Spruances

[contedicavour]

They did have Mk 41 VLS, but they didn't have the radars or FCS that you need to control SM-2's.

SM-2s cannot be used to their full potential because of lack of Aegis, but you can still launch them by using simpler fire control systems such as the STIR on the Canadian TRUMP destroyers. That's not expensive and can upgrade your Spruance into an AAW DDG. Though I agree with you it will still be a far cry from an Aegis ship.

cheers

 

[AegisFC]

What I mean was that with out some sort of radar and computer upgrade a Spruance can launch SM-2's but they'd just go in a random direction.

 

[contedicavour]

What I mean was that with out some sort of radar and computer upgrade a Spruance can launch SM-2's but they'd just go in a random direction.

I'm not sure I understand your point.
An illuminating radar such as the STIR 1.8 aboard the Canadian TRUMP destroyers can perfectly and accurately guide the SM2s, the only limitations are the n° of targets than can be attacked simultaneously, and the range (can't use the full 167km range of a SM-2III).
The STIR is a compact sensor requiring less space than an air search radar...

cheers

 

[tatra]

The Spruance "as is" can guide SARH-missile like Sea Sparrow. Given the NSSMS fit, it could in principle also guide Standard missiles (ehich is also SARH), provided that guidance frequencies and software of the two missile types are compatible. Given that the Guided Missile Fire Control System (GMFCS) Mk 91 with Tracking Illuminator System (TIS) Mk 9 is geared towards guiding RIM-7, it would not be able to optimally utilize RIM-66 / RIM-67 Standard Missile cabilities though. But I suppose it could work.

A cost effective AAW upgrade should center on a multifunction radar. This could be Thales SeaPar (admittedly geared towards ESSM, not SM2, but still providing massively superior AAW compared to current NSSMS fit), or larger APAR (better for SM2), or similar.

 

[beleg]

There was an offer to give Taiwan modernised Spruaces with forward MK61VLS, rear Mk41 VLS, AN-SPY1 on a new composite mast, RAMs and Illuminator radars with apprx. 600mio$ per ship. Compared to the price of a new Burke this is still cheap, but is it really worth? Can the ship carry such burden? I am not really sure..

 

[Sea Toby]

While this isn't the official line, in reality the Spruances were designed back during the early 1970s to replace the Forrest Sherman destroyers as ASW carrier escorts. The Kidds were designed and built after the Spruance program for Iran. The Ticenderogas were designed and built to replace the Coontz, Leahy, and Belknap classes as AAW carrier escorts. There were a few nuclear cruisers built of the California and Virginia classes built too as AAW carrier escorts. The first batch of Burkes were built to replace the Adams class destroyers as AAW carrier escorts the latter batch of Burkes were built to replace the Spruances. That's the story about the US Navy's carrier escorts. In this time and age, you'll notice the newer ASW carrier escorts are armed better to engage SSM.

On the other hand the Brooke and Garcia class frigates replaced old WWII Fletcher class destroyers, and the Knox class frigates replaced old WWII FRAM I Gearing and Sumnter class destroyers. The Perrys were designed to replaced the Brooke and Garcia class frigates, but more were built as its AAW capability during the Reagan buildup FRAM II Gearings and Sumnters that weren't replaced earlier. Also, more Perrys were built because of the delayed Burke program. During the Reagan buildup reaching the 700 ship navy goal meant a large program of cheaper warships, i.e. the Perry class.

The LCS is currently under construction for a reduced 21st century navy to replace the Perrys. In the next decade replacements for the Ticenderogas will be designed and built.

 

[contedicavour]

There was an offer to give Taiwan modernised Spruaces with forward MK61VLS, rear Mk41 VLS, AN-SPY1 on a new composite mast, RAMs and Illuminator radars with apprx. 600mio$ per ship. Compared to the price of a new Burke this is still cheap, but is it really worth? Can the ship carry such burden? I am not really sure..

Well, Taiwan still has some WW2 vintage destroyers to replace, and its recent Lafayette frigates lack anything more decent (for AAW) than the Chaparral (sort of Stinger mounts). The 4 Kidds and the OHPs aren't enough to provide good AAW cover to a fleet highly exposed to potential air attacks from mainland China.
So a modernized Spruance would have done wonders, even if it would still be massively inferior to a Burke Flight II (but who can afford it other than Japan ?)

cheers

 

[RubiconNZ]

So a modernized Spruance would have done wonders, even if it would still be massively inferior to a Burke Flight II (but who can afford it other than Japan ?)

cheers

Australia can
:dance

 

[contedicavour]

Australia can
:dance

I was thinking about Asia, but yes, Australia is one lucky country with a very healthy economy & budget surplus

cheers

 

[tatra]

There was an offer to give Taiwan modernised Spruaces with forward MK61VLS, rear Mk41 VLS, AN-SPY1 on a new composite mast, RAMs and Illuminator radars with apprx. 600mio$ per ship. Compared to the price of a new Burke this is still cheap, but is it really worth? Can the ship carry such burden? I am not really sure..

