US Navy Littorals are cracking.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

ISTR we didn't have problems like this with the Fletchers and Sumners we flooded the world's oceans with during WWII...

According to Wikipedia, the Fletchers and these new LCS were about the same displacement…. THAT IS CRAZY.

There are so many places that a modern Fletcher would kick ass, with 5 independently controllable 5 inch fast firing guns - never mind the 40mm and 20mm guns, and swap out the torpedo mounts for some vertical launch tubes…. F the helicopter. Use them as dedicated body-guards for ships transiting the Straits of Hormuz…. Let the IRG run their little speed boats. Put a re-enforced bow on them so that they can ram stuff….

[Diamondback]

According to Wikipedia, the Fletchers and these new LCS were about the same displacement…. THAT IS CRAZY.

There are so many places that a modern Fletcher would kick ass, with 5 independently controllable 5 inch fast firing guns - never mind the 40mm and 20mm guns, and swap out the torpedo mounts for some vertical launch tubes…. F the helicopter. Use them as dedicated body-guards for ships transiting the Straits of Hormuz…. Let the IRG run their little speed boats. Put a re-enforced bow on them so that they can ram stuff….

Even the Sumner with three independent mounts of dual 5"/38DP... I'd frankly use the Sumner hull as a base to build on, specifically a Gearing II FRAM, as those were a longer and beamier evolution of the Fletcher-Sumner lineage.

And yeah, warships have grown, a modern DD is about the same tonnage as a WWII light cruiser like an Atlanta, some as heavy as a Brooklyn. (Admittedly, Atlanta was first meant as a "super-destroyer" to lead destroyer squadrons, something akin to the older Porter/Somers "Destroyer Leaders" and Omha CL's in that role but bigger; then they got pressed into service in cruiser divisions packing depth charges and torpedo tubes with disastrous results (Sullivans disaster for one) then they found their niche as antiair specialists.

Hmmm... modernize an Atlanta. Reinstall the original wing turrets, replace the C and X (inner centerline) mounts with VLS, swap on Goalkeepers in place of some of the Bofors mounts...

[sndt1319]

Can someone explain the difference between the 5” guns on a ship and say a M777 155mm in terms of range, damage, ext….

[Diamondback]

Can someone explain the difference between the 5” guns on a ship and say a M777 155mm in terms of range, damage, ext….

If nobody beats me to the punch, once I get back to the laptop after today's errands I'll go over to NAVWEAPS and get you some answers. Are we talking today's 5" mounts or the old "gold standard" in the WWII 5" Dual-Purpose? (If you remember Under Siege, these were the guns that fired star shells in that.)

[sndt1319]

I guess I don’t get the design difference between Naval guns and land based systems. Why not shared tube or round design. I get why the loading mechanisms would be different but they both use separated ammo right?

[Diamondback]

I guess I don’t get the design difference between Naval guns and land based systems. Why not shared tube or round design. I get why the loading mechanisms would be different but they both use separated ammo right?

In a nutshell, at a given bore diameter a Naval or Coast Artillery gun will have a longer barrel, a longer and heavier projectile and more powder charge per shot than its land counterpart. Field artillery is constrained by the needs of being portable, while a ship mount has relatively more room to expand the weapons system's space footprint, manpower etc. for better performance.

As an aside, at the end of the Coast Artillery era, most sites were using Navy-built ship guns and turrets transferred to Army operation after being emplaced on permanent land sites. (Ft DeRussy museum in Honolulu has a good presentation of this.)

[Business_Casual]

I guess I don’t get the design difference between Naval guns and land based systems. Why not shared tube or round design. I get why the loading mechanisms would be different but they both use separated ammo right?

Different target set.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

The modern 5inch guns are water cooled too, IIRC.

[Diamondback]

All that said, the Germans took the turret off one of their PzH 2000 self-propelled howitzers and plopped it onto a ship, and considered it a successful test for a Naval Gunfire Support role despite not deploying the combination.

[Diamondback]

Can someone explain the difference between the 5” guns on a ship and say a M777 155mm in terms of range, damage, ext….

Head to head...

M777
Caliber: 155mm
Barrel length in calibers: ~33
MV: 2710fps
Range & weight (M982 Excalibur round) 25mi / 106lb

Mk 51 AGS 155mm/62 (Zumwalt)
Caliber: 155mm
Barrel length in calibers: 62
MV: 2707fps
Range & weight (cancelled LRLAP round) 100nm / 225lb