Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Up until the advent of AEGIS technology on the Ticonderoga Class Cruisers (CG's) and then later on the Burke class Destroyers (DDG's), the KIDD class DDG's were the most powerful multi-purpose destroyers in the US inventory, and in all probability, in the world. The four ships of this class, originally designed for sale to the then-friendly Iranian Navy, are unique among US Warships, in that they combined the combat systems capability of the former VIRGINIA-class nuclear cruisers (CGN's) with the proven anti-submarine warfare qualities of a SPRUANCE-class destroyers (DD's). The four Kidd class guided missile destroyers are similar to the Spruance class destroyers, but have greater displacement and improved combat systems. The ships are built on the same hull as the Spruance destroyers.
The principle difference between the Kidd Class destroyers and the current Ticonderoga Class CG's and newer Burke DDG's lies in the phased array radars of the AEGIS system and its greater capablity to detect and target incoming hostile air threats. Since the AEGIS phased array radar does not have to rotate, it can continuously track targets from any direction, without having to be hampered with the cycle time of earlier systems. In addition to the ability to continuously track targets, and the higher computing capacity of the AEGIS system, the Burke's and later calss Ticonderoga's aree fitted with Vertical Launch Systems (VLS) for their missiles, which allow them to be fired more rapidly as enemies attempt to saturate the defenses. Having said this, the Kidd Class DDG's employed the most technologically advanced radars and launchers for rail launched Anti-AirCraft missiles (AAM) in the world, and are among the most powerful Anti-Air and all purpose destroyers on the high seas. The four destroyers of the Kidd class were originally built for the Shah of Iran, and were acquired by the US Navy following the Shah's overthrow in 1979. The US Navy acquired them in 1981 and 1982 after they were canceled by the succeeding Iranian government. For this reason they are often referred to as the "Ayatollah class".Built for action in the Persian Gulf, these ships are designed for general purpose operations rather than specialized anti-submarine warfare (ASW), specialized anti-air warfare (AAW) or anti-surface warfare (ASuW). They infact combined the besty of all of these in the early 1980's.
The ships feature advanced air-intake and filtration systems in order to handle dust and sand prevailing in Persian Gulf operating area as well as greater air-conditioning capacity. The ships have the ability to fire surface-to-air missiles in support of Aegis cruisers, which, if necessary, can assume control of the destroyer's missiles. This could be very critical if future AEGIS sales are provided to Taiwan (the ROC) as the AEGIS ships capability will be significantly enhanced when traveling in company with any of the Kidd Class destroyers. As they are, the KIdd classare outfitted with air-defense radar that allows them to command a wide ocean area. They can also support amphibious landing forces.
KIDD-class armaments include the New Threat Upgrade (NTU) anti-air warfare (AAW) system to improve their anti-air warfare performance against the technologically advanced threat expected into the 21st century, as well as two Mk 26 launchers for Standard surface-to-air missiles, and SQS-58 hull mounted active sonar, ASROC, eight Harpoon surface-to-surface missiles, two five-inch guns and hangar facilities for one Lamps Mk 1 helicopter. The most formidable warship of her size to patrol the world's oceans, the KIdd class blended the best features of the SPRUANCE Class destroyers with the combat system of the VIRGINIA Class nuclear cruisers to produce a ship with unique characteristics:The most sophisticated medium-range AAW systems in the Fleet, quick-reacting and highly accurate, with the capability for today's air defense environment and the growth potential for tomorrow's.
An exceptionally reliable and responsive engineering plant.
A deadly surface-to-surface weapons capability.
KIDD's combat system is her complement of weapons and electronics subsystems and equipment, which collectively enables her to carry out combat missions.
AAW: Anti-Air Warfare
ELW: Electronic Warfare
The ship's Electronic Warfare Sensor is designated as an anti-ship missile defense sensor. It provides rapid and automatic detection, processing, and analysis of enemy electronic emissions. It is used with four deck-mounted Super Rapid-Blooming Off-board Chaff (SRBOC) mortar-type launchers, which provide defense against homing missiles by creating deceptive chaff targets.
Communication
KIDD has a modern, automated communications system. For Fleet Broadcast Traffic, the Naval Modular Automated Communication System (NAVMACS) A-Plus uses a computer for automated message processing. NAVMACS is joined with a satellite communications transceiver and a satellite receiver to provide high-speed, low- interference information transfer via satellite links. For two-way tactical communications, KIDD carries a full range of modern UHF, VHF, and HF
radio equipment.
