Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Long and short stories from the 1984 movie
Post Reply
Matt Wiser
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 2:48 am
Location: Auberry, CA

Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Matt Wiser »

The USN's most powerful destroyers of the war:

The Kidd class Guided Missile Destroyers in World War III





The four destroyers of the Kidd class have been described as “The Ayatollah Khomeni's gift to the U.S. Navy.” Originally ordered for the Imperial Iranian Navy in 1976, they were AAW versions of the Spruance-class destroyers, with Mk 26 twin launchers for the Standard ER SAM and ASROC, as opposed to the ASROC and Sea Sparrow launchers of the Spruance-class ships. After the fall of the Shah, the Khomeni regime canceled the order for the ships, and they were acquired by the U.S. Navy in July, 1979. The ships have been informally called the “Ayatollah class," or the" Dead-Admiral Class.” They were the most powerful destroyers in the U.S. Navy at the outbreak of war, giving splendid war service, and all four remain in service today in the Naval Reserve Force.


USS Kidd (DDG-993): Assigned to the Atlantic Fleet at the outbreak of war, she served as an escort for the carriers Eisenhower and America for much of the war. Kidd got around, supporting carriers during operations against Libya and the liberation of Gibraltar. She later participated in the liberation of Iceland and the Kola raid, serving as an AAW “Gatekeeper” for the Eisenhower. During Operation GULF HAMMER, she provided AAW cover for the cruiser Des Moines on the NGFS line, and was the command ship for an ASW group in the Gulf during the endgame in the Gulf in 1989. On several occasions, she took shots at Soviet aircraft inbound or leaving Brownsville, killing several, while she participated in the sinking of several Soviet submarines. Kidd then supported the Cuba blockade, providing AAW support to the destroyers on the blockade line. After the Armistice, she began to carry the SH-60B ASW helicopter in place of the wartime SH-2F, and resumed normal deployments with the Sixth Fleet. In 2004, she was reassigned to the Naval Reserve Force, and is still assigned to the NRF, home-ported at Mayport Naval Station, FL.


USS Callaghan (DDG-994): Assigned to the Pacific Fleet at war's beginning, she mainly served as an AAW escort to the carrier USS Ranger (CV-61) for much of the war. Callaghan supported the Ranger Carrier Battle Group's operations against Soviet-occupied Alaska and the Upper British Columbia Coast, and participated in the sinking of the Charlie-I class SSGN K-308 on 7 May, 1987. She participated in the Kamchatka Raid, and received damage from a near-hit AS-5 antiship missile that her CIWS guns exploded a mere one hundred yards from the ship. After repairs at the Bremerton Navy Yard, she was assigned to convoy duty on the Yokohama-San Francisco run, and was involved in the sinking of two Soviet submarines, the Victor-I class K-38 on 11 May 1988 350 miles east of Marcus Island, and the Echo-II SSGN K-116 1100 miles west of San Francisco on 2 April, 1989. Callaghan was torpedoed by the Akula-class SSN K-191 on 11 June of that year, and spent the next six months undergoing repairs at Bremerton Navy Yard, having lost her propellers and rudder. She returned to service in January, 1990, and after workups, resumed normal deployments with the Pacific Fleet, receiving the SH-60B as well. After several WestPac deployments, she was reassigned to the Naval Reserve Force, with her home port at San Diego.

USS Scott (DDG-995): Assigned to the Atlantic Fleet, she was assigned to escort the carrier Coral Sea, and left Norfolk with that carrier when war began. Scott participated in operations in the Mediterranean, and after the carrier was sunk by a Backfire strike in January, 1986 while returning from the Mediterranean, she was reassigned to convoy duty. Scott provided AAW cover to numerous convoys, before joining the amphibious force assigned to the Liberation of Iceland and then she took part in the Kola Raid, where she was the AAW “Gatekeeper” for the carrier John F. Kennedy. Scott resumed convoy duty after Kola, and sank two Soviet Submarines, the Foxtrot-class SS B-57 on 22 October, 1987, 200 miles north of Bermuda, and the Hotel-II SSN K-40 on 5 February 1988, 340 miles west of the Azores. She was reassigned to the John F. Kennedy battle group for Operation GULF HAMMER, and remained with the carrier group for the rest of the war, escorting the carrier during that operation, strikes against Cuba, and participated in the final operations against the Brownsville Pocket in 1989. After Cuba's acceptance of the Armistice, Scott returned to Norfolk, and after a yard period, returned to normal operations. She received the SH-60B, and participated in several deployments to the Sixth Fleet and anti-piracy patrols off of Somalia and Yemen. Like her sisters, she was later reassigned to the Naval Reserve Force, and home-ported at Norfolk.

