Thursday, August 1, 2019

So Sarge, what exactly is a destroyer?

U.S. Navy Destroyers, Sample Size Comparisons
Warships are expensive, especially the big ones. Many nations with a coastline can't afford large navies. This has always been true and continues today. Now what if a small country can afford a smaller warship which can pack a very large punch? More bang for the buck, so to speak.

This was all rather problematic prior to the invention of the Whitehead torpedo. While "torpedoes" did exist during the War of the Rebellion (1861-1865), they were not self-propelled and were known as "spar torpedoes". Essentially a bomb attached to a spar, an extension projecting out from the bow of the ship. So the smaller (cheaper) ship attacking the larger (more expensive) ship had to pretty much go right alongside its target. With deleterious results for the target ship and the attacking vessel.

The Confederate States Ship H.L. Hunley managed to sink the USS Housatonic using a spar torpedo, she also sank herself with the loss of all crew.

The Whitehead torpedo, which could be launched at a distance, revolutionized naval warfare. Now a small, rather inexpensive boat could carry a weapon which could sink a much larger (expensive) warship. (I'm sure the Royal Navy pronounced this as barbaric and unsporting.)

Capital ships* began to get even more expensive with the advent of covering them with armor plate and providing larger and larger guns in rotating turrets. So torpedo boats (as they were called), small, fast boats carrying two or more Whitehead-type torpedoes posed a huge threat to the modern, armored battleship.

HMS Lightning, an early torpedo boat (1876).
(Source)
How does one fight a torpedo boat? The existing warships were too heavy and slow to maneuver to avoid the torpedoes being sent their way by these small, fast (and hard to hit) torpedo boats. If those torpedo boats were in close enough, the big ships couldn't even depress their big guns low enough to hit them! (Not to mention not being able to swivel fast enough to track them.)

What to do, what to do?

This fellow had a pretty good idea -

Capitán de Navio Fernando Villaamil Fernández-Cueto
Spanish Navy
Create another type of small combatant to fight the torpedo boats, it would be as fast and maneuverable as the torpedo boat, but would be armed with cannons as well as torpedoes. Their sole mission would be to protect the capital ships from the torpedo boats. Thus was born the torpedo boat destroyer. (You see where this is going, don't you?)

Spanish Navy torpedo gunboat Contratorpedero Destructor, designed and built in the UK by Thomson and delivered to the Spanish Navy in 1887.
Destructor's Armament
  • 1 × 90 mm gun
  • 4 × 57 mm guns
  • 2 × 37 mm guns
  • 2 × 360 mm torpedo tubes
Sadly, Capitán de Navio Fernando Villaamil Fernández-Cueto was killed in action during the Spanish-American War at the Battle of Santiago de Cuba. Perhaps fittingly, he died aboard the Spanish destroyer Furor.

Francisco Arderius, one of Furor's officers, reported Fernando Villaamil's end:
After several gunshots that caused tremendous damage and many casualties, Capitán de Navio Villaamil went up to the prow gun platform; when I was about to follow him, a grenade exploded there [...]. I could only see a flood of blood coming down. [...] Shortly after we went overboard, the ship, already on fire, sunk with the lifeless body of Don Fernando Villaamil. (Source)
Over time, the size of the torpedo boat destroyers grew - while the name got smaller. Eventually they were simply called destroyers.

With the advent of the guided missile, both anti-ship (including submarines) and anti-air, the destroyer became a major surface combatant in it's own right. Prior to that, destroyers were used in their original role of performing screening for the capital ships. In World War I their opponents were generally other destroyers. Though with larger torpedoes, they posed a large threat to capital ships. Ship captains did not like to see torpedo tracks in the water, heading their way.

In both world wars destroyers were used to escort convoys of merchant ships, protecting them from another new weapon, the submarine. That role became very large in World War II against the German and Japanese submarine fleets. The Japanese also used their destroyers very effectively against U.S. Navy submarines. While the Germans and Italian did have destroyers, many of the German destroyers were destroyed in the Norway campaign of 1940. The Italians were operating under the threat of air attacks throughout the Mediterranean. The European Axis destroyers played a smaller role than their British, American, and Japanese counterparts.

In the opening graphic, you can see the steady growth in size of the American destroyer. Those aren't all of the various American destroyer classes over time, just a representative sample from World War I (Clemson-class) to the present day. While the Spruance-class is larger than the Arleigh Burke-class, this is something of an anomaly, the same hull was used for the Ticonderoga-class (sometimes called Aegis-class) cruisers. Typically cruisers are larger than destroyers. Two ships, same hull, different missions.

The Zumwalt-class is the size of a World War II cruiser, she's a very large ship for a destroyer, one could argue that in reality, she isn't a destroyer at all. Designed primarily for land attack, with the dropping of the Advanced Gun System, she's just a big missile carrier.