Specifications | |
| Power plant | 4 - LM 2500 General Electric gas turbines, 80,000 shaft horsepower two shafts, |
| Length | 563 feet (171.6 meters) |
| Beam | 55 feet (16.8 meters) |
| Displacement | Light Displacement: 7289 tons Full Displacement: 9783 tons Dead Weight: 2494 tons |
| Speed | 33 knots (38 mph, 60.8 kph) |
| Aircraft | 1 - SH-3 helicopter or 2 - SH-2 Seasprite LAMPS helicopter |
| Armament |
2 - Mk26 launchers for Standard Missile 2 - MK 141 quad launchers w/ 8 Harpoon missiles 2 - MK 15 20mm Phalanx CIWS Close-In Weapons Systems 2 - 5-Inch 54 Cal. MK 45 Guns (lightweight gun) 2 - MK 32 triple tube mounts w/ six Mk-46 torpedoes) MK 112 Launcher for ASROC |
| Combat Systems |
SPS-48E Air Search Radar SPG-60 Gun Fire Control Radar SPS-55 Surface Search Radar SPQ-9A Gun Fire Control Radar SQS-53 Sonar SLQ-32 (V)3 OUTBOARD II |
Ships | ||||||
| Name | Number | Builder | Homeport | Ordered | Commissioned | Decommissioned |
| Kidd | DDG 993 | Ingalls | STB ROC | 23 Mar 1978 | 27 Mar 1981 | 12 Mar 1998 |
| Callaghan | DDG 994 | Ingalls | STB ROC | 23 Mar 1978 | 29 Aug 1981 | 31 Mar 1998 |
| Scott | DDG 995 | Ingalls | STB ROC | 23 Mar 1978 | 24 Oct 1981 | 11 Dec 1998 |
| Chandler | DDG 996 | Ingalls | STB ROC | 23 Mar 1978 | 13 Mar 1982 | 1999 |
I am personally disappointed that we didn't get more in the face of the PRC and offer the ROC the Aegis ships now. We already export the technology. Japan has built their own enhanced version of the Burke Class, the Kongo Class, shown here:
(though agruably not as good as our Block IIA class ships), and we have sold a scaled down version of the AEGIS system to Spain for inclusion on their F-100 class DDG's, the first of which, the Alvaro De Bazan, was recently launched and is shown here:
Nonetheless, the Kidd Class DDG's are very formidable ships and are every bit a match and more for the new Russian DDG's the PRC has aquired. Of course, that's not the only reason the ROC wanted them, the principle reason was for the AEGIS ability to ultimately perform in the TMD role.
However, if we later sell the ROC AEGIS too, then the combined capability of the KIDD and AEGIS DDG's is extremely formidable, as spoken of in the report.
FYI
FYI
FYI
FYI
FYI
Thanks, Jeff.
Gonna bookmark this one.
FYI
FYI
It is interesting to note that the ROC would be the third nation to recieve the exported technology ... after Japan and Spain.
Personally, I believe the ROC is more in our camp for the long haul (if we'd let 'em) than either of the others.
nyhow, the Kidd class are fromidable weapon systems.
FYI
I may be stupid on this but, I don't think we need much more than the Kidd Class, at this time. I think the weapons sale to Taiwan says a lot. BTW, my interpretation says the U.S. will defend Taiwan, if China chooses to go there. Like I said, I may be stupid...
Personally, I believe the ROC is more in our camp for the long haul (if we'd let 'em) than either of the others.
nyhow, the Kidd class are fromidable weapon systems.
Couldn't agree with you more.
No, you're not stupid: You're dead-on-right.
You make more sense than all of the pinheads on TV.
FYI
If we are serious about holding out on the AEGIS, then you are right.
I personally am the kind of guy who would have gone ahead and gotten right to the point and sold the AEGIS and the KIDD's to the ROC, so there was no misunderstanding. There certainly is no misunderstanding the ChiComm intentions IMHO.
Of course then, here's a picture and a link to what I think we really should tell the Red Chinese:
But, if the Reds don't back off and we announce 6 months from now, or even one year from now, the AEGIS deal, we accomplish the same.
OH...I'm not worthy...I'm not worthy...LOL Thanks a bunch, JH2! I know a bit about the pilot side of the Navy, and only a smattering about the boat side! The "boat side" may be the one I want to study in the future!
FYI
The KIDDs are damn fine warships, it's a shame that we can't still man them in today's downsized US Navy!
But it's great to see them go to the ROC. Any estimate on arrival time, and time to go into service? I hope the ROCs build multiple bases for them and move them frequently to deter preemptive ballistic missile attack from the mainland. They will be primary targets!
Hopefully, the weapons which have been announced for sale are only the visible overt tip of the iceberg of what we are sending to Taiwan.
Thanks much, Jeff Head.
Best regards. S&W R.I.P.
Amen bro.
I wish we still had them too. They'd be a heck of an escort for any MEU or in a CBG, particularly with the capability for the AEGIS system to direct them. Their ASW capaibilities are sorely needed as well. ... they are kind of a Super-Spruance.
My understanding is we are looking at 2003 for commissioning into the ROC, followed by their sea trials.
Wish it could be faster.
PS: One of the great points about the KIDDs the article did not mention is that as gas turbine ships, they can cut the lines, (literally, with axes), and get away to sea at full speed in only minutes from "cold iron"! This is an important consideration if missiles are inbund!
(I always joke that I will know when WW3 is about to happen when I see the San Diego fleet racing out the bay at flank, throwing ten foot wakes through the marinas!)
FYI
Thanks for the link and the graphic! I believe, as long as the ChiComs think we will defend Taiwan, they don't want to go there. So many in the U.S. are saying we are weak, but by whose standards? By our standards, we are weak. But by the rest of the world's standards, we are not some third world country to be messed with! Thanks, again, for the graphic...saw it on Brit Hume's show!
Thanks for the link and the graphic! I believe, as long as the ChiComs think we will defend Taiwan, they don't want to go there. So many in the U.S. are saying we are weak, but by whose standards? By our standards, we are weak. But by the rest of the world's standards, we are not some third world country to be messed with! Thanks, again, for the graphic...saw it on Brit Hume's show!
