The Ship Model Forum

[quote="Sauragnmon"]Hmmm I think I messed up the designations, I was thinking the 5/54 singles - sixes might be a little too big for the Atlanta, save on her lowest mounts. Mk42 could also be an option. Torpedo tubes that high up might be questionable, I would consider a lower mounting, maybe on the sides where the torpedos were originally, or somewhere along the broadside.

DLG could be double-ended with the Mk13's, one fore one aft. Directors would likely be SPG-51 or SPG-55, could replace some of the multitude of Mk37 directors for the 5" battery. ASROC midships is good, similar to the Gearing FRAM layout. 3"/50 sets would be quite nice to see on the ship as well.

Damn, might have to build one or two for my Extended WW2 US Navy ideas. Bugger.[/quote]On the 6" Mk 16 mounts idea, I was going to put one each in the fore and aft lower gun mounts, with some 3"/50 twins immediately behind and above the Mk 16 mounts. I've already started on this mod. I was thinking this might be a late 40's or early 50's fit. The 60's version would have the 5"/54 mounts and ASROC.

As a side note, in my Friedman US Cruiser book, they have some pics of the USS Juneau as a CLAA in the early 50's and she was fitted with the twin 3"/50 mounts. There is actually a pic [url=http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/119/0411916.jpg]here[/url]. there are a few other pics on that site as well that show her with the 3"/50 mounts.

Hmmm I think I messed up the designations, I was thinking the 5/54 singles - sixes might be a little too big for the Atlanta, save on her lowest mounts. Mk42 could also be an option. Torpedo tubes that high up might be questionable, I would consider a lower mounting, maybe on the sides where the torpedos were originally, or somewhere along the broadside.

DLG could be double-ended with the Mk13's, one fore one aft. Directors would likely be SPG-51 or SPG-55, could replace some of the multitude of Mk37 directors for the 5" battery. ASROC midships is good, similar to the Gearing FRAM layout. 3"/50 sets would be quite nice to see on the ship as well.

Damn, might have to build one or two for my Extended WW2 US Navy ideas. Bugger.

[quote="Sauragnmon"]I'd probably start with the main guns - shedding some of the upper weight as the previous posters have mentioned is good, so the upper guns might go. To compensate, lower mounts would be given Mk16's or similar, to extend range, thus effectiveness, and gain a compensating rate of fire.

Proceed onwards, we could refit 3"/50RF guns onto the upper mounts from the 5", and the 40mm mountings. Remove most of the 20mm mounts, as they're only mildly useful in the new paradigm of combat. Torpedo racks on the sides would be removed, replaced with triple tube launchers of modern usage.

Missile conversions would likely see a Mk13 replacing a 5" or two, directors would find their way up top somewhere. Could ostensibly replace the 3" conversion mounts. ASROC in the midships dip would probably be the most feasable, a la Gearing.

Thoughts?[/quote]I like some of the ideas here. I have already started working on one of my Atlanta kits with the idea of an upgrade focusing on the Mk 16 triple mount and a few other ideas for a 50's/60's era modification (also maybe a few triple ASW torp tubes above the forward Mk 16 as in some of the Gearing/Sumner FRAM's). I also like the idea of a DLG type and the Mk 13 idea. Maybe a Mk 13 superimposed over a 5" 54 caliber single mount forward and a 5" 54 on the aft end with an ASROC between the funnels. Then I need to figure out the radar and sensor fit, obviously need directors for the gun and missile launchers.

Alright, I think I am going to start in on a second whiff Atlanta now!

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the USN considered CLK conversions for the CLAA class in the late 1940's - early 1950's. This was during the period when the USN was concerned about really "Advanced" Soviet Subs that required large hulled escorts for range, speed, sensors, and new weapons. I don't know how far this concept advanced in the design stage. The gun armament could/would be reduced and ASW weapons added.

Guided Missile conversions were likely considered, but the space required to have a capable missile ship kept growing and out-stripped these small ships. The best they could have achieved would be as DDG's.

I'd probably start with the main guns - shedding some of the upper weight as the previous posters have mentioned is good, so the upper guns might go. To compensate, lower mounts would be given Mk16's or similar, to extend range, thus effectiveness, and gain a compensating rate of fire.

Proceed onwards, we could refit 3"/50RF guns onto the upper mounts from the 5", and the 40mm mountings. Remove most of the 20mm mounts, as they're only mildly useful in the new paradigm of combat. Torpedo racks on the sides would be removed, replaced with triple tube launchers of modern usage.

Missile conversions would likely see a Mk13 replacing a 5" or two, directors would find their way up top somewhere. Could ostensibly replace the 3" conversion mounts. ASROC in the midships dip would probably be the most feasable, a la Gearing.

Thoughts?

The biggest problem that the CLAAs suffered from was top weight. Unless you can solve that problem all mods are pretty useless. Those ships were built too light and therefore didn't have a whole lot of room for growth. The 6-8 twin 5"/38s weren't even armored due to the weight problems.

It's kind of interesting, the [i]Norfolk [/i]class CLKs were envisioned as ASW CLAAs and were built on a similar hull with a similar engineering arrangement. A conversion along those lines could be neat. Twin 3"/70s, ASROC, some Mk-32 TTs, etc... Dick's idea of a DLG-6 mod is interesting as well. I wonder if they survived long enough if they could have taken a Mk-13 like the DDG conversions of the [i]Mitschers[/i]

If you wanted to do a complete makeover, consider that the Atlanta hull was 50' longer and 5' wider than the DLG-6 class. That could allow for the complete DLG-6 armament package, with a second 5"/54 forward of the ASROC but on the same level. Add a more pronounced clipper bow for the anchors to clear the added bow mounted sonar. Anything short of this level of upgrade, and the ship would have been nothing but a target in the '70's.

You might be interested in the last post in this thread by Michael Potter:
http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=23563&start=105

Been bouncing this one around in my head. Anybody have any good ideas for what may have been done to these ships to keep them viable in the 60's and 70's? How much room was there for a reasonable upgrade? Maybe as a Mitscher type DLG destroyer leader or similar? I've got six or seven of the Dragon/DML/Revell AG kits so a few whiff ideas would be welcome and might help get the creative juices flowing.