Yes, assuming it is similar to the Advance Enclosed Mast/Sensor hybrid composite structure trialled on USS ARTHUR W. RADFORD (DD 968), probably with AEGIS combat system "light" (based on the Spy-1F multifunction phased array radar, a scaled version of the AN/SPY-1D in service on US Navy AEGIS cruisers and destroyers) with some Continuous Wave Illuminator Type MK 82 or possibly Thales STIR added.

http://navysite.de/dd/dd968_8.jpg

Early Ticonderoga's (CG47-51 baseline 0 and 1, decommed from 2004 onwards, still with Mk26 launchers like Kidd, but with AEGIS, though not the most capable version) would be another option.

 

[Jtimes2]

Well, Taiwan still has some WW2 vintage destroyers to replace, and its recent Lafayette frigates lack anything more decent (for AAW) than the Chaparral (sort of Stinger mounts). The 4 Kidds and the OHPs aren't enough to provide good AAW cover to a fleet highly exposed to potential air attacks from mainland China.
So a modernized Spruance would have done wonders, even if it would still be massively inferior to a Burke Flight II (but who can afford it other than Japan ?)

cheers

Actually, the last of the FRAM'ed Gearing class destroyers (Shen Yang) left service in January. The Sea Chapparal launchers have been transferred to the LaFayette class frigates that the Taiwanese bought from France. The Sea Chapparal is a 1970s-vintage weapon that uses a ground-fired version of the AIM-9 Sidewinder.

There is still a pretty big hole in the Taiwanese AAW capabilities. For some time in the late 1990s they planned on building a stretched O.H. Perry (FFG-7) class hull with an Aegis-lite phased array, but this fell by the wayside due to budget cuts. You can probably find a line drawing of this project on the WWW.

I think the Spruances are beautiful ships but unfortunately there isn't a second-hand market for a subkiller that big. Legislatures and Parliaments want to spend $ on new hardware (preferably domestic built), not modernising/converting 20-year old hulls. Excellent comments though!

 

[contedicavour]

Actually, the last of the FRAM'ed Gearing class destroyers (Shen Yang) left service in January. The Sea Chapparal launchers have been transferred to the LaFayette class frigates that the Taiwanese bought from France. The Sea Chapparal is a 1970s-vintage weapon that uses a ground-fired version of the AIM-9 Sidewinder.

There is still a pretty big hole in the Taiwanese AAW capabilities. For some time in the late 1990s they planned on building a stretched O.H. Perry (FFG-7) class hull with an Aegis-lite phased array, but this fell by the wayside due to budget cuts. You can probably find a line drawing of this project on the WWW.

I think the Spruances are beautiful ships but unfortunately there isn't a second-hand market for a subkiller that big. Legislatures and Parliaments want to spend $ on new hardware (preferably domestic built), not modernising/converting 20-year old hulls. Excellent comments though!

Thanks !
What would you expect from Taiwan in terms of acquisitions in the next decade to plug the hole in AAW capabilities ? Some OHPs with a VLS for ESSM and SM-2 (a bit like the Australian upgrade) ? An upgrade of the Lafayette with sylver VLS for Aster (15s at least) ?
Everybody looks closely at the long delayed SSK programme, but AAW seems to be just as urgent...

cheers

 

[Salty Dog]

Yes, assuming it is similar to the Advance Enclosed Mast/Sensor hybrid composite structure trialled on USS ARTHUR W. RADFORD (DD 968), probably with AEGIS combat system "light" (based on the Spy-1F multifunction phased array radar, a scaled version of the AN/SPY-1D in service on US Navy AEGIS cruisers and destroyers) with some Continuous Wave Illuminator Type MK 82 or possibly Thales STIR added.

http://navysite.de/dd/dd968_8.jpg

Early Ticonderoga's (CG47-51 baseline 0 and 1, decommed from 2004 onwards, still with Mk26 launchers like Kidd, but with AEGIS, though not the most capable version) would be another option.