The ability to get under way quickly with the gas turbines is a critical capability, not only for egressing in case of inbounds on their port, but for the ASW role as well.
They (like the Spruance) are a heck of a sprint and listen platform.
". . . .it's a shame that we can't still man them in today's downsized US Navy!"
tsk tsk tsk. . . . .
Don't you mean "...pursun them..."?
Today's downsized Navy IS a shame.
It's good to see these ships are going to be put to use.
Maybe Taiwan would like some submarines?
After all, the Kidd is still a TARGET. ;^)
But I bet the chow will be GREAT!
I am all for making Taiwan our unsinkable aircraft carrier, China's "Cuba", just load it for bear and stick it in the ChiComs eye!
No, we are not weak, but we have been downsized and we are vulnerable right now.
We must show the ChiComms that despite this we have the will to face them off in their own backyard, but we must do it wisely.
There is a 2-3 year period of great threat and vulnerability right now, even if we start to reverse the down sizing since Desert Storm immediately. The basic reason is that we are not in a position to support two full blown, theater size conflicts right now. Our enemies know this and are going to test us.
I pray we can hurriedly build back up, and convince them in the mean time that the cost would still be far too high for them.
Regards.
Peraps a more fitting analogy would be England to Germany.
Only problem is, if we are caught out of position and sent realing for any period of time ... attrition will bring the ROC down .... unless ....
I still believe the ROC has significant subversion and dissent plans for the mainland if the shooting ever starts. That has to SCARE the PRC "Party Leaders" nicht wahr?
I TOTALLY DITTO what you said. We need to spend this time rebuilding ASAP! In the meantime, we need to "speak softly, and carry a big stick." Keeps 'em off balance! The other countries don't know what we have! We are enjoying a "good reputation" right now. We need to capitalize on that (while we rebuild). Regards to you, kind sir!
FYI
FYI
FYI
Hopefully, the weapons which have been announced for sale are only the visible overt tip of the iceberg of what we are sending to Taiwan.
I think that is the case, judging by unusual expanded orders for items placed in Feb of this year with certain aerospace companies. In fact, it appears that someone is rather anxious to get started on restocking some of our stuff too. (About time)
The Chi-Coms will re-landscape the west coast into green glass from subs off the coast before the fleet has time to get the lines cast off. LA, SF, SD and Seattle. Maybe Pearl Harbor too. Shortly after that, Beijing will assume a green glass appearance as well. Let's hope we keep it down to verbal jousting and technical sabre rattling.
FYI
Crumbs for our brothers in Taiwan & everthing for our enemy China.
Strange how outraged China (and you) are over those crumbs, and how happy Taiwan is over them.
A ship so quiet, and an ASW system so capable, that she operates offensively against submarines.
The most sophisticated medium-range AAW systems in the Fleet, quick-reacting and highly accurate, with the capability for today's air defense environment and the growth potential for tomorrow's.
An exceptionally reliable and responsive engineering plant.
Man, this reads like a magazine ad.
"I'll take it!"
You may be somewhat overestimating the PLAN's capabilities.
The KIDD class are not crumbs by any stretch. They will be the most powerful surface combatants in the South China Sea.
If the new deisel sub deal goes through, that will not be a pitance either. Those new, quiet, diesel subs wikk be perfect for breaking any blockade of the ROC by the PRC. The P-3's, particualarly if they are the newer mods which allow for Harpoon missiles, are also very potent in the ASW role particularly, but also in the anti-surface role.
Having said that, like you, I would have preferred to see the AEGIS sale now, to insure that the PRC does not misunderstand our resolve. I believe there is a chance that they will. If they do, and if we have the resolve, then following up this announcement with the AEGIS and the PAC-3 Patriots will hammer the resolve home.
If we do not, then we will be asking for more and more trouble, which I believe will utlimately require a lot of blood to resolve.
The ChiComms ballistic missile sub capability is very weak. We are probably all over their one or two boats at all times and would probably put them down if there was the slightest threat or indication that you mention.
If that Typhoon deal with the Ruskies went through, and if it included the Ruskie missiles .... then that is a different deal, althoug with only two of them, we'd probably be one or two deep on them as well.
Now, their newer ICBM's are a different story and they could get the same job done ... but in that case the folks in San Diego would have a few more minutes.
All the more reason for BMD!
I suppose that small number of subs might be tracked and held at bay.
I thought the Chinese had already taken delivery of the new Russian subs. The land launched ICBM that can hit the west coast might allow Travis time to watch a 10 foot wake. The ChiComs can't afford to let our vessels leave port in the Pacific. If they don't slam dunk those 4 ports, we will make them pay dearly. It might not be possible to pull off that approach at this moment, but the ChiComs are still accumulating resources.
If I ever see the ten foot wakes coming through the marina as the fleet runs for the open ocean, I will know I have only minutes to live.
If the Chinese are clever and resourceful (and they are) they have mine laying ports on the bottom of all COSCO ships. In the weeks before any massive Asian "breakout", (invasion of Luzon, Palawan, Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore etc.) they will seed smart mines in all of the shipping channels where they have access. Where they do not, they will use false flag ships or illegal cover agents in fishing boats (primarily around our sub bases). I assume that they have ongoing sound collection opertions ongoing at all of our ports to isolate our warship signatures, the data being used to update the mines' chips.
