Editing County-class destroyer (section)

==Development==
A class of ten ships was envisaged in 1958 for about [[British pound|£]]6–7.5 million each,<ref>G. Moore. Daring to Devonshire in Warship 2006. Conway Maritime. (London) p124, 130</ref> equivalent to a costed Programme for four large, Seaslug-armed, 15,000-ton cruisers, estimated at £14 million each,{{sfn|Moore|2005| p=124}} based on an upgraded [[Minotaur-class cruiser (1947)|''Minotaur''-class cruiser]] (1951), approved for full design in early 1955. The final four County-class ships, with hull numbers 07 to 10, were delayed in 1960 while an anti-submarine escort carrier was considered. Hulls 07 and 08 were approved in 1963 as a temporary stopgap,{{sfn|Moore|2005|p= 130}}<ref>ADM 167 162 1963</ref> and the ninth and tenth hulls were cancelled.

The class was designed as a hybrid cruiser-destroyer with dimensions similar to the broad-beam 1951 [[Dido-class cruiser|''Dido'' class]].<ref>1/ADM22760:1951 Emergency War Programme, Gun armament (PRO)</ref>{{sfn|Brown|Moore|2012|p=31}} Much larger than predecessors such as the 2,800 ton {{sclass|Daring|destroyer (1949)|4}}. the new County class would be destroyer-leaders for aircraft carrier task forces and when operating "[[East of Suez]]" also play a traditional cruiser flagship role with shore bombardment, and attacking enemy shipping.{{sfn|McCart |2014 |pp=pvii & 3}} In 1955 the new [[First Sea Lord]] [[Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma|Louis Mountbatten]] specified the development of 4,800 ton Fast fleet escort design (DNC 7/959) with a Seaslug missile replacing a stern twin 3-inch anti-aircraft mounting,.{{sfn|Moore|2005|p=123}} This replacing a 15,000 ton cruiser design which would have combined Seaslug with the Type 984 3D radar and a conventional [[Tiger-class cruiser|''Tiger''-class]] gun armament.

During 1956–1958 a full "alternative" gun armament was an option for the new Fast Escort for the fleet {{sfn|Hall (May 2008)|pp=48–51}} based on a modern [[Combined steam and gas|combined gas turbine and steam turbine]] (COSAG) propulsion unit and armed with two twin 4.5-inch guns, two twin 40&nbsp;mm Bofors and a single twin 3-inch gun. A detailed March 1957 study following the [[Suez Crisis]] and the [[1957 Defence White Paper]] decided to increase the size of the new missile destroyers to that of light cruisers and include some cruiser features<ref>DNC 7/1014 for Board of Admiralty & ADM 167/150:1957</ref><ref>Brown & Moore. 2012, p 37=8</ref> The study opted for a {{convert|505|ft|abbr=on}} long hull with a fit of 18 Seaslug and four nuclear warhead fitted Seaslug for extended range anti-aircraft, anti-missile and anti-ship.<ref>DNC 7/1014</ref> Twin [[Bofors 40 mm Automatic Gun L/60|40 mm Bofors]] were kept due to doubt over the future and effectiveness of the [[Seacat (missile)|"Green Light"]] missile then under development.{{sfnp|Moore|2005|p=127}} The [[Limbo (weapon)|Limbo mortar]] was the only anti-submarine weapon.

A revised design in March 1958 added Seaslug and Seacat missiles and a telescoping aircraft hangar. Mountbatten staged an impressive demonstration shoot for [[flag officer]]s and politicians: the Seaslug test ship [[HMS Girdle Ness|HMS ''Girdle Ness'']] launched ten Seaslugs, including a salvo of two Seaslugs together. The success included hits in the lethal zone of two piston-engine [[Fairey Firefly]] radio-controlled drones at {{convert|16|km|abbr=on}} flying at a speed of 315-375&nbsp;mph.{{sfn |Grove |2005 |p=198}} This enabled the Minister of Defence [[Duncan Sandys]] to gain the approval of the Cabinet Defence Committee for Seaslug production to be approved in 1958.{{sfn|Grove |2005 |p=198}}<ref>:PRO. ADM 205/172 1958, (26) p. 211</ref>

