Shipbucket

Even within these limits, the DG design varied considerably. At first it was to have an austere sonar suite with provision for landing, but not stowing, a helicopter. The missile launcher would be the new Mk 26 Mod 1, which could fire ASROC as well as the Standard missile; austerity measures included the deletion of the SPS-49 two-dimensional radar. Those objecting said that so valuable a ship should have at least two launchers, and the design was recast to show two Mk-13 launchers, with 40 missiles each-- but without ASROC capability. LAMPS and an SPS-49 were added, and by early 1973 the DG displaced 6,161 tons fully loaded and was to cost $136.1 million (follow-on ship), both of which figures exceeded Admiral Zumwalt's limits.

This was not entirely satisfactory. Although compact, the Mk 13 launcher severely limited the dimensions of the missiles it could accommodate, and thus left little room for growth in the Standard missile, or indeed for replacement of that weapon by some alternative, such as the blended rocket-ramjet then being discussed. Nor was it suited to nuclear weapons, which in earlier SAM systems had been considered and important means of breaking up mass attacks. Thus early in 1973 DG development shifted once more to the Mk 26, this time in its Mod 2 (64-missile) version. The DG now fell within the displacement limit (5,884 tons fully loaded), although its estimated cost rose to about $200 million, which merely foreshadowed the explosive cost escalation to come.

As an aside, is there any chance that the Mk-32 Torpedo Tubes could have been mounted partially inside the superstructure? The more I look at it, they can't fit where I've put them. Maybe it needs a door or such.

In the Spruance DD (built 1972-1981...), the TT were into the side hull.....not ?