lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,966 
Likes: 49,370
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 14, 2020 20:01:37 GMT
Simon did you consider the learning curve has to start somewhere? The first two USN Cruiser to missile ship conversions were the Baltimore class Boston and Albany. They lost their #3 Eight in turret and gained a twin rail Terrier launcher. The opinion of the USN was they were a very valuable and useful step and remained first line Missile ships for a dozen years. Whole lot of hard earned OJT lessons went into the later CA,CL and DL conversions. The purpose built Longbeach CGN, DLGs and DLGNs also built on what the conversions taught. Granted the fiscal constraints for the RN made for much tougher choices than the Cold War USN. Looks good oscssw , that could work for the Tiger class, especially that the RIM-2 Terrier came into operational use in 1956. Photo: RIM-2 Terrier guided missiles on one of the two missile launchers aboard the U.S. Navy guided missile cruiser USS Boston (CAG-1), while she was moored in the harbour of Beirut, Lebanon, on 3 January 1966 Photo: USS Boston firing a Terrier guided missile, August 1956 |
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 6, 2020 14:10:21 GMT
Simon did you consider the learning curve has to start somewhere? The first two USN Cruiser to missile ship conversions were the Baltimore class Boston and Albany. They lost their #3 Eight in turret and gained a twin rail Terrier launcher. The opinion of the USN was they were a very valuable and useful step and remained first line Missile ships for a dozen years. Whole lot of hard earned OJT lessons went into the later CA,CL and DL conversions. The purpose built Longbeach CGN, DLGs and DLGNs also built on what the conversions taught. Granted the fiscal constraints for the RN made for much tougher choices than the Cold War USN. Sorry for the late reply; life got in the way in a very significant fashion. Yes, the learning curve needed to start somewhere. For the RN, the affordable option was the County class DLGs. They provided more capacity than conversions of the Tigers, particularly in the timeframe in question. The County design began in 1958ish, following on from the effective cancellation of the larger missile cruisers planned in the early 1950s. Tiger was commissioned in March 59, Lion in July 1960 and Blake in March 1961; there isn't a sufficient gap between their commissioning and the entry into service of the first 4 Counties to justify anything that a converted Tiger could bring to the party. You are quite right on the fiscal constraints of the RN vs USN; the former could afford what amounted to a single ended Leahy/2nd generation missile ships rather than the USN which fielded them after the first generation of the 2 Boston CAG and Gyatt DDG experimental conversions. The numbers of the 2G ships also give some indication of the difference: 8 RN Counties compared to 10 Farraguts, 18 Leahys and 23 CFAs. |
|
oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Sept 6, 2020 15:23:27 GMT
Hope Life was not too traumatic and all is well with you and yours now Simon.
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 6, 2020 16:15:58 GMT
Unfortunately, it was and things don't look like improving.
A bit of writing and history is something of a distraction.
|
|
oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Sept 7, 2020 12:28:26 GMT
Unfortunately, it was and things don't look like improving. A bit of writing and history is something of a distraction.
Sorry to hear that Simon.
IMO, FWIW, you have come to the right place for a healthy, entertaining and educational distraction. I come to this site to "escape' the insanity and hatred that permeates far too much today.
My very best wishes .
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Sept 7, 2020 14:28:37 GMT
Unfortunately, it was and things don't look like improving. A bit of writing and history is something of a distraction.
Best wishes that things get better soon. Until then please enjoy the distraction as much as you can.
|
|
1bigrich
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 478
Likes: 611
|
Post by 1bigrich on Sept 7, 2020 16:37:52 GMT
Unfortunately, it was and things don't look like improving. A bit of writing and history is something of a distraction. Sorry to hear that. I hope you can keep your mind off things...
Regards,
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 7, 2020 18:19:53 GMT
Thanks chaps; not sure if it is possible, but as said history, writing and naval debate is good.
Back on the Tigers for a moment, one of the key limitations to their utility is their length. The Neptunes and postwar Minotaurs would have been a bit better suited to a Sea Slug conversion because of the dimensions of the missile magazine; they could carry 48 Sea Slug compared to 24 for a County and perhaps fewer for a Tiger.
|
|
1bigrich
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 478
Likes: 611
|
Post by 1bigrich on Sept 8, 2020 0:32:26 GMT
Thanks chaps; not sure if it is possible, but as said history, writing and naval debate is good. Back on the Tigers for a moment, one of the key limitations to their utility is their length. The Neptunes and postwar Minotaurs would have been a bit better suited to a Sea Slug conversion because of the dimensions of the missile magazine; they could carry 48 Sea Slug compared to 24 for a County and perhaps fewer for a Tiger.
The early missiles requiring assembly took up massive space. I've commented before having been aboard Little Rock in Buffalo, it was surprising just how much room was dedicated to Talos.
Wasn't there a proposal to convert light fleet carriers to Sea Slug missile cruisers?
Regards,
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 9, 2020 12:26:38 GMT
There were design studies into the conversion of Majestic class carriers into missile ships, specifically because Leviathan was lying around incomplete and would be less costly than a KGV conversion.