Needless to say, the Panama Canal will be out of commission for years after they blow Gatun Dam, regardless of whether we recapture the (dry) real estate.
If the Chinese are clever and resourceful (and they are) they have mine laying ports on the bottom of all COSCO ships.
You are right, but if they do, how hard would it be to detect that?
In the weeks before any massive Asian "breakout", (invasion of Luzon, Palawan, Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore etc.) they will seed smart mines in all of the shipping channels where they have access. Where they do not, they will use false flag ships or illegal cover agents in fishing boats (primarily around our sub bases). I assume that they have ongoing sound collection opertions ongoing at all of our ports to isolate our warship signatures, the data being used to update the mines' chips.
Under 8 more years of Gore, this would be a possibility. Right now, the PRC window for opportunity is closing fast. Doing the above would make every PLAN & COSCO tanker a target...it would be a turkey shoot, and probably WWIII.
Needless to say, the Panama Canal will be out of commission for years after they blow Gatun Dam, regardless of whether we recapture the (dry) real estate.
But look at the bright side...no more Castro...such an act would be a red carpet welcome to get rid of his ass and retake the canal and void that stupid treaty for all time.
China is buying the very latest equipment from russia and it is obvious china is not rearming to be more friendly in the area - america should help all countries in the area to update their military to catch up with china - if china wants to waste its money on the military - its obvious the locals should think seriously about rearming.
Thanks for the ping, Jeff.
Modern weapons systems are quite fascinating. I can't help but think, considering the Red mentality, that if we were to give the Republic of China flintlock muskets, the Reds would view it as an overtly hostile act on our part.
Sooner or later we're going to have to face off with them. I sincerely hope that when we do, it will be while we are strong, and able to pick the time, place and circumstances of the confrontation. If we wait, until it comes about, until they bring it about, on their terms, then we're gonna be in for one helluva fight that we, no doubt will prevail in, but the cost will be so much higher.
One should never deal with their enemy from a position of weakness, unless it's a deception, and then when one is weak, it's necessary to appear strong.
Seeing as how I've read that book, why does it seem that those in authority missed it altogether?
I guess they were just too busy spending money on midnight basketball, multi-culturalism, perverted art, grants and gifts to race-baiting poverty pimps, socialist environmentalists, trade unionists and globalists.
I'm afraid it's going to be a very long, hot summer.
Thanks for the bump! ;^)
This capability will represent a SIGNIFICANT upgrade to Taiwan's (the ROC's) naval capability, though signifcantly less capability against the ballistic missile threat from the mainland which the AEGIS would ultimately provide
I'm certainly no expert but it's my understanding that the AEGIS offers virtually NO CAPABILITY against ballistic missles. It wasn't designed to counter that threat. Is this wrong?
Thanks for the flag, Jeff. Interesting reading, but I'm with you on the Aegis. If it takes until 2003 to get the KIDDs up and running, how long is it gonna take for the Aegis and shouldn't we be starting NOW?
Nothing will stop a Scud. But typical missiles like the Sunburn can be handled by the Aegis types. I'm not sure about the Kidd because I don't know how many missiles it can intercept at the same time.
Very informative. Bttt.
But, if the Reds don't back off and we announce 6 months from now, or even one year from now, the AEGIS deal, we accomplish the same.
Exactly! It's my belief that Bush is holding his cards very close to the vest for a reason. I trust him and his national security advisors to do the right thing more than I do a few partisan naysayers on this site who still will not admit that the option to sell later is not off the table. After all, the Aegis will not be ready until 2010 and nothing prevents Taiwan from beginning the training now.
Thanks very much for the ping. Your presentation of this information is first class!
Ping!
We should arm their neighbors and re-arm ourselves, challenging the Red Chinese, like Reagan did the Soviets, to keep up if they can ... of course all of this AFTER we stop pumping the dollars into their economy that they are using to for their arms race.
Although written right before Bush announced his decision, here is part of a piece I found interesting.
Soon President Bush will have to make a decision on arms
sales to Taiwan; whether to sell the more advanced ships
which the Taiwanese want, or lesser ships and equipment so
as not to overly provoke Beijing. It will be a decision fraught
with important symbolism, but devoid of real military
meaning. Taiwan can never hope to outgun the mainland.
Only the United States can physically prevent a military
takeover of the island. And all three players know that China
could shut down Taiwan by seriously threatening air and sea
lanes.All three players know that resorting to force would bring
disaster, however. Taiwan is riding high, and polls have
shown that most Taiwanese are willing to consider
reunification sometime in the future when China is more
democratic. As for the United States, whether it considers
China to be a strategic partner or a strategic competitor,
absolutely no national interest is served by a military
confrontation. Subsequently, no US interests would be
served by Taiwanese independence. And China, although it
wants to make it clear that it will fight rather than irrevocably
lose Taiwan, has a vital interest in peace, prosperity, and
integration in the world economy.
Nothing will stop a Scud. But typical missiles like the Sunburn can be handled by the Aegis types.
Right, but we're talking about anti-ship missiles, right? Not about ballistic missiles that would be launched against cities, etc...the typical "Nuke" we think of. The AEGIS has no capability to stop those according to my info (which could be wrong) but the FAS analysis seems to say it does: "though signifcantly less capability against the ballistic missile threat from the mainland which the AEGIS would ultimately provide"
If the AEGIS could do that, why are we talking about building the "Starwars" system?
