Amphibious Loading Error

[dgaad]

And another : this one is the Ward, the first American ship to sink a Japanese vessel in WW2. Note both the displacement, ship complement and cargo capacity can differ from other APDs :


NavSource Online: Amphibious Photo Archive
DD-139 / APD-16 Ward

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wickes Class Destroyer: Launched 1 June 1918 at Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo CA.; Commissioned 24 July 1918 as USS Ward Destroyer No. 139; Designated (DD-139) 1 July 1920; Decommissioned 21 July 1926 at San Diego; Laid up in the Reserve Fleet at San Diego CA; Recommissioned 15 January 1941 at Navy Destroyer Base, San Diego CA; Converted to a Dent Class High-speed Transport at Puget Sound Navy Yard and designated (APD-16), 6 February 1943; Final Disposition, lost to enemy action 7 December 1944 at Ormoc Bay Philippines; Struck from the Navy List 20 January 1945.

Specifications: Displacement 1,247 t; Length 314' 4"'; Beam 30' 11"; Draft 9' 10"; Speed 35 kts; Complement 231; Boats 4 LCP(L) landing craft; Armament 3 5"/50, 2 40mm, 5 20mm, 1 depth charge rack, 4 depth charge projectors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[dgaad]

To sum up

There were 3 classes of APDs used in the war, their specifications are as follows :

Dent Class High Speed Transports

APD 1 through APD 36 (some APD numbers in this class were never assigned)

Displacement was anywhere from 1 ton to 1.25+ tons

Typical cargo capacity was 130 troops plus 4 LCP(L) landing boats (Higgins Boats?). But this varied.

Dates of Manufacture : 1917 through 1920s
Based on WW1 Destroyer frames of several classes

Charles Lawrence Class High Speed Transports

Based on the Buckley Class Destroyer Escort

APD 37 through APD 86 (some numeric designations were skipped)

Charles Lawrence Class High-speed Transport: Laid down as a Buckley Class Destroyer Escort 1 August 1942 at Bethlehem-Hingham Shipyard, Hingham MA; Launched 16 February 1943; Commissioned USS Charles Lawrence (DE-53), 31 May 1943; Converted at New York to a Charles Lawrence Class High-speed Transport redesignated, (APD-37), 23 October 1944. Charles Lawrence was the lead ship in this class of APD conversions; Placed Out-of-Commission-in-Reserve 21 June 1946 at Green Cove Spring Fla; Laid up in the Altlantic Reserve Fleet, Floridia Group, Green Cove Springs; Struck from the Naval Register 1 September 1964; Final Disposition, sold for scrapping 31 January 1966.

Specifications: Displacement 1,400 t; Length 306' (oa); Beam 36' 10"; Draft 13' 6" (max); Speed 24 kts; Range 6,000 nautical miles at 12 kts; Complement 186; Troop Capacity 162; Boats 4 LCVP landing craft; Armament 1 5"/38 dual purpose gun mount, 3 twin 40mm gun mounts, 8 single 20mm gun mounts, 2 depth charge tracks; Propulsion, 2 GE Turbines, (turbo-electric drive), 2 boilers, 2 shafts, 12,000 Shaft horsepower.

Dates of manufacture were from 1942 to 1944


Crosley Class High Speed Transports

APD 87 through APD 139 (some numeric designations were skipped)

Crosley Class High-speed Transport: Laid down as (DE-226) a Rudderow Class Destroyer Escort at Philadelphis Navy Yard, Philadelphia PA; Launched 12 February 1944; Reclassified a Crosley Class High-speed Transport, (APD-87), 17 July 1944, while under construction. Commissioned USS Crosley (APD-87), 22 October 1944; Decommissioned 15 November 1946 at Green Cove Springs Fla; Laid up in the Atlantic Reserve Fleet, Florida Group, Green Cove Springs; Struck from the Naval Register 1 June 1960; Final Disposition, Transferred to Ecuador as a power hulk, fate unknown.

Specifications: Displacement 1,400 t; Length 306' (oa); Beam 37"; Draft 12' 7" (limiting); Speed 23.6 kts (trial); Range 6,000 nautical miles at 12 kts; Complement 12-15 Officers, 189-192 Enlisted; Troop Capacity 12 Officers, 150 Enlisted; Boats 4 LCVP landing craft; Troop Accoutrements, 6 1/4 ton trucks, 2 1 ton trucks, 4 ammunition carts, 4 pack howitzers, Storage, Ammunition 6,000 cu. ft., General Cargo 3,500 cu. ft., Gasoline 1,000 cu. ft., Armament 1 5"/38 dual purpose gun mount, 3 twin 40 mm gun mounts, 6 single 20 mm gun mounts, 2 depth charge tracks; Propulsion, 2 Babcox and Wilcox DR boilers, 2 GE Turbines, (turbo-electric drive), 2 shafts, Shaft horsepower 12,000.