USS Chandler (DDG-996): The other unit of the class assigned to the Pacific Fleet, she was at Subic Bay in the Philippines when hostilities began, as pat of the Constellation Carrier Battle Group. Chandler and the other AAW ships were able to use their weapons to defend against a Soviet air attack from Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam (Tu-16K Badgers of Soviet Naval Aviation with AS-6 missiles). The carrier group left Subic Bay afterwards and the next day, launched air strikes against the Soviet base. Chandler remained part of the Constellation Group for much of the war, and participated in the mopping-up after the Battle of Puget Sound, where she encountered two Soviet stragglers, sinking the Kanin-class DDG Gnevny and an Alligator-class LST. Chandler then assisted in the mop-up on the San Juan Islands, before the carrier group returned to San Diego. Her next combat was back in the South China Sea, where a combined U.S. Navy, Royal Australian Navy, and ROC Navy force eliminated the Soviet squadron based at Cam Ranh Bay, and both air and missile attack neutralized the base. Chandler also participated in the Kamchatka and Kurile operations, and sank a Foxtrot-class submarine that nearly torpedoed the carrier. Operations off of Mexico and against Alaska followed, and the Constellation group covered the seaborne force that landed in Anchorage, Juneau, and the Alaskan islands after the Soviet surrender on 14 October 1989. After a brief upgrade that included a SH-60B detachment to replace the SH-2F that had been the ship's wartime helo complement, Chandler resumed routine deployments to WestPac, joining the Abraham Lincoln Carrier Battle Group when that carrier joined the Pacific Fleet. She, like her sisters, was reassigned to the NRF, and is home-ported at Naval Station Everett, Washington.


Displacement: 9,574 tons full load

Length: 563 feet

Beam: 55 feet

Draft: 30 feet

Propulsion: 4 GE LM 2500 gas turbines, 80,000 SHP, 2 shafts

Speed: 30+ knots

Crew: 339 (20 officers and 319 enlisted)

Helicopters: 1 SH-2F LAMPS I, later 2 SH-60B LAMPS III

Missiles: 2x Mk 26 twin launchers for Standard 1 ER SAMs

2x Mk 141 Quad Harpoon launchers

Guns: 2 5-inch Mk 54 single mounts

2x 20-mm Mk 15 Phalanx CIWS

Several pintle mounts for .50 caliber machine guns or Mark 19 Automatic Grenade Launchers.

ASW Weapons: ASROC fired from forward Mk 26 launcher

2x triple Mk 32 torpedo tubes for Mark 46 torpedoes

Radars: SPS-48C 3-D search

SPS-53 Surface Search

SPS-55 Surface Search

Sonars: SQS-53A bow mounted

SQR-19 Towed Array Sonar

EW: SLQ-25 Nixie

SLQ-32(v)2
The difference between diplomacy and war is this: Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell so elegantly that they pack for the trip.
War is bringing hell down on that someone.
User avatar
jemhouston
Posts: 6536
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by jemhouston »

Kind of wish they build the last half dozen Spruances as Kidds
Wolfman
Posts: 1181
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:03 pm
Location: LCS-3, BB-35, CGN-39, SSN-775

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Wolfman »

Didn’t they build another pair of these during the war?
“For a brick, he flew pretty good!” Sgt. Major A.J. Johnson, Halo 2

To err is Human; to forgive is not SAC policy.

“This is Raven 2-5. This is my sandbox. You will not drop, acknowledge.” David Flanagan, former Raven FAC
Poohbah
Posts: 3511
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:08 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Poohbah »

Wolfman wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 7:52 pm Didn’t they build another pair of these during the war?
There was talk of doing it, and even some money appropriated in FY87-88 for long-lead items, but waterfront industrial capacity was stretched to the limits during the war, so it never got to the contract phase. Postwar, it was decided to procure two more Aegis cruisers than to buy two more Kidd-class ships--the cost of a repeat Kidd with VLS and New Threat Upgrade--which would be almost akin to building a new design due to the limited experience base and all of the engineering changes--was not that much less than a repeat Bunker Hill, but you got a LOT more capability from the latter.
Wolfman
Posts: 1181
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:03 pm
Location: LCS-3, BB-35, CGN-39, SSN-775

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Wolfman »

Ah. I see.
“For a brick, he flew pretty good!” Sgt. Major A.J. Johnson, Halo 2

To err is Human; to forgive is not SAC policy.