The Aegis cannot stop a flight of missiles lobbed into a city like a Scud. Their velocity and momentum makes impact inevitable. The best you can do is knock them into pieces.
You know what will stop a Sunburn? Styrofoam peanuts.
Actually, a defense against ballistic missiles has been tested using an new upgrade for AEGIS. First successful test was in 1997. Two AEGIS crusiers have already been outfitted with the necessary control systems and are developing core doctrine and tactics. Thye have already undergone sea trials. (CG 70 and CG 73).
Testing of the control vehicle (warhead) has been ongoing with two more successful tests in 2000 (June and August). it is planned to have the first units available and on station in 2003. From this time forward the system will be fitted into both Arleigh Burk class DDG's and VLS Ticonderoga Class CG's.
This is the first stage of a two stage Navy Ballistic Missiles Defense program which will utilize AEGIS and upgraded Standard Missiles (SM-2 Block IVA I believe). This first stage is Area Defense, the second stage, which will further upgrade the missile (To SM-3 Block I I believe)and control systems is the Theater Wide version. It is expected to go on line 3-4 years after the area defense capability.
That is why it was going to take a few years for the ROC to get their AEGIS ships with that capability ... we have to get a few ourselves first. I believe the PAC-3 Patriot systems were to function as both long term island defense and as a "stand in" until the more capable ships, which could be stationed just off shore and also provide anti-aircraft and anti-shipping defense came on line.
Even without the upgrade, the AEGIS ships do have significant capability against high speed cruise missiles and aircraft .... and would probably try and down some of the short range missiles the Red Chinese will employ across the straits. Of course, the KIDD's offer a similar, less capable option.
Great info is available on-line at the government's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization Site
Actually, I believe the Patriot System can knock down a Scud now. Particualrly the new PAC-3 update which is one of the things the ROC wanted and didn't get.
Read my POST NUMBER 62 regarding AEGIS plans for BMD. Go to the site and go through the two Navy Fact Sheets for Area Defense and Theater Defense.
We have already tested the capability and successfully intercepted a Ballistic Missile in 1997. The Navy Program will probably be the initial implementation of a true system and offers the flexability of stationing the "platforms" or "missile bases" off of any shore we desire. A good first step.
AEGIS is likely to perform well against most fast flying crusie missiles like the Sunburn, although it was designed to hit mutliple mach high flying missiles aimed at carriers and/or lower speed sea skimmers. The sunburn is a fast flying sea skimmer and could cause some problems, although I believe it could be knocked down by a good layerd defense.
Regards.
As I have stated on the thread, I am personally disappointed we didn't go ahead and get the AEGIS going to the ROC now. but if we can step into it, we can accomplish the same thing.
I believe it more important that we get the PAC-3 Patriot upgrade to the ROC now because it offers a more immediate defense against the missiles the ChiComms are deploying against them across the straits.
We already have Patriot batteries on the island that have been sold to the ROC which will be effective, the PAC-3 is just the latest upgrade.
I believe we should. But, if we get the KIDDs online, with the intention of preparing the ROC for the AEGIS (and covertly start making the preparations) we can accomplish the same thing.
I don't know if this is going on in the background or not, one can only hope.
Like I said, with a tyrant and a bully of the nature of the Red Chinese, I believe we should have made our intentions crystal clear. We risk their going ever further by not doing so in the name of preserving what I consider to be a misbegotten economic policy anyway ... one which is giving the ChiComms the funds which they are using to build their military against us. And they are VERY upfront about it.
Actually, Ballistic Missile Defense has been possible for a long time. We successfully tested and were ready to deploy a system in the early seventies which used missiles similar to these standard upgrades and also used low yield, proximity nuclear warheads. The ABM treaty killed that.
The AEGIS and Patriot type upgrades to defend against Ballistic missiles (up to and including ICBM's) are a point solution in the overall strategy. Point, meaning they are shot from relatively near the point of impact which decreases the difficulty of the intercept.
The Theater Wide upgrade to the AEGIS system will improve this, but also be a much more difficyult problem. Similar to the land based THAADS which has had a lot of difficulty.
Star Wars was meant to knock down the ICBM's in their "boost" phase or as the leave the atmosphere in the ballistic flight. Those systems are being developed but are still a long way off.
These destroyers have one advantage over the Aegis ships. they are available much more rapidly. The Aegis ships would be available at the earliest in 2008. The Kidd class is subject to delivery before the next presidential term.
That said I would have preferred that both had been sold to Taiwan. The next best thing is that the Aegis class ships have not been denied forever.
Stay well - Yorktown
The World Navies Today. Interesting facts (?) and figures, plus some good pictures.
Thanks for a great article. I bookmarked it for later reference.
No, we are not weak, but we have been downsized and we are vulnerable right now.
Jeff, who has a "strong" Navy today ? Stronger than ours.
Are we missing something here?
Nowhere in the discussion have I seen comment on the ability of Kidd destroyers to operate in conjunction with Aegis equipped ships: like the ones we already have.
Seems likely to me that a good part of the training time that ROC crews receive will involve how to operate their four (affordable) DDG's with US forces and with US control over their missiles.
Why should they support the more expensive (and more objectionable)systems when we can provide the core system when the balloon goes up?
Agree completely.
