. To date, three have been announced:
Ship Hull classification
symbol
Laid down Launched Commissioned Scheduled to replace References
Gerald R. Ford CVN-78 13 November
2009
November
2013
2016
(scheduled)
Enterprise(CVN-65)
John F.
Kennedy
CVN-79 2014
(scheduled)
2018
(scheduled)
2020
(scheduled)
Nimitz(CVN-68)
Enterprise CVN-80 2018
(scheduled)
2023
(scheduled)
2025
(scheduled)
Dwight D.
Eisenhower(CVN-69)
Notes
[1] FY14 cost of CVN-79 (procured in FY13) in then-year dollars; the same budget puts the cost of CVN-78 (procured in FY08) at $12,829.3
million but that includes ~$3.3bn of development costs. CVN-80 is estimated at $13,874.2m, making the total cost of the first three Fords
$38,041.9m, or $12.68bn each.
[2] [2] Combat fleet of the world 2012
[3] Before its redesignation to Ford-class (CVN-78), the new carrier was known as the CVNX carrier program ("X" meaning "in development")
and then as the CVN-21 carrier program. (Here, the "21" is not a hull number, but rather it is common in "future" plans in the U.S. military,
alluding to the 21st century.)
[4] http:/ / www. naval-technology. com/ projects/ cvn-21/
[5] [5] Covers the costs of the CVN-21 program, how those are calculated, and where the $5billion savings on operational costs is expected to come
from over the ship's planned 50-year lifetime.
[6] "Ship Information". USS Nimitz Homepage. 4March 2008.
[7] "Our Ship". USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN71) Web Page. 4March 2008.
[8] [8] Schank, John. Modernizing the U.S. Aircraft Carrier Fleet: Accelerating CVN21 Production Versus Mid-Life Refueling. Santa Monica: Rand
Corporation, 2005. p.76.
[9] [9] Larrabee, Chuck. DDG 1000 Dual Band Radar (DBR). Raytheon. 1March 2008.
[10] [10] Aircraft Carriers - CVN 21 Program Fact File. United States Navy. 8October 2007. 4March 2008.
[11] Schank, John. Modernizing the U.S. Aircraft Carrier Fleet, p.77.
[12] (http:/ / www. navy.mil/ navydata/ fact_display.asp?cid=4200& tid=250& ct=4) Navy Fact File for CVN-21 program
[13] http:/ / military. federalequipment. com/ node/ 9
Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
236
[14] [14] Keeter, Hunter. "New carrier island is a heart of higher sortie rates for CVN21". BNET Business Management Network. 4March 2008.
[15] Schank, John. Modernizing the U.S. Aircraft Carrier Fleet p.78.
[16] Schank, John. Modernizing the U.S. Aircraft Carrier Fleet, p.80.
[17] [17] Doyle, Michael, Douglas Samuel, Thomas Conway, and Robert Klimowski. "Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System - EMALS". Naval
Air Engineering Station Lakehurst. 1March. p.1.
[18] [18] Doyle, Michael, "Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System - EMALS". p.1.
[19] [19] Rodriguez, Carmelo. "Launch and Recovery Testing". ITEA-SAN. Turboelectric Arresting Gear. Mission Valley Hotel, San Diego. 16June
2005.
[20] [20] Larrabee, Chuck. "Raytheon Successfully Integrates Final Element of Dual Band Radar for DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer". Raytheon
News Release. 4March 2008.
[21] http:/ / www.fas.org/ sgp/ crs/ weapons/ RL32109.pdf
[22] Schank, John. Modernizing the U.S. Aircraft Carrier Fleet p.83.
[23] Taylor, Leslie. "CVN21 MS&A Overview". NDIA. 7June 2006. 1March 2008.
[24] [24] | page= 13
[25] http:/ / www.cnas.org/ files/ documents/ publications/ CNAS%20Carrier_Hendrix_FINAL. pdf
[26] "Lead Ship Testing and Reliability Shortfalls Will Limit Initial Fleet Capabilities." (http:/ / www. gao. gov/ products/ GAO-13-396)
References
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carriers.
Aircraft Carriers CVN (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200& tid=200& ct=4) US
Navy Fact File
Design & Preparations Continue for the USA's New CVN-21 Super-Carrier (updated) (http:/ / www.
defenseindustrydaily. com/ design-preparations-continue-for-the-usas-new-cvn21-supercarrier-01494/ ), Defense
Industry Daily. Provides an extensive briefing re: the new ship class, and adds entries for many of the contracts
under this program.
Gerald R. Ford Class (CVN-78) Aircraft Carrier(Navy recognition) (http:/ / www. navyrecognition. com/ index.
php?option=com_content& task=view& id=809)
237
AMPHIBIOUS
Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ship
USS Iwo Jima (LPH-2)
Class overview
Builders: Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Philadelphia Naval Shipyard
Ingalls Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Essexclass (some ships converted)
Succeededby: Tarawaclass
In commission: 19612002
Completed: 7
Active: 0
Laid up: 1
Retired: 7
General characteristics
Type: Amphibious Assault Ship (LPH)
Displacement: 18,474tons (full)
11,000tons (light)
Length: 592ft (180m)
Beam: 84ft (26m)
Draft: 27ft (8.2m)
Propulsion: 2 600psi (4.1MPa) boilers,
one geared steam turbine,
one shaft,
22,000 shaft horsepower (16MW)
Speed: 22 knots (41km/h)
Troops: 2,157
Complement: 667
Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ship
238
Armament: Initially:
4 3-inch (76mm) / 50caliber AA guns
Later:
2 3-inch (76mm) / 50caliber AA
guns,
8 cell Sea Sparrow BPDMS launchers,
2 Phalanx CIWS
Aviation facilities: 25 helicopters or AV-8 Harriers
Flight deck width: 105ft (32m)
The Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ships of the United States Navy were the first amphibious assault ships
designed and built as dedicated helicopter carriers, capable of operating up to 20 helicopters to carry up to 1,800
marines ashore. They were named for battles featuring the United States Marine Corps, starting with the Battle of
Iwo Jima. The first ship of the class was commissioned in 1961, and the last was decommissioned in 2002. Because
these ships bore the hull classification of LPH they have often been referred to as "Landing Platform, Helicopter".
Ships of the class:
USSIwo Jima(LPH-2)
USSOkinawa(LPH-3)
USSGuadalcanal(LPH-7)
USSGuam(LPH-9)
USSTripoli(LPH-10)
USSNew Orleans(LPH-11)
USSInchon(LPH-12)
Popular culture
One of the Iwo Jima class ships served as the fieldsite in Edwin Hutchins's classic cognitive science study Cognition
in the Wild. Although Hutchins does not mention the ship class by name, on p.7 he characterizes it as a 603-foot-long
(184m) amphibious helicopter carrier.
References
hazegray.org: Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ships (http:/ / www. hazegray. org/ navhist/ carriers/ us_assau.
htm#iwo-cl)
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship
239
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship
USSSaipan during Expeditionary Strike Group integration training in 2004
Class overview
Name: Tarawa
Builders: Ingalls Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Iwo Jimaclass
Succeededby: Waspclass
Built: 15 November 1971 3 May 1980
In commission: 29 May 1976present
Planned: 9
Completed: 5
Cancelled: 4
Active: 1
Retired: 4
General characteristics
Class & type: Amphibious assault ship/LHA
Displacement: 39,967 tonnes (39,336 long tons; 44,056 short tons) full load
Length: 834 feet (254m)
Beam: 131.9 feet (40.2m)
Draft: 25.9 feet (7.9m)
Propulsion: 2 Combustion Engineering boilers
2 Westinghouse turbines
70,000 horsepower (52,000kW)
2 propeller shafts
1 bow thruster
Speed: 24 knots (44km/h; 28mph)
Range: 10,000 nautical miles (19,000km; 12,000mi) at 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph)
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship
240
Boats & landing
craft carried:
4 LCU 1610
Or two LCU and two LCM-8
Or 17 LCM-6
Or 45 LVT
Troops: 1,703
Complement: 56 officers, 874 sailors (1998)
Armament: As of 1998:
Mark 49 RAM missile system
2 Vulcan Phalanx
6 25 mm automatic cannons
8 12.7 mm machine guns
Previous weapons:
2 8 cell MK- 25 NATO Sea Sparrow BPDMS launchers (replaced by Phalanx
units)
3 5-inch (127 mm) Mk 45 lightweight guns (deleted 19971998)
Aircraft carried: Up to 19 Sea Stallions, 26 Sea Knights, or mixed airgroup
6 Harrier jump-jets
Aviation facilities: 820-by-118.1-foot (249.9 by 36.0m) flight deck with 2 aircraft lifts
The Tarawa class is a ship class of amphibious assault ships/LHA operated by the United States Navy (USN). Five
ships were built by Ingalls Shipbuilding between 1971 and 1980; another four ships were planned, but later canceled.
As of April 2011, only one vessel is active, the USS Peleliu, and the class is due to be replaced by the America class
amphibious assault ships from 2014 onward.
Design
The vessels have a full load displacement of 39,967 tonnes (39,336 long tons; 44,056 short tons).
[1]
Each ship is 834
feet (254m) long, with a beam of 131.9 feet (40.2m), and a draft of 25.9 feet (7.9m).
Propulsion is provided by two Combustion Engineering boilers, connected to two Westinghouse turbines. These
supply 70,000 horsepower (52,000kW) to the ship's two propeller shafts. A Tarawa class vessel can reach a
maximum speed of 24 knots (44km/h; 28mph), and has a maximum range of 10,000 nautical miles (19,000km;
12,000mi) at 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph). In addition to the main propulsion system, the ships are fitted with a bow
thruster.
As of 1998, the ships' armament consists of a Mark 49 RAM surface-to-air missile system, two Vulcan Phalanx
close-in weapons systems, six Mark 242 25 mm automatic cannons, and eight 12.7 mm machine guns. Previously,
the amphibious warships were fitted with 2 Mark 25 Sea Sparrow missile systems (which were replaced by the
Phalanx units), and three 5-inch (127 mm) Mk 45 lightweight guns in bow sponsons and port aft sponson (the guns
were removed across the class during 1997 and 1998). Countermeasures and decoys include four Mark 36 SRBOC
launchers, a SLQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo decoy, a Sea Gnat unit, SLQ-49 chaff decoys.
The number of helicopters carried by each vessel was up to 19 Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallions, 26 Boeing Vertol
CH-46 Sea Knight, or a mix of the two. The 820-by-118.1-foot (249.9 by 36.0m) flight deck is fitted with two
aircraft lifts, and up to nine Sea Stallions or 12 Sea Knights can be operated simultaneously. With a small amount of
modification, the ships could carry and operate up to six McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II jump-jets.
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship
241
A LCU returning to USSBelleau Wood's well
dock
The Tarawa class ships are designed to embark a reinforced battalion
of the United States Marine Corps and their equipment. Onboard
accommodation is provided for up to 1,703 marines, while 33,730
cubic feet (955m
3
) is provided for the battalion's vehicles, and
116,900 cubic feet (3,310m
3
) is allocated for stores and other
equipment. As well as deploying by helicopters, personnel and
equipment can be embarked or offloaded via a 268-by-78-foot (82 by
24m) well deck in each ship's stern. Up to four LCU 1610 landing
craft can be transported in and operated from the well deck, along with
other designs and combinations of landing craft (two LCU and two
LCM-8, or 17 LCM-6, or 45 LVT).
The Tarawa design was later repeated for the Wasp class amphibious assault ships, with some changes.
[2]
The main
changes to the latter eight-ship class include the lower placement of the ship's bridge aboard the Wasps, the
relocation of the command and control facilities to inside the hull, modifications to allow the operation of Harrier
jump-jets and Landing Craft Air Cushion hovercraft, and removal of the 5-inch guns and their sponsons to increase
the overall size of the flight deck.
Construction
All five warships were built by Ingalls Shipbuilding, at this company's shipyard in Pascagoula, Mississippi. The
Tarawa was approved for construction during Fiscal Year 1969, with two more ships of this class ordered by
Congress in the 1970 and 1971 fiscal years. Nine ships of this class were originally contemplated for the Tarawa
class, but just five were ordered and built, and the other four ships were never ordered by the Navy.
Work on the first warship of this class, the USSTarawa, began on 15 November 1971, and she was commissioned
into the Navy on 29 May 1976. The last of the five ships, the USSPeleliu, was completed on 3 May 1980.
Decommissioning and replacement
Main article: America-class amphibious assault ship
The Tarawas began leaving service in 2005. By April 2011, four of the five amphibious assault ships had been
decommissioned, leaving only Peleliu in active service.
The Tarawa class is to be replaced by the America class amphibious assault ship.
[]
The first America class vessel is
scheduled to be delivered in 2013.Wikipedia:Citation needed Originally, four were planned (with the Wasp class
USSMakin Island built as a direct replacement for Belleau Wood), but the number has since been
reduced.Wikipedia:Citation needed
Ships
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship
242
Name Laid down Launched Commissioned DecommissionedWikipedia:Citation
needed
FateWikipedia:Citation
needed
USSTarawa(LHA-1) 15
November
1971
1 December
1973
29 May 1976 31 March 2009 Awaiting disposal
USSSaipan(LHA-2) 21 July 1972 18 July 1974 15 October 1977 25 April 2007 Sold for scrap
USSBelleau
Wood(LHA-3)
5 March
1973
11 April
1977
23 September
1978
28 October 2005 Sunk as target ship on 13
July 2006
USSNassau(LHA-4) 5 March
1973
21 January
1978
28 July 1979 31 March 2011 In reserve
USSPeleliu(LHA-5) 12
November
1976
25
November
1978
3 May 1980 Active as of 2014
Citations
[1] Sharpe (ed.), Jane's Fighting Ships 199899, p. 822
[2] Bishop & Chant, Aircraft Carriers, p. 230
References
Bishop, Chris; Chant, Christopher (2004). Aircraft Carriers: the world's greatest naval vessels and their aircraft
(http:/ / books. google. com. au/ books?id=PY8CvlKC7kgC). London: MBI. ISBN0-7603-2005-5. OCLC
56646560 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 56646560).
Sharpe, Richard, ed. (1998). Jane's Fighting Ships 199899 (101st ed.). Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane's Information
Group. ISBN0-7106-1795-X. OCLC 39372676 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 39372676).
Wertheim, Eric, ed. (2007). The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World: Their Ships, Aircraft, and
Systems (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=TJunjRvplU4C) (15th ed.). Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press.
ISBN978-1-59114-955-2. OCLC 140283156 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 140283156).
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Tarawa Class.
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
243
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
The USS Wasp (LHD-1), in March 2004.
Class overview
Name: Wasp
Builders: Ingalls Shipbuilding
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Tarawaclass
Succeededby: Americaclass
Cost:
$750 million each, average
[1]
In commission: 1989present
Completed: 8
Active: 8
General characteristics
Type: Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) amphibious assault ship
Displacement: 40,500 long tons (41,150t) full load
Length: 831ft (253.2m)
Beam: 104ft (31.8m)
Draft: 27ft (8.1m)
Propulsion: Two boilers, two geared steam turbines, two shafts, 70,000 shaft-horsepower;
two General Electric LM2500 geared gas turbines, two shafts (USS Makin Island)
Speed: 22 knots (41km/h; 25mph)
Range: 9,500 nautical miles (17,600km; 10,900mi) at 18kn (33km/h; 21mph)
Boats & landing
craft carried:
3 Landing Craft Air Cushion or
12 Landing Craft Mechanized
Troops: 1,894 Marine Detachment
Complement: 1,208
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
244
Sensors and
processing systems:
1 AN/SPS-49 2-D Air Search Radar
1 AN/SPS-48 3-D Air Search Radar
1 AN/SPS-67 Surface Search Radar
1 Mk23 Target Acquisition System (TAS)
1 AN/SPN-43 Marshalling Air Traffic Control Radar
1 AN/SPN-35 Air Traffic Control Radar
1 AN/URN-25 TACAN system
1 AN/UPX-24 Identification Friend Foe
Armament: Two Rolling Airframe Missile launchers
Two Sea Sparrow missile launchers
Three 20mm Phalanx CIWS systems (LHD 58 with two)
Four 25 mm Mk 38 chain guns (LHD 58 with three)
Four .50 BMG machine guns
Aircraft carried: Actual mix depends on the mission
Standard Complement:
6 AV-8B Harrier II attack aircraft
4 AH-1W SuperCobra attack helicopter
12 CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters or 4+ MV-22 Osprey
4 CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopters
34 UH-1N Huey helicopters
Assault:
42 CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters
or
22+ MV-22 Osprey
Sea Control:
20 AV-8B Harrier II attack aircraft
6 SH-60F/HH-60H ASW helicopters
The Wasp class is a class of Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) amphibious assault ships operated by the United States
Navy. Based on the Tarawa class, with modifications to operate more advanced aircraft and landing craft, the Wasp
class is capable of transporting almost the full strength of a United States Marine Corps Marine Expeditionary Unit
(MEU), and landing them in hostile territory via landing craft or helicopters. All Wasp-class ships were built by
Ingalls Shipbuilding, at Pascagoula, Mississippi, with the lead ship, USSWasp, commissioned on 29 July 1989.
Eight Wasp-class ships were built, and as of 2013[2], all eight are active.
Design
The Wasp class is based on the preceding Tarawa-class design.
[3]
The design was modified to allow for the operation
of AV-8B Harrier II aircraft and Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) hovercraft, making the Wasp class the first
ships specifically designed to operate these.
Wasp, left, and Tarawa-class Saipan, in 1993.