While the missile worked against level flying targets, the beam guidance system was dubious at range and in rough water and eight fixed stabilisers were added to the design of the County-class. Advocacy for the guided missiles fit{{sfnp|Wise|2007|pp=19–21}} was led by Mountbatten{{sfnp|Preston|1980}}{{page needed|date=April 2023}} and the Cabinet agreed with using the system, despite staff reports over missile unreliability and inaccuracy,.{{sfnp|Wise|2007|pages=19–21}} This was confirmed by the dismal performance in the following Seaslug target launches at [[RAAF Woomera Range Complex|Woomera range]], South Australia in 1959{{sfn|Grove|2005|p=198}} Many Royal Australian Navy officers felt Seaslug was unsuitable for the RAN.{{sfnp|Moore|2005|pp=132–133, note&nbsp;26, p.&nbsp;135}}

Final revisions to the design in 1958<ref>ADM 167 152 1958 and First Lords Record (Public Record Office)- the final, construction order, ship cover and legend no longer exist</ref> were to adopt a high flush deck from B turret, increasing internal space, the cancellation of the nuclear-tipped Seaslug, and provision for folding fins for the Seaslug; this allowed storage of 20 extra missile bodies which could be rapidly assembled. Against staff advice, a tight fitting, fixed side-hangar for the anti-submarine [[Westland Wessex]] helicopter was added on the insistence of the First Sea Lord.{{sfnp|Mountbatten|1989|p=187}} While a flawed layout, it proved usable when tested in the [[Falklands War]] in 1982.

Lord Mountbatten classified the County-class as guided missile destroyers to gain Treasury and political support{{sfn|McCart|2014|p=vii, 1-3}} with cruisers discredited in the media{{citation needed|date=April 2023}} as colonial relics, obsolete gunships like battleships. The Royal Navy staff and officers regarded the County class as cruisers{{sfn|McCart |2014|p=3}} and to signify{{citation needed|date=April 2023}} they were major surface units they were given names previously carried by cruisers including the preceding [[County-class cruiser|County-class heavy cruisers]] and First World War [[Armored cruiser|armoured cruisers]]. They were however less than real cruisers,  unarmoured and fitted to destroyer standards, except for staff accommodation and a dated, short ranged, semi automatic, 4.5 destroyer armament<ref>D.K. Brown. Century of Naval Construction.  History of Royal Corps of Naval Constructors. Conway Maritime. London (1983)</ref><ref>C.J Bartlett. The Long Retreat. A Short History of British Defence Policy 1945-70. Macmillan (1972) & Palgrave (2014)</ref>{{page needed|date=April 2023}} given additional spotting radar. They did provide space and weight for light Bofors and Oerlikons to be fitted if required as happened post Falklands War. The apparently impressive performance of Seaslug against jet [[Gloster Meteor]] UC15 drones, giving the Royal Navy a good number of impressive County-class 'destroyers' and a greater number of ship commands and posts for ambitious officers.{{sfnp|Wilson|2013|pp=624–625}}

While short on the support and logistic spares stocks of a traditional cruiser, they were  envisaged by the [[Director of Naval Construction]] as being 'probably' used in the cruiser role{{sfn|Hall (May 2008)|p=48}} with space for Flag staff offices, and admiral's barge accommodation{{sfnp|Friedman|2006|pp=181–190}} in the 1960s: the last decade when the UK oversaw significant colonial territory East of Suez. Its missile capability had been overtaken by aircraft development by 1962–63, when HMS ''Devonshire'' and ''Hampshire'' entered service, but in the early and mid-1960s the modern lines of these guided-missile destroyers, with their traditional RN cruiser style and their impressive-looking missiles, enabled the overstretched Royal Navy to project sufficient power to close down the threat of a militant, left-leaning Indonesia to Malaysia and Borneo during the [[Indonesia-Malaysia confrontation]].<ref>{{cite book |first=N. |last=van der Bijl |title=Confrontation. The War with Indonesia 1962–66 |publisher=Pen & Sword |date=2007 |pages=134–5, 139}}</ref>