Spruance class

SM2MR and VL Asroc, maybe. By the way, I don’t think Mk41 VLU is used to launch Harpoon missiles. These are typically fired from deck mounted launch racks.

Doubtful. SM2 is no good without another vessel to provide the guidance and the VLA was only built in very limited numbers for the USN. One would think that the best vessels for the export market would be the few not fitted with the VLS since the Mk116 can employ the standard ASROC and Harpoons. If you have to have a VLS model then I guess most of the cells will be empty save for a few ESSMs perhaps.

Daniel

I made the question about if the Spruance can fire Guided Missiles becouse Turkey is to get the last to Spruance that are currently in US service.

Now, the Spruance are currently mostly Tomahawk launch platforms but since Turkey is most propably not to get the Tomahawks with the Spruance, what else beside Harppons could they load into the 61 cell VLS?

SM2MR and VL Asroc, maybe. By the way, I don’t think Mk41 VLU is used to launch Harpoon missiles. These are typically fired from deck mounted launch racks.

I made the question about if the Spruance can fire Guided Missiles becouse Turkey is to get the last to Spruance that are currently in US service.

Now, the Spruance are currently mostly Tomahawk launch platforms but since Turkey is most propably not to get the Tomahawks with the Spruance, what else beside Harppons could they load into the 61 cell VLS?

For ASW, the ships just have the normal 324mm torpedo launcher, plus the helicopters – not exactly a stunning capability! I would have half expected them to replace the SM-1 with a RIM-116 launcher, which would at least leave them a basic defensive capability. I think this is a sad part of the future, look at the LCS, it now seems to only have a 57mm gun, and a RIM-116 launcher, with no SSM, no advanced defence missile system, no VLS, and no other real capability. I would have expected the LCS to end up being a pretty bare hull, but with a large Mk41 VLS, or its replacement, allowing a mixture of missiles, to suit the mission, but that seems unlikely now.

Besides losing the SM-1. How about the Harpoon? I don’t see any canisters on deck for them? With no SSM’s or SAM’s the class has loss much of its capabilities……..(i.e. in USN Service)

The frigates primary mission is ASW (isnt it?).

According to US Department of Defense, two of the Spruance class ships(DD-985 CUSHING and DD-987 O’BANON) will be heading to Turkish Navy in years, 2006 and 2007…

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodgc/olc/docs/May9.pdf

Besides losing the SM-1. How about the Harpoon? I don’t see any canisters on deck for them? With no SSM’s or SAM’s the class has loss much of its capabilities……..(i.e. in USN Service)

In 2003, the Navy started to remove the Mk-13 guided missile launchers from the remaining PERRY – class frigates. This action was designed to reduce the ships’ operating cost but leaves the PERRYs without the ability to fire guided missiles. The Navy explained the decision with the age of the Mk-13 system and the system’s ineffectivness against high-speed cruise missiles. The ships will receive an upgrade to the Phalanx system and a new missile decoy system to compensate the loss of their guided missile capabilities.

No more Mk13 launcher in the front

No more tracking and illuminating radar amidship, forward of the gun.

on globalsecirty there is at least one pic at the bottom with that modification.

Thanks…….I’ll check it out! 😎

on globalsecirty there is at least one pic at the bottom with that modification.

They already have done that on a couple of Perry’s.

Does anyone have any pic’s? Also, why cut off the launcher? Seems like you would just leave the magizine empty……………

not possible because SM-2 requires Mid course guidance along with time sharing of illuminators both of which would require software and platforms to support it. Also i believe it require a 3D radar for target location to be preprogrammed into missile before launch.

I’m getting the feeling were talking past each other. I’m referring to a situation in which you have a VLS equipped Spruance and, say, a Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke nearby. The Spruance launches an SM2 but the missile is controlled/guided/directed by the nearby AEGIS equipped ship. In this case – a cooperative engagement- the Spruance wouldn’t need a 3D radar or illuminators. After all, these are on the Tico/AB. Both ships would need CEC (i.e. some software and communications equipment) and the Spruance would need to be able to at least put the missile in a certain box where upon the other ship can take over the guidance proces. Or is my understanding of CEC incorrect?

They already have done that on a couple of Perry’s.

They have already started mate, where have you been? Perry’s have been sold off to Poland, Taiwan and a couple of other places.

I read recently that the USN was going to inactivate the SM-1 Missile System on its remaining Perry Class Frigates. I believe they are also going to remove (i.e. CUT!) the launcher from the forward part of the deck? 😡

It should be possible to fire SM2MR from the forward Mk41. Spruance could possibly use that same radar directors for guidance that it uses for Sea Sparrow (both SAMs are semi-active radar homing). However, those probably would not allow making use of the full SM2 flight envelope. HOwever, if there is Cooperative Engagement Capability, Spruance could serve as launch platform with another ships actually controlling the missile during the engagement.

not possible because SM-2 requires Mid course guidance along with time sharing of illuminators both of which would require software and platforms to support it. Also i believe it require a 3D radar for target location to be preprogrammed into missile before launch.

I actually don’t think the Spruance class can fire the SM-2, it requires a level of radar tech that the USN decided not to refit this class with.

It should be possible to fire SM2MR from the forward Mk41. Spruance could possibly use that same radar directors for guidance that it uses for Sea Sparrow (both SAMs are semi-active radar homing). However, those probably would not allow making use of the full SM2 flight envelope. HOwever, if there is Cooperative Engagement Capability, Spruance could serve as launch platform with another ships actually controlling the missile during the engagement.

They have already started mate, where have you been? Perry’s have been sold off to Poland, Taiwan and a couple of other places.

Taiwan, like Spain, built its own (resp. 8 and 6 units). Australia got 4 built in the US and built 2 to more in country. Used Perry’s went to Poland (2), Turkey (9, of which 1 as parts hulk), Egypt (4), Bahrain (1).

Are they going to get rid of Perrys also, or will they keep some of them around?

They have already started mate, where have you been? Perry’s have been sold off to Poland, Taiwan and a couple of other places.

Are they going to get rid of Perrys also, or will they keep some of them around?

I actually don’t think the Spruance class can fire the SM-2, it requires a level of radar tech that the USN decided not to refit this class with.

As for their early retirment, guess you could say the smae reasoning that has called our F-111’s in to an early bed is at work here with the Spru’s. Yes it would have much to do with funding the newer ships, but don’t forget, the US wants more money to help rebuild Iraq and that has taken so much money away from other projects.