US DD classes and missions

[niceguy2005]

Ok, now that I am starting to actually know a little about US ships of the era, I am wondering about mission assignments for US DDs and what others do in the game. I wonder if like me, when they form an air combat TF do they just pick 10 DDs out of the pool of DDs available, or do they actually select them based on their class (characteristics)?

What got me thinking about this are all the Flush Deck class DDs, which seem to be great for cargo transport escort and ASW, but are inferior surface or carrier escort duty. As I look through the database I see that Bagley class looks great for carrier escort duty, they have long legs and good AA value, while there ASW ability is low. Conversely the Mahan class seems to have low AA scores, but still long legs, so they are better for transport escorts.

Anyone care to share how they use the DDs? What's historical? Any other uses for all the flush decks? Does any of this change with upgrades?

[madflava13]

Well at the beginning of the war, you mostly have Flush Deckers and Mahans. Flush deckers I use exclusively for convoy escort, and only important convoys get them. Others get MSW/PG escorts. Once you have more types to choose from, I pick the DDs with the highest AA ratings as my CV group escorts, throwing in 2 or so of classes with higher ASW ratings. British/Oz DDs I use in SC TFs, since their torpedos are more likely to work - although their short legs can be troublesome.

I also use APDs as high-value troop convoy escorts - they tend to have ASW ratings of 8...

[niceguy2005]

I have used flush decks with some success in the DEI as coastal patrol ships, they are fast enough to "appear out of thin air" and strike at transports, but their inferior guns and manuvering make them easy prey for Japanese DD.

APDs do make great ASW ships, but I tend to hold most of these in reserve for critical FT missions. If I have a major campaign underway these ships will almost always be docked in a rear port in the thearter waiting to be needed

[m10bob]

By mid war, U.S. tincans were more uniformly designed as all-purpose, and the Fletchers all had more AA than a pre-war battleship.
This alone made them perfect "picket ships" (and unintentional target/sacrifices for kamikazes).

[Rob Brennan UK]

I tend to use the US APd's as thir historical transport role. Main reason being these are the only FT ships that can carry engineering vehicles. normal DD+CL cant load them . so seebees get moved forward with APD's ..

[YankeeAirRat]

Dig up the book "US Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History" by Norman Friedman. He talks about both pre-war and post-war destroyer development, along with development of the destroyer in USN from 1900 up to 2002. Basically you are looking at two types of ships that the US rated as destroyers, the Flush-deckers from World War 1 and Ships like the Benson and Sims classes which were designed to fill what was called the Destroyer Leader role. The Destroyer Leader role was thought of as the ship which the commodore of a destroyer squadron was stationed on. So at various times it was multi-roled (which at the time most of these ships were developed and built was around either anti-shipping or anti-subs) and larger then a typical destroyer but smaller then the armored cruiser or even the light cruisers of the day. Mr. Friedman also mentions how a number of these ships were later ham-strung by the various naval treaties of the days so to keep at thier weight certain armaments were sacrificed during the inter-war period and later as the war started even more was off loaded to make room for more of either AAW or ASW weapons. A really interesting book and the rest of the series of books are very good.

[niceguy2005]

Thanks. I'll check for the book.

[saj42]

I use the 'flush deckers' solely for convoy escort. I don't rate them very good for SC TFs. More importantly IMHO, a good number of them upgrade to APDs - most valuable for FT TFs (guaranteed to unload in one phase - and there are never enough small APs)

[Feinder]

At the beginning of the war, you tend to micro-manage your American DDs. Whether it's the limiting range of the Flush-Deckers picking out those with better ASW or AAA value.

But after about Sept '42, a DD is DD is DD is DD (except limiting range of Flush-Deckers).

Yes, there are differences in classes later on, but fundamentally, if you put 8x DDs in your TF, they're going to sufficiently contribute whatever you wanted them to (be it ASW or AAA or torps), regardless of class.

-F-

[niceguy2005]

I'm resurrecting this thread one more time because I have completed some research on this topic. Turns out a DD is pretty much a DD in world war II. The majority of the DDs in this game were constructed in the 30s, save the Flush Deckers which are WWI vintage. According to the research I did DDs are general purpose screen vessels for all sorts of TF. Exceptions include Flush Deck (mostly ASW), Gridley, Bagley, Benham (all stress torpedos) and the Porter (lead DD). Only the Flush Deck is really considered vastly inferior to the others.

[Nikademus]

In terms of the game, the most crucial class to bear in mind as Allies are the Porters....non-DP 5inchers. Bettcha a dollar more than one player has put them in a carrier TF.

For Japan...(and yes, i've done this) putting one of the older DD classes without DC's into an escort TF. (oopsie)

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

I'm resurrecting this thread one more time because I have completed some research on this topic. Turns out a DD is pretty much a DD in world war II. The majority of the DDs in this game were constructed in the 30s, save the Flush Deckers which are WWI vintage. According to the research I did DDs are general purpose screen vessels for all sorts of TF. Exceptions include Flush Deck (mostly ASW), Gridley, Bagley, Benham (all stress torpedos) and the Porter (lead DD). Only the Flush Deck is really considered vastly inferior to the others.

Dates not all inclusive but just ballpark figures:

Bagley - Pre-war, 1937 commissioning dates
Benham - Pre-war, 1939 commissioning dates
Benson - Pre-war, 1940-1941 commissioning dates
Bristol - WWII-era, 1942-1943 commissioning dates
Clemson - Pre-war, usually 1920s commissioning dates [game has as Flush Deck]
Farragut - Pre-war, 1934-1935 commissioning dates
Fletcher - WWII-era, 1942-1944 commissioning dates
Gearing - WWII-era, 1945-late 40's commissioning dates
Gridley - Pre-war, 1937-1938 commissioning dates
Mahan - Pre-war, 1936-1937 commissioning dates
Porter - Pre-war, 1936 commissioning dates
Sims - Pre-war, 1939-1940 commissioning dates
Somers - Pre-war, 1937-1939 commissioning dates
Sumner - WWII-era, 1944-1945 commissioning dates
Wickes - mostly WWI era with commissioning dates in 1918 or 1919 [game has as Flush Deck]

[niceguy2005]

Dereck, just curious, you're list doesn't actually include the Flush Deck class.

Interesting note, I had read that 60 of these were mothballed after WWI due to treaty obligations. Apparently when one of the old tin cans rusted out, or more commonly had a boiler go bad, they would pull one out of mothballs for service (rather than go through the expense of replacing the boiler). When WWII started, they yanked them all out of mothballs and refitted them.

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

Dereck, just curious, you're list doesn't actually include the Flush Deck class.

Interesting note, I had read that 60 of these were mothballed after WWI due to treaty obligations. Apparently when one of the old tin cans rusted out, or more commonly had a boiler go bad, they would pull one out of mothballs for service (rather than go through the expense of replacing the boiler). When WWII started, they yanked them all out of mothballs and refitted them.

There was no actual "Flush Deck" class. If you will note the Clemson and Wickes classes ARE what the game has listed as the Flush Deck class. In my list i noted that the game had those as Flush Decks.

[DeepSix]

ORIGINAL: YankeeAirRat

Dig up the book "US Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History" by Norman Friedman. He talks about both pre-war and post-war destroyer development, along with development of the destroyer in USN from 1900 up to 2002.
...

Another good read is Theodore Roscoe, United States Destroyer Operations in World War II.