Modern destroyers have vastly more capable sensors but are somewhat less well-armed than their predecessors. All those missiles are very capable but there are only so many. An anti-aircraft missile isn't very useful against a surface or submerged target. The same goes for the other missiles. Before deploying, a missile armed destroyer needs to choose its missile load-out carefully.

At least the Arleigh Burke-class still has a gun (though small) and can fire torpedoes. It has a lot of missile as well.

Destroyers are the workhorses of the fleet. Important ships for an uncertain world, there are never enough of them.




Sources and other reading:
* A capital ship is typically the largest, most effective ship in a fleet. Up until early World War II the capital ship was the armored battleship. In modern times it is the aircraft carrier, some might argue it's the nuclear powered submarine. I count both of those types as capital ships.

48 comments:

  1. The stuff ya learn here.....Japan has nine destroyer classes with another class for training....huh.... Interesting post Sarge, profiles really show the size increase over the years.

    ReplyDelete
  2. “Those aren’t all...”
    Seriously, Sarge, how could you leave out the Sumner and Gearing cans?
    Geez!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They weren't in the original graphic, otherwise they'd be in there.

      That's my excuse, lame as it might seem. But I did go looking for those, then decided (as night fell and the witching hour approached) that I had to go with what I had.

      Apologies to all of the tin can sailors who served on the Sumner and Gearing classes.

      Sorry Skip.

      Delete
    2. They were late to the game in WWII but played a big roll in Korea and Vietnam Nam.
      FRAM gave them new life.
      Also overlooked was the Forrest Sherman Class, which followed the Summers and Gearings.
      They were a lot more accommodating to crew than the earlier classes.

      Delete
    3. Overlooked? Not by me. The objective was to provide a background on the destroyer class of ship for those in the audience who didn't serve in the navy, any navy. Also how the destroyer has evolved over time.

      Delete
    4. There certainly have been a number of destroyer classes!

      Delete
  3. Big bite for small ships - but as with many things military, it's the bravery and skill of the sailors that determine how big that bite will be. Their influence in the outcome of WW I and II is out of proportion to their size - they may not have won the big battles, but they played an integral part in enabling several victories at sea in both conflicts. I think a post of Taffy 8 in the battle of Leyte Gulf would be a good way to end Destroyer Week!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They won the Battle of the Atlantic, which enabled the Normandy Invasion and allowed the resupply of the Russians keeping them in the war. Those two circumstances sealed the defeat of the Nazis.

      But...as I've said before, WWII was won by the Allies, meaning everybody from Rosie the Riveter, Pierre of the Resistance, Keith Park in the BOB, Pablo on Mindano, Sammy the Sub Dude, Dick Bong, through to Paul Tibbets, and literally, the millions of other ordinary shmoes who did their duty.

      Delete
    2. BTW, another great post. El Sargento de la fuerza aérea...

      Delete
    3. Juvat the 1st - Let us not forget Ivan Ivanovich. Without the Russians WWII would have been very different. Of course, they helped start the damned thing in Poland as well. Can't blame the Russian soldiers who simply fought hard and died in their millions, literally.

      But yup, a team effort.

      Delete
    4. (Insert grumbling about how Ivan should have been left to fight Fritz all by themselves....grumble, grumble...)
      (Insert Sarge's return grumble about 'enemy of my enemy'....grumble, grumble...)
      (Insert grumble about 'enemy of my enemy is the enemy of my enemy' and 'FDR sure loved him some socialist (Insert sound of door opening) (Insert sound of Gibb's Slap on back of Beans head)(Insert "What, what did I do?" from aforementioned Beans)(Insert sound of door closing.)
      (Insert typing on screen sound like in movies, "Keep it up and I'll come down there and give you another.")

      Delete
    5. I would say they won the Battle off Samar.

      Delete
    6. And no one who knows history would argue with you.

      Delete
  4. Good post, OldAFSarge! (rubs back of head...)

    The Torpedo Boat Destroyer originally was intended to fit a very specific role, but quickly became the do-everything ship for all sorts of details.

    But it was the advent of radio that created the radio picket role that the destroyers really took a new and critical role. No more the need for a large picket force when one can have one or two fast destroyers just shadowing or picketing a worthy target, waiting to radio updates to a larger force somewhere else. Of course, lack of radio updates was a sign also...

    As to what is a destroyer vs what is a cruiser, if I was in charge that would be easy. The role and size would determine it.

    Spruance class - well, really it's a cruiser, if you can call an Aegis shop on the same hull a cruiser.

    The Arleigh Burke is definitely a destroyer - meant to serve as a protective screening element with some offensive punch.

    Zumwalt? Cruiser. Meant to be an offensive punch more than a screening element. Why not BB? because the Zumwalt can't stand up to a slugfest of gun, bomb or missiles and still wade through and keep fighting. Sure she can probably take some damage, but she's not armored (especially with a plywood superstructure...) so she can't wade in and stay in a fight. Take out her gens and she's unable to fire anything that isn't man-carried. So Cruiser she is and in my mind will always be.