The main physical changes between the two designs are the lower
placement of the ship's bridge aboard the Wasps, the relocation of the
command and control facilities to inside the hull, the removal of the
5-inch Mk 45 naval guns and their sponsons on the forward edge of the
flight deck, and a lengthening of 24 feet (7.3m) to carry the
LCACs.Wikipedia:Citation needed
Each Wasp class ship has a displacement of 40,500 long tons (41,150t)
at full load, is 831 feet (253.2m) long, has a beam of 104 feet
(31.8m), and a draft of 27 feet (8.1m).
[4]
For propulsion, most of the
ships are fitted with two steam boilers connected to geared turbines,
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
245
which deliver 70,000 shaft horsepower (33,849kW) to the two propeller shafts. This allows the LHDs to reach
speeds of 22 knots (41km/h; 25mph), with a range of 9,500 nautical miles (17,600km; 10,900mi) at 18 knots
(33km/h; 21mph). The last ship of the class, USSMakin Island, was instead fitted with two General Electric
LM2500 geared gas turbines.
[5]
The ship's company consists of 1,208personnel. The ships are the largest
amphibious warfare vessels in the world.
Amphibious operations
The LHDs can support amphibious landings in two forms: by landing craft, or by helicopter. In the 266-by-50-foot
(81 by 15.2m) well deck, the LHDs can carry three Landing Craft Air Cushion, twelve Landing Craft Mechanised,
or 40 Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAVs), with another 21AAVs on the vehicle deck. The flight deck has nine
helicopter landing spots, and can operate helicopters as large as the Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion and Boeing Vertol
CH-46 Sea Knight. The size of the air group varies depending on the operation: a standard air group consists of six
Harriers and four Bell AH-1W SuperCobras for attack and support, twelve Sea Knights and four Sea Stallions for
transport, and three or four Bell UH-1N Iroquois utility helicopters. For a full assault, the air group can be maxed out
at 42 SeaKnights, while a Wasp operating in the sea control or 'harrier carrier' configuration carries 20Harriers
(though some ships of the class have operated as many as 24), supported by six Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk helicopters
for anti-submarine warfare. The CH-46 is being replaced by the MV-22 Osprey on a squadron-by-squadron basis,
with the expected full conversion within all aviation combat elements by 2019.
[6]
Two aircraft elevators move
aircraft between the flight deck and the hangar; in order to transit the Panama Canal, these elevators need to be
folded in.
USS Essex performing a stern gate mating with a
landing craft
Each ship is capable of hosting 1,894 personnel of the United States
Marine Corps; almost the full strength of a Marine Expeditionary Unit
(MEU). A Wasp-class vessel can transport up to 30,800 square feet
(2,860m
2
) of cargo, and another 20,000 square feet (1,858m
2
) is
allocated for the MEU's vehicles, which typically consists of five M1
Abrams battle tanks, up to 25 AAVs, eight M198 howitzers, 68trucks,
and up to 12 other support vehicles. An internal monorail is used to
shift cargo from the cargo holds to the well deck.
Each Wasp-class ship has a hospital with 64 patient beds and six
operating rooms. An additional 536 beds can be set up in an "Overflow
Casualty Ward" as needed.
[7]
Armament and sensors
The armament of the first four Wasp class consists of two Mark29 octuple launchers for RIM-7 Sea Sparrow
missiles, two Mark49 launchers for RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles, three 20mm Phalanx CIWS systems, four
25 mm Mark 38 chain guns, and four .50 BMG machine guns. The next four ships, Bataan, Bonhomme Richard, Iwo
Jima and USSMakin Island(LHD-8), have a slightly reduced weapons outfit compared to their preceding sister
ships, with one Phalanx and one Mark38 gun removed.
Countermeasures fitted to the ships include four to six Mark 36 SRBOC launchers, an AN/SLQ-25 torpedo decoy,
AN/SLQ-49 chaff buoys, a Sea Gnat missile decoy, and an AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare Suite.
The sensor suite fitted to each ship comprises an AN/SPS-48 or AN/SPS-52 air-search radar backed up by an
AN/SPS-49 air-search radar, an SPS-67 surface search radar, an AN/URN-25 TACAN system, along with several
other radars for navigation and fire control.
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
246
Construction
All Wasp-class ships were built by Ingalls Shipbuilding, at Pascagoula, Mississippi.
[8]
The first ship of the class,
USSWasp, was commissioned on 29 July 1989.
[9]
The fifth ship of the class, USSBataan, was constructed through a process of modular assembly and prefitting out,
which meant that the LHD was almost 75 percent complete when she was launched. The Bataan was also the first
LHD built to house females (as opposed to being modified after completion), with dedicated berths for up to 450
female sailors or Marines.
Ships and homeports
USSWasp(LHD-1), Norfolk, Virginia
USSEssex(LHD-2), San Diego, California
USSKearsarge(LHD-3), Norfolk, Virginia
USSBoxer(LHD-4), San Diego, California
USSBataan(LHD-5), Norfolk, Virginia
USSBonhomme Richard(LHD-6), Sasebo, Japan
USSIwo Jima(LHD-7), Norfolk, Virginia
USSMakin Island(LHD-8), San Diego, California
A Sea Sparrow missile being launched by USS Makin Island A CH-53E Super Stallion lifting pallets off USS Bataan
References
Citations
[1] http:/ / www. military-today. com/ navy/ wasp_class.htm
[2] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=Wasp-class_amphibious_assault_ship& action=edit
[3] Bishop & Chant, Aircraft Carriers, p. 230
[4] Bishop & Chant, Aircraft Carriers, p. 231.
[5] Liewer, Steve. "Navy Goes Green With New Hybrid Ship" (http:/ / www3. signonsandiego. com/ stories/ 2009/ sep/ 15/
navy-goes-green-new-hybrid-ship/ ). San Diego Union-Tribune, 15 September 2009, p. 1.
[6] Anthony, Marian. "U.S. Marines Nostalgic Phrog Helicopters To Be Phased Out By MV22." (http:/ / www. businessinsider. com/
us-marines-nostalgic-phrogphased-out-by-mv22-2011-4) Business Insider, 12 April 2011.
[7] "USS KEARSARGE LHD-3 SHIP'S LOADING CHARACTERISTICS PAMPHLET." (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/
docs/ slcp-lhd-3/ Secti. html)
[8] "Northrop Grumman Starts Fabrication on Eighth LHD 1 Wasp-class Ship" (http:/ / www. irconnect. com/ noc/ press/ pages/ news_releases.
html?d=40795) 27 May 2003
[9] "Wasp To 'Come Alive' today At Naval Yard" (http:/ / articles. dailypress. com/ 1989-07-29/ news/
8907290198_1_ship-amphibious-assault-aircraft-carrier) Daily press 29 July 1989
Bibliography
Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
247
Bishop, Chris; Chant, Christopher (2004). Aircraft Carriers: The World's Greatest Naval Vessels and Their
Aircraft (http:/ / books. google.com. au/ books?id=PY8CvlKC7kgC). London: MBI. ISBN0-7603-2005-5.
OCLC 56646560 (http:/ / www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 56646560).
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Wasp class amphibious assault ships.
Extensive information on GlobalSecurity.org (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ lhd-1.
htm)
America-class amphibious assault ship
248
America-class amphibious assault ship
Not to be confused with America-class steamshipor America-class ship of the line.
USS America (LHA-6) during trials in 2013
Class overview
Builders: Huntington Ingalls Industries
Ingalls Shipbuilding Division
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Wasp class
Cost: US$10,169.9m program cost for 3,
$3.4bn/unit (FY13)
Built: 2008
Building:
1
[1]
Planned:
11
[2]
Completed: 1
Active: 1
General characteristics
Type: Amphibious assault ship
Displacement: 44,971 long tons (45,693t) full load
Length: 844ft (257m)
Beam: 106ft (32m)
Propulsion: Two gas turbines, two shafts, with 70,000 total brake horsepower, and two 5,000hp (3,700kW) auxiliary
propulsion engines.
Speed: 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph) plus
Complement: 65 officers, 994 enlisted men
1,687 Marines
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPQ-9B fire control radar
AN/SPS-48E air search radar
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32B(V)2
two Mk53 Nulka decoy launchers
America-class amphibious assault ship
249
Armament: Two Rolling Airframe Missile launchers
two Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile launchers
two Phalanx CIWS
seven dual .50 caliber machine guns
Armor: none
Aircraft carried: F-35B Lightning II
MV-22B Osprey
CH-53E Super Stallions OR
Sikorsky CH-53K Super Stallion helicopters
UH-1Y Venom
AH-1Z Viper
MH-60S Knighthawk
Aviation facilities: hangar deck
The America-class amphibious assault ships (formerly the LHA(R) class) of the U.S. Navy was designed to put
ashore a Marine Expeditionary Unit using helicopters and MV-22B Osprey V/STOLs, supported by AV-8B Harrier
or F-35 Lightning II V/STOL fighter planes and various attack helicopters. The first of these warships should be
delivered to the U.S. Navy in 2013 to replace the USSPeleliu(LHA-5) of the Tarawa-class amphibious assault
ships. The design of the America class was based on that of the USSMakin Island(LHD-8), the last ship of the
Wasp class, but the "Flight 0" ships of the America class will not have well decks, and they have smaller on-board
hospitals in order to give more space for aviation uses.
Although they only carry helicopters and V/STOL aircraft, the USS America, with a displacement of about 45,000
long tons, is similar in size to the fixed wing aircraft carriers of France and India.
The America can be used as a small aircraft carrier with a squadron of jet fighters plus several multipurpose
helicopters, such as the SH-60 Seahawk. She can carry about 20 AV-8B Harriers, F-35Bs, or a mixture of the two,
but the future ships of this class, starting with LHA-8, will have smaller aircraft hangars to leave room for larger
amphibious warfare well decks.
[3]
Design
The design of the USS America is based on the USS Makin Island (LHD-8), herself an improved version of the
Wasp-class amphibious assault ships with gas turbine power. About 45 percent of the "Flight 0" design of this class
is based on that of the Makin Island, but with her well deck omitted to allow more room for aircraft, their spare parts
and weapons, and their fuel. Note that the gas turbines of the Makin Island, the America, and her possible successors
burn the same kind of fuel (JP-5) that is burned in the gas turbines of their helicopters, the jet engines of their AV-8B
Harrier and MV-22 Osprey fixed wing aircraft and, in future ships, the gas turbines of the Landing Craft Air
Cushions (LCACs) that they could carry in their well decks. All of this greatly simplifies the storage, distribution,
and use of the fuels for these craft.
The typical aircraft complement for the first two vessels is expected to be 12 MV-22B Osprey transports, six STOVL
F-35B Lightning II multirole jet aircraft, four CH-53K heavy transport helicopters, seven AH-1Z/UH-1Y attack
helicopters, and two Navy MH-60S Knighthawks for air-sea rescue. The exact make-up of the ship's aircraft
complements will vary according to her mission. She can carry about 20 AV-8Bs or F-35Bs, and two MH-60Ses to
serve as a small aircraft carrier as demonstrated by Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) operations in Operation Iraqi
Freedom.
The U.S. Marine Corps is now more concerned about anti-ship missile attacks from fast attack craft, hence the
Commandant of the Marine Corps wants to keep the amphibious ships farther offshore. In that case, Marines would
be sent ashore in long-ranged MV-22 V/STOL aircraft. The MV-22 is significantly larger than the largest helicopters
used by the Marine Corps and the Navy in the past. Hence, the America has twice the displacement of the much
America-class amphibious assault ship
250
older Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ships (all of which are now decommissioned).
Setting the beam of the America at 106 feet is dictated by the need for these ships to pass through the Panama Canal.
The Congressional Budget Office found that LH(X)-class ships would be more cost-effective if they were built with
nuclear powerif the price of oil reached and stayed above $140 per barrel by 2040.
[4]
The America-class amphibious assault ships are engineered with a hybrid-electric propulsion system derived from
the one used on the USS Makin Island (LHD-8). The ships can use diesel-electric propulsion for slow speeds and use
gas-turbines for high speeds. The amphibious ships can utilize the diesel-electric engines when operating close to
shores in situations that require lower speeds.
[5]
A modified version of the design of the USS America, designated the MPF(F), LHA(R), or T-LHA(R), was proposed
for two ships of the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future). The MPF(F) is the Navy's concept for a "sea base" to
support operations ashore starting in about 2025.
These two ships would hypothetically be manned by a civilian crew from the Military Sealift Command, and hence
not armed with weapons. Funding for the MPF(F) and the LHA(R) was tabled by the Senate Armed Services
Committee in the fiscal year 2008 budget. The U.S. Navy now intends to buy more ships of the America class for its
fleet of amphibious warfare ships.
The so-called "LHX" was a warship that was proposed in the late 1990s to replace the Tarawa-class ships, but with a
dry deck for hovercraft rather than a floodable "well deck". After the year 2000, the LHX, the so-called "Amphibious
Assault Ship Future Replacement", was put forward to replace all of the LHDs.
The new LHX could be a Flight 2 design of the America class built with a well deck and a smaller island
superstructure, which would give it 20 percent more capacity on the flight deck. This would remove the current
restriction on MV-22s to land on spots 5 and 6, and also giving room for four MV-22B, three F-35B Lightning IIs, or
three CH-53Ks to use the flight deck. In 2008, the procurement of Flight 2 ships was tentatively planned for 2024,
but that might not be practical or affordable by then.
In January 2014, the Navy began taking measures on the USS America in order to reduce damage from excessive
heat given off by the F-35B and MV-22 to prolong the life of the flight deck. The F-35B engine gives off much more
heat than the previous AV-8B Harrier STOVL fighter and the MV-22 Osprey's heat exhaust has been known to
damage flight decks. Plans include 14 different modifications to the ship and limiting the number of flight operations
that are conducted off the deck. The Navy is looking for cost-effective solutions that will not affect the combat
effectiveness of the America. Restricting the number of flight operations is not expected to decrease its usefulness as
amphibious assault ships are made to support quick assaults, while full-sized aircraft carriers have the mission of
conducting sustained air operations. Lessons learned from these measures will be applied to the USS Tripoli LHA-7
and LHA-8 ships under construction, which will allow them to perform "complete unrestricted operations."
[6]
Some
changes to the America are as small as putting covers over life rafts and refueling stations and moving antennas.
[7]
Well deck
Further warships in this class will have a well deck for amphibious warfare in their sterns to contain landing craft
(such as the Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) exactly as in the Tarawa-class amphibious assault ships (LHA)s and
the Wasp-class amphibious assault ships.
The addition of a well deck will leave less space for aircraft on board the ships, but the "Early Operational
Assessment" of 2005 criticized the "Flight 0" design because the expanded aviation facilities gave no space for a
well deck. Also, the USS America has reduced stowage space for military vehicles, and the size of her hospital was
reduced by two-thirds with respect to the Wasp-class ships.
Before he became the Under Secretary of the Navy, Robert O. Work also brought into question the usefulness of an
amphibious warfare ship without a well deck. The concept of the Landing Platform Helicopter (LPH) had failed
when their helicopters met anti-aircraft systems off the coast of Lebanon during the late 1970s. In that case, Marines
America-class amphibious assault ship
251
first had to be moved onto warships that had well decks.
The third ship of the class (LHA-8) will be the first in its class with a well deck for deploying amphibious vehicles.
While there was emphasis on lighter ground vehicles in the late 1990s, up-armored and heavier vehicles were used
during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Future counterinsurgency operations require ships that can carry and
deliver those vehicles, including through use of shore connectors; cargo lift requirements are met more expensively
by aircraft airlifting equipment. Adding the well deck will require the ship's island to be slightly smaller compared to
its two predecessors. Early design work with funds will begin in 2015, detailed design work and construction will
start in 2017, and the LHA-8 will enter service in 2024.
History
The program started in July 2001, with development beginning in October 2005, the production decision was made
in January 2006, and construction of LHA-6 began in December 2008. The keel-laying ceremony was on 17 July
2009 with delivery originally planned for August 2012. As of 2009, delivery was planned for February 2013 and
initial capability for February 2014, but delivery has now been further delayed into FY2014.
Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding was awarded $48.1m for "additional planning and advanced engineering services
in support of the LHA replacement (LHA[R]) Flight 0 amphibious assault ship (LHA 7)" on 28 October 2010, to run
until May 2012. It is tentatively scheduled for delivery in 2017. In January 2011 development problems led to the
F-35B program being placed on probation for two years, and plans for LHA-7 could change if the F-35B is canceled.
In April 2012, Contract N00024-10-C-2229 was issued to Huntington Ingalls Industries, in which funding for steel
plate purchase for LHA-7 is planned, and announced requirement for additional four ships (to LHA-10). LHA-7 will
be laid down in April 2013 and her commission is planned in 2018.
[8]
On 4 May 2012, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced the selection of USS Tripoli as the name for the
Navy's next large-deck amphibious assault ship (LHA-7).
[9]
On June 13, 2014 the U.S. Department of Defense announced on their website, that DOD had rewarded General
Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Co., San Diego, California modification to the reward as part
design/development work on LHA-8 for $23,500,000.
[10]
On June 20, 2014, the PCU Tripoli's shipyard, Ingalls Shipyards, is set to authenticate the ship's keel in ceremony by
the ship's sponsor, Lynne Mabus, wife of Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus.
[11]
Ships in class
Ship Hull Number Builder Laid down Launched Commissioned Fate
America LHA-6 Huntington Ingalls Industries, Pascagoula 17 July 2009 4 June 2012 Late 2014 Sea trials
Tripoli LHA-7 22 June 2014 Under construction
References
Notes
[1] http:/ / www. wlox. com/ story/ 25833222/ keel-laying-ceremony-held-for-amphibious-assault-ship-tripoli
[2] http:/ / defensetech.org/ 2013/ 06/ 04/ first-america-class-amphib-nears-completion/
[3] Freedberg, Sydney J. Jr. "Navy's Newest, LHA-6, A Dead End For Amphibious Ships?" (http:/ / defense. aol. com/ 2012/ 10/ 03/
navys-newest-lha-6-a-dead-end-for-amphibious-ships/ ?icid=related1) 3 October 2012.
