Beginning in World War II, the United States has provided warships to a number of allied nations. A cruiser, 37 escort carriers, 50 destroyers, 9 submarines, and hundreds of frigates (DE and PF types), patrol craft, torpedo boats, minesweepers, landing ships and craft, and auxiliary ships went to foreign navies during the 1939-45 conflict. After the war, the U- S. Navy was able to support the rebuilding of several nations’ navies, including those of Germany and Japan, by supplying ships.
A massive program of small combatants built for foreign navies was initiated during the Korean War (1950- 53). Of particular significance were the large numbers of minesweepers produced in U. S. shipyards. Many of these ocean (MSO). coastal (MSC), and inshore (MSI) minesweepers went directly to foreign navies, while others went after some U. S. Navy service. Some of these ships survive in foreign service today, including several under the French tricolor.
However, the rate of transfer of ships—new and used—to foreign navies slowed in the 1960s. The number surviving war-era ships available for transfer declined, few new-construction U. S. ships were suitable or affordable for the smaller foreign navies, and foreign shipyards began producing innovative and highly capable ships. Shipyards and design agencies in France, Britain, and West Germany were particularly successful in the areas of diesel-electric submarines and small combatants armed with antiship missiles. An interesting second order effort emerged from Israel which, after buying German-designed, French-built missile boats of the Saar class, has developed improved designs, armed with the indigenous Gabriel antiship missile. One of these designs—the Reshef—has been built in Haifa and Durban for the South African Navy, and ships of this class are serving in the Chilean Navy.
In this environment, an impression has evolved in some quarters that the United States is unable to compete in the worldwide modernization of naval forces. This image is abetted by higher U. S. labor costs and a lack of interest by the U. S. Navy in small and coastal combatants in the post-Vietnam era.* However, U. S. naval systems and, in several instances, warships or their designs have been most successful on the foreign market during the past two decades.
As foreign yards began major construction programs for their own navies, they tended to continue to rely on U. S. weapons and sensors. In many instances, these systems were too complex or expensive for local development, or in many situations the U. S. system was the best available. Thus, many foreign-built warships can be seen with Mk-32 torpedo tubes (firing Mk-44 and later Mk-46 ASW torpedoes), Mk-42 5-inch guns, ASROC rocket launchers, and U. S. radars and fire control systems.
Although U. S. development lagged in antiship missile development, the U. S. Navy led the world in antiaircraft missile development. Italy and the Netherlands purchased Northern Ordnance Mk-10 Terrier systems for cruisers, while France, Italy, and Japan acquired the firm's Mk-13 Tartar system for their destroyers.
With these missile systems went associated radars and fire control groups, with the antennae for AN/SPS- 52 and -39 radars being prominent today on several foreign warships. (In addition, West Germany and Australia purchased Charles F. Adams [DDG-2]-class destroyers with Mk-13 Tartar systems, while General Dynamics Tartar antiship missiles were provided to Iran for use on board former U. S. destroyers in that country’s navy.)
The antiship missile threat led the U. S. Navy to belatedly adopt the Sparrow air-to-air missile for ship defense. This missile, in use by many NATO and other allied armed forces, was thus a natural for a multinational program, and the Raytheon NATO Sea Sparrow evolved, which is now found in numerous U. S. warships as well as those of other navies. Some multinational programs were not as successful. For example, the Pegasus (PHM-1) hydrofoil design was to have been a joint effort with the West German and Italian navies, but the post- Zumwalt reduction in the U. S. effort ended that plan, and no foreign units of this type have been constructed.
During the past few years, four of the U. S. Navy’s most advanced weapons have appeared in foreign service. The most publicized was the Hughes Phoenix long-range, air-to-air missile, supplied to the Iranian Air Force for its F-14A Tomcat fighters. The fall of the Shah in 1979 compromised that weapon, pointing out the potential dangers of giving advanced weapons to Third World nations, even those with friendly, relatively stable governments.
The U. S. Navy's late entry into the antiship missile field, the McDonnell Douglas Harpoon, was rapidly made available to several foreign navies. At this writing, more than 75 foreign surface ships and some British attack submarines are armed with Harpoon. The General Dynamics Phalanx close- in weapon system (CIWS), which made its operational debut in the U. S. Navy on board several aircraft carriers in late 1980, has already been fitted in a Japanese destroyer and Saudi gunboats, with more of the Gatling- type guns to follow on other foreign ships. Finally, the new Gould Mk-48 torpedo is being sold to Australia for use on board that navy’s six Oberon- class submarines.
Beyond the U. S. weapons and sensors that are readily visible on foreign warships, two other U. S. systems have become widely used in foreign navies. First, the Aerojet AN/SLQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo countermeasures system is being fitted in several foreign ships. Second, the General Electric LM2500 gas turbine propels a large number of foreign warships and small combatants.
Several reasons are apparent for this widespread use of U. S. systems by foreign navies. First, buying into major U. S. production programs reduces the foreign nation's development costs while providing first-line systems. Second, a vital component in weapons and sensors in the electronics-computer era has been "software.” U. S. producers provide full software packages, saving the users time and costs. Finally, U. S. Navy- sponsored programs generally include development of related training, logistics and maintenance support, and in some cases, training hardware, another time and cost savings for a foreign buyer. Indeed, these U. S. software and support packages are often far superior to those available anywhere else in the West.
