Ships of the USA

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

Friday, August 27th 2004, 7:45am

Ships of the USA

Battleships

In service

Delaware, North Dakota, Utah, Florida, Arkansas, Wyoming, New York, Texas, Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvainia, Arizona, New Mexico, Idaho, Mississippi, Tennessee, California, Colorado, Maryland, West Virginia

Building

None

Battlecruisers

In service

None

Building

Lexington, Saratoga

Armoured Cruisers

In service

Pittsburgh (ex Pennsylvainia), Frederick (ex Maryland), Huntington (ex West Virginia), Pueblo (ex Colorado), Huron (ex south Dakota), Charleston, St. Louis

Building

None

Light Cruisers

In service

Salem, Birmingham, Chester, Omaha, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, Raleigh, Detroit, Richmond, Concord, Trenton

Building

Marblehead, Memphis

Aircraft carriers

In service

Langley

Building

Ranger, Constitution

Destroyers

331 in total

279 flush deckers, 21 drayton class, 6 Allen, 6 Caldwell, 5 Conyngham, 8 Aylwin, 6 cushing

Submarines

90 in total

Smaller ships

53 eagle boats
331 subchasers

Go to the top of the page

LordArpad

Professional

Posts: 1,032

Friday, August 27th 2004, 12:04pm

I'm slightly shocked by how few cruisers they have

Go to the top of the page

Red Admiral

Italian Stallion

Posts: 7,019

Friday, August 27th 2004, 12:08pm

CAPITAL SHIPS RETAINED BY THE UNITED STATES NAVY

Battleships : Colorado, West Virginia, Maryland, California, Tennessee, Idaho,
New Mexico, Mississippi, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Nevada, New York, Texas, Arkansas, Wyoming, Florida, Utah
Battle Cruisers : Lexington, Saratoga

UNITED STATES NAVY CARRIERS

Langley, Ranger, Constitution

This and the RN ships are from a thread a while back on the meeting place pg. 4

The post-war USN was very capital-ship heavy, with hardly any cruisers.

Go to the top of the page

Swamphen

Mr. Dynamite

Posts: 4,191

Friday, August 27th 2004, 3:29pm

I still have a problem with the second and third New Mexicos. In RL Congress refused to fund them - they were paid for using the funds from selling the old Idaho and Mississippi to Greece. This wasn't done in WW - ergo, only one New Mexico.

Unless, of course, Congress considered Atlantis enough of a threat to fund them...

Go to the top of the page

Red Admiral

Italian Stallion

Posts: 7,019

Friday, August 27th 2004, 5:33pm

I think that there are enough threats in the world to warrant congress authorising funds to construct an extra New Mexico.

Swamphen, I don't know if you've read it anywhere, but the Colorado's still have 12x14" guns and not 8x16" weapons.

Go to the top of the page

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

Saturday, August 28th 2004, 6:10am

The Lexington class BC's also have triple 14" mounts and would likely have better armor to boot.

I suppose I could add some of the older cruisers, I'm just wondering if the North Carolina class AC's would be too big for the Americans to retain under the CT rules.

I wonder if the Washington (the 4th colorado class) would be built.

Go to the top of the page

Red Admiral

Italian Stallion

Posts: 7,019

Saturday, August 28th 2004, 9:39am

Quoted

The Lexington class BC's also have triple 14" mounts and would likely have better armor to boot.

Nope, they actually have worse armour. 6" belt and 4" deck.

For the old armoured cruisers; if it has 10" guns it gets scrapped. I think that's fairly simple.

Go to the top of the page

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

Saturday, August 28th 2004, 11:28am

Well I guess the North Carolina are definately out, they have 10" guns. I assumed they were larger repeats of the California's, continuing to use 8".

Oops!

"Nope, they actually have worse armour. 6" belt and 4" deck."

I thought the historical Lexington design was scary!

Go to the top of the page

CanisD

Professional

Posts: 1,464

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 6:40pm

Well, I'll have to make MAJOR cuts in destroyers and submarines, since right now I'm around 130,000 tons over the limit on DD's and about 50,000 tons over on submarines. I'll have to cut over 100 Flush Deckers and 60+ subs, assuming they are S-Class. Delaware and North Dakota will have to become target and training ships once the Lexington and Saratoga are completed.

Go to the top of the page

Rooijen10

Mr. Valentines Day

Posts: 9,644

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 7:10pm

A special diet for the US Navy. :-)

Go to the top of the page

CanisD

Professional

Posts: 1,464

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 7:35pm

"Squat and thrust and burn those tons!!!"

Go to the top of the page

Swamphen

Mr. Dynamite

Posts: 4,191

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 10:58pm

Quoted

Delaware and North Dakota will have to become target and training ships once the Lexington and Saratoga are completed.

Probably a few more than that, since the US limits just got chopped from 21 capital ship hulls, to 14. =:-0 Subs, on the other hand, didn't change at all...

Go to the top of the page

Rooijen10

Mr. Valentines Day

Posts: 9,644

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 11:09pm

Need a special BB diet as well then. ^_^

Go to the top of the page

Swamphen

Mr. Dynamite

Posts: 4,191

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 11:14pm

But wouldn't eating BBs cause you to gain weight?

Go to the top of the page

Rooijen10

Mr. Valentines Day

Posts: 9,644

Wednesday, January 5th 2005, 11:30pm

It's not a diet for Humans! It's a diet for Navies!

Go to the top of the page

CanisD

Professional

Posts: 1,464

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 1:09am

Well, the new limits save me the trouble of modernizing my coal burners. They're all becoming soup cans and razor blades!

Go to the top of the page

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 6:11am

Don't burn off to many tons, theres still a chance the U.S. may possibly retain 16 capital ships. Once we get feed back from everyone we can determine just what the number retained is.

Go to the top of the page

CanisD

Professional

Posts: 1,464

Thursday, January 6th 2005, 6:14am

No problem, just need to recalculate some things...

Go to the top of the page