It is my understanding that the Phalanx AA system shoots down incoming missiles simply by putting up a "wall" of shell fragments. Anything coming through the "wall" -- whether it's a Scud, a Sunburn or a ballistic missile -- would have to be heavily armored to fly a straight and steady course. Is this information accurate?
I agree. Actually, I did comment on this capability in the article. From the article above:
The ships have the ability to fire surface-to-air missiles in support of Aegis cruisers, which, if necessary, can assume control of the destroyer's missiles. This could be very critical if future AEGIS sales are provided to Taiwan (the ROC) as the AEGIS ships capability will be significantly enhanced when traveling in company with any of the Kidd Class destroyers.
That goes for their AEGIS or ours.
Is there any information still around on the "Sprint" and "Spartan" systems the Army had in North Dakota?
The CIWS does do what you indicate, however, the "wall" is really a "stream" of projectiles which must make contact with the missile itself.
It is a difficult intercept, particularly at relative high angles of attack.
This means some may get through.
That is why we, and most navies employ a layered defense. Longer Range AAM's like the Standard Missile to knock off the majority of incomings, shorter range AAM's like the Sea Sparrow, to knock down more ... and finally the CIWS to get any stragglers.
The Russians always intended to try and saturate such defenses with so many missiles that some would invariably get through. This was the principle reason for the development of AEGIS and the use of its phased array radar (saved time in targeting and tracking by not having to rotate) and its massive computer "crunching" capacity.
Having said that, the KIDD class were the absolute "top of the line" before AEGIS and are capable of heavy AAM defense. They cannot be upgraded to the BMD role though and this was a principle concer of the ROC.
If we hold out that we possibly will sell AEGIS, we can hopefully keep the PRC at bay and still force them down. I personally would have like to see us make that crystal clear by getting the ball rolling now.
We should have sold them the Aegis system
We blinked and the Chinese will force us to blink every time. We will sell it to Spain where there is no threat but not to Taiwan where the Chinese keep up a constant threat.
The Kidds are excellent surface combatants but it just doesn't make any sense not to give the Aegis to Taiwan. We have already give modified versions to other countries and the Taiwanese are very capable of handling these types of vessels. I am also not so worried about the loss of any technical data to the Chinese. But i believe we are just appeasing the Chinese by not giving the Aegis to Taiwan.
IMHO, when it comes to blue water fighting there is definitelyt no navy as strong as the US Navy.
However, again IMHO, the Red Chinese are not wanting to fight us on those terms. They would prefer to simply deny us the ability to project power into the Western Pacific, and particularly the South China Sea, which is close to their airfields, their logistics and their support base.
They are building resources to challenge us in this manner and are gearing up in other "choke point" areas to help in that regard.
With mines, submarine warfare, sea skimming missiles, newer aircraft, etc. they represent a mortal threat in those waters which we cannot ignore or take ilghtly.
If it came down to it, and they were successful in taking out a couple of our carriers ... we would be sent realing in an effort to counter them and project our power into the region. Their advantage in this regard is that they don't want to project power globally so much as to keep us from doing it in that region.
In this regard, they are getting stronger while we have been sizing down. We have to be on our guard and insure we don't size down so far that we get sidetracked by a feint in one direction (which may be a very serious threat) and then blind sided in another.
Thanks for the flag.
When do the Aegis get commissioned? If they are already commissioned, how many do we have?
5.56mm
I tend to agree with you both.
However, if (and it's a big if) we go forward with preparations for AEGIS and counter any future aggressive moves (and they are almost a sure thing) by the ChiComms with the AEGIS announcement, we will have not lost any time ... only the results of the next agression.
For the same reasons I believe the PAC-3 upgrade to the Patriot is essential, and we did make it clear here that we are moving forward with the training to prep the ROC fo it.
IMHO, unless we resolutely and very pointedly stand up to the PRC now, we will be fighting them inside of a very few short years, maybe sooner.
They intend to eject us from the Western Pacific in general, and the South China Sea inparticular ... and they are using our money and our technology to prepare to do it!
Jeff - you have bigplanet e mail
We already have 27 AEGIS Ticonderoga class cruisers, and currently have 29 AEGIS Burke destroyers and 15 more either outfitting or building.
The real issue here for Taiwan (ROC) is the new BMD (Ballistic Missile Defense) upgrades to these ships which will start going online for us in 2003-2004. We would get such capability to the ROC in 2008-2009 after we have put it to sea in numbers.
The theater defense Aegis system would most likely be a major part of any national missle defense system. However at present the Aegis as an anti ballistic missle system missle system for area defense must sacrifice its role as a conventional anti aircraft defense system. This may change with subsequent software releases.
Stay well - Yorktown
Previously, the Chinese vehemently opposed the Kidd sale. We just did an end run around them.
If I ever see the ten foot wakes coming through the marina as the fleet runs for the open ocean, I will know I have only minutes to live.
Unless it is a drill you are of course correct. However, at this time I do not think we do this kind of drill anymore
Stay well - Yorktown
I believe this is true (losing normal AAW capabilities) for only those cells in the VLS which are firing the BMD upgraded missile (SM-2 Block IVA and later the SM-3 BLOCK I).
I believe all other cells which are loaded with Standard Missiles for normal AAW will still function in that role.