The widespread use of U. S.-developed ship systems has overshadowed the fact that several nations have bought U. S. ships and ship designs during the past few years. The largest of these is the sea control ship (SCS), a V/STOL carrier design from the Zumwalt era that was not built by the U. S. Navy. Spain is building an SCS, the Canarias, of about 14,500 tons standard. This ship will replace the U. S.-built light carrier Cabot (CVL-28), which has served the Spanish Navy as the Dedalo since 1967.
Spain also proposed to build a ship of this design for the Australian Navy in competition with a proposal from the Litton/Ingalls shipyard for an updated Iwo Jima (LPH-2)-class helicopter ship. Interestingly, the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) has stipulated that both ships have the same electronics and propulsion (LM2500) and other systems to make them compatible with the Australian Navy’s logistics base for the several Oliver Hazard Perry (FFG-7)-class frigates purchased by the RAN. However, primarily for budgetary reasons the RAN was forced to buy the Royal Navy’s V/STOL carrier Invincible.
Three ships of the FFG-7 design are also under construction in Spain with standard U. S. systems. Earlier, the Spanish Navy built five frigates of the Knox (FF-1052) class. Those ships differed from their U. S. counterparts by having a Mk-13 Tartar launcher fitted aft with its associated AN/SPS-52 radar and fire control. Thus, the Spanish ships overcome the major criticism of the U. S. versions of these ships by having a surface-to- air missile system.
The United States has not constructed diesel-electric combat submarines since 1960, hence there has been little foreign interest in U. S. construction or design of undersea craft. The significant exception has been Dutch construction of the Zwaardvis and improved-Zwaardvis classes of attack submarines based on the U. S. Barbel (SS-580) design. Another unusual foreign design purchase has been Israel’s adoption of the Grumman Super Flagstaff, a 100-ton hydrofoil missile craft. This design evolved from the U. S. Navy’s Flagstaff (PGH-l), which was Grumman’s entry in the phm competition. Two of these hydrofoil craft are being built for the Israeli Navy, which has an option for several more. Although Israel is now a leading designer of small combat craft, its government still decided to import hydrofoil technology rather than undertake development of such high-speed (50-knot plus) craft.
The major U. S. small combatant yards are Tacoma Boatbuilding and Peterson Builders, which have produced numerous units for the U. S. Navy, including the Asheville (PG-84)-cIass patrol gunboats. Tacoma redesigned the Asheville and built three units for South Korea in the 1970s, and helped set up a production line for the 270-ton ships at Chinhae, which built five more units. Tacoma also built a prototype coastal patrol and interdiction craft (CPIC) for the U. S. Navy, which was designed specifically for foreign use. The 71-ton craft was to have been produced in Korea and possibly elsewhere, but after the Korean Navy ran the CPIC on trials from 1975 to 1980, it was returned to the U. S. Navy with no further units being built.
The Tacoma and Peterson yards also started dual production of small combatants for Saudi Arabia. The current Saudi naval expansion program includes the purchase of 2.000-ton frigates in France and two smaller designs in the United States. Tacoma is producing four 720-ton patrol missile chasers (PCGs), and Peterson is building nine 320-ton patrol missile gunboats (PGGs) for the Saudi Navy. These craft were challenges in naval design because of the large number of complex systems provided in comparatively small hulls. The Peterson effort has encountered difficulties with the PGG’s displacement being significantly above specifications, with a resulting loss of speed.
Although today the U. S. Navy demonstrates little interest in such small combatants, these major efforts for South Korea and Saudi Arabia have demonstrated that there are design and construction capabilities for these ships and craft in the United States. Also, in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, several U. S. firms have produced riverine-type craft for foreign navies in addition to very small numbers for the residual U. S. Navy inshore capability. In this category. the Marinette Marine Corporation and Peterson have constructed a series of 31-ton patrol boats (PB Mk- IIIs) for the U. S. Navy, one of which has been armed with the Norwegian-developed Penguin missile. This is the latest of several European systems evaluated by the U. S. Navy. Two of these systems have been adopted by the U. S. Navy and procured in large numbers. The Dutch-developed WM-28 radar/fire control system is in wide American use as the Mk-92 produced by Sperry, as is the Italian 76-mm. OTO Melara gun, produced in the United States by Northern Ordnance. One or both of these systems are found in the destroyer, frigate, and patrol combatant ships now being built for the U. S. Navy.*
The use of foreign systems and components in U. S. ships is extremely difficult because of protective U. S. laws. For example, the SEMT-Pielstick medium-speed diesel engines were selected for the Whidbey Island (LSD-41) class as being the only diesels of their type available with extensive operating time. However, they could be used if manufactured in the United States, hence the Fairbanks Morse division of Colt Industries will produce the diesels for the U. S. Navy at probably a higher cost than if they could have been procured directly from the French manufacturer. Although the argument is made that the higher cost of U. S. production results in the monies being spent in the United States, this must be offset against its possible affects on foreign purchases of U. S. warship and naval systems.
* The major exception being the program of 30 PHMs initiated by Admiral E. R. Zumwalt during his tenure as CNO (1970-74). which was subsequently cut to six units and would have been reduced to but a single prototype except for congressional mandate.
* Although this column addresses primarily ships and ship systems, it should be noted that the U. S. Navy has recently selected the British Hawk training aircraft: the U. S. Marine Corps earlier acquired the British Harrier V/STOL aircraft; and the U. S. Coast Guard is procuring the French-developed Falcon fixed-wing maritime patrol aircraft and the Dolphin helicopter, all with U. S. manufacturers.