[4] "The Cost-Effectiveness of Nuclear Power for Navy Surface Ships" (http:/ / www. cbo. gov/ doc. cfm?index=12169). CBO, May 2011.
[5] Navy to Test Hybrid-Propulsion on Destroyers (http:/ / defensetech. org/ 2013/ 08/ 06/ navy-to-test-hybrid-propulsion-on-destroyers/ ) -
Defensetech.org, 6 August 2013
America-class amphibious assault ship
252
[6] SNA 2014: Heat From F-35, MV-22 Continue to Plague Big Deck Amphibs (http:/ / news. usni. org/ 2014/ 01/ 15/
sna-2014-heat-f-35-mv-22-continue-plague-big-deck-amphibs) - News.USNI.org, 15 January 2014
[7] Navy Bringing Well Decks Back to Amphibs (http:/ / www. dodbuzz. com/ 2014/ 01/ 18/ navy-bringing-well-decks-back-to-amphibs/ ) -
DoDBuzz.com, 18 January 2014
[8] http:/ / flotprom. ru/ news/ ?ELEMENT_ID=109511
[9] http:/ / www. defense. gov/ releases/ release. aspx?releaseid=15247
[10] Defense.gov Contract Announcements include General Dynamic's award for LHA-8's development research for Flight I version of LHA-8.
(http:/ / www. defense. gov/ Contracts/ Contract.aspx?ContractID=5307)
[11] Tripoli's Keel Authentication Ceremony announced for June 20th, 2014. (http:/ / newsroom. huntingtoningalls. com/ News-Releases/
Media-Advisory-Navy-Secretary-Mabus-Mississippi-Gov-Bryant-to-Speak-at-Keel-Authentication-of-Tr-3de. aspx)
External links
US Navy.mil NewsStand LHA(R) page with image (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display.
asp?cid=4200& tid=400& ct=4)
LHA-6 America Global Security Info Page (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ lha-6. htm)
LHX/LHA(R) (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ lhx. htm)
America Class project on naval-technology.com (http:/ / www. naval-technology. com/ projects/
americaclassamphibio/ )
Landing Ship, Tank
A Canadian LST off-loads an M4 Sherman during the Allied
invasion of Sicily in 1943.
Landing Ship, Tank (LST) is the naval designation
for vessels created during World War II to support
amphibious operations by carrying significant
quantities of vehicles, cargo, and landing troops
directly onto an unimproved shore.
The first tank landing ships were built to British
requirements by converting existing ships. This was
followed by the development of a purpose built ship.
Thereafter, the British and US collaborated upon a joint
design with the majority of the construction carried out
by the US and supplied under lend-lease. The majority,
a thousand, were laid down in the United States during
World War II for use by the Allies. Eighty more were
built in the United Kingdom and Canada.
Landing Ship, Tank
253
LST Mk.1
Class overview
Name: LST Maracaibo class
Builders: Furness Shipbuilding Company, Haverton Hill-on-Tees
Operators: Royal Navy
Succeededby: Boxer
Completed: 3 (Misoa, Tasajera & Bachaquero)
General characteristics
Tonnage: 4,800 long tons (4,877t) GRT
Length:
382ft (116m)
[1]
Beam: 64 ft
Draught: Fully laden :
15ft (4.6m) aft
4ft (1.2m) forward
Ramps: Double hinged ramp, effective length of 100 ft (30 m)
Propulsion: Reciprocating steam engine, 2 shafts, 3,000 shp
Capacity: 18 30 ton tanks or 22 25 ton tanks or 33 3-ton trucks
Troops: Berths for 217 troops
Complement: 98 Combined Operations personnel
Armament: 1 twin 40 mm gun
6 20 mm guns
3 Lewis guns
2 4in (100mm) smoke mortars
Notes: Equipment: 2 50 ton derrick cranes
Boxer as Fighter Direction Ship
Class overview
Name: LST (1) Boxer class
Builders: Harland and Wolff
Operators: Royal Navy
Preceded by: Maracaibo
Landing Ship, Tank
254
Succeededby: LST (2)
Completed: 3 (Boxer, Bruiser, Thruster)
General characteristics
Type: Landing Ship, Tank Mark I
Displacement: 3,620 long tons (3,678t) standard
5,410 long tons (5,497t) full load
Length: 400ft (120m)
Beam: 49ft (15m)
Draught: 14ft 6in (4.42m)
Propulsion: Steam turbines, 2 shafts, 7,000shp (5,200kW)
Speed: 18 knots (33km/h; 21mph) laden to beaching draught
16.5 knots (30.6km/h; 19.0mph) at deep
Range: 9,000nmi (17,000km; 10,000mi) at 14kn (26km/h; 16mph)
Capacity: 13 Churchill tanks or 20 medium tanks, 27 vehicles on upper deck, 193 men
Complement: 169
Armament: 4 QF 2 pdr
8 20 mm Oerlikon
2 4-inch smoke mortars
Notes: Equipment: 1 40 ton crane
The British evacuation from Dunkirk in 1940 demonstrated to the Admiralty that the Allies needed relatively large,
ocean-going ships capable of shore-to-shore delivery of tanks and other vehicles in amphibious assaults upon the
continent of Europe. As an interim measure, three 4000 to 4800 GRT tankers, built to pass over the restrictive bars of
Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela, were selected for conversion because of their shallow draft. Bow doors and ramps were
added to these ships, which became the first tank landing ships, "LST (1)": HMSMisoa, Tasajera and Bachaquero.
They later proved their worth during the invasion of Algeria in 1942, but their bluff bows made for inadequate speed
and pointed out the need for an all-new design incorporating a sleeker hull.
The first purpose-built LST design was HMSBoxer. It was a scaled down design from ideas penned by Churchill. To
carry 13 Churchill infantry tanks, 27 vehicles and nearly 200 men (in addition to the crew) at a speed of 18 knots, it
could not have the shallow draught that would have made for easy unloading. As a result, each of the three (Boxer,
Bruiser, and Thruster) ordered in March 1941 had a very long ramp stowed behind the bow doors.
[2]
The three ships were converted to "Fighter Direction Ships" for the invasion of Normandy.
The U.S. were to build seven LST(1) but in light of the problems with the design and progress with the LCT Mark II
the plans were cancelled. Construction of the LCT(1)s took until 1943 and the first US LCT(2) was launched before
them.
[3]
LST Mk.2
Landing Ship, Tank
255
Class overview
Name: LST (2)
Operators: United States Navy
Royal Navy
Royal Canadian Navy
Subclasses: LST-1 class
LST-491 class
LST-542 class
Completed: c. 1000
General characteristics
Displacement: 1,780 long tons (1,809t) light
3,880 long tons (3,942t) full load
Length: 327ft 9in (99.90m)
Beam: 50ft (15m)
Draught: Unloaded :
3ft 4in (1.02m) bow
7ft 6in (2.29m) stern
Loaded :
8ft 2in (2.49m) bow
14ft 1in (4.29m) stern
Propulsion: 2 General Motors 12-567 diesel engines, two shafts, twin rudders
Speed: 12 knots (14mph; 22km/h)
Boats &
landing
craft carried:
2 to 6 LCVPs
Troops: Approx. 140 officers and other ranks
Complement: 8 to 10 officers, 100 to 115 enlisted
Armament: 1 3in (76mm) gun
6 40 mm Bofors guns
6 20 mm guns
2 .50 cal (12.7 mm) machine guns
4 .30 cal (7.62 mm) machine guns
Development
At their first meeting at the Atlantic conference in Argentia, Newfoundland in August 1941, President Franklin D.
Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill confirmed the Admiralty's views. In November 1941, a small
delegation from the Admiralty arrived in the United States to pool ideas with the United States Navy's Bureau of
Ships with regard to development of ships and also including the possibility of building further Boxers in the US.
[4]
During this meeting, it was decided that the Bureau of Ships would design these vessels. As with the standing
agreement these would be built by the US so British shipyards could concentrate on building vessels for the Royal
Navy. The specification called for vessels capable of crossing the Atlantic and the original title given to them was
"Atlantic Tank Landing Craft" (Atlantic (T.L.C.)). Calling a vessel 300ft (91m) long a "craft" was considered a
misnomer and the type was re-christened "Landing Ship, Tank (2)", or "LST (2)".
The LST(2) design incorporated elements of the first British LCTs from their designer, Sir Rowland Baker, who was
part of the British delegation. This included sufficient buoyancy in the ships' sidewalls that they would float even
with the tank deck flooded.
[5]
The LST(2) gave up the speed of HMS Boxer at only 10 knots but had a similar load
Landing Ship, Tank
256
while drawing only 3 feet forward when beaching.
Design
Within a few days, John C. Niedermair of the Bureau of Ships
sketched out an awkward looking ship that proved to be the basic
design for the more than 1,000 LST (2) that were built during World
War II. To meet the conflicting requirements of deep draft for ocean
travel and shallow draft for beaching, the ship was designed with a
large ballast system that could be filled for ocean passage and pumped
out for beaching operations.
[6]
An anchor and mechanical winch
system also aided in the ship's ability to pull itself off the beach. The
rough sketch was sent to Britain on 5 November 1941 and accepted
immediately. The Admiralty then requested the United States to build 200 "LST (2)" for the Royal Navy under the
terms of lend-lease.
The preliminary plans initially called for an LST 280feet (85m) in length; but, in January 1942, the Bureau of Ships
discarded these drawings in favor of specifications for a ship 290 feet (88m) long. Within a month, final working
plans were developed that further stretched the overall length to 328 feet (100m) and called for a 50-foot (15m)
beam and minimum draft of 3.8feet (1.2m). This scheme distributed the ship's weight over a greater area, enabling
her to ride higher in the water when in landing trim. The LST could carry a 2,100-ton (1,900t) load of tanks and
vehicles. The larger dimensions also permitted the designers to increase the width of the bow door opening and ramp
from 12 to 14feet (3.7 to 4.3m) and thus accommodate most Allied vehicles. As the dimensions and weight of the
LST increased, steel plating thickness increased from 0.25-inch (6.4mm) to 0.375-inch (9.5mm) on the deck and
sides with 1-inch-thick plating under the bow.
[7]
By January 1942, the first scale model of the LST had been built
and was undergoing tests at the David Taylor Model Basin in Washington, D.C.
Provisions were made for the satisfactory ventilation of the tank space while the tank motors were running, and an
elevator was provided to lower vehicles from the main deck to the tank deck for disembarking. In April 1942 a
mock-up of the well-deck of an LST was constructed at Fort Knox, Kentucky to resolve the problem of ventilation
within the LST well-deck. The interior of the building was constructed to duplicate all the features found within an
actual LST. Being the home to the Armored Force Board, Fort Knox supplied tanks to run on the inside while Naval
architects developed a ventilation system capable of evacuating the well-deck of harmful gases. Testing was
completed in three months. This historic building remains at Fort Knox today.
Early LST operations required overcoming the 18th century language of the Articles for the Government of the
United States Navy: "He who doth suffer his ships to founder on rocks and shoals shall be punished..."
[8]
There were
some tense moments of concept testing at Quonset, Rhode Island in early 1943 when designer Niedermair
encouraged the commanding officer of the first U.S. LST to drive his ship onto the beach at full speed of 10 knots
(19km/h).
Landing Ship, Tank
257
Production
USSLST-983 with LST-601 in the background,
launches a Marine LVTP-5 for a waterborne
landing. When carrying amphibious tractors, an
LST could land her payload from offshore
without beaching.
USSLST-325 (left) and USSLST-388 unloading
while stranded at low tide during the Normandy
Invasion in June, 1944. Note: propellers, rudders
and other underwater details of these LSTs;
40mm single guns; "Danforth" style kedge
anchor at LST-325's stern.
USS LST-742 on 13 October 1950 at Wolmi-do
island, Inchon Harbor, loading supplies for the
upcoming Wonsan invasion.
In three separate acts dated 6 February 1942, 26 May 1943, and 17
December 1943, Congress provided the authority for the construction
of LSTs along with a host of other auxiliaries, destroyer escorts, and
assorted landing craft. The enormous building program quickly
gathered momentum. Such a high priority was assigned to the
construction of LSTs that the previously laid keel of an aircraft carrier
was hastily removed to make room for several LSTs to be built in her
place. The keel of the first LST was laid down on 10 June 1942 at
Newport News, Va., and the first standardized LSTs were floated out
of their building dock in October. Twenty-three were in commission by
the end of 1942.
The LST building program was unique in several respects. As soon as
the basic design had been developed, contracts were let and
construction was commenced in quantity before the completion of a
test vessel. Preliminary orders were rushed out verbally or by
telegrams, telephone, and air mail letters. The ordering of certain
materials actually preceded the completion of design work. While
many heavy equipment items such as main propulsion machinery were
furnished directly by the Navy, the balance of the procurement was
handled centrally by the Material Coordinating Agency an adjunct
of the Bureau of Ships so that the numerous builders in the program
would not have to bid against one another. Through vigorous follow-up
action on materials ordered, the agency made possible the completion
of construction schedules in record time.
The need for LSTs was urgent, and the program enjoyed a high priority
throughout the war. Since most shipbuilding activities were located in
coastal yards and were largely used for construction of large,
deep-draft ships, new construction facilities were established along
inland waterways. In some instances, heavy-industry plants such as
steel fabrication yards were converted for LST construction. This
posed the problem of getting the completed ships from the inland
building yards to deep water. The chief obstacles were bridges. The
Navy successfully undertook the modification of bridges and, through
a "Ferry Command" of Navy crews, transported the newly constructed
ships to coastal ports for fitting out. The success of these "cornfield"
shipyards of the Middle West was a revelation to the long-established
shipbuilders on the coasts. Their contribution to the LST building
program was enormous. Of the 1,051 LSTs built during World War II,
670 were constructed by five major inland builders. Chicago Bridge
and Iron shipyard in Seneca, Illinois launched 156 ships and was
specifically chosen because of their reputation and skills, particularly in welding. The most LSTs constructed during
World War II were built in Evansville, Indiana, by Missouri Valley Bridge and Iron, & International Steel Co.
Modifications
Landing Ship, Tank
258
By 1943, the construction time for an LST had been reduced to four months. By the end of the war, this had been cut
to two months. Considerable effort was expended to hold the ship's design constant, but, by mid-1943, operating
experience led to the incorporation of certain changes in the new ships.
The LST-491 class replaced the elevator installed in the original LST-1 class, to transfer equipment between the tank
deck and the main deck, with a ramp that was hinged at the main deck. This allowed vehicles to be driven directly
from the main deck into the tank deck, and then across the bow ramp to the beach or causeway, speeding the process
of disembarkation.
Changes in the later LST-542 class included the addition of a navigation bridge, the installation of a water
distillation plant with a capacity of 4,000 gallons per day, the removal of the tank deck ventilator tubes from the
center section of the main deck, the strengthening of the main deck to carry a smaller Landing Craft Tank (LCT),
and an upgrade in armor and armament, with the addition of a 3"/50 caliber gun.
LST Mk.3
Class overview
Name: LST (3)
Builders: R & W. Hawthorn, Leslie & Co. Ltd, Harland and Wolff, Swan, Hunter & Wigham Richardson Ltd,
Vickers-Armstrongs
Operators: Royal Navy
Royal Australian Navy
Hellenic Navy
Royal Netherlands Navy
Indian Navy
Planned: 119
Completed: UK:
31 LST (3)
2 LST (C)
2 LST (Q)
Canada:
26 LST (3)
Cancelled: 40 + 6 scrapped before completion
Active: 0
Preserved: 0
General characteristics
Displacement: 2,140 tons light
4,980 long tons (5,060t) full load
Length: 347ft (106m) o/a
Beam: 55ft 2in (16.81m)
Draught: Loaded :
4ft 7in (1.40m) bow
11ft 6in (3.51m) stern
Ramps: 23 feet by 14 feet ramp
Propulsion: Twin screws, steam reciprocating engines, 5,500hp (4,100kW), 10ft (3.0m) propeller
Speed: 13 knots (24km/h; 15mph)
Capacity: 10 tanks plus 15 vehicles
Troops: 13 officers and 150 men
Landing Ship, Tank
259
Complement: 14 officers and 90 men
Armament: 8 20 mm Oerlikon for A/A defence on some ships
Design
The LST (2) design was successful and production extensive but there was still a need for more LSTs for British
operations. As such it was decided to build a further 80 of them in UK and Canada to be available in the spring of
1945.
The British Staff drew up their own specification, requiring that the ship:
Be able to embark and disembark tanks, motor transport etc. on beaches of varying slopes, and amphibians and
DD Sherman tanks into deep water
Carry five Landing Craft Assault (LCA) or similar craft and one LCT (5) or LCT (6) on the upper deck in place of
transport and as an alternative to LCT (5) two NL causeway to be carried; the LCT (5) and NL causeways to be
capable of launching direct from the upper deck.
To carry 500 tons of military load and to beach with that and sufficient fuel and stores for 1,000mi (1,600km)
return journey at 10 knots (19km/h), on draughts 4ft 6in (1.37m) forward and 11ft 6in (3.51m) aft.