It seems I read somewhere that for those ships so configured (for the BMD role) that they were going to carry a realtively small number of BMD missiles (less than 20). Of course all of this could change between now and actual deployment.
Thanks Jeff. I have bookmarked it.
Thanks Chris, I will be looking for it.
Haven't got it yet.
Thanks Chris, I will be looking for it.
Haven't got it yet.
I especially like this one:
The Phalanx AA system is a jam-o-matic that every one of my Bro's in the Navy tells me is a maintenance nightmare.
Quote from one bro "if we ever have to cut anchor and run we always have a spare!"
ABSOLUTELY! I used that pic (among many others) in my
Red Blooded "Apology" to the Red Chinese
That PIC is originally off of the US Navy site. Heck of a shutter speed huh?
Excellent, thank you very much!
Btw, did you feel that quake this weekend?
5.56mm
Great post, Jeff. A SpruCan-with-Bite is a good choice for Taiwan, since, in a war situation, their main task is going to be keeping the shipping lanes open. With our subs (and the new SSKs we're selling them) to police up any ChiCom antishipping forces, Taiwan should be able to break any PLAN blockade. Besides, if things go that wrong, we'll have an AEGIS task force on station anyway. Our guys, along with help from the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (probably the most capable destroyer navy in the world) will be able to counter pretty much anything the ChiComs throw at Taiwan.
Japan is the England of the Far East. Taiwan is more like Austria -- and the anschluss is coming...
But just look at that Little Bullet:) the Navy would be better off bolting on an M1A1 Abrams. Please bring back the Big MO class BattleShips!
Of course all of this could change between now and actual deployment.
I know they are working on this.
Stay well - Yorktown
That "little bullet" may be armor piercing.
Well, one option is for Lockheed Martin to pull a Loral -
you know how it works - the Taiwanese Kidds have radar
problems, so Lockheed just puts new radars on `em... Of
course, the new radars are - whoops, SPY-1Ds, just like
the ones on the Arleigh Burke-class DDGs...
Then of course, at the White House...
"From what we can tell, the Aegis radars provided to Taiwan
by Lockheed got there due to a bureaucratic snafu..."
And of course, the Taiwanese get to reverse engineer the
stuff before we get it back... so they get Aegis and we
get deniability.
The Phalanx AA system is a jam-o-matic
The Phalanx is basically the same (gun) as the M163A1 Vulcan the Army had for several years. Talk about jams! I would not want to bet my life on a system like that. Feed chute problems, de-linker problems, gun drive motors, the list goes on and on.
I am really a military technology nut, but World War II is more my area. Thanks for the info. It's clear that if we sold Taiwan our own Arleigh Burke class destroyers, they could have them immediately. I believe we should start building about eight or 12 Arleigh Burkes right away. If an Arleigh Burke's fire control system is capable of operating and firing the weapon systems on an accompanying Kidd class destroyer, that would be an awesome (and very cost-effective) pairing for Taiwan.
We must never allow Red Chinese expansion/aggression to get off the ground. With their reserves, they have 100 million men in uniform. Granted, nearly all of them are in rather primitive "National Guard" rifle divisions with AK-47 assault rifles and WWII/Korea vintage supporting arms. But the sheer numbers are simply overwhelming. Once their ball gets rolling, it would be hard to stop without going nuclear.
I believe this is true (losing normal AAW capabilities) for only those cells in the VLS which are firing the BMD upgraded missile (SM-2 Block IVA and later the SM-3 BLOCK I).
I may be wrong but I was under the impression that the specific problem was in the software which controled the BMD functioning and its original incompatability with the normal AAW software. They were still working on this relatively recently. They may have resolved the problem.
I believe all other cells which are loaded with Standard Missiles for normal AAW will still function in that role.
The inital software incompatability problem did not preclude reloading the AAW software so that the Aegis system could alternate between BMD and AAW so I have no disagreement with your understanding.
It seems I read somewhere that for those ships so configured (for the BMD role) that they were going to carry a realtively small number of BMD missiles (less than 20). Of course all of this could change between now and actual deployment.
That is my understanding also.
Stay well - Yorktown
I agree, the anschluss is coming.
I am afraid it'll be a tough one, and pray we can yet avoid it with resolute action and an end to appeasing the ChiComms financially ... but in any case, I am also convinced we will at length prevail.
BTW, I have heard the KIDD's called an "AEGIS Lite"
"Once their ball gets rolling, it would be hard to stop without going nuclear."
OK? I mean they are already paid for aren't they!
BRING BACK BIG MO!
The Iowa-class BBs BIG bullets REALLY pierce armor...
and they go further than the 5" rounds.
Don't forget the psychological effects, either...
For more info, check out www.usnfsa.com
Thanks Jeff, geat information.
"However, if (and it's a big if) we go forward with preparations for AEGIS and counter any future aggressive moves (and they are almost a sure thing) by the ChiComms with the AEGIS announcement, we will have not lost any time ... only the results of the next agression."
Correct. It makes no difference Aegis or no Aegis we are heading towards a confrontation with China in the region sooner or later. We might as well have a Aegis Combatant in the region.
We should arm their neighbors and re-arm ourselves, challenging the Red Chinese, like Reagan did the Soviets, to keep up if they can ... of course all of this AFTER we stop pumping the dollars into their economy that they are using to for their arms race.
Yes.
LNM!, FYI...
