Virginia CGNs

Still……think it was a shame to take those beutiful ships out so early………A

danrh,

Thanks for the info, I was getting mixed up with a Typhon frigate which would have had the Typhon missile and a strike cruiser CSGN which would have had the Aegis system.

The Virginia class always looked lightly armed with all that empty deck space fore and aft, but really had a very good weapons capability.

I think the Aegis equipped variant was going to be called the Typhon?

Virginia class info and not very good pics here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cgn-38.htm

The Typhoon was an earlier TVM SAM that was abandoned on cost grounds in favour of the “safer” Standard missile.

Typhon

Global Security – Typhon

Daniel

The Virginia class always looked lightly armed with all that empty deck space fore and aft, but really had a very good weapons capability.

I think the Aegis equipped variant was going to be called the Typhon?

Virginia class info and not very good pics here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cgn-38.htm

These hangars were closed in the early 1980’s when the Virginias got the Tomahawk launch boxes.

And would be more of a CRUISER than the Destroyer hulls of the CG-47s……

The layout of the four ships of the Virginia class was similar to that of their two California class predecessors, but with some modifications, the most significant of which are the replacement of the California’s single-arm MK 13 launchers by the later MK 26 twin Asroc launcher forward and the provision of a helicopter hanger in the stern.

The helicopter hanger in the fantail measured 42 feet by 14 feet and was served by an electro-mechanical elevator covered by a telescopic hatch. This arrangement in a ship other than an aircraft carrier was the first since the Des Moines (CA 134) class of cruisers of the mid-1940s. The door/elevator reportedly leaked badly and were not liked by her crews.

The benefits of nuclear powered ships-primarily their long range and the reduction they allowed in fleet trains-were starting to be offset by their enormous capital costs, and when faced with a bid for a numerically large class of cruisers to take the Aegis system, the US Congress insisted that the oil fired Spruance design, rather than the nuclear powered Virginia design be used as the starting point. The result was the Ticonderoga Class.

Planned Refueling Complex Overhauls were canceled in the early 1990s due to the expense of maintaining the nuclear propulsion components. The ships were all decommissioned after a relatively brief period of service averageing somewhat less than two decades. CGN-41 for example was commissioned in 1980 with a life expectancy of 38 years, though it was retired in 1997 after only half that period in service.

A remarkably clean design, certainly when compared to the USN Spruance/Kidd/Tico class hulls or to Sovremenny and P15 Delhi classes.

I’d always wished they’d based the Ticonderoga class on the Virginia class hull rather than the Spruance. Just looks so much better.

They were very nice looking ships……I understand Taiwan has the Kidd class now……

The layout of the four ships of the Virginia class was similar to that of their two California class predecessors, but with some modifications, the most significant of which are the replacement of the California’s single-arm MK 13 launchers by the later MK 26 twin Asroc launcher forward and the provision of a helicopter hanger in the stern.

The helicopter hanger in the fantail measured 42 feet by 14 feet and was served by an electro-mechanical elevator covered by a telescopic hatch. This arrangement in a ship other than an aircraft carrier was the first since the Des Moines (CA 134) class of cruisers of the mid-1940s. The door/elevator reportedly leaked badly and were not liked by her crews.

The benefits of nuclear powered ships-primarily their long range and the reduction they allowed in fleet trains-were starting to be offset by their enormous capital costs, and when faced with a bid for a numerically large class of cruisers to take the Aegis system, the US Congress insisted that the oil fired Spruance design, rather than the nuclear powered Virginia design be used as the starting point. The result was the Ticonderoga Class.

Planned Refueling Complex Overhauls were canceled in the early 1990s due to the expense of maintaining the nuclear propulsion components. The ships were all decommissioned after a relatively brief period of service averageing somewhat less than two decades. CGN-41 for example was commissioned in 1980 with a life expectancy of 38 years, though it was retired in 1997 after only half that period in service.

A remarkably clean design, certainly when compared to the USN Spruance/Kidd/Tico class hulls or to Sovremenny and P15 Delhi classes.

I’v read that the Virginia class CGNs had a helicopter hanger built into their sterns. Was this a success? I’v never seen pictures of these ships operating helos………and it’s allways been my opinion that these ships were retired too early………I would have loved to have seen these ships rebuilt/modernized with AEGIS and VLS………

Yes they did but apparently the hangar leaked and was largely unusable. Hence they rarely(if ever) embarked helos.

We had a discussion of this class earlier in the year on the Harpooners Point Forum

They really were nice ships but I like the Kidds myself. All the same systems but actually affordable 😉 .

Daniel