To carry a load of sixty tons over the main ramp and ten tons over the vehicle ramp (i.e., the 50ft (15m) ramp
from the upper deck to the bow door. After trials, this was removed from some vessels)
To be fitted for operations in the tropics and in cold climates
Two major problems made a redesign necessary. The preferred (locomotive type) light weight medium-speed
Electro-Motive Diesel 12-567 diesel engines were not immediately available. Staff wanted more power and higher
speeds if possible, which the EMD engines could have provided. However, the only engines available were very
heavy steam reciprocating engines from frigates that had been cancelled. These delivered two and a half times the
power of the diesels. So large were they that significant changes had to be made to accommodate them. Lack of
welded construction facilities meant that the hull had to be riveted. This combination of heavy hull and heavy
engines meant that speed was only 3 knots faster than the LCT(2)
At the same time, other improvements were madeas well as simplifications required so most of the structure could
be assembled with rivets. The cutaway hard chine that had been dropped in the American version of the Mark 2
vessels was restored. The tank deck, which was above the waterline, was made parallel to the keel, there was to be
no round down to the upper deck, and the ship was enlarged to accommodate the more bulky machinery.
Provision was made for carrying the British Landing Craft Assault (LCA) in gravity davits, instead of American
assault craft. Provision was also made for carrying Landing Craft Tank (LCT) and Landing Craft Mechanized
(LCM), and NL pontoon causeways.
When the design commenced, engineers knew that the beaches where the ships were expected to land would be very
flat, but it was not possible to produce a satisfactory vessel with a 3ft (0.91m) draught forward, and very little keel
slope, so the 1 in 50 keel slope was maintained. It was known that the 1:50 slope would often result in the LST
grounding aft on a shallow beach, resulting in the vehicles being discharged into comparatively deep water.
Various methods had been investigated to overcome the problem, but heavy grounding skegs and the N.L. pontoon
causeways were finally accepted as standard; the pontoon causeways were formed of pontoons 7ft (2.1m) 5ft
5ft (1.5m), made up into strings and rafts. When offloading, the rafts were secured to the fore end of the ship, and
the load discharged directly onto the shore, or towed on the raft to the shore.
The ships were fitted out for service in both very cold and tropical conditions. The accommodation provided for both
crew and army personnel was greatly improved compared with "LST (2)". The main hazard, apart from enemy
action, was fire on the tank deck. Fire sprinklers were provided, but the water drenching system installed in later
American vessels could not be provided.
Landing Ship, Tank
260
The bow door arrangements were similar to the LST (2), but the bow ramp was arranged in two parts in an attempt to
increase the number of beaches on which direct discharge would be possible. The machinery for operating the bow
doors and ramp were electrical, but otherwise, steam auxiliaries replaced the electrical gear on the LST (2). The
general arrangements of the tank deck were similar, but headroom was increased, and a ramp fitted to reach the top
deck, as in later "LST (2)"s. Provision was made for carrying LCA on gravity davits instead of the American built
assault boats. The arrangements were generally an improvement over the LST (2), but suffered from a deeper
draught, and, to some extent, from the haste in which they were built.
First orders were placed in December 1943, 45 with British builders, and 35 with Canadian builders. The first of
these ships was delivered by Swan Hunter in December 1944. During 1944, follow up orders were placed in Canada
for a further 36. These programmes were in full swing when the war ended, not all vessels were completed.
The ships were numbered numbers LST - 3001 to LST 3045 and LST -3501 to 3534. LST -3535 and later were
cancelled.
Fifteen 40-ton tanks or 27 25-ton tanks could be carried on the tank deck with an additional fourteen lorries on the
weather deck.
Propulsion
Steam was supplied by a pair of Admiralty pattern 3-drum water-tube type boilers, working at 225 pounds per square
inch. The main engines were of the 4-cylinder triple expansion 4-crank type, balanced on the Yarrow-Tweedy-Slick
system, the cylinders being as follows;
High pressure 18.5 in diameter
Medium pressure 31.0 in diameter
Forward low pressure 38.5 in diameter
Aft low pressure 38.5 in diameter
The common stroke was 30 inches (760mm). The piston and slide valve rods were all fitted with metallic packing to
the stuffing boxes, and all pistons fitted with packing rings and springs. The high-pressure valve was of the piston
type, whilst the remaining ones were of the balanced type. The main engines were designed to develop 2,750hp
(2,050kW) at 185 rpm continuously.
With the ships being twin screw, the engines were fitted with a shaft coupling to the crank shaft at the forward end,
allowing the engine to be turned end to end to suit either port or starboard side fitting.
Modifications for landing craft
When the LST (3)'s were ordered, the LST (2) programme was in full swing, and similar arrangements were made to
enable the LSTs to carry the 112 feet (34m) long LCT5 or LCT6 that were being built in America for the Royal
Navy.
The LCT needed lifting onto the deck of the ship, being carried on wedge-shaped support blocks; at the time of
launching she was set down on the "launch ways" by simply slacking off bolts in the wedge blocks, allowing the
launch way to take the weight. To carry out a launch, the LST was simply heeled over about 11 degrees by careful
flooding of tanks in the hull. The height of the drop was about 10ft (3.0m), and immediately after the launch the
craft's engines were started and they were ready for operation.
This method was used for moving LCT5s from Britain to the Far East, although there seems to be no reference to
LST (3)'s being used, most being completed late in or after the war.
Even at the end of the war there was a need for more ships able to carry minor landing craft, and two of the LST (3)'s
then completing were specially fitted to carry LCM (7). These craft, which were 58ft (18m) long and weighed
Landing Ship, Tank
261
about 28 tons, were carried transversely on the upper deck of the ship. They were hoisted on by means of a specially
fitted 30-ton derrick; This 30-ton derrick replaced a 15-ton derrick, two of which were the standard fit of the LST
(3). The 30-ton derrick was taller and generally more substantial than the 15 ton one.
The LCM (7)s were landed on trolleys fitted with hydraulic jacks. These ran on rails down each side of the deck, and
were hauled to and fro by means of winches. The stowage was filled from fore to aft as each craft was jacked down
onto fixed cradles between the rails. The ships completed to this standard were LST-3043/HMS Messina, and
LST-3044/HMS Narvik. While these ships were able to carry LCMs, they were only able to carry out loading and
unloading operations under nearly ideal weather conditions, and therefore could not be used for assault operations;
they also lacked the facilities to maintain the landing craft (which the Dock Landing Ships provided).
The Landing Craft Assault were developments at the very start of the war. They were wooden-hulled vessels plated
with armour, with a length of 41ft 6in (12.65m) overall including propeller guards, a beam of 10ft (3.0m), and a
displacement of 10 tons, rising to 13 tons fully loaded. Draught was 2ft 3in (0.69m), and normal load was 35
troops with 800lb (360kg) of equipment. A pair of Scripps marine conversions of Ford V8 marine engines,
producing 130bhp (97kW) at 2,800 rpm, provided propulsion producing 11 knots (20km/h) unloaded, 8 knots
(15km/h) service speed, 3 knots (5.6km/h) on one engine. Range was 5080 miles on 64 gallons. Armament was
typically a Bren light machine gun aft; with two Lewis Guns in a port forward position.
The LCM (7)'s that were carried on the LST (2) were considerably larger, 60ft 3in (18.36m) in length, 16ft (4.9m)
beam, with a hoisting weight of 28 tons, full load displacement of 63 tons. Beaching draught was 3ft 8in (1.12m),
and propulsion was provided by a pair of Hudson Invader petrol engines, later replaced with Grays diesels, both sets
providing 290bhp (220kW), giving a speed of 9.8 knots (18.1km/h).
The main requirement of the design was to carry a 40-ton Churchill tank or bulldozer at 10 knots (19km/h). 140 had
been completed when the war ended, and some saw service through to the 1970s.
Variants
Some LST(3) were converted to LST(A) (A for "assault") by adding stiffening so they could safely carry the heaviest
British tanks.
Two LST(3) were converted to command vessels, LST(C): LST 3043 and LST 3044. Post war they became HMS
Messina (L112) and HMS Narvik (L114). They were better armed with ten 20mm Oerlikons and four 40mm
Bofors.
Two LST(3) were converted during building into Headquarters command ships LST(Q). These were L3012, which
became L3101 (and later HMS Ben Nevis) and LST 3013, which became LST 3102, and then HMS Ben Lomond.
They acted as LST "mother ships", similar in most aspects to American ships based on the LST (2) hull. They had
two Quonset huts erected on the main deck to accommodate 40 officers. Berths on the tank deck berthed an extra
196 men. A bake shop and 16 refrigeration boxes for fresh provisions augmented the facilities normally provided for
the crew. Four extra distilling units were added, and the ballast tanks were converted for the storage of fresh water.
Landing Ship, Tank
262
Service in World War II
U.S. LSTs carrying the Australian
26th Brigade from Morotai Island to
Tarakan Island in April 1945.
At the Armor Training School in Ft. Knox, Kentucky, buildings were erected as
exact mock-ups of an LST. Tank crews in training learned how to maneuver their
vehicles onto, in and from an LST with these facilities. One of these buildings
has been preserved at Ft. Knox for historic reasons and can still be seen.
From their combat dbut in the Solomon Islands in June 1943 until the end of the
hostilities in August 1945, the LSTs performed a vital service in World War II.
They participated in the invasions of Sicily (Operation Husky), Italy, Normandy,
and southern France in the European Theater and were an essential element in
the island-hopping campaigns in the Pacific that culminated in the liberation of
the Philippines and the capture of Iwo Jima and Okinawa.
Despite the large numbers produced, LSTs were a scarce commodity and
Churchill describes the difficulty in retaining sufficient LSTs in the
Mediterranean for amphibious work in Italy, and later the logistics of moving
large numbers to the eastern theatres, while still supplying the large armies in
Europe.
The LST proved to be a remarkably versatile ship. A number of them were converted to become landing craft repair
ships (ARL). In this design, the bow ramp and doors were removed, and the bow was sealed. Derricks, booms, and
winches were added to haul damaged landing craft on board for repairs, and blacksmith, machine, and electrical
workshops were provided on the main deck and tank deck. Another successful conversion was the LST "Mother
Ship". This version of the standard LST hull had two Quonset huts erected on the main deck to accommodate 40
officers. Bunks on the tank deck berthed an additional 196 men. A bake shop and 16 refrigeration boxes for fresh
provisions augmented the facilities normally provided the crew. Four extra distilling units were added, and the
ballast tanks were converted for storage of fresh water.
LSTs putting cargo ashore on one of the invasion
beaches, at low tide during the first days of the
Invasion of Normandy in June, 1944. Barrage
balloons are overhead and a US Army
"half-track" convoy forming up on the beach.
Thirty-eight LSTs were converted to serve as small hospital ships and
designated LSTH. They supplemented the many standard LSTs, which
removed casualties from the beach after landing tanks and vehicles.
LSTs had brought 41,035 wounded men back across the English
Channel from Normandy by D-Day+114 (28 September 1944). Other
LSTs, provided with extra cranes and handling gear, were used
exclusively for replenishing ammunition. They possessed a special
advantage in this role, as their size permitted two or three LSTs to go
simultaneously alongside an anchored battleship or cruiser to
accomplish replenishment more rapidly than standard ammunition
ships.
Three LST (2) were converted into British "Fighter Direction Tenders"
(FDT), swapping their landing craft for Motor Launches and outfitted
with AMES Type 11 and Type 15 fighter control radar to provide
Ground-controlled interception (GCI) coverage for air defence of the D-Day landing areas. Of these ships, HMS
FDT 216 was stationed off Omaha and Utah beaches, HMS FDT 217 was allocated Sword, Juno, and Gold beaches.
HMS FDT 13 was used for coverage of the overall main shipping channel. In the period 6th June to 26th June Allied
fighters controlled by the FDTs resulted in the destruction of 52 enemy aircraft by day, and 24 enemy aircraft by
night.
[9]
In the latter stages of World War II, some LSTs such as USSLST-906 were fitted with flight decks from which small
observation planes were sent up during amphibious operations.
[10]
Landing Ship, Tank
263
It has been estimated that, in the combined fleets assembled for the war on Japan, the tonnage of landing ships,
excluding landing craft, would have exceeded five million tons and nearly all built within four years.
Throughout the war, LSTs demonstrated a remarkable capacity to absorb punishment and survive. Despite the
sobriquets "Large Slow Target" and "Large Stationary Target," which were applied to them by irreverent crew
members, the LSTs suffered few losses in proportion to their number and the scope of their operations. Their
brilliantly conceived structural arrangement provided unusual strength and buoyancy; HMSLST 3002 was struck
and holed in a post-war collision with a Victory ship and survived. Although the LST was considered a valuable
target by the enemy, only 26 were lost due to enemy action, and a mere 13 were the victims of weather, reef, or
accident. A total of 1,152 LSTs were contracted for in the great naval building program of World War II, but 101
were cancelled in the fall of 1942 because of shifting construction priorities. Of 1,051 actually constructed, 113
LSTs were transferred to Britain under the terms of Lend-Lease, and four more were turned over to the Greek Navy.
Conversions to other ship types with different hull designations accounted for 116.
Post-War developments
United States
The USSGraham
County(LST-1176) beached at
Vieques, Puerto Rico in 1964.
Embarked troops on the Greek LST Lemnos
(L-158) ex-USS LST-36, around 1956
The end of World War II left the Navy with a huge inventory of
amphibious ships. Hundreds of these were scrapped or sunk, and most
of the remaining ships were put in "mothballs" to be preserved for the
future. Additionally, many of the LSTs were demilitarized and sold to
the private sector, along with thousands of other transport ships,
contributing to a major downturn in shipbuilding in the United States
following the war. Many LSTs were used as targets in aquatic nuclear
testing after the war, being readily available and serving no apparent
military applications. World War II era LSTs have become somewhat
ubiquitous, and have found a number of novel commercial uses,
including operating as small freighters, ferries, and dredges.
Consequently, construction of LSTs in the immediate post-war years
was modest. LST-1153 and LST-1154, commissioned respectively in
1947 and 1949, were the only steam-driven LSTs ever built by the
Navy. They provided improved berthing arrangements and a greater
cargo capacity than their predecessors.
The success of the amphibious assault at Inchon during the Korean
War showed the utility of LSTs once again. This was in contrast with
the earlier opinion expressed by many military authorities that the
advent of the atomic bomb had relegated amphibious landings to a
thing of the past. During the Korean War a number of LSTs were
converted to transport the much needed, but slow and short range LSU
from the United States to the Korean theater of war using the
piggy-back method. After arrival the LSU was slid off sideways from
the LST.
[11]
Additionally, LSTs were used for transport in the building
of an Air Force base at Thule, Greenland during the Korean War. Fifteen LSTs of what were later to be known as the
Terrebonne Parish-class were constructed in the early 1950s. These new LSTs were 56 feet (17m) longer and were
equipped with four, rather than two, diesel engines, which increased their speed to 15 knots (28km/h). Three-inch
Landing Ship, Tank
264
50-caliber twin mounts replaced the old twin 40-millimeter guns, and controllable pitch propellers improved the
ship's backing power. On 1 July 1955, county or, in as known in the case of Louisiana, parish names were assigned
to many LSTs, which up to then had borne only a letter-number hull designation.
In the late 1950s, seven LSTs of the De Soto County-class were constructed. These were an improved version over
earlier LSTs, with a high degree of habitability for the crew and embarked troops. Considered the "ultimate" design
attainable with the traditional LST bow door configuration, they were capable of 17.5 knots (32.4km/h).
United Kingdom
The LST (3) as commercial ferry
In 1946 a brand new concept of transport was developed in the UK. It was during World War II that a few
experienced men recognised the great potential of landing ships and craft. The idea was simple; if you could drive
tanks, guns and lorries directly onto a ship and then drive them off at the other end directly onto a beach, then
theoretically you could use the same landing craft to carry out the same operation in the civilian commercial market,
providing there were reasonable port facilities. From this idea grew the worldwide roll-on/roll-off ferry industry of
today. In the period between the wars Lt. Colonel Frank Bustard formed the Atlantic Steam Navigation Company,
with a view to cheap transatlantic travel, this never materialised, but during the war he observed trials on Brighton
Sands of an LST in 1943 when its peacetime capabilities were obvious.
In the spring of 1946 The Company approached the Admiralty with a request to purchase three of these vessels. The
Admiralty were unwilling to sell, but after negotiations agreed to let the ASN have the use of three vessels on
bareboat charter at a rate of 13 6s 8d per day. These vessels were LSTs 3519, 3534, and 3512. They were renamed
Empire Baltic, Empire Cedric, and Empire Celtic, perpetuating the name of White Star Line ships in combination
with the "Empire" ship naming of vessels in government service during the war.
The chartered vessels had to be adapted for their new role. First the accommodation on board had to be improved,
and alterations in the engine and boiler rooms had also to be made. Modified funnels and navigational aids had also
to be provided before they could enter service. On the morning of 11 September 1946 the first voyage of the Atlantic
Steam Navigation Company took place when the Empire Baltic sailed from Tilbury to Rotterdam with a full load of
64 vehicles for the Dutch Government. On arrival at Waalhaven the vessel beached using the method employed
during wartime landings, being held by a stern anchor. The vessel stayed on the beach overnight, returning at 08:00
the next morning. This leisurely pace of work was followed for the first few voyages, the beach being employed
possibly due to normal port facilities being unavailable due to wartime damage. Following the Rotterdam maiden
voyage, ASN used their new vessels to transfer thousands of vehicles for the Army from Tilbury to Hamburg, later
moved to Antwerp in 1955.
