Farragut-class destroyer (1934)

The ''Farragut''-class destroyers were a class of eight 1,365-ton destroyers in the United States Navy and the first US destroyers of post-World War I design. Their construction, along with the , was authorized by Congress on 29 April 1916, but funding was delayed considerably. Limited to 1,500 tons standard displacement by the provisions of the London Naval Treaty of 1930, the ships were laid down beginning in 1932 and were completed by 1935. After 12 years since the last of the previous class of American destroyers (the ) was commissioned, the ''Farragut''s were commissioned in 1934 and 1935.

These ships were slightly larger than their predecessors, faster, and they had only two stacks, versus the four stacks common to all the earlier classes. The class was the first of six classes of 1,500-ton destroyers built in the 1930s to modernize the United States Navy, and all eight ''Farragut''s saw extensive front-line service during World War II. None were lost in battle, although only five survived the war. After numerous incremental improvements, the 1,500-tonners were succeeded by the 2,100-ton , which was not subject to treaty restrictions.

Design

The ''Farragut''s were a considerable improvement from previous destroyers, taking advantage of technological advances during the 12-year gap in destroyer production. The impact of aircraft on naval warfare was reflected in their heavy dual-purpose main gun armament. They also had greatly improved machinery and greater fuel capacity that extended their range to as opposed to the ''Clemson''s . Their larger size and improved habitability soon earned them the nickname of "goldplaters" from the crews of older destroyers.

The list of desired improvements compiled from the operational experience of the earlier and ''Clemson'' classes was both long and comprehensive. Both classes had pointed sterns that deeply dug into the water, greatly increasing turning diameter.Friedman, p.46 This was addressed with the transom stern design of the ''Farragut'' class. The previous classes were flush deck designs; while providing good hull strength, this proved to be wet in high seas. This was addressed with the raised forecastle employed on the ''Farragut'' class. Cruising range on both the ''Wickes'' and ''Clemson'' classes had been a constant affliction of commanders; the ''Clemson''s had been built with wing tanks giving better range, but at the cost of having high mounted fuel oil on both sides—a decidedly vulnerable feature in a ship without an armored belt such as a destroyer.Friedman, p.44 The ''Farragut'' class corrected this range deficiency by having a design range of as opposed to the ''Clemson's'' . Steady improvements to both boilers and steam turbines in the years between the ''Clemson'' and ''Farragut'' designs allowed this improved range, along with greater speed and a reduction from 4 to 2 stacks.

The success of the efforts become clear with the testimony of Rear Admiral Emory S. Land, head of the Bureau of Construction and Repair, to the General Board, comparing the ''Farragut'' class to the ''Wickes'' and ''Clemson'' classes. Those advantages were:
*The ''Farragut'' class was 3.3 knots faster.
*The class had double the GM height (resulting in greater initial stability).
*They had 25% more armament—5 main guns rather than 4—and about 35% greater firepower, mounting /38 caliber guns (Mark 12) as opposed to the 4 in (102 mm)/50 caliber gun (Mark 9) mounted on most previous destroyers.
*All 8 torpedo tubes were on the preferred centerline position.
*The guns were fed by power hoist from the magazines.
*Being high-freeboard vessels, sea-keeping was much improved over the flush deckers that preceded it.
*The radius of action increased by .

This had all been accomplished on a displacement rise of only 22%.

The ''Farragut''-class destroyers were considered unstable in heavy weather and in turns. This was compounded by war-time modifications that made them even more top-heavy. Two of the destroyers, ''Hull'' and ''Monaghan'', sank as a result of the December 1944 typhoon. One of the survivors stated

A court of inquiry after the loss concluded that hebasic stability of the ''Farragut''-class ships "is materially less than other destroyers."

Engineering

The ''Farragut''-class propulsion plant was considerably improved over the ''Clemson''-class. Steam pressure and temperature were raised from saturated steam to steam superheated to . Superheated steam increased the efficiency of the turbines, improving the ships' range. This was the first use of superheaters in a US destroyer. Economizers were also fitted; these used boiler exhaust gas to preheat the feedwater before it entered the boiler; these increased the ships' range by requiring less fuel to boil the water to steam.Friedman, p. 88 The ''Farragut''s turbines were Parsons-type reaction turbines manufactured by Bethlehem Steel. Each main turbine was divided into a high-pressure and a low-pressure turbine feeding into a common reduction gear to drive a shaft, in a similar manner to the machinery illustrated below and at the following reference. This general arrangement became standard for most subsequent steam-powered surface ships of the US Navy. Single-reduction gearing (as in the ''Clemson''s) was used on the ''Farragut''s; the s and later classes had double-reduction gearing, which reduced the required size of the (then faster spinning) turbines still further.

Armament

*As built: These were the first US destroyers with a dual-purpose main armament. They received five of the then-new /38cal gun (Mark 12), installed in Mark 21 dual-purpose single mounts. The forward two mounts (numbered 51 and 52) were partially enclosed with lightly-armored open-back shields. (''see picture'') The midships mount (No 53) and the after two mounts (numbers 54 and 55) were open. Unlike subsequent five-gun US destroyers, mount 53 was immediately aft of the stacks. An important feature was the dual-purpose Mark 33 director above the bridge, which coordinated the fire of the 5 inch guns against both ships and aircraft. By late 1942, radio proximity fuses (VT fuses) would make the guns much more effective against aircraft. Just aft of mount 53 were two trainable torpedo tube quad-mounts (with four tubes on each mount), one abaft the other. The class was initially equipped with the Mark 8 torpedo, which was replaced by the Mark 15 torpedo beginning in 1938. On the 02 level, aft of mount 52, there were two single .50 cal (12.7mm) machine gun (MG) mounts next to the port and starboard rails. Two more .50 cal MGs were on the main deck, midships.
*c 1943: Due to the need for greater light anti-aircraft (AA) protection that emerged following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the .50 cal MGs and Mount 53 were replaced by 20 mm and 40 mm AA weapons. The type and quantity varied from ship to ship depending on when and where they were refitted. Also, roll-off depth charge racks were added to the stern, along with four K-gun depth charge throwers.Gardiner and Chesneau, p. 125 One source states the depth charge racks were added in 1936.

Service

All ships were present at the attack on Pearl Harbor, where sank a Japanese midget submarine. Three of the class were lost in the war: ran aground in Alaskan waters in January 1943 and became a total loss, while and ''Monaghan'' were lost in Typhoon Cobra in December 1944. The remaining five ships survived World War II; they were broken up for scrap shortly after the end of the war.

Ships in class

See also

*
* List of destroyer classes of the United States Navy
* List of United States Navy losses in World War II

References

Citations

Sources

*
*
*
*

External links

''Farragut''-class destroyers
a
Destroyer History Foundation

"Goldplater" destroyers
a
Destroyer History Foundation

Comparison of 1500-ton classes
a
Destroyer History Foundation

USS ''Farragut'' (DD-348) General Information Book with as-built data
a
Destroyer History Foundation


* ttp://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm NavSource Destroyer Photo Index Page*

{{Authority control

Destroyer classes