View Single Post
  #7  
Old 09-09-2018, 10:04 PM
swaghauler swaghauler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: PA
Posts: 1,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dragoon500ly View Post
Source material is the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet, 14th Edition by Norman Polmar.

The major problem with the Adams-class is that they are outdated. The first ship, DDG-2 Charles F. Adams was launched 8 Sep 1959 and commissioned 10 Sep 1960. The "youngest" is DDG-24 Waddell, launched 26 Feb 1963 and commissioned 28 Aug 1964.

They were considered to be highly capable destroyers for their relatively small size, although the lack helicopter facilities. They are based on an improved FORREST SHERMAN arrangement, with a Tarter missile-launching system (later upgraded to Standard-MR) in place of the SHERMAN's aft-most 5-inch gun.


The Navy had planned to modernize the 23 ships of this class, adding an additional 15 years beyond their nominal 30 year life span. This modernization was planed for fiscal years 1980-1983. But, however, increasing costs and congressional interest in new destroyer construction lead to a cut back in the modernization program, first to the last ten ships, and then only to three ships (DDG-19, 20 and 22, upgraded 1981-1985).
----

The primary weakness in the Adams-class lies in their electronics suites. Only the three modernized ships have 'modern' radars and fire control suites. These would have to be replaced, the problem being of having updated systems to replace the older units with. Time frame wise, some of my Navy buddies have 'guessmated' anywhere from 4 to 12 months depending upon how much rewiring would need to be completed.

Soooooo...

Realistically, if the USN brought the Adams back into regular service, IMHO they would have been regulated to convoy escort instead of fleet support, most likely paired with a Perry-class frigate to take advantage of their more modern systems.
The issue is which timeline is used. In the real world, ALL BUT 2 Adams were sold by 1994. The sad thing is that they were much lighter and more cost efficient to operate than Burkes (being Half the displacement at 4500 tons). I doubt you could pair them with a Perry though because the Navy ended up pairing Burkes with Perrys and there wouldn't be enough left. It is ironic that the Perry's best trait was that it was the only ship in the fleet that carried TWO helos and had the RAST gear to launch and recover in sea state 4. The Ticos carried two helos but were not equipped with RAST until after the Perrys demonstrated its usefulness. Why the Flight I and Flight II Burkes were NOT equipped with hangers is beyond me. The Navy really tripped up there.
Reply With Quote