 CL-154 class concept September 1945 - approximation | |
| Class overview | |
|---|---|
| Name | CL-154 class |
| Operators |  United States Navy |
| Preceded by | Juneau class |
| Succeeded by | None |
| Planned | 6 |
| Completed | 0 |
| General characteristics September 1945[1] | |
| Class & type | Light cruiser |
| Displacement | 11,950 tons (full load) |
| Length | 610 ft 0 in (185.9 m) |
| Propulsion |
|
| Speed | 34.5knots (63.9 km/h; 39.7 mph) |
| Armament |
|
TheCL-154 class of 5-inch (127 mm) gunlight cruisers was aUnited States Navy project from the last two years ofWorld War II, with antecedents reaching back to 1938 and earlier. The CL-154 class was contemporary to the 6-inch (152 mm) gunWorcester-class light cruisers and the 8-inch (203 mm) gunDes Moines-class heavy cruisers: like them the CL-154 design incorporated thelessons learned through World War II combat. The Navy allocated six hull numbers (CL-154 through CL-159) to the CL-154 class for the planned construction, but unlike theWorcester andDes Moines classes the CL-154 class would be cancelled with no units named or constructed. Had these ships been built, they would have been given thehull classificationCLAA (anti-aircraft light cruiser) on 18 March 1949.
_steaming_at_high_speed%2c_circa_in_November_1941_(NH_57455).jpg)
The CL-154 class was the final attempt to build a "super-Atlanta-class cruiser" by replacing theAtlanta's5-inch/38-caliber gun with the new5-inch/54-caliber Mark 16 gun. The new gun had a higher rate of fire and a longer range than the 38-caliber gun, and fired a heavier and more destructive projectile; the only downside to the new gun was a heavier mount, faster barrel wear, and greater crew fatigue if forced into manually loading.[2][3] It was slated for installation in the projectedMontana-classbattleships, and its developer, the Navy'sBureau of Ordnance / BuOrd desired to find additional applications for it. A light cruiser installation for the new gun similar in design to theAtlanta class was naturally attractive to BuOrd.[4][5]
The 1936Second London Naval Treaty imposed limits that resulted in theAtlanta class with the 5-inch/38-caliber gundual purpose rapid fire main gun battery, the first such ship in the Navy.[6]
The first attempt to design a super-Atlanta using the 5-inch/54-caliber Mark 16 gun was the "Cruiser-Destroyer", or CLD of 1938.[7] The name reflected an intended minor role of theAtlanta class as adestroyerflotilla leader. The design study ended in 1940 without any ships started due to more pressing priorities.[8] The "ship characteristics" resulting from the study would be almost identical to that of the later CL-154 design.[9]
When the United Statesentered World War II the 5-inch gunAtlanta class was under construction: eightAtlanta-class ships would ultimately be completed. As the Navy gained experience with combat conditions, it was decided that theAtlantas needed improvement. However, major improvements would cause unacceptable delays in the construction programs.[10] It was decided that theAtlantas and other cruisers would be succeeded by two new generations, an "interim" generation with minor improvements that were easily added during the war, and a later generation near the war's end which would incorporate major improvements including new gun types.[11]
_underway_on_1_July_1951_(NH_96890).jpg)
The"interim" generation would include the 5-inch gunJuneau class. By late 1944 the Navy had realized that the ship construction program could be cut back due to the near-total destruction of theImperial Japanese Navy. The number of the ships of this generation would be small in comparison to the previous generation: only threeJuneau-class ships were completed.[12]
The later (and as it would turn out)final generation of gun cruisers met the same fate as the "interim" generation: only a handful were completed. The German introduction ofanti-ship guided missiles and the Japanese use ofkamikaze attacks (which were in effect missiles guided under direct human control) made all anti-aircraft guns smaller than the 3-inch gun obsolete and increased pressure to adopt 5- and 6-inch dual purpose (DP) guns which were capable of attacking both airborne and surface targets at longer ranges and with higher rates of fire. BuOrd had begun development of such gun designs in the 1930s, including the 5-inch/54-caliber Mark 16, and had continued to push for ships that would act astestbeds for their new guns. The Navy agreed in the waning days of World War II to construct a small number of cruisers for this purpose, including the 5-inch gun CL-154 class.[13] Initially the Navy wanted at least one squadron of six ships of each class, but in the end only twoWorcester-class and threeDes Moines-class cruisers would be completed, and the CL-154 class would be cancelled in its entirety.[14]
BuOrd had again proposed a 5-inch/54 caliber gun cruiser in June 1942, and theBureau of Ships / BuShips noted that two unfinishedAtlanta-class hulls could be converted if one less turret was installed and other compensations were made (for example, increasing the beam of the ships by a foot, or reducing the armor thickness).[15] TheGeneral Board killed the proposal two months later largely on logistical grounds (i.e., the difficulties of adding a new ammunition type to the fleets).[16]
The General Board began to reconsider in the spring of 1944. BuShips noted that the as-yet unlaunchedJuneau class was already overweight despite every effort to reduce it, which meant a larger hull would be required for any follow-on design, and that projected improvements in aircraft would likely make the move to the 5-inch/54 caliber gun necessary.[17] BuShips presentations of design studies to the General Board in October and then December 1944[18] showed it was extremely difficult to design a cruiser with adequate armor on a hull displacement large enough to accommodate six or eight twin 5-inch/54 caliber gun mounts plus a robust secondary battery, but small enough to obtain a 35-knot (65 km/h; 40 mph) speed on two propellers; more propellers would have meant an even larger and more expensive ship, an unacceptable result. Still, six hull numbers were allocated to the project at this time, CL-154 through CL-159.[17]
The CL-154 class was cancelled on 27 March 1945 due to broad naval budget cuts ordered byPresidentFranklin D. Roosevelt, butSecretary of the NavyJames Forrestal reinstated the design study on 10 May 1945 in recognition of theAtlanta class's successful history of screening carriers from air attack.[19] In June 1945 BuOrd ranked the 5-inch gun for the CL-154 class as their sixth top priority.[20] The newShip Characteristics Board / SCB set the final ship characteristics for the class in September 1945, which included dropping the20 mm and40 mm secondary batteries in favor of six or eight dual mounts of the new3"/70 Mark 26 gun. Weeks later the SCB recommended the class be cancelled oncost-effectiveness grounds. The projected ship would be expensive, equal to the cost of two proposed destroyers with similar armament, a proposal that would become theMitscher-class destroyers (but eventually with the single mount5"/54 caliber Mark 42 gun instead of the dual mount 5"/54 caliber Mark 16): the two destroyers would be more operationally flexible and survivable than – but with only two-thirds of the volume of fire of – the one cruiser. No further action was taken.[1]