The AEM/S on DD-968 was a proof-of-concept or advanced technology demonstrator. Sailors reported an unanticipated benefit of being able to work aloft in bad weather. The AEM/S eventually found it's way into the new LPD-17 class.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Uss_san_antonio_1330453.jpg

The Spruances were never intended to carry or fire the SM-2. That folklore arose since the Mk-41 VLS had the capability to fire the SM-2. Spruances definitely did not have the FCS to do so. The Mk-41 on the Spruance class was to launch the ASROC and Tomahawk variants, nothing more.


Nice photo of a Spruance and Kidd side-by-side

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kidd_class_vs_Spruance_class.jpg

 

[Lostfleet]

so what will happen to the rest of the Spruances? will they be just place in reserve?

I assume some of them would be sunk for target practice or artificial reef, but I wonder if one or two turns up as a museum ?

I was aboard a Spruance class once during an open day in Norfolk ( USS Peterson ) it would be cool to be able to visit a modern post-WWII destroyer as a museum.

I am suprised that Turkey did not receive Spruances. It would have been good for them to have bigger ships compared to Perrys and Mekos they currently have. ( it would be good to have MK41 launchers on board if it was allowed - maybe they could have built their own version somehow)

 

[Salty Dog]

so what will happen to the rest of the Spruances? will they be just place in reserve?

I assume some of them would be sunk for target practice or artificial reef, but I wonder if one or two turns up as a museum ?

I was aboard a Spruance class once during an open day in Norfolk ( USS Peterson ) it would be cool to be able to visit a modern post-WWII destroyer as a museum.

I am suprised that Turkey did not receive Spruances. It would have been good for them to have bigger ships compared to Perrys and Mekos they currently have. ( it would be good to have MK41 launchers on board if it was allowed - maybe they could have built their own version somehow)

Courtesy of Wiki, here's a a list and disposition of the Spruance class:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spruance_class_destroyer

The class as posted above was too expensive to maintain. Not cost effective at all.

I also feel they had too deep a draft requirement (34 ft) which would keep them out of some ports.

The minimum manning concept was great, but you needed more bodies just for routine maintenance and upkeep.

The aluminum superstructure also produced some cracking problems, especially after aluminum armour plating was put on later, adding even more stress.

The US Navy as always ran these around to death so at least the tax payers got their monies worth.

Not opting for the Spruances was in my opinion a wise decision by prospective users.

 

[beleg]

Navy is using the funds for other projects

Milgem OPV Corvette,
Half life modernisation of MEKO Track Is
ESSM on MEKO TrIIs and adding of 64 cell VLS to first 2 ship of Track II
Modernisation of exOHPs
AIP Sub acqusition (2+2)
Amphibious modernisation programme (LPD+LCS+LST ships)
Plans for Turkish AAW based on exp gained from Milgem.

 

[Sea Toby]

As I recall, back during the late 1980s, early 1990s, the US Navy wished for 29 Arleigh Burke class DDGs. They were so good, the navy built more. I believe 62 ships will be built eventually, more than enough to replace the previous classes of AAW warships. The Spruances are being replaced by the last of the new Arleigh Burkes. The US Navy is not hurting at the high end of escorts, but at the low end of escorts.

Many of the frigates are being decommissioned now and in the near future. Unless the LCS program takes off, the US navy will be missing many ocean escorts. If not the LCS program of ships, there is the possibility that the new national security cutters will be built in numbers to replace the frigates or a combination of LCSs and NSCs. With the end of the Cold War the US Navy isn't so concerned with the low end, other than to build up numbers to reach a fleet goal of 300 ships. The US Navy has never considered frigates as front line vessels.

 

[Salty Dog]

As I recall, back during the late 1980s, early 1990s, the US Navy wished for 29 Arleigh Burke class DDGs. They were so good, the navy built more. I believe 62 ships will be built eventually, more than enough to replace the previous classes of AAW warships. The US Navy is not hurting at the high end of escorts, but at the low end of escorts. Many of the frigates are being decommissioned now and in the near future. Unless the LCS program takes off, the US navy will be missing many ocean escorts. If not the LCS program of ships, there is the possibility that the new national security cutters will be built in numbers to replace the frigates or a combination of LCSs and NSCs. With the end of the Cold War the US Navy isn't so concerned with the low end, other than to build up numbers to reach a fleet goal of 300 ships.

We've actually touched on this in another thread (wrong topic though):

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7434&page=3

 

[Lostfleet]

Beleg where will they fit 64 cell VLS on Meko Frigates?

Salty Dog, does the Ticonderoga have the similar structural problems as the Spruance?

 

[Sea Toby]

I was under the impression they do, along with the same feedwater pumps issues with their gas turbines. And I have read and heard the Arleigh Burkes have bow problems due to slamming, which will need to be strengthened during the mid life refits.