The original three LSTs were joined in 1948 by another vessel, LST 3041, renamed Empire Doric, after the ASN
were able to convince commercial operators to support the new route between Preston and the Northern Ireland port
of Larne. Originally Liverpool was chosen, but opposition from other operators led to a move to Preston in
Lancashire. However, special port facilities were constructed at both Preston and Larne before the new route could
be opened a wartime-built end loading ramp built by engineers during World War II at Preston, and a floating
pontoon from a Mulberry harbour connected via a bridge to the Quay at Larne.
The first sailing of this new route was on 21 May 1948 by Empire Cedric. After the inaugural sailing Empire Cedric
continued on the Northern Ireland service, offering initially a twice-weekly service. Empire Cedric was the first
vessel of the ASN fleet to hold a Passenger Certificate, and was allowed to carry fifty passengers. Thus Empire
Cedric became the first vessel in the world to operate as a commercial/passenger Roll-on/roll-off ferry, and the ASN
became the first commercial company to offer this type of service.
Some of the first cargo on this service were two lorry-loads of 65 gas cookers each on behalf of Messrs Moffats of
Blackburn, believed to be the first commercial vehicles carried in this way as freight. The PrestonLarne service
Landing Ship, Tank
265
continued to expand, so much so that in 1950 the service was expanded to include a service to Belfast. This service
opened in 1950 and sailings out of Preston were soon increased to six or seven a week to either Belfast or Larne.
In 1954, the British Transport Commission (BTC) took over the ASN under the Labour Governments nationalization
policy. In 1955 another two LSTs where chartered into the existing fleet, Empire Cymric and Empire Nordic,
bringing the fleet strength to seven. The Hamburg service was terminated in 1955, and a new service was opened
between Antwerp and Tilbury. The fleet of seven ships was to be split up with the usual three ships based at Tilbury
and the others maintaining the Preston to Northern Ireland service.
During late 1956, the entire fleet of ASN were taken over for use in the Mediterranean during the Suez Crisis, and
the Drive on/Drive off services were not re-established until January 1957. At this point ASN were made responsible
for the management of twelve Admiralty LST (3)'s brought out of reserve as a result of the Suez Crisis too late to see
service.
The LST (3) in Army service
A major task at the end of World War II was the redistribution of stores and equipment worldwide. Due to the
scarcity and expense of merchant shipping it was decided in 1946 that the Royal Army Service Corps civilian fleet
should take over seven LSTs from the Royal Navy, These were named after distinguished corps officers; Evan Gibb,
Charles Macleod, Maxwell Brander, Snowden Smith, Humphrey Gale, Reginald Kerr, Fredrick Glover.
The LSTs needed to comply with Board of Trade regulations, and to be brought up to merchant navy standards,
which involved lengthy alterations including extra accommodation. On completion, five vessels sailed for the
Middle East, and two for the Far East.
During the evacuation of Palestine, Humphrey Gale and Evan Gibb made fifteen voyages each between Haifa and
Port Said lifting between them 26,000 tons of vehicles and stores.
Similar work was done worldwide until 1952 when the ships were handed over to the Atlantic Steam Navigation
Company, and subsequently in 1961 to the British-India Steam Navigation Company, tasked by the War Office
directly, RASC having no further concern with their administration.
The LST (3) as aviation training ship
The rapid increase in the use of helicopters in the Royal Navy in the late 1950s and 1960s required an increase in the
training and support facilities ashore and afloat. Operational training for aircrew was carried out by naval air stations
at Portland and Culdrose. The scrapping of some carriers and conversion of others to commando carriers in the
mid-1950s left a shortage of suitable decks. This led to the ordering of the RFA Engadine in 1964; however she
would not be available till 1967, in the meantime it was decided to convert LST 3027 to serve as an interim training
ship.
This work was carried out at Devonport Dockyard in 1964. The deck forward of the cargo hatch was cleared of all
obstructions, and strengthened for helicopter use. A small deckhouse used to support the gun emplacements was
retained, although no guns were fitted, and it was used by the Flight Deck Officer as a helicopter control position.
Below deck, two 10,000 gallon aviation fuel tanks were installed at the fore end of the tank deck, and refuelling
positions provided at the fore end of the flight deck. The tanks were sealed off by a bulkhead and the rest of the
space used for stores, workshops and accommodation. Finally the bow doors were sealed, as they would no longer be
needed. The flight deck was large enough for two Westland Wessex helicopters with rotors turning, or six could be
parked with rotors folded. Renamed HMSLofoten she proved extremely useful in service, and many lessons were
learned that would be incorporated into Engadine.
Landing Ship, Tank
266
Last WWII survivors
HMS Stalker
HMSStalker, previously LST-3515, survived until 2010 at what was
formerly Pounds scrapyard at the northern end of Portsea Island.
USSLST-325, previously LST-120 and Hellenic Navy RHS Syros
(L-144) is one of the last operating survivors of World War II. It is
currently home ported at Evansville, Indiana at the USS LST Memorial museum. The ship is kept in navigable shape
and participated in a cruise from Evansville, Indiana to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for the Amphibious Reunion in
Pittsburgh from September 17, 2010. Upon completion of the reunion, the ship sailed from Pittsburgh to Marietta,
Ohio, to take part in the Sternwheel Festival.
USSLST-510 participated in the Invasion of Normandy and has operated as a ferry in New England for almost 30
years. She currently operates between New London, Connecticut and Orient Point, on the East End of Long Island,
New York.
USSLST-393, which participated in the landings on Sicily at Salerno, and the Invasion of Normandy is now located
in Muskegon, Michigan as a museum and undergoing restoration.
USS Maricopa County, previously USSLST-938, had been transferred to the Republic of Vietnam Navy, and after
the Fall of Saigon was captured by North Vietnamese forces. As of 2003[12], she is active and in commission with
the Vietnamese People's Navy as the Tran Khanh Du.
The Philippine Navy received 20+ units of the LST Mk.2 starting in the late 1940s, and still have 7 units on their
active list as of 2010. This includes BRP Laguna (LT-501) (ex-USS LST-230), BRP Zamboanga del Sur (LT-86)
ex-USS Marion County (LST-975), BRP Kalinga Apayao (LT-516) (ex-USS Garrett County (LST-786) and BRP
Benguet (LT-507) (ex-USS Daviess County (LST-692).
The Philippine Navy also has the BRP Sierra Madre (LT-57) (ex-USS Harnett County) permanently beached on the
Second Thomas Shoal. The ship serves as an advance outpost, and is currently at the center of a territorial dispute
between China and the Philippines.
Modern developments
The USSFrederick(LST-1184) at sea. Today's
Newport-class ships can debark amphibious
vehicles from their stern gates.
The commissioning of the Newport-class in 1969 marked the
introduction of an entirely new concept in the design of LSTs. She was
the first of a new class of 20 LSTs capable of steaming at a sustained
speed of 20 knots (37km/h). To obtain that speed, the traditional blunt
bow doors of the LST were replaced by a pointed ship bow. Unloading
is accomplished through the use of a 112-foot (34 m) ramp operated
over the bow and supported by twin derrick arms. A stern gate to the
tank deck permits unloading of LVTs into the water or the unloading
of other vehicles into a landing craft utility (LCU), onto a pier, or
directly into the water. Capable of operating with high-speed
amphibious squadrons consisting of LHAs, LPDs, and LSDs, the Newport-class LST can transport tanks, other
heavy vehicles, and engineering equipment that cannot readily be landed by helicopters or landing craft. The
Newport type has been removed from the U.S. Navy, but serves on in the navies of Brazil, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico,
Morocco, Taiwan, Spain, in a modified form, Australia and soon with Peru. Indian Navy also maintains a fleet of
LSTs.
Landing Ship, Tank
267
Literature
The Ninety and Nine by William Brinkley, author of Don't Go Near the Water, portrays an LST running supplies to
Anzio during World War II. The title refers to the ship's company of ninety enlisted men and nine officers. The book
opens with a quotation attributed to Winston Churchill - "The destinies of two great empires ... seemed to be tied by
some god-damned things called LST's."
In the biography Man In Motion: Michigan's Legendary Senate Majority Leader, Emil Lockwood by Stanley C.
Fedewa and Marilyn H. Fedewa, Lockwood colorfully describes his World War II service aboard LST-478. "We
were always in the thick of it," Emil said, "because it was our job on the LSTs to carry personnel-operated tanks,
artillery, suppliesanything, you name itinto the heart of a war zone."
[13]
The novel Warm Bodies by Donald R. Morris portrays life on an LST in the 1950s. The title refers to the use of any
available body in port during overhaul for any duty necessary. "A Warm Body is man with at least one arm and two
fingers who can pick up something when he is told to." Although a work of fiction, the novel is based on Morris'
experience as an officer aboard an LST.
[14]
The Captain, the first novel by Russell Thacher (1919-1990), who later became a film producer, is set on board an
LST in the Pacific Arena during World War Two. The novel is notable for its early positive portrayal of
homosexuality, exemplified in the characters of two crew members, though male eroticism is undercurrent
throughout the book. It was published by Macmillan in New York in 1951 and Allan Wingate in London in 1952,
with subsequent paperback editions.
References
Notes
[1] Lenton & Colledge (1968) p.577
[2] Brown, D.K., Nelson to Vanguard pp. 142-143
[3] [3] Rottman p.6
[4] [4] Brown p.143
[5] [5] Brown, D.K. p.143
[6] [6] Niedermair (November 1982) p.58
[7] [7] Niedermair (November 1982) p.59
[8] [8] Wyckoff (November 1982) p.51
[9] http:/ / www. rquirk. com/ cdnradar/ cor/ chapter11. pdf
[10] "Flight Strip Makes Aircraft Out of Landing Craft." (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=gN8DAAAAMBAJ& pg=PA64& dq=Popular+
Mechanics+ Science+ installing+ linoleum& source=bl& ots=yzQ02csqDv& sig=Lse7JfsqahGNEIJnDq37RIszV2g& hl=en& sa=X&
ei=6r4DUJ-YIIb2rAHXu-SyDA& sqi=2& ved=0CDYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage& q& f=true) Popular Mechanics, December 1944, p.66.
[11] "LSU rides big brother to work." (http:/ / books.google. com/ books?id=49gDAAAAMBAJ& pg=PA94& dq=Popular+ Mechanics+
Science& source=bl& ots=wPfY03bHQE& sig=cm-xWdo-VtOnlEK9x6gfUnNseoc& hl=en& sa=X& ei=4cADUIjMAeKS2QXnp82wCw&
ved=0CDsQ6wEwAjgK#v=onepage& q& f=true) Popular Mechanics, September 1951, p. 94.
[12] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=Landing_Ship,_Tank& action=edit
[13] Fedewa, Stanley C., Fedewa, Marilyn H. Man In Motion: Michigan's Legendary Senate Majority Leader, Emil Lockwood (Llumina/MSU
Press, 2003)
[14] Morris, Donald R. Warm Bodies (Simon & Schuster, 1957)
Bibliography
This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
Lenton, H.T. & Colledge, J.J. (1968). British and Dominion Warships of World War II. Doubleday and Company.
Niedermair, John C. (November 1982). As I Recall...Designing the LST. United States Naval Institute
Proceedings.
Wyckoff, Don P., Colonel USMC (November 1982). Let There Be Built Great Ships... United States Naval
Institute Proceedings.
Selected Papers On British Warship Design In World War - From The Transactions Of The Royal Institute Of
Naval Architects, Conways Maritime Press, 1947, reprinted 1983. ISBN 0-85177-284-6
Landing Ship, Tank
268
Baker, R. (1947) Ships of the Invasion Fleet. Proceeding of the Royal Institute of Naval Architects, Vol. 89
pp.5972.
Brown, D.K. (Ed.), The Design And Construction Of British Warships 1939-1945, Vol 3 Amphibious Warfare
Vessels And Auxiliaries. ISBN 0-85177-675-2
Brown, D.K. (Ed.), The Design and Construction of British Warships 19391945 The Official Record, Conway
Maritime Press, London, 1996. pp 7380.
Carter, Geoffrey, Crises Do Happen - The Royal Navy And Operation Musketeer, Suez 1956, Maritime Books,
2006.
Cowsill, Miles, By Road Across The Sea - The History Of Atlantic Steam Navigation Company, Ferry
Publications 1990. ISBN 1-871947-07-3
Ladd, J.D., Assault From The Sea 1939-1945, ISBN 0-7153-6937-7
Lenton, H.T., Warships of the British and Commonwealth Navies 1966, Ian Allan Publishing, 1971.
Lovering, Tristan, Amphibious Assault, Manoeuvre from the sea, Seafarer Books. ISBN 9780955024351
Macdermott, Brian, Ships Without Names - The Story of The Royal Navys Tank Landing Ships In World War
Two, Arms & Armour 1992. ISBN 1-85409-126-3
Marriot, Leo, Royal Navy Aircraft Carriers 1945-1990, Ian Allan 1985. ISBN 0-7110-1561-9
Rottman, Gordon L., Landing Ship Tank (LST) 1942-2002, New Vanguard No. 115, Osprey Publishing 2005.
ISBN 1-84176-923-1
Speller, Ian, The Role of Amphibious warfare in British Defence Policy, 1945-56, Cormorant Security Series,
Palgrave. ISBN 0-333-80097-4
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Tank landing ships.
HMS Misoa - Landing Ship Tank (LST) (http:/ / www. combinedops. com/ LST HMS Misoa. htm)
Ship Tour LST325 in Evansville, Indiana (http:/ / www. evansvillecvb. org/ attractions/ lst-325)
DANFS: Tank Landing Ships (LST) (http:/ / www. hazegray. org/ danfs/ amphib/ lst. htm)
NavSource Online: Tank Landing Ship (LST) Index (http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 10/ 16/ 16idx. htm)
InsideLST.com (http:/ / www.insidelst. com/ ) - a selection of information on the construction, complement, &c
of LSTs, mostly taken from LST-325
United States LST Association website (http:/ / www. uslst. org/ )
The American Amphibious Forces Association (http:/ / gatorforce. com/ ) - information about later classes of
LSTs
History of LSTs (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ lst. htm/ ) including description of
LSTs in use as aircraft carriers etc..
The US LST Ship Memorial (http:/ / www. lstmemorial. org/ ) - A preserved and operational LST from World
War II - LST 325
LST Story (http:/ / www. youtube. com/ watch?v=OTSqhCdgwrI) Film: the building and launch of Tank Landing
Ship Coconino County (LST-603) during World War II.
Newport-class tank landing ship
269
Newport-class tank landing ship
USS Newport (LST-1179)
Class overview
Builders: Philadelphia Naval Shipyard
National Steel and Shipbuilding Company
Operators: Initial operator
United States Navy
Later operators (onsold after US service)
Royal Australian Navy
Brazilian Navy
Chilean Navy
Royal Malaysian Navy
Mexican Navy
Royal Moroccan Navy
Peruvian Navy (proposed)
Republic of China Navy
Spanish Navy
Preceded by: De Soto County-class tank landing ship
Succeededby: None
Built: 19661972
In commission: 19692002 (USN)
Completed: 20
Active: 0 (US)
Laid up: 4
Retired: 12
General characteristics
Type: Tank Landing Ship
Displacement: approx. 4,793tons light loaded,
8,500tons fully loaded
Length: 522ft (159m)
Beam: 70ft (21m)
Draft: 17.4ft (5.3m)
Newport-class tank landing ship
270
Propulsion: 6 ALCO diesels (3 per shaft)
16,000 shaft horsepower;
800hp GE bow thruster.
2 Hydraulically Controlled Variable Pitch Reversible Props and 1 Variable Pitch Bow
Thruster
3 ALCO/GE Generators (750kW, 1201 A each)
Speed: Over 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph)
Troops: Approximately 400 Marines, when embarked
Complement: 14 officers, 210 enlisted
Newport-class tank-landing ships are an improved class of tank-landing ship (LST) designed for the United States
Navy. The ships were intended to provide substantial advantages over their World War II-era predecessors. Of the
twenty completed, four were sunk as targets, four were retained as inactive reserves and the rest were sold to foreign
navies.
Class description
Twenty ships of the Newport tank landing ship class were built to replace the traditional bow door design LST.
The Newport class has higher speeds and trimmer lines than the LSTs of World War II. The vessels have two huge
derricks used to extend and retract a bow ramp. The 110-foot (34m) ramp has a 75-ton capacity.
The Newport class is the first amphibious ship to be fitted with an internal side propulsion unit located below the
waterline near the bow. The bow thruster allows the bow to be pushed from side to side while the stern remains
nearly stationary.
This class of LST also has a stern gate. It allows them to load and launch amphibious assault vehicles, and permits
sterngate matings with Landing Craft Utility (LCU) units.
Units
Ship Name Hull No. Builder USN
Commission
Decommission
Fate Link
Newport LST-1179 Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard
19691992 Sold to Mexican Navy as Papaloapan (ARM A-411)
[1]
Manitowoc LST-1180 Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard
19701993 Sold to Republic of China Navy as Chong ho (LST-232)
[2]
Sumter LST-1181 Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard
19701993 Sold to Republic of China Navy as ChongPing (LST-233)
[3]
Fresno LST-1182 National Steel & SB 19691993
Proposed for transfer to the Peruvian Navy from inactive
reserve
[4]
[5]
Peoria LST-1183 National Steel & SB 19701994 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
2004-12-07
[6]
Frederick LST-1184 National Steel & SB 19702002 Sold to Mexican Navy as Usumacinta (ARM A-412),
2002-11-22
[7]
Schenectady LST-1185 National Steel & SB 19701993 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
2004-11-23
[8]
Cayuga LST-1186 National Steel & SB 19701994 Sold to Brazilian Navy as NDCC Mattoso Maia (G-28)
[9]
Tuscaloosa LST-1187 National Steel & SB 19701993 Sunk as target, 2014-07.