“This is Raven 2-5. This is my sandbox. You will not drop, acknowledge.” David Flanagan, former Raven FAC
Rocket J Squrriel
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Rocket J Squrriel »

jemhouston wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:13 am Kind of wish they build the last half dozen Spruances as Kidds
Was there ever any consideration at all to making this the design for the Spruance's in the first place?
Westray: That this is some sort of coincidence. Because they don't really believe in coincidences. They've heard of them. They've just never seen one.
User avatar
jemhouston
Posts: 6536
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by jemhouston »

Rocket J Squrriel wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 11:19 pm
jemhouston wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 2:13 am Kind of wish they build the last half dozen Spruances as Kidds
Was there ever any consideration at all to making this the design for the Spruance's in the first place?
Don't think so since they needed a high end ASW escort. If I remember right, it original had three turbines for propulsion. When it was upgraded to four turbines, the gearing wasn't upgraded so care had to be careful not to over strain the gearing.
Matt Wiser
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 2:48 am
Location: Auberry, CA

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Matt Wiser »

Remember that the Spruance hull was used as the basis for the Ticonderogas. And that on the old board-before Theodore took his stuff down, he had more Ticos built after the war, to replace wartime attrition in the cruiser force. I think there were at least 20 additional hulls after OTl's CG-73. They picked up after the Puget Sound class Strike Cruisers. (CGN-74-77 built, CGN-78 authorized but not yet laid down when the stuff went off the board)
The difference between diplomacy and war is this: Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell so elegantly that they pack for the trip.
War is bringing hell down on that someone.
Wolfman
Posts: 1181
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:03 pm
Location: LCS-3, BB-35, CGN-39, SSN-775

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Wolfman »

OOC: I vote that this remain canon, with CGN-78 in the process of being built.
“For a brick, he flew pretty good!” Sgt. Major A.J. Johnson, Halo 2

To err is Human; to forgive is not SAC policy.

“This is Raven 2-5. This is my sandbox. You will not drop, acknowledge.” David Flanagan, former Raven FAC
Rocket J Squrriel
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Rocket J Squrriel »

Matt Wiser wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 2:12 am Remember that the Spruance hull was used as the basis for the Ticonderogas. And that on the old board-before Theodore took his stuff down, he had more Ticos built after the war, to replace wartime attrition in the cruiser force. I think there were at least 20 additional hulls after OTl's CG-73. They picked up after the Puget Sound class Strike Cruisers. (CGN-74-77 built, CGN-78 authorized but not yet laid down when the stuff went off the board)
I have a copy of the USN and Army list if you need it.

Ticonderoga class (38+3 reserve)

The first three units of this class were active when the war started. Ships from CG-52 forward fitted with VLS. Ships through CG-66 were completed by the end of the war; CGs 67-72 were completed 1990, CGs 73-78 were completed 1991, CGs 79-82 were completed 1992, CGs 83-86 were completed 1994, CGs 87-90 were completed 1995 for a total of 44 units completed. Decommissionings began in 2013 as the surviving early non-VLS units reached the end of their hull life, but the 38 surviving VLS ships are being refitted and modernized to extend their lives to 40 years. Three units became war losses.

Ticonderoga (CG-47) - decommissioned to reserve 2013.
Vincennes (CG-49) - decommissioned to reserve 2015.
Thomas S. Gates (CG-51) - decommissioned to reserve 2017.
Bunker Hill (CG-52)
Mobile Bay (CG-53)
Antietam (CG-54)
Leyte Gulf (CG-55)
San Jacinto (CG-56)
Lake Champlain (CG-57)
Philippine Sea (CG-58)
Normandy (CG-60)
Monterey (CG-61)
Chancellorsville (CG-62)
Cowpens (CG-63)
Gettysburg (CG-64)
Chosin (CG-65)
Hue City (CG-66)
Shiloh (CG-67)
Anzio (CG-68)
Vicksburg (CG-69)
Lake Erie (CG-70)
Cape St. George (CG-71)
Vella Gulf (CG-72)
Port Royal (CG-73)
Yorktown (CG-74)
Corregidor (CG-75)
Manila Bay (CG-76)
Valley Forge (CG-77)
Cape Esperance (CG-78)?
Solomons (CG-79)
Kwajalein (CG-80)
Princeton (CG-81)
Wake Island (CG-82)
Casablanca (CG-83)
Bastogne (CG-84)
White Plains (CG-85)
Fort Worth (CG-86)
Guantanamo Bay (CG-87)
Clovis (CG-88)
Santiago (CG-89)
Bennington (CG-90)

Puget Sound class (4+3)

In the late 1990s the Navy revived the old strike cruiser concept from the 1970s, intending to build a class of six large nuclear-powered cruisers capable of independent operations (replacing the battleships and heavy cruisers as SAG centerpieces) as well as task force defense. What emerged was a ship of approximately 18,000 tons full load displacement fitted with Aegis and armed with two 64-cell VLS, one 8-inch gun, and one 5-inch gun, besides the usual Harpoon, lightweight ASW torpedoes, and Phalanx. The ships proved extremely expensive and as a result construction has been very slow. Congress added a seventh ship in the FY2018 authorizing act.

