Destroyer leader

Background

By the end of World War I the destroyers intended to screen formations of battleships had evolved to a displacement of approximately 1,100 tons armed with four 4 in guns and six or more torpedoes. Italy had built three esploratori (scout cruisers) approximately 70% larger than contemporary destroyers. The Washington Naval Treaty encouraged the United Kingdom's satisfaction with its traditional fleet of s and the United States' contentment with the similar and s, while the signatories with smaller fleets explored alternative warship configurations between the classical definitions of destroyer and cruiser. Italy launched three more esploratori and France responded with six Chacal-class contre-torpilleur super destroyers. Japan launched the minimum light cruiser followed by the Fubuki-class "Special Type destroyers" with endurance to escort the Kido Butai mobile force of aircraft carriers over the wide reaches of the Pacific.

Germany built similarly enlarged Zerstörer when it commenced naval rearmament. With the exception of the and a few flotilla leaders, most British and American destroyers built between the world wars were smaller than contemporary Axis destroyers; but as the battleships for which the smaller destroyers had been designed as escorts faded into restricted roles in the combat experience of World War II, United States destroyer displacement increased to 2100 tons, 2200 tons, and 2400 tons to support Fast Carrier Task Force operations.

Description

As the United States Navy thinned its wartime fleet following World War II, the smaller destroyers were discarded until only those over 2,000 tons remained in active service. A sister ship was authorized, but not completed after experience with the prototype did not justify repetition of the design.

The next design was for an unarmored cruiser of displacement similar to Italian s to carry the new 5 inch/54 caliber Mark 42 gun. Each of the four ships received somewhat different experimental propulsion machinery powered by 1200 psi (8.3 MPa) Combustion Engineering forced-circulation boilers in DL-2 and DL-3; and Foster Wheeler boilers in DL-4 and DL-5. DL-2 and DL-3 had General Electric turbines while DL-4 and DL-5 had Westinghouse turbines. All four ships began operations in the Atlantic. DL-3 and DL-5 were transferred to the Pacific in 1956. DL-3 made routine deployments to the western Pacific for as long as she remained in commission, but DL-5 was transferred back to the Atlantic in 1963 after making a few western Pacific deployments. DL-2 and DL-4 made routine deployments to the Mediterranean Sea. The ships were built with AN/SPS-6 air search radar, AN/SPS-8 height finding radar, AN/QHBa scanning sonar and AN/SQG-1 attack sonar. During their first refit in the mid-1950s the AN/SQG-1 and AN/QHBa were replaced by AN/SQS-4 sonar and the secondary open 3 inch/50 caliber guns were replaced by 3 inch/70 Mark 26 guns. Later refits removed the unsatisfactory 3 inch/70 guns and Weapon Alpha.

After experimental flight operations with the Bell HUL-1 and Kaman HTK-1 aboard Mitscher in 1957, helicopter decks and hangars for the Gyrodyne QH-50 DASH were installed where the aft 3-inch guns had been. DL-2 and DL-3 underwent major overhaul at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard beginning in 1966 including new Foster Wheeler boilers, AN/SQS-23 sonar, AN/SPS-37 air search radar, AN/SPS-48 height finding radar, and the Tartar Guided Missile Fire Control System for RIM-24 Tartar missiles. DL-4 and DL-5 had earlier received a new 70-foot bow section mounting the AN/SQS-26 sonar and spent the remainder of their service lives testing these prototypes until retirement, when their sisters emerged from overhaul at Philadelphia in 1968 for another decade of service as guided missile destroyers.

A third class of destroyer leaders was designed after observing the performance of propulsion and weapons systems tested aboard the Mitscher class. The first three ships were ordered with three 5 inch/54 caliber guns shortly after the name change to frigates. The next three were ordered with two 5 inch/54 guns forward, and a RIM-2 Terrier missile system aft, marking the transition to guided missile frigates (hull classification symbol DLG), intended to defend aircraft carriers against anti-ship cruise missiles. All ten ships were completed with a single 5 inch/54 gun forward, an ASROC launcher where the B gun would have been, and the missile system aft; but the class was variously named Coontz for the first ship to be ordered with a missile system, or for the lowest numbered ship to be completed in that configuration. ASROC and sonar gave the guided missile frigates an anti-submarine capability that most of the World War II cruiser conversions lacked. All were reclassified as guided missile destroyers in 1975.

Similar ship classes

Evolution into guided missile cruisers

Two additional DLG classes and two similar nuclear-powered ships (DLGN) were completed by 1975 for a total of twenty additional guided missile frigates. These significantly larger ships were reclassified as guided missile cruisers (CG/CGN) in 1975. By 1995 the former guided missile frigates were replaced by the s and s.

Sources

• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book
• {{cite book

Notes

References

1. Blackman, p.434
2. Lenton & Colledge, pp. 79–94
3. Kafka & Pepperburg, p.784
4. Watts, pp. 126–143
5. Lenton, (1976) p. 67
6. Silverstone, pp. 100–103
7. Toppan, Andrew. "Norfolk".
8. "A Tin Can Sailors Destroyer History". The National Association of Destroyer Veterans.
9. "Mitscher Class". Gyrodyne Helicopter Historical Foundation.
10. Blackman, pp. 433 & 435
11. Blackman, p. 432
12. Watts, p.77
13. le Masson, pp.110&111
14. Watts, p.126
15. le Masson, pp.112&113
16. Kafka & Pepperburg, p.780
17. Earl Thomas Brassey, ''Brassey's Annual: The Armed Forces Year-book'', Praeger Publishers, 1938, p. 264
18. Watts, p.133
19. Silverstone, p.114
20. le Masson, p.116
21. Watts, p.141
22. Lenton & Colledge, p.107
23. Taylor, p.43
24. Silverstone, p.118
25. Watts, p.143
26. Lenton, (1968) p.13
27. le Masson, pp.118&119
28. Lenton & Colledge, p.109
29. Taylor, p.41
30. Watts, p.148
31. Lenton, (1968) p.24
32. Watts, p.152
33. Watts, p.153
34. Silverstone, p.135
35. Kafka & Pepperburg, p.768
36. Silverstone, p.146
37. Silverstone, p.148
38. Lenton & Colledge, p.121
39. Bauer and Roberts, pp. 213–217
40. Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 580–585