[10][11]
Newport-class tank landing ship
271
Saginaw LST-1188 National Steel & SB 19711994 Sold to Royal Australian Navy as HMAS Kanimbla,
1994-2011
[12]
San Bernardino LST-1189 National Steel & SB 19711995 Sold to Chilean Navy to as Valdivia (LST 93),
decommissioned in 2010
[13]
Boulder LST-1190 National Steel & SB 19711994 Inactive reserve, 1994-02-28. Proposed for transfer to the
Royal Moroccan Navy.
[14][15]
Racine LST-1191 National Steel & SB 19711993 Proposed for transfer to the Peruvian Navy from inactive
reserve
[16]
Spartanburg
County
LST-1192 National Steel & SB 19711994 Sold to Royal Malaysian Navy as KD Sri Indera Pura
(A-1505)
[17]
Fairfax County LST-1193 National Steel & SB 19711994 Sold to Royal Australian Navy as HMAS Manoora,
1994-2011
[18]
La Moure County LST-1194 National Steel & SB 19712000 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
2001-07-10
[19]
Barbour County LST-1195 National Steel & SB 19721992 Disposed of in support of Fleet training exercise,
2004-04-06
[20]
Harlan County LST-1196 National Steel & SB 19721995 Sold to Spanish Navy as Pizarro (L-42), decommissioned in
2012
[21]
Barnstable
County
LST-1197 National Steel & SB 19721994 Sold to Spanish Navy as Hernn Corts (L-41),
decommissioned in 2009
[22]
Bristol County LST-1198 National Steel & SB 19721994 Sold to Moroccan Navy as Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdallah
(407)
[23]
Image gallery
USS San Bernardino
(LST-1189) during a landing
exercise in 1979.
The USS Frederick (LST-1184)
with its bow ramp dropped to
take on U.S. Marines and
equipment.
Aft view of Spartanburg
County returning from
Operation Desert Storm,
1991.
Racine bow view with bow
ramp sitting on deck.
References
[1] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1179. htm
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1180. htm
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1181. htm
[4] S. 3052: Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008 (http:/ / www. govtrack. us/ congress/ billtext. xpd?bill=s110-3052)
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1182. htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1183. htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1184. htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1185. htm
[9] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1186. htm
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1187. htm
[11] http:/ / www.navy. mil/ view_image.asp?id=181415
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1188. htm
[13] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1189. htm
Newport-class tank landing ship
272
[14] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1190. htm
[15] http:/ / www.opencongress. org/ bill/ 111-s3847/ text
[16] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1191. htm
[17] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1192. htm
[18] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1193. htm
[19] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1194. htm
[20] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1195. htm
[21] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1196. htm
[22] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1197. htm
[23] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LST1198. htm
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Newport class tank landing ships.
Federation of American Scientists page on Newport class (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/
lst-1179. htm).
Casa Grande-class dock landing ship
273
Casa Grande-class dock landing ship
USSCabildo
Class overview
Name: Casa Grande
Builders: Newport News
Boston Navy Yard
Gulf Shipbuilding
Philadelphia Naval Yard
Operators: Royal Navy
United States Navy
Spanish Navy
Hellenic Navy
French Navy
Republic of China Navy
Preceded by: Ashland-class dock landing ship
Succeededby: Thomaston-class dock landing ship
Planned: 19
Completed: 17
Cancelled: 2
Retired: 17
General characteristics
Type: dock landing ship
Displacement: 4,032tons (light)
7,930tons (seagoing)
Length: 454ft (138m) at waterline
457ft 9in (139.52m) oa
Beam: 72ft 2in (22.00m)
Draught: 15ft 10in (4.83m)
Propulsion: 2-shaft turbines, 2 boilers
7,000 shp (LSD13-21 and 25-27)
9,000 shp (LSD22-24)
Speed: 15.6 knots (18.0mph; 28.9km/h)
Range: 7,400nmi (13,700km) at 15kn (28km/h)
Casa Grande-class dock landing ship
274
Boats &
landing
craft carried:
One of the following arrangements:
3 LCT Mark V or VI or
2 LCT Mark III or IV or
14 LCM Mark III or
41 LVT or
47 DUKWs
Capacity: 1,500tons of cargo (if not carrying boats)
Complement: 17 officers and 237 men
Armament: 1 5"/38 guns
12 40 mm Bofors guns (2 2), (2 4)
16 20mm guns
The Casa Grande class was a class of dock landing ships used by the Royal Navy and the United States Navy during
the Second World War. Nineteen ships were planned, but two, USSFort Snelling and USSPoint Defiance were
cancelled before being completed.
Design
The 'Landing Ship Dock' or LSD developed from a British staff requirement for a type of self-propelled drydock to
transport beaching craft over long distances, that would in turn deliver trucks and supplies onto the beach. A
flooding deck aft capable of holding either two of the larger British Landing craft tanks (LCTs) or three of the new
US LCTs was included in the designs. With the option of fitting extra decks, large numbers of vehicles could be
transported, and loaded into landing craft via ramps. Despite an initial specification for a speed of 17 knots (20mph;
31km/h), the LSDs were capable of only 15.6 knots (18.0mph; 28.9km/h).
Service
The British initially ordered seven of the class from US dockyards, numbered LSD-9 to 15. Only four were
delivered, numbers 9 to 12, while 13 to 15 were retained by the US Navy, which ordered another twelve to the
design, but only built ten. In total thirteen of the ships served with the US Navy, while four ships served with the
Royal Navy.
Ships
HMS Highway
Royal Navy
HMSEastway(F140)
HMSHighway(F141)
HMSNorthway(F142)
HMSOceanway(F143)
US Navy
USSCasa Grande(LSD-13) (ex-HMS Portway, ex-Spear)
USSRushmore(LSD-14) (ex-HMS Swashway, ex-Sword)
USSShadwell(LSD-15) (ex-HMS Waterway, ex-Tomahawk)
USSCabildo(LSD-16)
USSCatamount(LSD-17)
Casa Grande-class dock landing ship
275
USSColonial(LSD-18)
USSComstock(LSD-19)
USSDonner(LSD-20)
USSFort Mandan(LSD-21)
USSFort Marion(LSD-22)
USSFort Snelling(LSD-23) (cancelled, completed as USNSTaurus(T-AK-273))
USSPoint Defiance(LSD-24) (cancelled)
USSSan Marcos(LSD-25)
USSTortuga(LSD-26)
USSWhetstone(LSD-27)
Spanish Navy
Spanish ship Galicia (L-31), ex-USS San Marcos (LSD-25)
Greek Navy
Greek ship Okeanos (ex-HMSOceanway(F143))
French Navy
French ship Foudre (ex-HMSOceanway(F143), ex-Greek ship Okeanos)
Republic of China Navy
ROCS Chung Cheng (LSD-191) (ex-USS Comstock (LSD-19))
Notes
References
Colledge, J. J.; Warlow, Ben (2006) [1969]. Ships of the Royal Navy: The Complete Record of all Fighting Ships
of the Royal Navy (Rev. ed.). London: Chatham Publishing. ISBN978-1-86176-281-8. OCLC 67375475 (http:/ /
www. worldcat. org/ oclc/ 67375475).
Gardiner, Robert; Chesneau, Roger (1980). Conway's All the world's fighting ships, 19221946. Conway.
ISBN0-85177-146-7.
Jane's Fighting Ships of World War Two. New York: Crescent Books. 1996 [1989]. ISBN0-517-67963-9.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Casa Grande class dock landing ships.
Casa Grande class at Uboat.net (http:/ / www. uboat. net/ allies/ warships/ class. html?ID=592)
"Mother of Minesweepers." (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=8dwDAAAAMBAJ& pg=PA97& dq=1954+
Popular+ Mechanics+ January& hl=en& sa=X& ei=lYK0T7T1Es2dgQe5iMgH&
ved=0CDoQ6AEwAjgy#v=onepage& q& f=true) Popular Mechanics, February 1952, pp. 97-104.
Thomaston-class dock landing ship
276
Thomaston-class dock landing ship
USSThomaston(LSD-28)
Class overview
Builders: Ingalls Shipbuilding, Pascagoula, Mississippi
Operators: United States Navy
Brazilian Navy
Preceded by: Casa Grande-class dock landing ship
Succeededby: Anchorage-class dock landing ship
Built: 19531956
In commission: 19541990
Completed: 8
General characteristics
Type: Dock landing ship
Displacement: 11,800 long tons (11,989t) full load
Length: 510ft (160m)
Beam: 84ft (26m)
Propulsion: 2 600 psi boilers, 2 geared turbines, 2 shafts, 24,000shp (17,897kW)
Speed: 22 knots (41km/h; 25mph)+
Boats & landing
craft carried:
3 LCU or 9 LCM-8 or 50 AAV/LVTP-7 amphibious tractors
Troops: 325
Complement: 348 (18 officers, 330 enlisted)
Armament: 4 3in (76mm)/50 cal Mk.33 AA guns (2 twin mounts)
Aviation facilities: Helicopter landing area
The Thomaston class dock landing ship is a class of eight United States Navy dock landing ships.
The class of the ship is named after a town of Thomaston, Maine, which was the home of General Henry Knox, the
first Secretary of War to serve under the United States Constitution.
The class was designed and approved in the early 1950s. The lead ship of her class, the first to be built was the
Thomaston (LSD-28), which was laid down on 3 March 1953 at Pascagoula, Mississippi, by the Ingalls Shipbuilding
Corp.; launched on 9 February 1954, sponsored by Mrs. Mathias B. Gardner; and commissioned on 17 September
1954, Captain Marion F. Ramirez de Arellano in command.
Thomaston-class dock landing ship
277
Ships
Thomaston(LSD-28)
Plymouth Rock(LSD-29)
Fort Snelling(LSD-30)
Point Defiance(LSD-31)
Spiegel Grove(LSD-32)
Alamo(LSD-33)
Hermitage(LSD-34)
Monticello(LSD-35)
References
Anchorage-class dock landing ship
278
Anchorage-class dock landing ship
USS Anchorage (LSD-36)
Class overview
Operators: United States Navy
Republic of China Navy
Preceded by: Thomaston-class dock landing ship
Succeededby: Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship
Built: 19671972
In commission: 19692003
Completed: 5
General characteristics
Type: Dock landing ship
Displacement: 14,000 long tons (14,225t) Full
Length: 553ft (169m)
Beam: 85ft (26m)
Draft: 20ft (6.1m)
Propulsion: 2 geared steam turbines
2 boilers, 600 psi
2 shafts, 24,000shp (18,000kW) total
Speed: 22 knots (25mph; 41km/h)
Range: 14,800nmi (27,400km; 17,000mi) at 12kn (22km/h)
Boats &
landing
craft carried:
LCACs
Complement: 18 officers, 340 enlisted
Armament: 2 20 mm Phalanx CIWS
2 Mk-38 machine guns
4 .50 machine guns
The Anchorage class dock landing ships were a series of five dock landing ships (LSD) constructed and
commissioned by the United States Navy between 1965 and 1972. US Navy decommissioned all five of them by
Anchorage-class dock landing ship
279
2003. They are succeeded by Whidbey Island class LSDs and Harpers Ferry class LSDs.
Design and development
The Anchorage class of dock landing ships was built as a replacement for the remaining aging war-built LSDs of the
Ashland and Casa Grande classes. Their principal intended role was to carry additional landing craft to supplement
those carried by the Amphibious transport docks (LPD)s, which carried less landing craft in order to accommodate
more troops and cargo.
[1]
The Anchorage class was slightly larger than the preceding Thomaston class, but were of generally similar design,
with a large Well dock aft to accommodate landing craft, and a removable flight deck fitted above the well deck to
allow the operation of helicopters, although no hangar was provided. The well dock was 430 feet (130m) long and
40 feet (12m) wide, and could accommodate three Landing Craft Utilitys or nine LCM-8 Landing Craft
Mechanizeds.
[2]
The ship could carry 375 troops compared with the 345 carried by the Thomastons,
[3]
while 12,000
square feet (1,115m
2
) of vehicle parking space was provided.
[4]
The ships were propelled by two geared steam turbines driving two shafts and giving a total of 24,000 shaft
horsepower (18,000kW). This gave a speed of 20 knots (23mph; 37km/h), the standard speed of the postwar US
Navy amphibious fleet.
[5][6]
As built, the ships had a defensive armament of eight 3"/50 Mark 33 anti-aircraft guns in
four twin mounts, while major sensors included SPS-10 surface search radar and SPS-40 air-search radar.
Construction and service
The name ship of the class, USSAnchorage(LSD-36) was ordered under the Fiscal year 1965 (FY65) shipbuilding
program, with three more (USSPortland(LSD-37), USSPensacola(LSD-38) and USSMount Vernon(LSD-39))
ordered under the FY66 program and the final ship of the class, USSFort Fisher(LSD-40), under the FY67
programme.
[7]
They were laid down between 1967 and 1970 and entered service between 1969 and 1972.
The fire-control directors for the 3 in guns were removed in the late 1970s, while the ships' gun armament was
gradually reduced, with two mounts removed by 1990, and the remaining 3 inch guns removed by 1994.
[4]
Two
20mm Phalanx CIWS mounts to defend against anti-ship missiles and two 25 mm Bushmaster cannon to defend
against surface targets were fitted to replace these weapons.
[]
Ship List
Name
Builder
[]
Laid Down Launched Commissioned Fate
USSAnchorage(LSD-36) Ingalls Shipbuilding 13 March
1967
5 May 1968 15 March 1969 Decommissioned 1 October 2003
Sunk as target 17 July 2010
USSPortland(LSD-37) General Dynamics, Quincy,
Massachusetts)
21 September
1967
20 December
1969
3 October 1970 Decommissioned 4 August 2003
Sank as target 25 April 2004
USSPensacola(LSD-38) General Dynamics, Quincy 12 March
1969
11 July 1970 27 March 1971 Sold to Republic of China
(Taiwan) Navy in 2000
ROCSHsu Hai(LSD-193)
USSMount
Vernon(LSD-39)
General Dynamics, Quincy 29 January
1970
17 April 1971
13 May 1972
[]
Decommissioned 25 July 2003
Sank as target 16 June 2005
USSFort Fisher(LSD-40) General Dynamics (Quincy) 15 July 1970 22 April 1972 12 September
1972
Decommissioned 27 February
1998
Sold for scrapping 22 May 2009
Anchorage-class dock landing ship
280
References
[1] [1] Polmar 1981, pp. 144, 146.
[2] [2] Polmar 1981, p. 146.
[3] Polmar 1981, pp. 145146.
[4] [4] Baker 1998, p. 1046.
[5] [5] Polmar 1981, p. 125.
[6] Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, pp. 549550.
[7] [7] Gardiner and Chumbley 1995, p. 619.
Baker, A. D. (1998). The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 19981999. Annapolis, Maryland,
USA: U.S. Naval Institute. ISBN1-55750-111-4.
Blackman, Raymond V. B. (1971). Jane's Fighting Ships 197172. London: Sampson Low, Marston & Co., Ltd.
ISBN0-354-00096-9.
Gardiner, Robert; Chumbley, Stephen (1995). Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 19471995. Annapolis,
Maryland, USA: Naval Institute Press. ISBN1-55750-132-7.
Polmar, Norman (1981). The Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet (Twelfth ed.). London: Arms and Armour Press.
ISBN0-85368-397-2.
Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship
281
Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship
USSFort McHenry(LSD-43) conducting helicopter operations off the coast of Sumatra, (2005).
Class overview
Builders: Lockheed Shipbuilding and Construction Company
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Anchorage class
Succeededby: Harpers Ferry class
Cost: $250m
In commission: 1985 - Present
Planned: 8
Completed: 8
Active: 8
General characteristics
Displacement: 16,100tons
Length: 609ft (186m)
Beam: 84ft (26m)
Draft: 19ft 6in (5.0m)
Propulsion: 4 Colt Industries, 16-cylinder diesel engines, 2 shafts, 33,000 shp (25 MW)
Speed: 20+knots (37+km/h)
Boats & landing
craft carried:
4+1 LCACs or 21 LCM-6s or up to 36 Amphibious Assault Vehicles AAV or 3 LCUs.
Capacity: on deck: one LCM-6, two LCPL and one LCVP
Complement: 30 officers, 300+ enlisted Marine detachment: up to 504
Armament: 2 25 mm Mk 38 cannons
2 20 mm Phalanx CIWS mounts
1 / 2 Rolling Airframe Missile
6 .50 caliber M2HB machine guns
Aviation facilities: Large helicopter platform aft, no hangar
Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship
282
The Whidbey Island class dock landing ship is a dock landing ship of the United States Navy. Introduced to fleet
service in 1985, this class of ship features a massive well deck for the transport of US Marine Corps vehicles and a
large flight deck for the landing of helicopters or V-22 Ospreys. The well deck was designed to hold four LCAC
hovercraft, five if the vehicle ramp is raised, for landing Marines. Recent deployments have instead filled the well
deck with a combination of LCU(s), AAVs, Tanks, LARCs and other USMC vehicles and gear. The Whidbey Island
class of ship also uniquely benefits from multiple cranes and a shallow draft that further make it ideal for
participating in Amphibious operations.
All ships of the class are scheduled to undergo a midlife upgrade over the next five years to ensure that they remain
in service through to 2038. The ships will be upgraded each year through 2013, and the last ship will be modernized
in 2014. Ships homeported on the East Coast will undergo upgrades at Metro Machine Corp., while those on the
West Coast will receive upgrades at General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Company in San Diego.
Major elements of the upgrade package include diesel engine improvements, fuel and maintenance savings systems,
engineering control systems, increased air conditioning and chill water capacity, and replacement of air compressors.