This quote came up on Secret Projects a few years ago:
"At various times the KGVs were looked at for possible conversion to "G.W. Ships" (Guided Weapons Ships), but they all failed on the basis of cost versus the relatively small number of missiles to be carried.
More effort was expended on looking at aircraft carriers (especially the Implacables) and Vanguard. It was thought (1954) that for a KGV the removal of Y-turret would allow a splinter protected magazine of approx. 90-100 missiles, with a twin launcher and two sets of guidance radars."
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Sept 10, 2020 9:45:40 GMT
There were design studies into the conversion of Majestic class carriers into missile ships, specifically because Leviathan was lying around incomplete and would be less costly than a KGV conversion. This quote came up on Secret Projects a few years ago: "At various times the KGVs were looked at for possible conversion to "G.W. Ships" (Guided Weapons Ships), but they all failed on the basis of cost versus the relatively small number of missiles to be carried. More effort was expended on looking at aircraft carriers (especially the Implacables) and Vanguard. It was thought (1954) that for a KGV the removal of Y-turret would allow a splinter protected magazine of approx. 90-100 missiles, with a twin launcher and two sets of guidance radars."
That's actually a large number of missiles given the size of missiles at that date isn't it.
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 10, 2020 11:32:24 GMT
The Bostons deployed 144 Terriers on a cruiser hull, so a bit of yes and no.
|
|
oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Sept 10, 2020 20:47:19 GMT
The Bostons deployed 144 Terriers on a cruiser hull, so a bit of yes and no. "Now this is no Sh!T" ( All good USN Sea Stroies begin this way just as all Fairy Tales begin with "Once upon a Time".)
With the "Errier" you needed as many missiles as you could get.
Before we upgraded to the Standard we were a Terrier ship. Thank God we never had to rely on them in a real attack.
From the live fire exercises I witnessed I had very little confidence in those birds 1. Missile is "Fired" and nothing happens. Just stays on the rail making scary sounds. Jettison is the best that could happen 2. Missile is "Fired" booster fizzles and missile drops into the water close aboard. Go to flank and wait and see what happens 3. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites and missile fails to home and goes off on a ballistic trajectory
4. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off and fails to lock onto target. That is why we always fired in pairs. 5. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, lock on and warhead fails to explode. Never saw it ram anything
6. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, locks on to chaff cloud warhead explodes. Kills chaff cloud guess what the target does? Not good 7. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, locks on to target, warhead explodes for a kill.
I don't know about you folks but I would like better odds. But that's just me. I'm funny that way.
That is why we called it the "ERRIER". 
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Sept 11, 2020 6:42:19 GMT
The Bostons deployed 144 Terriers on a cruiser hull, so a bit of yes and no. "Now this is no Sh!T" ( All good USN Sea Stroies begin this way just as all Fairy Tales begin with "Once upon a Time".)
With the "Errier" you needed as many missiles as you could get.
Before we upgraded to the Standard we were a Terrier ship. Thank God we never had to rely on them in a real attack.
From the live fire exercises I witnessed I had very little confidence in those birds 1. Missile is "Fired" and nothing happens. Just stays on the rail making scary sounds. Jettison is the best that could happen 2. Missile is "Fired" booster fizzles and missile drops into the water close aboard. Go to flank and wait and see what happens 3. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites and missile fails to home and goes off on a ballistic trajectory
4. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off and fails to lock onto target. That is why we always fired in pairs. 5. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, lock on and warhead fails to explode. Never saw it ram anything
6. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, locks on to chaff cloud warhead explodes. Kills chaff cloud guess what the target does? Not good 7. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, locks on to target, warhead explodes for a kill.
I don't know about you folks but I would like better odds. But that's just me. I'm funny that way.
That is why we called it the "ERRIER".
I knew early missiles were big and unreliable compared to more modern ones but that's distinctly worrying to put it mildly. Sounds like their as great a danger to the launching ship as the target!
|
|
oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Sept 11, 2020 12:16:55 GMT
"Now this is no Sh!T" ( All good USN Sea Stroies begin this way just as all Fairy Tales begin with "Once upon a Time".)
With the "Errier" you needed as many missiles as you could get.
Before we upgraded to the Standard we were a Terrier ship. Thank God we never had to rely on them in a real attack.
From the live fire exercises I witnessed I had very little confidence in those birds 1. Missile is "Fired" and nothing happens. Just stays on the rail making scary sounds. Jettison is the best that could happen 2. Missile is "Fired" booster fizzles and missile drops into the water close aboard. Go to flank and wait and see what happens 3. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites and missile fails to home and goes off on a ballistic trajectory
4. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off and fails to lock onto target. That is why we always fired in pairs. 5. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, lock on and warhead fails to explode. Never saw it ram anything
6. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, locks on to chaff cloud warhead explodes. Kills chaff cloud guess what the target does? Not good 7. Missile is "Fired" booster ignites, missile sails off, locks on to target, warhead explodes for a kill.
I don't know about you folks but I would like better odds. But that's just me. I'm funny that way.
That is why we called it the "ERRIER".
I knew early missiles were big and unreliable compared to more modern ones but that's distinctly worrying to put it mildly. Sounds like their as great a danger to the launching ship as the target!
|
|