Dates of manufacture : 1944 through end of war.

[1089]

Originally posted by Sid
Also, 4 APDs should not be able to deliver more men than can fit! They are amazing ships - they sleep troops in the passageways no less. There is quite literally no room to overcrowd them -- they are filled to the gills for short runs. For a long trip, the APD goes empty, or partly filled, so men can tolerate conditions.

Hi Sid--

Your original post seemed to imply that these APDs were sunk on the way, but still managed to deliver their cargo (perhaps even more than would fit on them, as well. Was I incorrect to infer this from it, or is it similar to the PacWar thing where the unit gets there even if all ships are sunk on the way, albeit with a few subtracted for casualties in the attack. I can see where maybe 5-10% might be rescued, but all equipment should be lost in this case. It makes a difference as to whether I would choose to try to attack an inbound transport convoy or a Surface Combat TF that is on the way to bombard. If the soldiers and equipment get there anyway, what's the point.

Thanks,
kp

[Sid]

It is TRUE that my APDs delivered the cargo AFTER being sunk. Only one of four survived, but 756 men, and 32 guns were delivered! You MIGHT rescue men, but how could you rescue guns? Surely 32 guns (up to 155s) would not fit on one ship!

Then too, ALL the APDs described above were NOT APDs in May of 1941. So why do I have an APD with such capacity???? Are your APDs generic? Finally, note that LCVP is the SMALLEST of landing craft, and itself not an early developmen. There were earlier LCPs and similar that had NO provision for vehicles or vehicle size, ro-ro handling. We are playing 1942 scenarios here, not 1944. So why pretend that a ship available later in the war is available early in 1942????? And why does the equipment survive sinking?

[1089]

Originally posted by Sid
It is TRUE that my APDs delivered the cargo AFTER being sunk. Only one of four survived, but 756 men, and 32 guns were delivered! You MIGHT rescue men, but how could you rescue guns? Surely 32 guns (up to 155s) would not fit on one ship!

Then too, ALL the APDs described above were NOT APDs in May of 1941. So why do I have an APD with such capacity???? Are your APDs generic? Finally, note that LCVP is the SMALLEST of landing craft, and itself not an early developmen. There were earlier LCPs and similar that had NO provision for vehicles or vehicle size, ro-ro handling. We are playing 1942 scenarios here, not 1944. So why pretend that a ship available later in the war is available early in 1942????? And why does the equipment survive sinking?

Ok, I guess now we wait for Paul or Erik to clue us into why this was designed specifically to model something we haven't thought of, but even though they are good, I can't see an explanation for the guns getting there. Let me try, "Even though the ships are listed as sunk during the battle, due to FOW this may not be the case. The Allies had a doctrine during the time frame of the game that if the ship were about to sink, do not abandon it, but sail it to the closest shallow water. There people could be rescued by PT boats, and even the guns could be pulled out of the water later. This would slow down the introduction of these guns into battle, while the salt water and kelp were cleaned out of them, so this is accurately modeled by the units arriving disrupted." How's that?;)

But perhaps this could be looked into for the patch or at the very least for WITP, where the shallow water is probably a lot further away?

kp

[Sid]

Your theory works for me. It is called rationalization. Justification for something after the fact that is, in fact, inherently not what you really wanted to do at all. My ships sank in shallow water, and there was no fog about it -- they really were gone forever. But they could have beached - or anyway been close inshore so salvage of cargo was not impossible.

My greater problem is with the sheer amount of troops and cargo. Those four little ships should never have had what they delivered, and I assume they had even more than that when loaded.

As to a patch, perhaps it might be best to just define "fast transport" on DDs, cruisers, APDs, etc. as restricted to light infantry, and let regular ops carry anything, as indeed it might have been possible. If I don't like a ship capabilities, I can always edit it myself.

[1089]

Originally posted by Sid
Your theory works for me. It is called rationalization. Justification for something after the fact that is, in fact, inherently not what you really wanted to do at all. My ships sank in shallow water, and there was no fog about it -- they really were gone forever. But they could have beached - or anyway been close inshore so salvage of cargo was not impossible.

My greater problem is with the sheer amount of troops and cargo. Those four little ships should never have had what they delivered, and I assume they had even more than that when loaded.

As to a patch, perhaps it might be best to just define "fast transport" on DDs, cruisers, APDs, etc. as restricted to light infantry, and let regular ops carry anything, as indeed it might have been possible. If I don't like a ship capabilities, I can always edit it myself.

I meant it as a joke. I really hope they will do something about this one, both the capacity, which sounds like Rich will be doing, and the delivery of sunken soldiers and equipment, which will not be so easy.

kp