The ships also replaced steam systems with all-electric functionality that will decrease maintenance effort and
expense.
Ships
Ship Hull No. Builder Commissioned Home Port NVR Page
Whidbey Island LSD-41 Lockheed, Seattle 1985 Little Creek, Virginia
LSD41
[1]
Germantown LSD-42 Lockheed, Seattle 1986 Sasebo, Japan
LSD42
[2]
Fort McHenry LSD-43 Lockheed, Seattle 1987 Little Creek, Virginia
LSD43
[3]
Gunston Hall LSD-44 Avondale, New Orleans 1989 Little Creek, Virginia
LSD44
[4]
Comstock LSD-45 Avondale, New Orleans 1990 San Diego, California
LSD45
[5]
Tortuga LSD-46 Avondale, New Orleans 1990 Little Creek, Virginia
LSD46
[6]
Rushmore LSD-47 Avondale, New Orleans 1991 San Diego, California
LSD47
[7]
Ashland LSD-48 Avondale, New Orleans 1992 Sasebo, Japan
LSD48
[8]
The Whidbey Island (LSD 41) and Tortuga (LSD 46) are to be decommissioned during the FYDP 2013-2018 and the
remaining ships of the class are to be retired before the end of their service lives.
[9]
However, recent unofficial
reports state that the Whidbey Island (LSD 41) decommissioning date has been changed to 2021.Wikipedia:Citation
needed
Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship
283
Sources
[1] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD41. htm
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD42. htm
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD43. htm
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD44. htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD45. htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD46. htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD47. htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LSD48. htm
[9] IHS Janes Fighting Ships Executive Summary 2012
US Navy Type Information (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200& tid=1000& ct=4)
Hutchinson, R. (ed.) (2002) Jane's Warship Recognition Guide, London : HarperCollins, ISBN 0-00-713722-2
This article includes information collected from the Naval Vessel Register, which, as a U.S. government
publication, is in the public domain. The entry can be found here (http:/ / www. nvr. navy. mil/ nvrships/ s_LSD.
htm).
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Whidbey Island class dock landing ships.
Federation of American Scientists (FAS): LSD-41 Whidbey Island class (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/
sys/ ship/ lsd-41. htm)
GlobalSecurity.org: LSD-41 Whidbey Island class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/
lsd-41. htm)
Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship
284
Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship
USS Carter Hall (LSD-50)
Class overview
Name: Harpers Ferry
Builders: Avondale Shipyard
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship
Succeededby: San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
Cost: $324.2 million
In commission: 1995 present
Planned: 4
Completed: 4
Active: USSHarpers Ferry(LSD-49),
USSCarter Hall(LSD-50),
USSOak Hill(LSD-51),
USSPearl Harbor(LSD-52)
General characteristics
Displacement: 16,708tons
Length: 609ft (186m)
Beam: 84ft (26m)
Draft: 21ft (6.4m)
Propulsion: Four Colt Industries, 16-cylinder diesels, two shafts, 33,000 shaft horsepower (25MW)
Speed: 20 knots (37km/h; 23mph)
Boats &
landing
craft carried:
2 LCACs
Complement: 22 officers, 391 enlisted
Armament: 2 25 mm Mk 38 cannons
2 20 mm Phalanx CIWS mounts
2 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launchers
6 .50 caliber M2HB machine guns
Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship
285
The Harpers Ferry-class of the United States Navy is a class of dock landing ships completed in the early 1990s.
Modified from the Whidbey Island class, it sacrifices landing craft capacity for more cargo space, making it closer to
an amphibious transport dock type, but was not designated as such. Externally, the two classes can be told apart by
the order of weapons. The Harper's Ferry type has the Phalanx CIWS mounted forward, and the RAM launcher on
top of the bridge, while the Whidbey Island has the opposite arrangement.
All ships of the class are scheduled to undergo a midlife upgrade to ensure they remain in service through 2038. The
ships will be upgraded each year through 2013, and the last ship will be modernized in 2014. Ships homeported on
the East Coast will undergo upgrades at Metro Machine Corp., and ships based on the West Coast will receive
upgrades at General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Company in San Diego.
Major elements of the upgrade package include diesel engine improvements, fuel and maintenance savings systems,
engineering control systems, increased air conditioning/chill water capacity, and replacement of air compressors.
The ships also replaced steam systems with all-electric functionality that will decrease maintenance.
The Harpers Ferry class ships
Ship Name Hull No. Builder Commissioned Homeport
Harpers Ferry LSD-49 Avondale Shipyard 7 January 1995 Naval Base San Diego (CA)
Carter Hall LSD-50 Avondale Shipyard 30 September 1995 Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek (VA)
Oak Hill LSD-51 Avondale Shipyard 8 June 1996 Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek (VA)
Pearl Harbor LSD-52 Avondale Shipyard 30 May 1998 Naval Base San Diego (CA)
Sources
US Navy Type Information (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display. asp?cid=4200& tid=1000& ct=4)
Hutchinson, R. (2002) Jane's Warship Recognition Guide Harper Collins: London, New York.
Raleigh-class amphibious transport dock
286
Raleigh-class amphibious transport dock
USS Vancouver (LPD-2)
Class overview
Name: Raleigh-class amphibious transport dock
Builders: New York Naval Shipyard
Preceded by: None
Succeededby: Austin class
General characteristics
Type: Amphibious transport dock
The Raleigh class of amphibious transport docks served the United States Navy.
Ships
Ship Hull No. Builder Commissioned
Decommissioned
NVR Page
Raleigh LPD-1 New York Naval Shipyard 19621991
LPD-1
[1]
Vancouver LPD-2 New York Naval Shipyard 19631992
LPD-2
[2]
La Salle AGF-3 New York Naval Shipyard 19642005
AGF-3
[3]
References
[1] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD1. htm
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD2. htm
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ AGF3.htm
Austin-class amphibious transport dock
287
Austin-class amphibious transport dock
USS Austin (LPD-4)
Class overview
Name: Austin-class amphibious transport dock
Builders: New York Naval Shipyard,
Ingalls, Lockheed
Operators: United States Navy
Indian Navy
Preceded by: Raleigh class
Succeededby: San Antonio class
In commission: 1965
Completed: 12
Active: 2
General characteristics
Type: Amphibious transport dock
Tonnage: 7,713 tons dwt
Displacement: 9,201 tons (light)
16,914 tons (full)
Length: 548ft (167m)w/l
569ft (173m) o/a
Beam: 84ft (26m) w/l
105ft (32m) extreme
Draft: 22ft (6.7m) navigational,
34ft (10m) ballasted
Propulsion: 2 boilers, 2 steam turbines, 2 shafts, 24,000shp (18,000kW)
Speed: 21 knots (24mph; 39km/h)
Boats &
landing
craft carried:
1 LCAC, or
1 LCU, or
4 LCM-8, or
9 LCM-6, or
24 AAV
Complement: 24 officers, 396 enlisted, 900 marines
Austin-class amphibious transport dock
288
Armament: 2 25mm Mk38 guns
2 Phalanx CIWS
8 .50-calibre machine guns
Aircraft carried: Up to 6 CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters
The Austin class of amphibious transport dock followed the Raleigh class and was followed by the San Antonio
classes. Note that some sources consider Cleveland (seven built) and Trenton (two built) ships to be a part of the
Austin class, but the Naval Vessel Registry lists them as a separate class.
Ships
Ship Hull No. Builder Commissioned
Decommissioned
Homeport NVR page
Austin LPD-4 New York Naval Shipyard 19652006 Norfolk, Virginia
LPD04
[1]
Ogden LPD-5 New York Naval Shipyard 19652007 San Diego, California
LPD05
[2]
Duluth LPD-6 New York Naval Shipyard 19652005 San Diego, California
LPD06
[3]
Cleveland sub-class
Cleveland LPD-7 Ingalls Shipbuilding 19672011 San Diego, California
LPD07
[4]
Dubuque LPD-8 Ingalls Shipbuilding 19672011 San Diego, California
LPD08
[5]
Denver LPD-9 Lockheed Shipbuilding 1968 Sasebo, Japan
LPD09
[6]
Juneau LPD-10 Lockheed Shipbuilding 19692008 Sasebo, Japan
LPD10
[7]
Coronado LPD-11/
AGF-11
Lockheed Shipbuilding 19702005 San Diego, California
AGF11
[8]
Shreveport LPD-12 Lockheed Shipbuilding 19702007 Norfolk, Virginia
LPD12
[9]
Nashville LPD-13 Lockheed Shipbuilding 19702009 Norfolk, Virginia
LPD13
[10]
Trenton sub-class
Trenton LPD-14 Lockheed Shipbuilding 19712007 Norfolk, Virginia
LPD14
[11]
Ponce LPD-15 Lockheed Shipbuilding 1971 Norfolk, Virginia
LPD15
[12]
Cleveland class
Austin-class amphibious transport dock
289
USS Dubuque (LPD-8)
Class overview
Name: Cleveland-class amphibious transport dock
Preceded by: Austin-class amphibious transport dock
Succeededby: Trenton-class amphibious transport dock
Completed: Cleveland, Dubuque, Denver, Juneau, Coronado, Shreveport, Nashville
The Cleveland class of amphibious transport dock was a refinement of the Austin class. All earlier classes are being
replaced by the San Antonio class.
The Cleveland class was originally to consist of 10 ships, LPD-7 through LPD-16. Seven ships were actually
completed and listed in this class, with one being converted to a command ship, Coronado(AGF-11).
Trenton(LPD-14) and Ponce(LPD-15) were originally to be included in the Cleveland class, but were completed as
almost identical Trenton-class LPDs. The most noticeable difference between the Cleveland and Austin classes is the
extra level in the superstructure housing a flag bridge and command and control facilities for an embarked staff
which the earlier ships lack.
Ships
Ship Builder Homeport
USSCleveland(LPD-7)
(decommissioned)
Ingalls Shipbuilding San Diego, California
USSDubuque(LPD-8)
(decommissioned)
Ingalls Shipbuilding San Diego, California
USSDenver(LPD-9) Lockheed Shipbuilding Sasebo, Japan
USSJuneau(LPD-10)
(decommissioned)
Lockheed Shipbuilding San Diego, California
USS Coronado
(LPD/AGF-11)
(decommissioned)
Lockheed Shipbuilding San Diego, California
USSShreveport(LPD-12)
(decommissioned)
Lockheed Shipbuilding Norfolk, Virginia
USSNashville(LPD-13)
(decommissioned)
Lockheed Shipbuilding Norfolk, Virginia
Austin-class amphibious transport dock
290
Trenton class
USS Trenton (LPD-14)
Class overview
Name: Trenton-class amphibious transport dock
Operators: United States Navy
Indian Navy
Preceded by: Cleveland-class amphibious transport dock
Succeededby: San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
Completed: Trenton, Ponce
The Trenton class of amphibious transport dock was a refinement of the Austin and Cleveland classes. Note that
some sources consider Cleveland and later ships to be a part of the Austin class, but the Naval Vessel Registry lists
them as a separate class. All earlier classes are being replaced by the San Antonio class. LPD-16, while authorized,
was cancelled before being constructed.
As of August 2013[13] the above mentioned site Naval Vessel Registry lists the USS Trenton and the USS Ponce as
Austin class amphibious transport docks.[14]
Ships
Ship Builder Homeport
USS Trenton
(LPD-14)
(decommsioned)
Lockheed Shipbuilding Norfolk, Virginia
USS Ponce (LPD-15) Lockheed Shipbuilding Norfolk, Virginia
References
[1] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD4. htm
[2] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD5. htm
[3] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD6. htm
[4] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD7. htm
[5] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD8. htm
[6] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD9. htm
[7] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD10. htm
[8] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ AGF11.htm
[9] http:/ / www. nvr. navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD12. htm
[10] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD13.htm
[11] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD14.htm
[12] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ details/ LPD15.htm
[13] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=Austin-class_amphibious_transport_dock& action=edit
[14] http:/ / www.nvr.navy.mil/ nvrships/ s_LPD. htm
Austin-class amphibious transport dock
291
External links
U.S. Navy Fact File: Amphibious Transport Dock - LPD (http:/ / www. navy. mil/ navydata/ fact_display.
asp?cid=4200& tid=600& ct=4)
Federation of American Scientists: LPD 4 Austin class (http:/ / www. fas. org/ man/ dod-101/ sys/ ship/ lpd-4.
htm)
GlobalSecurity.org: LPD 4 Austin class (http:/ / www. globalsecurity. org/ military/ systems/ ship/ lpd-4. htm)
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
292
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
USSSan Antonio(LPD-17) and USSNew York(LPD-21) in June 2011.
Class overview
Builders: Northrop Grumman Ship Systems
Operators: United States Navy
Preceded by: Austin-class amphibious transport dock
Newport-class tank landing ship
Charleston-class amphibious cargo ship
Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship
Succeededby: N/Acurrent authorized amphibious transport dock line
Cost:
$1,602.5 million (ave. for class, FY2012)
[1]
$2,021.4million (last ship, FY2012)
Built: 20002017 (forecast)
In commission: 2006present
Building: 2
Planned: 12
Completed: 9
Cancelled: 1
Active: 9
General characteristics
Type: Amphibious transport dock
Displacement: 25,300 t (full)
Length: 684ft (208m)
Beam: 105ft (32m)
Draft: 23ft (7.0m), full load
Propulsion: Four sequentially turbocharged marine Colt-Pielstick diesel engines, two shafts, 41,600 shp
Speed: In excess of 22 knots (41km/h)
Boats & landing
craft carried:
Two LCACs (air cushion); or
1 LCU (conventional)
14 Amphibious Assault Vehicles
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
293
Complement: Crew: 28 officers, and 333 enlisted men
Landing force: 66 officers, and 633 enlisted men
Sensors and
processing systems:
AN/SPS-48G, AN/SPQ-9B
Electronic warfare
& decoys:
AN/SLQ-32
Armament: 2 Bushmaster II 30 mm close-in-guns
two Rolling Airframe Missile launchers
two Mk 41 eight-cell VLS for quad-packed ESSMs (if required)
Several twin M2 Browning machine gun turrets
Aircraft carried: Launch or land up to four CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters, or up to two MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft
simultaneously with room to place four MV-22s on the flight deck and one in the hangar deck
The San Antonio class is a class of amphibious transport dock (LPD) warships used by the United States Navy.
These warships replace the older Austin class LPDs (including Cleveland and Trenton sub-classes), as well as the
Newport class tank landing ships, and the Charleston class amphibious cargo ships that have already been retired.
Twelve ships of the San Antonio class were proposed, but only eleven funded, with one canceled due to budget cuts
and cost overruns. Their original target price was $890 million; as built, their average cost is $1.6 billion. As of
March 2014[2] nine warships of this class are in service with the U.S. Navy.
History
The San Antonio class was designed to provide the Navy and U.S. Marine Corps with modern, sea-based platforms
that are networked, survivable, and built to operate with 21st century transformational platforms, such as the MV-22
Osprey, the (since canceled) Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), air-cushioned landing craft (LCACs), and future
means by which Marines are delivered ashore. The ship is more than 45 percent larger than the Austin class,
displacing more than 25,000 tons at full load. It carries fewer troops but has twice as much space for vehicles,
landing craft, and aircraft.
The project embraced a "Design for Ownership" philosophy; a concurrent engineering approach that injects operator,
maintainer, and trainer input into the design development process. The goal was to ensure that operational realities
are considered throughout the total ship design, integration, construction, test and life cycle support of the new ships
and their systems. This process was intended to improve combat readiness, enhance quality of life, and reduce Total
Ownership Costs, and resulted in numerous changes during the project.
The San Antonio class has significant survivability features and computer technology. In addition to Rolling
Airframe Missile (RAM) protection from air threats, the class was designed to minimize radar signature. Radar
cross-section (RCS) reduction techniques make the ships more difficult to locate and target. Enhanced survivability
features include improved nuclear blast and fragmentation protection and a shock-hardened structure. The fiber-optic
shipboard-wide area network (SWAN) connects onboard-integrated systems. The network will allow "plug in and
fight" configuration, updating and replacing hardware more easily when newer technology becomes available.
Moreover, the class has extensive communications, command, control, and intelligence systems to support current
and projected expeditionary warfare missions of the 21st century.
The Advanced Enclosed Mast/Sensors (AEM/S) System mast, a 93-foot-high hexagonal structure 35 feet in
diameter, is constructed of a multi-layer frequency-selective composite material. It is designed to permit the ship's
own sensor frequencies with very low loss while reflecting other frequencies. The tapered hexagonal shape of the
AEM/S is designed to reduce radar cross section, and enclosing the antennas provides improved performance and
greatly reduces maintenance costs.
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
294
The San Antonio class also incorporates the latest quality of life standards for the embarked Marines and sailors,
including sit-up berths, a ship services mall, a learning resource center, and a fitness center. Medical facilities
include two operating rooms and 124 beds. Additionally, they are the first USN ships designed to accommodate
sailors and Marines of both sexes as part of the crew and embarked troops.
Following the extended problems and incidents experienced by the USS San Antonio, the U.S. Department of
Defense's Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), stated in 2010 that the ships are 'capable of operating
"in a benign environment," but not effective, suitable and not survivable in a combat situation'.
[3]
The DOT&E found
in 2011 that the class's first ship, USS San Antonio, had several deficiencies which rendered it "not operationally
effective, suitable, or survivable in a hostile environment".
[4]
U.S. senator Kay Hagan has asked if the LPD-17 construction line ought to be extended to a 12th ship as a bridge to
building the LX(R) (formerly LSD(X)) on the same hull, but the USN has indicated that the requirements of the
LX(R) have not yet been settled and that the LPD-17 hull might be too large for such a mission.
