Pretty interesting, but I do have some comments. I do get some of the changes were changes for the sake of changing stuff (not cheating) but I'll note some that I found less plausible then the real world solutions
It's a cool drawing though!
- I really think the original locations for both the phalanx and the SLQ-32 were superior where they were in the real life ships. The fore and aft arcs would be better. Tico had the arrangement as placed here because of the directors and SPY-1 deckhouses (and the pilothouse) took up the space where the phalanxes are on the Sprucan and Kidd.
- I was surprised, when I started comparing weights, that with the 3 127mm guns I actually came up with 112 tons of weight while the Mk 71 + Mk 45 + Mk 29 was 132 tons. Still, 2 Mk 45's and an Mk 29 would only be 45 tons, significantly less then what is drawn now. This layout would thus eat up quite a bit of the modernisation margins in the spruance design, but many of these modernisation systems are included in it (the Mk 26 and the Mk 74 FCS, notably) so it seems more doable then I thought on first glance
- I am not entirely certain the hull shading is accurate like this. Good enough for this drawing? sure! just adding this as notification that it needs more work before anyone applies it to the IRL sprucans
- I am really wondering what that SPG-60 is standing on. The air intake housings on the hangar of the spruance before the modifications for the SH-60 were directly at the edge, the walkway around it being there for maintenance/access to the air intake housing on all sides. According to the drawing, you fitted the SPG-60 'in front' of the air intakes and there are still railings ( so space to walk around it) 'in front'.
Personally, I would fix this by putting the SPG-60 closer to midships instead, so behind the air intakes from our viewpoint here.
- I am not certain but I don't think the Mk 26 GMLS could fire the nuclear depth charge version of ASROC.
- I wonder if this ship would take SM-2 or SM-1......