• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

FFG(X)

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,610
Reaction score
1,762
WWII DE names might be a good source. Ships from the Taffy force for stance.
What was the Taffy force, never heard of that one?
Short version: TAFFY 3 was one of three groups of escort carriers and their DD/DE escorts off Leyte in the Philippines in 1944. The Japanese launched a last-ditch effort to get at the US landing force invading the Philippines. Halsey's Third Fleet with all the fleet carriers was supposed to be covering, but was decoyed out of the way. What was left was three groups of escort carriers and their tin cans, a mix of DDs and DEs (plus some slow battleships in the bombardment force). TAAFFY 3 was six CVEs, three DDs, and four DEs, up against 23 Japanese ships, inclulding 4 battleships and six heavy cruisers. TAFFY 3's escorts and aircraft made a series of nearly suicidal torpedo and gun attacks on the Japanese to cover the withdrawal of the escort carriers; their combined efforts actually sank multiple cruisers and convinced the Japanese commanders that they had run into a force of USN heavy cruisers at least. The Japanese turned away, but TAFFY 3 was nearly obliterated, with two carriers and three escorts sunk, others badly damaged, and over 1000 dead. But they kept the Japanese out of the invasion force, where they could have slaughtered tens of thousands of Marines on their transports.

 
Last edited:

SSgtC

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
623
Reaction score
924
WWII DE names might be a good source. Ships from the Taffy force for stance.
What was the Taffy force, never heard of that one?
Short version: TAFFY 3 was one of three groups of escort carriers and their DD/DE escorts off Leyte in the Philippines in 1944. The Japanese launched a last-ditch effort to get at the US landing force invading the Philippines. Halsey's Third Fleet with all the fleet carriers was supposed to be covering, but was decoyed out of the way. What was left was three groups of escort carriers and their tin cans, a mix of DDs and DEs (plus some slow battleships in the bombardment force). TAAFFY 3 was six CVEs, three DDs, and four DEs, up against 23 Japanese ships, inclulding 4 battleships and six heavy cruisers. TAFFY 3's escorts and aircraft made a series of nearly suicidal torpedo and gun attacks on the Japanese to cover the withdrawal of the escort carriers; their combined efforts actually sank multiple cruisers and convinced the Japanese commanders that they had run into a force of USN heavy cruisers at least. The Japanese turned away, but TAFFY 3 was nearly obliterated, with two carriers and three escorts sunk, others badly damaged, and over 1000 dead. But they kept the Japanese out of the invasion force, where they could have slaughtered tens of thousands of Marines on their transports.

That fight is one of the big reasons why CV-32 was renamed Leyte. Those ships and men fought their hearts out and gave every last ounce they had.
 

1635yankee

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
52
Reaction score
52
WWII DE names might be a good source. Ships from the Taffy force for stance.
What was the Taffy force, never heard of that one?
See, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar

"Taffy 1," "Taffy 2," and "Taffy 3" were the sub-units of Task Group 77.4 at the Battle off Samar. Taffy 3 comprised 3 Fletcher class destroyers and 4 destroyer escorts with a total of about 23 5"/38 guns and a total of about 40 torpedoes. They quite literally charged a much more powerful Japanese force, which included at least one battleship, heavy and light cruisers, and destroyers.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,046
Reaction score
3,854

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,610
Reaction score
1,762

From this link, the latest Fincantieri FFG(X) data sheet.
 

Attachments

  • Fincantieri data sheet.png
    Fincantieri data sheet.png
    550.2 KB · Views: 111

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
418
This is a good podcast that covers the program and where the yard is at with its investments. Also discussed is the potential of a second yard to be brought along if and when they look to expand the class or accelerate deliveries.

 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,610
Reaction score
1,762
Slightly different angle (and not so good a render) but it shows off the NSM installation with 16 rounds.
 

Attachments

  • Constellation-class-Frigate-US-Navy-Fincantieri-2-1.jpg
    Constellation-class-Frigate-US-Navy-Fincantieri-2-1.jpg
    104.7 KB · Views: 96

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,046
Reaction score
3,854

On frigate, Filling said the program formally kicked off before Congress passed the FY 2020 defense bill, so it wasn’t bound by the new requirements. Still, he said, the Navy had already been moving in a similar direction, and so the frigate development plan gives a glimpse of what’s to come for DDG(X).

One of the most important things the frigate program did was craft the capability development document at the Navy level instead of with the Joint Staff. This allowed the Navy to share detailed specifications with potential shipbuilders from the start, and as shipbuilders proposed ideas that could drive down cost or boost performance, the Navy on its own could update requirements in both the CDD and the specifications. Filling said the end result was a design that is affordable, producible and ensured the shipbuilder’s voice was captured in the process.

“Right now at the maneuvering and seakeeping basin out at Carderock there is a segmented frigate model running in the basin right now, running alongside several other surface ships, so it’s good to see a surface ship renaissance out there at Carderock,” he said.

Even though the Constellation-class (FFG-62) design is based off the FREMM multi-mission frigate operated by the French and Italian navies, the length and beam were increased to meet Navy specifications, so the altered hull will need to go through testing to ensure the new dimensions are effective on the high seas, Filling said.

Filling also said he and his counterparts at NAVSEA’s engineering directorate (SEA 05) were conducting formal Systems Engineering Technical Reviews (SETRs) on frigate components. Frigate contractor Fincantieri brought with it many of its original equipment manufacturers, but the Navy is still conducting a full detail design process to ensure that, as some components are moved to U.S.-based manufacturing plants or swapped for new American components, the systems still work well together in the final frigate design.

Because the frigate program started before the FY 2020 defense bill passed, it is not technically required to create a land-based engineering site – but Filling said the Navy is making plans right now to set one up at Naval Surface Warfare Center Philadelphia, where most of the other LBESs will be located.

“Maybe [we’re] a little bit behind where we’d like to be in the newly envisioned STA process, but we’re working fast to get that done,” he said of building an LBES to support the frigate program.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
3,363
Reaction score
2,148
Apparently Greek shipbuilding industry is being offered cooperation with the FFG(X) program, as well as a chance to build the hulls for three of four planned MMSCs. I suspect this is a plan to establish basically a lead-follow relationship between Marinette and Onex and prepare the Greek yard to build the MMSCs and then some FFG(X) for the Greek Navy in the future. (And I'll bet the European FREMM builders are thrilled about that idea...) I guess this could be part of the "Joint Strike Frigate' concept above, though it is basically a conventional shipbuilding-for-export co-production model, not some radical new idea.

Greek seems to have chosen the French Frigats in a €5b deal
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,610
Reaction score
1,762
Timing is probably better for Greece, if nothing else. MMSC isn't a great fit for their needs and Belharra is probably available sooner than FFG(X). getting a couple of LaFayettes is definitely useful.

Do we know if the drawing with armament and so forth in the article is specific to the Greek examples?
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
418
The shipbuilder also has an official render of the final configuration on its website -

 

Similar threads

Top