    Funny that the LCS really fits what the original Torpedo Boat Destroyer role was. A small, well armed ship meant to stick it's snout in between small fast boats and the main fleet. But, being LCS, they missed the mark, badly. (Insert grumble about warships with waterjet propulsion and not being able to shoot their popgun without sending someone up to take the railing down...grumble...grumble...)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That "small, well-armed ship" bit gave me a chuckle.

      Delete
  5. FWIW, the torpedoes carried by the Burke as anti-submarine and the WWII destroyers had anti-ship torpedoes - big difference. Also, what you want to do is drop the torpedo on the submarine from a helo - a long way away from the ship. An "over the side" shot is not preferred. Trust this former ASW Officer (on a frigate - which could be a post of its own!).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All excellent points, Tom. Those small torps don't run very far, do they?

      Delete
    2. Not every torpedo needs to be a Long Lance.

      Though it is nice to have Long Lance-like torpedoes.

      Delete
    3. True, but I'll take a Mk-48 ADCAP over that any day of the week.

      Delete
    4. OldAFSarge, the MK46 didn't go too far. You have to get them close enough for them to ping and acquire the target. The fire control panel was fed by the sonar for range and bearing. If you were on top of the sub you'd program the torpedo to go right into acquisition mode. Now, the MK48 fired from a sub is wire guided - not fire and forget. They are much larger than a MK46.

      Delete
    5. Yes Sir, I knew that. We have Mk-48 and Mk-54 mockups in the main lobby at work. Daughter was an ASWO on a Burke. ASW is known to us, first hand.

      Delete
    6. Any destroyer or cruiser that finds itself within 40,000 yards of an enemy submarine is dead. As others have pointed out, you need to get them way far away from the ship using the helo or P3/P8 and the SOSUS is just about completely gone now. About the only hope left is TAGOS and our SSNs, plus destroying the bad guys in port.

      Delete
    7. Killing them in port is the optimum solution. Submarines are a huge threat.

      Delete
  6. Hey Old AFSarge;

    I don't know why but I consider the FLetcher class the last of the true destroyers. I know...I know...I am an anachronism

    ReplyDelete
  7. Torpedo Boat Destroyers... They weren't meant to shoot the torpedo boat, were they? I'd understood they ran them down. Front end designed to run up and over the offending miscreant... Cut in twain, and rolled over it... "Ramming speed!" Or did I miss the boat on that? *snerk*

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually they were meant to shoot them. Ramming might scratch the paint, mustn't have that.

      ("miss the boat" - heh.)

      Delete
  8. Poland had a small, but busy fleet of destroyers in WW2...
    Of the 4 serving on eve of war, 3 (ORP Burza, Grom, and Blyskawica) sneaked out of Baltic and joined RN, while one (ORP Wicher) was sunk by Stukas on 3rd day of war.
    They were joined by leased RN ships, Piorun (ex-Nerissa) Garland (not renamed) and Orkan (ex-Myrmidon), and few Hunt-class DE's.
    Best thing? Blyskawica is afloat to this day, as museum ship in Gdynia.
    If you ever visit Gdansk area, must-see.
    here is her wiki page:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORP_B%C5%82yskawica
    and you can sail her in World of Warships too...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another invaluable contribution by Poland in WWII!

      Delete
  9. "...new weapon, the submarine." By WWI the submarine was hardly new, having a history going back to at least the American War of Independence, or perhaps the L. Da Vinci.

    Thanks for the post.
    Paul L. Quandt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...perhaps the L. Da Vinci." The " the " there was unneeded and wrong.

      The OGF

      Delete
    2. Paul the 1st - I'll semi-disagree with you there Paul, the submarine didn't become a viable weapons system until WWI. In those terms it was a "new" weapon. The concept had been around a long time, just never effective.

      Delete
    3. Paul the 2nd - No worries mate, call it a typo.

      Delete
    4. I agree that the submarine did not become an effective weapon until the early 20th century, but earlier vessels did cause damage and in one case sank an enemy ship. Albeit at the loss of sub and crew.

      Paul

      Delete
    5. One-off events don't make a useful weapon system. The potential wasn't there until the technology got better.

      Delete
  10. "...if I was in charge..." Andrew: ' were ', that is the subjunctive tense.

    The OGF

    ReplyDelete
  11. That Zumwalt is a big-azz destroyer. Although I'm not sure when it's going to be doing anything destructive. Seems like they've been welded to the pier down on NAVSTA SD. I think we got it out of the ship yard a little prematurely, so these ships are in the Navy NICU, getting all the final work done pierside. I could be wrong though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Soon to be joined by the utterly useless USS Ford which should not have been accepted by the navy in the state it's in.

      Delete
    2. Cap'n - Even Congress is starting to notice, that's how bad things are with Ford.

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)
Can't be nice, go somewhere else...

NOTE: Comments on posts over 5 days old go into moderation, automatically.