[5]
However
Commandant James F. Amos has also endorsed dropping LSD in favor of continued LPD production.
[6]
Chief of Naval Operations Greenert is considering using some of the extra space in the San Antonio class to mount
modular equipment in the same fashion as the Littoral combat ship.
[7]
As part of their bid to offer "Flight II"
LPD-17s for the Dock landing ship replacement contract, HII has suggested fitting out the ships to carry the Aegis
Ballistic Missile Defense System.
[8][9]
Ships of the class
Name Number Builder Launched Commissioned Home port Status
San Antonio LPD-17 Avondale, La. 12 July 2003 14 January 2006 Norfolk, Virginia Active
New Orleans LPD-18 Avondale, La. 11 December 2004 10 March 2007 San Diego, California Active
Mesa Verde LPD-19 Ingalls, Miss. 19 November 2004 15 December 2007 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Green Bay LPD-20 Avondale, La. 11 August 2006 24 January 2009 San Diego, California Active
New York LPD-21 Avondale, La. 19 December 2007 7 November 2009 Mayport, Florida Active
San Diego LPD-22 Ingalls, Miss. 7 May 2010 19 May 2012 San Diego, California Active
Anchorage LPD-23 Avondale, La. 12 February 2011 4 May 2013 San Diego, California Active
Arlington LPD-24 Ingalls, Miss. 23 November 2010 8 February 2013 Norfolk, Virginia Active
Somerset LPD-25 Avondale, La. 14 April 2012 1 March 2014 San Diego, California Active
John P. Murtha LPD-26 Ingalls, Miss. Under construction
Portland LPD-27 Ingalls, Miss. Under construction
Gallery
during construction at
Avondale, 2002
Port-bow view of . Port-quarter view of . Steel from the World Trade
Center is poured for construction
of
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock
295
Elevation of LPD-17 class ship. Cutaway illustration of the
U.S. Navy's San
Antonio-class amphibious
transport dock ship (LPD).
References
[1] [1] LPD-27 is the last scheduled member of the class, bought with $2,021.4M (FY2012)
[2] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ w/ index. php?title=San_Antonio-class_amphibious_transport_dock& action=edit
[3] Capaccio, Tony Northrop Navy Ships `Not Survivable' in Combat, Official Says (http:/ / www. bloomberg. com/ news/ 2010-10-28/
northrop-navy-ships-not-survivable-in-combat-u-s-defense-official-says. html) Bloomberg, 28 October 2010
[4] "LPD-17 San Antonio Class Amphibious Transport Dock" (http:/ / www. dote. osd. mil/ pub/ reports/ FY2011/ pdf/ navy/ 2011lpd17. pdf).
DOT&E
[5] O'Rourke, Ronald. "Navy LPD-17 Amphibious Ship Procurement: Background, Issues, and Options for Congress." (http:/ / opencrs. com/
document/ RL34476/ 2011-03-16/ ?26236) Congressional Research Service, 16 March 2011.
[6] "Navy League Conference 2013 speeches on the future of the maritime services." (http:/ / www. c-spanvideo. org/ program/ 311966-1)
[7] Freedberg, Sydney J. Jr. "Modular 'Trucks' Will Rule The Waves: CNO." (http:/ / defense. aol. com/ 2012/ 04/ 18/
modular-trucks-will-rule-the-waves-cno/ ) Aol Defense. 18 April 2012.
[8] "HII Pitching BMD Role For LPD-17 Hull." (http:/ / www. defensedaily. com/ free/ HII-Pitching-BMD-Role-For-LPD-17-Hull_20355. html)
[9] "LPD Flight II." (http:/ / www. huntingtoningalls.com/ flight2/ index)
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to San Antonio class amphibious transport docks.
The San Antonio class's Web site (http:/ / www. pms317. navy. mil/ )
San Antonio Class Landing Platform Dock, United States of America(Naval technology) (http:/ / www.
naval-technology. com/ projects/ lpd17/ )
San Antonio class Amphibious transport dock(Military today) (http:/ / www. military-today. com/ navy/
san_antonio_class. htm)
San Antonio Class (LPD 17) Amphibious Transport Dock (http:/ / www. navyrecognition. com/ index.
php?option=com_content& task=view& id=1627) (navyrecognition.com)
Charleston-class amphibious cargo ship
296
Charleston-class amphibious cargo ship
USS Charleston (LKA-113) in 1988
Class overview
Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co.
Built: 19661969
In commission: 19681994
Completed: 5
Laid up: 5
General characteristics
Type: Amphibious cargo ship
Displacement: ~9,000 tons (light)
~18,500 tons (full load)
Length: 576ft (176m)
Beam: 82ft (25m)
Draft: 26ft (7.9m)
Propulsion: Steam Turbine
Speed: 20 knots (37km/h)
Boats & landing
craft carried:
Up to 18 landing craft
Complement: 50 officers, 592 men
Armament: 4 twin 3"/50 caliber guns
Aviation facilities: Helicopter landing platform
The Charleston-class amphibious cargo ships were a class of amphibious cargo ships in service with the United
States Navy. These ships served in Amphibious Readiness Groups between 1968 and 1994. The ships were the last
amphibious cargo ships built for the U.S. Navy, their role having been taken over by amphibious transport docks.
Charleston-class amphibious cargo ship
297
Service
Built in the late 1960s, these ships participated in the Vietnam War. Four of the five ships in the class had been
transferred to the reserve fleet in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The need for additional sealift capacity resulted in
all four being returned to the active fleet in 1982. They are among the first Navy ships to have a fully automated
main propulsion plant (600-pound pressure with superheat, known as a "Super Six."). The lead ship of the class,
Charleston was decommissioned in 1992, and was joined by St. Louis in November 1992. The remaining ships were
decommissioned in 1994. All ships are mothballed for possible activation in the future.
[1]
Design
USS EL Paso shows the general layout of the
Charleston-class.
The assigned mission of the amphibious cargo ship was to transport
and land combat equipment and material with attendant personnel in an
amphibious assault. To optimize their capability for combat loading,
they provided considerable flexibility in cargo stowage methods. The
cargo elevators servicing holds 1, 3, and 4 make all categories of
supplies and all levels available simultaneously to either the main deck
or the helicopter platform. Use of the ship's forklifts and pallet
transporters speed the maneuvering of cargo in the holds and enable
delivery to various debarkation stations via the main deck
passageways, which run the length of the ship. The arrangement and
quantity of booms and cargo elevators make it possible to
simultaneously embark/debark vehicles and cargo.
Vehicles in upper stowage spaces can be embarked/debarked through the hatches with cargo booms, while pallets are
embarked/debarked in lower stowage spaces by elevators. The main deck hatch of hold 2 is unobstructed and can be
opened for embarking/debarking of vehicles without the delay of unloading landing craft stowed on the hatch. Hold
4 is well suited for high priority cargo because of its direct access to the flight deck or main deck via elevator
number 5.
[2]
Ships
Three LKAs tied up at Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard, Jan 2008
USSCharleston(LKA-113). Launched 2 December 1967.
Commissioned 14 December 1968. Decommissioned 27 April
1992.
[3]
USSDurham(LKA-114). Launched 29 March 1968.
Commissioned 24 May 1969. Decommissioned 25 February
1994.
[4]
USSMobile(LKA-115). Launched 19 October 1968.
Commissioned 29 September 1969. Decommissioned 25 February
1994.
[5]
USSSt. Louis(LKA-116). Launched 4 January 1969.
Commissioned 22 November 1969. Decommissioned 2 November 1992.
[6]
USSEl Paso(LKA-117). Launched 17 May 1969. Commissioned 17 January 1970. Decommissioned 21 April
1994.
[7]
Charleston-class amphibious cargo ship
298
References
[1] Stefan Terzibaschitsch 50 Jahre Amphibische Schiffe der U.S. Navy. Leonberg (Germany), p.65
[2] Stefan Terzibaschitsch Seemacht USA. Bechtermuenz, Augsburg (Germany), p. 602. ISBN 3-86047-576-2
[3] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 10/ 02/ 02113.htm
[4] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 10/ 02/ 02114.htm
[5] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 10/ 02/ 02115.htm
[6] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 10/ 02/ 02116.htm
[7] http:/ / www. navsource. org/ archives/ 10/ 02/ 02117.htm
Landing Craft Air Cushion
299
Landing Craft Air Cushion
For LCAC as a generic term for military assault hovercraft, see LCAC (disambiguation).
LCAC
A US Navy LCAC maneuvers to enter the well deck of the amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge
Type Landing Craft
Placeoforigin United States
Service history
Inservice 1986present
Production history
Manufacturer Textron Marine and Land Systems/Avondale Gulfport Marine
Numberbuilt 91
Specifications
Weight 182 long tons (185 t) full load
Length 87 feet 11 inches (26.4 meters)
Width 47 feet (14.3 meters)
Crew 5
Main
armament
two 12.7 mm (.50 in) machine guns. Gun mounts will support: M2HB .50 in cal machine gun; Mk 19 Mod 3
40 mm grenade launcher; M60 machine gun. Tests conducted with GAU-13 30 mm gatling gun.
Engine 4 gas turbines
Payloadcapacity 60 tons (up to 75 tons in an overload condition)(54/68 metric tons)
Operational
range
200 nmi at 40 kt (370 km at 75 km/h) with payload
300 nmi at 35 kt (550 km at 65 km/h)with payload
Speed 40+ knots (46+ mph; 74 km/h) with full load, 70+ knots maximum speed
The Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) is a class of air-cushion vehicle (hovercraft) used as landing craft by the
United States Navy's Assault Craft Units and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF). They transport
weapons systems, equipment, cargo and personnel of the assault elements of the Marine Air/Ground Task Force both
from ship to shore and across the beach.
Landing Craft Air Cushion
300
Design and development
Concept design of the present day LCAC began in the early 1970s with the full-scale Amphibious Assault Landing
Craft (AALC) test vehicle. During the advanced development stage, two prototypes were built. JEFF A was designed
and built by Aerojet General in California, with four rotating ducted propellers. JEFF B was designed and built by
Bell Aerospace in New Orleans, Louisiana. JEFF B had two ducted rear propellers similar to the proposed SK-10
which was derived from the previous Bell SK-5 / SR.N5 hovercraft tested in Vietnam. These two craft confirmed the
technical feasibility and operational capability that ultimately led to the production of LCAC. JEFF B was selected
as the design basis for todays LCAC.
[1]
USMC LAV-25s and HMMWVs are offloaded
from a USN LCAC craft at Samesan RTMB,
Thailand
The first 33 were included in the FY82-86 defense budgets, 15 in
FY89, 12 each in FY90, FY91 and FY92, while seven were included in
FY93. The first LCAC was delivered to the Navy in 1984 and Initial
Operational Capability (IOC) was achieved in 1986. Approval for full
production was granted in 1987. After an initial 15-craft competitive
production contract was awarded to each of two companies, Textron
Marine & Land Systems (TMLS) of New Orleans, La, and Avondale
Gulfport Marine, TMLS was selected to build the remaining craft. A
total of ninety-one LCAC have now been built. The final craft, LCAC
91, was delivered to the U.S. Navy in 2001.
On June 29, 1987, LCAC was granted approval for full production.
Forty-eight air-cushion landing craft were authorized and appropriated through FY 89. Lockheed Shipbuilding
Company was competitively selected as a second source. The FY 1990 budget request included $219.3 million for
nine craft. The FY 1991 request included full funding for 12 LCACs and advance procurement in support of the FY
1992 program (which was intended to be nine craft). The remaining 24 were funded in FY92.
[2]
The LCAC first deployed in 1987 aboard USS Germantown (LSD-42). LCACs are transported in and operate from
all the U.S. Navy's amphibious-well deck ships including LHA, LHD, LSD and LPD. Ships capable of carrying the
LCAC include the Wasp (3), Tarawa (1), Anchorage (4), Austin (1), Whidbey Island (4-5), Harper's Ferry (2), and
San Antonio (2) classes. All of the planned 91 craft have been delivered to the Navy. Of these 91 LCACs, seven of
these have been disassembled for FGE, ten are in deep Reduced Operation Status (ROS), two are held for R&D, and
36 are in use on each coast at Little Creek, Virginia and Camp Pendleton, California. Eight minesweeping kits were
acquired in 1994-1995.
The craft operates with a crew of five. In addition to beach landing, LCAC provides personnel transport, evacuation
support, lane breaching, mine countermeasure operations, and Marine and Special Warfare equipment delivery. The
four main engines are all used for lift and all used for main propulsion. The craft can continue to operate, at reduced
capability, with two engines inoperable. They are interchangeable for redundancy. A transport model can seat 180
fully equipped troops. Cargo capacity is 1,809sqft (168.1m
2
). The LCAC is capable of carrying a 60 ton payload
(up to 75 tons in an overload condition), including one M-1 Abrams tank, at speeds over 40 knots. Fuel capacity is
5000 gallons. The LCAC uses an average of 1000 gallons per hour. Maneuvering considerations include requiring
500 yards or more to stop and 2000 yards or more turning radius. The bow ramp is 28.8ft (8.8m) wide while the
stern ramp is 15ft (4.6m) wide. Noise and dust levels are high with this craft. If disabled the craft is difficult to tow.
In recent years spray suppression has been added to the craft's skirt to reduce interference with driver's vision.
The LCAC is a dramatic innovation in modern amphibious warfare technology. It provides the capability to launch
amphibious assaults from points over the horizon (OTH) from up to 50 nautical miles offshore, thereby decreasing
risk to ships and personnel and generating greater uncertainty in the enemy's mind as to the location and timing of an
assault, thereby maximizing its prospects of success. The LCAC propulsion system makes it less susceptible to
mines than other assault craft or vehicles. Due to its tremendous over-the-beach capability, the LCAC is accessible to
Landing Craft Air Cushion
301
more than 80% of the world's coastlines. Previously, landing craft had a top speed of approximately eight knots and
could cross only 17% of the world's beach area. Assaults were made from one to two miles off-shore.Its high speed
complements a joint assault with helicopters, so personnel and equipment can be unloaded beyond the beach in
secure landing areas. For 20 years, helicopters have provided the partial capability to launch OTH amphibious
assaults. Now, with LCAC, landing craft complement helos in speed, tactical surprise and without exposing ships to
enemy fire.
[3]
The similarities between a Navy LCAC and an airplane are substantial. The craftmaster sits in a "cockpit" or
command module with a headset radio on. He talks to air traffic control which for LCAC's is well-deck control
located near a ship's sterngate. The ride feels like a plane in high turbulence. The craftmaster steers with a yoke, his
feet are on rudder controls -- and he flies a lot like a hockey puck on an air hockey table, The LCAC is similar to a
helicopter in that it has six dimensions of motion. Operating the LCAC demands unique perceptual and psychomotor
skills. In addition, with a machine as expensive and inherently dangerous as the LCAC, sound judgment and
decision-making also play an important role. Concerns over escalating training cost, projections for an increased
number of LCAC vehicles and crew, and a high attrition rate in training highlighted the importance of developing a
more accurate means of selecting candidates. Attrition of operators and engineers has dropped from an initial high of
40% in 1988 to approximately 10-15% today.
[4]
In Fiscal Year 2000 the Navy started an LCAC Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) to add 10 years of design
life to each craft. The SLEP will be applied to 72 LCACs, extending their service life from 20 to 30 years, delaying
the need to replace these versatile craft.
[5]
Without a SLEP the first LCAC would face retirement in 2004, based on a 20-year lifespan. Naval Sea Systems
Command (NAVSEA) has been working with Textron Marine and Land Systems since April 1996 on LCAC SLEP
research and development. The actual SLEP modifications are planned to be conducted in two phases.
Phase I. Over a period of several years electronics system recapitalization will take place at each Assault Craft Unit
(ACU), where the craft are physically located. This will involve replacing current electronics components, which are
increasingly becoming obsolete and unsupportable, with an open electronics architecture using easily upgraded,
Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) components. The new electronics suite will be more reliable and less costly to
operate and maintain.
Phase II. Buoyancy box replacement will be conducted at the Textron Marine and Land Systems facility in New
Orleans, LA, where Textron will use design changes, coatings, and changes in materials to increase the LCACs
resistance to corrosion. Phase II will also include the electronics upgrade of Phase I, until the entire active fleet is
outfitted with the new configuration. The new buoyancy box will incorporate improvements to damage stability and
trim control of the LCACs.
NAVSEA transitioned from the research and development effort to the SLEP in 1999. Concurrently NAVSEA also
considered additional SLEP options, including an enhanced engine to provide improved operation in excessively hot
environments and an advanced skirt that is more reliable and cost effective.
The Navy continued the LCAC Service Life Extension Program in Fiscal Year 2001. This program combines major
structural improvements with Command, Control, Communications, Computer and Navigation upgrades and adds 10
years to the service life, extending it to 30 years. In FY 2001, it was funded at $19.9 million and extended the service
life of 1 craft. The SLEP is planned for a total of 72 craft.
The near-term focus will be on the "C4N" [Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Navigation]
program, to replace the crafts' obsolete equipment. This will focus on replacement of LN-66 radars with modern,
high-power P-80 radar systems. Additionally, the SLEP will include an open-architecture concept, relying on
modern commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment, which will allow much easier incorporation of later
technology changes, such as the precision navigation system and communications systems fully interoperable with
in-service and near-term future Joint systems now planned. The C4N program is to complete by 2010.
Landing Craft Air Cushion
302
Through 2016, the Navy will look to incorporate other important service-life enhancements: Engine upgrades
(ETF-40B configuration) that will provide additional power and lift particular in hot (110-degrees F and higher)
environments, reduced fuel consumpti