Additional information: The KIDD class is also known as the "Dead Admiral" class, as all four of the ships are named after WWII Admirals killed in the line of duty (one at Pearl Harbor, I believe). All of these ships are extremely capable air-defense platforms. Their capabilities are greatly enhanced when used in conjunction with either airborne radars or AEGIS-capable vessels. (Think maybe we're planning on keeping a few AEGIS ships in the neighborhood just in case? That way we upgrade their capabilities without giving away the technology. Thoughts on this please?). Finally, while the addition on the KIDD class DDG's to the ROC Navy is a good thing, the eight diesel subs they're getting are of much greater utility at the present time. (Thoughts on this, please?). Anyway, that's my take....
Same gun as on the Vietnam era F105 Thuds. Are the 20mm on the F15 & F16 fighters any different ??
We already have 27 AEGIS Ticonderoga class cruisers, and currently have 29 AEGIS Burke destroyers and 15 more either outfitting or building.
Jeff, do you think after Tiawan gets the Kidds that if something flared up, we would send some Aegis ships there ASAP to supplement them? Not a sale, but manned by us to help them?
I believe we can quickly hve an AEGIS in the area to help augment, and in fact upgrade, the capability of the KIDD's in a potnetially saturated environment.
I believe the diesel subs are ideal for the ROC, particularly with the sub lkaunched version of Harpoon that they are also getting. Blockade breakers. Ideally suited for the waters around the SCS.
But, the prinicple reason for the AEGIS was to get them moving towards BMD capability.
I believe the ROC was hoping to get both now. They may ultimately get both anyway. That is my hope.
Mines can be made to burrow under sand and mud, so they can be very hard to detect.
If Gatun Dam is blown, it will not matter who owns the real estate, the canal will be out of operation for years until Gatun Lake refills with rainwater.
Yes I do.
The problem with Vulcan Phalanx and most "close in weapons systems" is that they hit the incoming missile, but so close that the kinetic damage from the supersonic missile, high explosives, remaining rocket fuel etc means a huge hit regardless. Destroyers have been sunk by missiles where the warhead did not detonate: the kinetic damage, and burning rocket fuel inside of the target ship is sufficient.
Download High-Res Version Here
If I ever see the ten foot wakes coming through the marina as the fleet runs for the open ocean, I will know I have only minutes to live. Unless it is a drill you are of course correct. However, at this time I do not think we do this kind of drill anymore.
Oh, now you've gone and started me remembering how in my younger days, I would stand in the schoolyard and listen to the daily test of the Civil Defense siren. My parents and most of the teachers explained the wailing noise away by saying "Oh, that's just to let everyone know when it's mid-day and time for lunch...", or something similar.
One teacher, however, was a US Navy veteran who fought in WWII. He refused to sugar-coat the subject and his frank description of the siren's purpose made my hair stand on end.
Thanks for the bump and the great info. We need more such informative posts.
BTTT and bookmark...MUD
You know Jeff, this really is GREAT info. My initial reaction after Rumsfield recommended against AEGIS for Taiwan was "OH NO! BUSH IS GONNA CAVE!" But after reading this, hearing Rush this morning, and other opinions that I consider very valuable here on FR, I think this was the *best* decision Bush could make for one reason: IT HELPS TAIWAN NOW. AEGIS is still 8-10 years away from delivery to Taiwan. They needed power NOW. And they got it.
WTG President Bush!!!
I also remember those days and the old duck and cover.
Stay well - Yorktown
Wow! Thanks for the flag Jeff! Before reading this, the most I knew about a ship was that it is customary to tip the cabin steward the day you got docked and went back home.
Luis
P.S. And that it's best to get first dinner seating so that you'll have some room for the midnight buffet.
If Aegis technology can be acquired on the open market, is it possible for Taiwan to modify these to come out with what they want, while the U.S. stays somewhat neutral?
If Aegis technology can be acquired on the open market
Aegis technology is most definitely NOT available on the open market. The U.S. has provided some scaled-down versions of it to our allies, but the full-scale up-to-date version is not available to anyone else.
Interesting post.
I didn't realize that the Kidd class could be controlled by an Aegis system on another ship. Knowing that, this isn't necessarily a bad deal. In the short term, Taiwan gets some usable destroyers. If there were to be an all out war, we could send our Aegis equipped ships in and as allies, we could use their firepower with our Aegis control system. In the longer term, when we sell them the Aegis system, it will be more powerful with the Kidd class destroyers that it would be without them. A good deal all around.
Also, I don't think that the Aegis system has been totally ruled out. The decision has just been delayed. Since it was going to take 10 years to deliver the Aegis systems, having something delivered in 2 to 3 years is better.
If there were to be an all out war, we could send our Aegis equipped ships in and as allies, we could use their firepower with our Aegis control system.
Hmm, there was a recent thread that detailed an agreement between the U.S. and Taiwan regarding military communications and such. That fits together with this idea perfectly, hand-in-glove.
Thanks for the ping, Sync.
And thanks for this wonderful thread, Jeff! It is one to bookmark!
Thanks for the heads up!
FYI, a good thread here on the Kidd Classs going to the ROC.
Agree with your entire post bro.
I'm afraid we are headed down a very rocky path and just hope we can get through all of the switchbacks, washes and slides without tumbling down the mountain.
Stay well.
Thanks for the ping Irma.I'm bookmarking this goodie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |