MAJOR-B wrote:
...was presented today with a request from someone whom I work with.. They would like to have a model for the local american legion post.. have sent a request for information from Iron shipwrights.. they produced the only kit I know of and also have ordered the ray bean CGN DVD to help with the project however several ? remains. So, I need some blanks filled in so here are my ?
1. why no guns
2. why no upgrade to MK-26 or VLS
3. did she embark any helo's it appears to have a hangar...
I had to dig pretty deep into my e-mail for this one.
In my discussions with a NAVSEA project manager, he said,
Quote:
"...there was a $92million Warfighting Improvement Plan built out to the level of detailed design and ready for long-lead funding in 1987 that would have pulled a Leahey CG first to prove the concept and then Bainbridge. The work would have been to replaced her forward Mk10 mount and magazine with a Spruance-class style 500 round magazine with SALGP and long range guided rounds for the Mk71 Mod1 8"/60caliber 8" gun and replaced the ASROC launcher and below-deck magazine with a 29-cell VLS "A-sized" module and support equipment. The aft Mk10 and magazine would have been replaced with a 61-cell VLS and its support equipment. Both VLS decks would have supported the SM-2, ASROC, and TLAM. There was no need for these ships to have hangars as the Ticos and Sprucans were packing 2 a piece.
...and...
Quote:
"There was a lot of talk about reviving the Mk71 gun program and an initial order of 15 guns that would have been split between the non-VLS Sprucans and a few Leaheys and Bainbridge. The next order would have fleshed out the Leaheys and CGN-9 in her strike cruiser WIP."
It turns out from a recent GHWB biography that those plans along with upgrading and maintaining the Iowa-class battleships until 2015, Forestall-class CVs, and all NTU ships (CG and CGNs) were concessions to the dissolving Soviet Union in a gesture of good faith to prevent the "use it or lose it" attitude the Warsaw Pact still had in the early 90s. Quite literally these naval assets were traded to prevent a conventional war in Europe (WWIII).
So, it could have been! Indeed, perhaps it
should have been! What is certainly true is that the entire armed services could have benefitted from the Mk71 program having been finalized, fleshed out, and implemented into the fleet back when the Navy was at least half way serious about NGFS. Of course nowadays the Navy has forgotten all lessons of NGFS. For whatever reason, the Navy has forgotten that an 8" gun that can achieve 65nm with laser guided rounds and was achieved in 1972. Because the larger caliber enables the PGM and LR technologies much easier (5" ERGM failed, because the round was too small to support the engineering necessary to make it work, the 155mm LRLAP is too expensive to manufacture, because while it works, the round is too small to make it manageable. The 8" long range guided projectile was achieved in 1972 and was slated to be mass produced.) Imagine what we could have done today...