oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Sept 10, 2020 21:07:23 GMT
My candidate is USS Gyatt (DD-712/DDG-1).
Named for Private Edward Earl Gyatt, USMC, killed in a Japanese counterattack following the landing at Tulagi, British Solomon Islands, 8 August 1942. Commissioned as DD 712 on 3 May.
Gyatt was converted to a DDG at Boston Naval Shipyard 16 September 1955.
Modified as follows:
The after 5-inch twin mount was removed and a launcher for two 27-foot, 2,760-lb. Terrier missiles was installed.
The hull was strengthened in way of the launcher.
Horizontal storage for fourteen reloads was provided immediately forward.
A modified Mk 25 Mod. 7 “Beamrider” radar was fitted atop the gun director: the ship’s fire control system now directed both the missiles and the remaining two 5-inch/38 caliber twin mounts forward.
A British-designed Denny-Brown hull stabilization system was installed, the US Navy’s first. Its purpose was to control rolling via retractible 45 sq. ft. underwater fins mounted amidships.
Four 3-inch/50 caliber twin mounts, controlled by a Mk 56 director, replaced the former 40mm quad mounts aft; two stacked triple torpedo tube mounts and improved radar were also installed.
Gyatt became—after cruisers Boston (CAG 1) and Canberra (CAG 2)—the US Navy’s third guided missile-equipped surface warship. Reclassified DDG 712 on 1 December 1956
Soon recognized as the first ship of a new type and accordingly designated DDG 1 on 23 May 1957, the “One” continued in this role for five years.
Her missile battery was removed and on 1 October 1962 and she reverted to her DD 712 designation.
Decommissioned on 26 September 1969
Stricken on 22 October 1969
Expended as a target on 11 June 1970 off the Virginia Capes.
|
|
1bigrich
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 478
Likes: 611
|
Post by 1bigrich on Sept 10, 2020 22:45:23 GMT
My candidate is USS Gyatt (DD-712/DDG-1).
I agree, Senior Chief. HMS Devonshire didn't commission until 1962, and I think the French T-47 conversions to Tartar ships was started in 1962 as well.
I've often wondered if the cost of making Gyatt a DDG was prohibitive? Even though she didn't carry many missiles, I would think some of those navies getting Gearings and Allen M Sumners postwar might have wanted the capability. Of course, with your description of the Terrier in the Tiger-class thread, maybe those navies thought they were better off with the twin 5in/38!
Regards,
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,971 
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 20, 2020 10:21:20 GMT
My candidate is USS Gyatt (DD-712/DDG-1).
Looks nice.  But there is not much in defense at here back looking at here, only the twin Terrier guided missile launchers are there.  |
|
1bigrich
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 478
Likes: 611
|
Post by 1bigrich on Sept 20, 2020 13:25:54 GMT
The conversion definitely did not hurt her lines. She was still a handsome ship. As I recall, she only carried 10 or 14 missiles. As a 'proof of concept' she has to be called a success, but in the cost-benefit analysis, I'm sure the USN saw her as diminishing returns. For the cost and expense of the conversion, she just was not worthwhile carrying so few missiles. And after Senior Chief's description of Terrier's performance, that small number of missiles was even less worthwhile. Hence no further Gearing/Sumner conversions... My thoughts, |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,971
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 20, 2020 15:46:18 GMT
The conversion definitely did not hurt her lines. She was still a handsome ship. As I recall, she only carried 10 or 14 missiles. As a 'proof of concept' she has to be called a success, but in the cost-benefit analysis, I'm sure the USN saw her as diminishing returns. For the cost and expense of the conversion, she just was not worthwhile carrying so few missiles. And after Senior Chief's description of Terrier's performance, that small number of missiles was even less worthwhile. Hence no further Gearing/Sumner conversions... My thoughts, So how would a Sea Slug system look like on the back of a US destroyer. |
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Sept 20, 2020 15:58:49 GMT
It wouldn't. Sea Slug needed a lot of hull space and wasn't suited to a US destroyer.
Gyatt was definitely the first DDG in pure terms. The first effective guided missile destroyers might be a different matter. The Farraguts were built as frigates, albeit lighter ones. The Charles F. Adams class were the first really effective production DDGs.
|
|
1bigrich
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 478
Likes: 611
|
Post by 1bigrich on Sept 20, 2020 17:25:05 GMT
It wouldn't. Sea Slug needed a lot of hull space and wasn't suited to a US destroyer. Gyatt was definitely the first DDG in pure terms. The first effective guided missile destroyers might be a different matter. The Farraguts were built as frigates, albeit lighter ones. The Charles F. Adams class were the first really effective production DDGs.
Agreed, Sea Slug needed too much room for so small a hull. The Counties were essentially Destroyers In Name Only. They should have been cruisers, but the RN called them 'destroyers' to help get them through Parliament.
Farragut/Coontz always struck me as another Atlanta hulled missile ship that got stuffed into the DDG category instead of CG.
Charles F. Adams had a true destroyer lineage, descended from the Forrest Sherman class, which was an attempt to produce a modern, post-war Fletcher. The Fletchers were regarded as the best DDs of the war by the USN, the Allen M. Sumers and Gearigs were felt to be too bow-heavy with the two twin 5in mounts forward.
Toward the end of their life, there was a Proceedings article called. Requiem for the DDG-2s. The author made a point that later in their lives they were useful in close support of the CV/CVNs, as they had a rather noisy propulsion plant but good sonar and ASW capability with the Mk 32 tubes and ASROC. Any hostile submarine skipper closing on the carrier would KNOW there was a a ship nearby that was going to kill his boat as soon as he launched torpedoes.
Not to drag us off topic, but given their export success, I've wondered if a modern DDG-2 might not be a viable platform. Say gas turbines in place of boilers, 2 x 5in/62 Mk 45 Mod 4 mounts, 48 cell VLS, Mk 32 tubes,CIWS or Sea RAM, with or without Aegis. I know helicopters are important ASW weapons, but the Adams class and some other ships like the Tachikaze or Hatakaze classes seemed to have useful lives without them. If Aegis is not fitted their missiles can be controlled by accompanying ships. or VLS ESSM could be quad-packed in some cells for self defense. Either way, Aegis or no, they could find uses in fleet work, convoy and auxiliary escort and might be better in the littoral environment that LCS.
My thoughts,
|
|
