Shipbucket

I'd be very fond of the idea of dropping a few 5/38 turrets (probably the forward beam ones) and replacing them with RAM in tubs. You've already got more than enough 5/38 for gunfire support (USN apparently figured four turrets on an Iowa was enough). A few more RAM would be infinitely more valuable for staving off SSM-related conflagration and/or death, and removing forty or sixty men is pretty worthwhile from a cost standpoint. Just seal off the 5/38 magazines forward, or use them for enlarged berthing spaces if you would like some breathing room. It'd go a very long way to improving habitability, a persistent concern of most post-WW2 free world navies.

In terms of RAM guidance, it just ties into SSDS, and would fire mostly on (I think) SLQ-32 reception bearings. Something like TAS Mk 23 or SPS-58/65 low-flier detection set would go a long way toward improving the situation. Perhaps replace the mainmast SPS-67 with one of these?

Some equivalent of NSSM might be nice (I have a little unsourceable voice in the back of my head that says the only reason the Iowas didn't get NSSM was because of blast damage, which would obviously be less severe with 12" versus 16"), but I certainly understand if the DREAD GOD OF AUSTERITY would not allow them.

What do the SPS-58/65 and TAS Mk23 look like? I've never heard of them before.

I'm drawing a blank on NSSM as well...

Naval Sea Sparrow Missile. It's the version of Sea Sparrow with folding wings that came before the 'Totally not a new missile so Congress won't freak' ESSM came into service. The earlier non-folding wing Sea Sparrows were used in the Basic Point Defense Missile System (and some even had manually directed guidance radars).

I think it is supposed to be NATO Sea Sparrow Missile...

The Hughes Target Acquisition System (TAS) Mk 23 is designed to react automatically to incoming antiship cruise missiles, designating them to a Sea Sparrow illuminator (Mk 91 or Mk 115) and engaging them... in effect the TAS is an antiaircraft combat system (excluding missile fire control directors, which it controls) for a small ship; it can also be integrated into the fire control system of a larger unit. Its L-band pulse-doppler radar has no separate designation, but the system as a whole goes considerably beyond that visible element... Mk 23 was tested at sea aboard the frigate Downes in 1975... The TAS radar is designed for short-range operation in severe clutter and jamming; it requires high precision for good designation accuracy and, in turn, rapid lock-on of weapon fire control systems, as well as a low false-target rate, since the number of defensive weapons is quite limited. There is also a requirement for very fast switching on and off (in fact in milliseconds) to permit fleet operation in EMCON (RF Emission Control). The linear array antenna scans at 30rpm; it is mounted back-to-back with an IFF antenna on a stabilized platform: it is 14ft wide, for a horizontal beam width of about 3deg. Vertical beam-width is 75°, for gapless coverage of diving and sea-skimming approaching missiles. Total weight is 10,000 lb (2000 lb topside). There are four operating modes: normal, with an instrumented range of over 20nm, to employ point defense missiles; medium range, for radar surveillance, with an instrumented range of over 90nm (this also provides aircraft control capability)... Once a target has been detected, the IFF system determines whether it is friendly, and the associated UYK-20 computer determines whether it is a threat and when it can be engaged... In the frigate Downes the TAS radar has completely replaced the SPS-40 air search radar formerly installed.

L-band pulse-doppler air search target acquisition radar to work with the Point Defense Missile System. It was developed at high priority after the sinking of the Israeli destroyer Eilat by Egyptian 'Styx' missiles in 1967... Throughout the design the emphasis was on simplicity and low cost, in contrast to the Hughes Target Acquisition System. Construction is modular for maximum standardization, with two alternative antennas: a large stabilized, 16ft, horn-fed ellipse and a lightweight antenna, essentially SPS-10 with a dual feed permitting duplex operation. SPS-58 and -58B use the large antenna, the latter having no display but rather feeding directly into NTDS; -58A and -58C are analogous systems duplexing with SPS-10. There is also a new 9ft 6in planar array antenna. MTI is used to exclude clutter, and improvements in that direction continue to be made. Current production versions are designated SPS-65. Westinghouse.

Regarding the surface search set, I mean... it's not really a very attractive situation, is it?

If nothing else, on a high-value combatant that by necessity will be operating in the littorals, I'd really like to have a higher vantage point and clearer field of view for periscope detection.

One idea might be to replace both of the dog-dish OE-82 SATCOM units with SPS-67, and relocate the SATCOM dishes to lower (but clear-overhead) vantage points. One might fit nicely right on the pilothouse where SPS-67 sits now. Maybe two more bracketed to either side of the stack? The current after SPS-67 (or whatever it is) could then be a SPS-65 or a TAS Mk 23.

This might help arrangement, by the way: SPS-67 has a 113" swung diameter, which means the antenna you're using is substantially oversize!

Yes, agreed. However this brings me to another question: this ship would not be operating alone but rather with a supporting group of destroyers and frigates. Wouldn't they be responsible primarily for ASW?

Interesting to note, I had wondered why that radar was so damn big. I just used the same one from the parts sheets assuming (wrongly I guess) that all the modern ship drawers had checked it. I guess not everyone is as thorough as I am!

I would live in tremendous fear of an opportunistic SSK being in the right place at the right time and sitting silent on the bottom until something loud and tasty-sounding went by. There's no absolute answer to this problem (short of moving slowly with a bunch of ROVs in support), but at least you might hope to see a scope go up. The threat isn't worth a DD-level ASW suite, by any means, but relocating a surface search set is a fairly low ship-impact move.