Puget Sound (CSGN-91) - commissioned 2007.
Wichita (CSGN-92) - commissioned 2010.
Galveston (CSGN-93) - commissioned 2013.
Long Beach (CSGN-94) - commissioned 2016.
Denver (CSGN-95) - under construction, to be commissioned in 2019.
Brownsville (CSGN-96) - under construction, to be commissioned in 2022.
CSGN-97 - authorized.
Westray: That this is some sort of coincidence. Because they don't really believe in coincidences. They've heard of them. They've just never seen one.
Wolfman
Posts: 1181
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:03 pm
Location: LCS-3, BB-35, CGN-39, SSN-775

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Wolfman »

I move that this be retained as canon!
“For a brick, he flew pretty good!” Sgt. Major A.J. Johnson, Halo 2

To err is Human; to forgive is not SAC policy.

“This is Raven 2-5. This is my sandbox. You will not drop, acknowledge.” David Flanagan, former Raven FAC
Matt Wiser
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 2:48 am
Location: Auberry, CA

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Matt Wiser »

The motion is granted.
The difference between diplomacy and war is this: Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell so elegantly that they pack for the trip.
War is bringing hell down on that someone.
Wolfman
Posts: 1181
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:03 pm
Location: LCS-3, BB-35, CGN-39, SSN-775

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Wolfman »

So what do we name CSGN-97, then? She’s probably been built and commissioned by now…
“For a brick, he flew pretty good!” Sgt. Major A.J. Johnson, Halo 2

To err is Human; to forgive is not SAC policy.

“This is Raven 2-5. This is my sandbox. You will not drop, acknowledge.” David Flanagan, former Raven FAC
User avatar
jemhouston
Posts: 6536
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by jemhouston »

Wolfman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:25 pm So what do we name CSGN-97, then? She’s probably been built and commissioned by now…
Vancouver in honor of the Canada City / Battle
Poohbah
Posts: 3511
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:08 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Poohbah »

jemhouston wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:53 pm
Wolfman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:25 pm So what do we name CSGN-97, then? She’s probably been built and commissioned by now…
Vancouver in honor of the Canada City / Battle
One problem of the Highway War is that most of the really good battles have names ending in Northing or Easting.
User avatar
jemhouston
Posts: 6536
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by jemhouston »

Poohbah wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 2:26 pm
jemhouston wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:53 pm
Wolfman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:25 pm So what do we name CSGN-97, then? She’s probably been built and commissioned by now…
Vancouver in honor of the Canada City / Battle
One problem of the Highway War is that most of the really good battles have names ending in Northing or Easting.
The USMC did fight in Vancouver. Long Beach doesn't fit with the Highway war. It's also the only not named for WW3 battle.
Poohbah
Posts: 3511
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:08 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Poohbah »

jemhouston wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:09 pm
Poohbah wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 2:26 pm
jemhouston wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:53 pm

Vancouver in honor of the Canada City / Battle
One problem of the Highway War is that most of the really good battles have names ending in Northing or Easting.
The USMC did fight in Vancouver. Long Beach doesn't fit with the Highway war. It's also the only not named for WW3 battle.
She's named to honor the battle history of CGN-9. The Honorable Sylvia Morgan, who represented most of Long Beach in the 2010s, had served aboard her as an OS from '87 to '91, and she was also President of the crew association.

Remember the Golden Rule: she who has the gold makes the rules.
Wolfman
Posts: 1181
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 4:03 pm
Location: LCS-3, BB-35, CGN-39, SSN-775

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by Wolfman »

Yeah, I agree with the name Long Beach and the reasoning for it.
“For a brick, he flew pretty good!” Sgt. Major A.J. Johnson, Halo 2

To err is Human; to forgive is not SAC policy.

“This is Raven 2-5. This is my sandbox. You will not drop, acknowledge.” David Flanagan, former Raven FAC
User avatar
jemhouston
Posts: 6536
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am

Re: Fact File: the Kidd Class Destroyers

Post by jemhouston »

Poohbah wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:44 pm
jemhouston wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 3:09 pm
Poohbah wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 2:26 pm

One problem of the Highway War is that most of the really good battles have names ending in Northing or Easting.
The USMC did fight in Vancouver. Long Beach doesn't fit with the Highway war. It's also the only not named for WW3 battle.
She's named to honor the battle history of CGN-9. The Honorable Sylvia Morgan, who represented most of Long Beach in the 2010s, had served aboard her as an OS from '87 to '91, and she was also President of the crew association.

Remember the Golden Rule: she who has the gold makes the rules.
I learned that when Dan Golden headed NASA. :lol:
Post Reply