Talk:Fletcher class destroyer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fletcher class destroyer article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale
High rated as High-importance on the assessment scale
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.


Do we know how many DCs Fletchers routinely carried? Trekphiler 01:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I remember owning a plastic model of a Fletcher where I was able to remove one of the 5-inch turrets and replace it with what looked like of those rectangular Hedgehog launchers. Was this ever an actual modification to the ships? Masterblooregard (talk) 03:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Without looking at my sources, can't say for certain, but IIRC, it was a late war/postwar mod, replacing B turret. Trekphiler (talk) 10:40, 8 February, & 14:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Boiler room tactics

Is the layout diag correct? I'd expect boiler rooms to be located beneath the stacks, not enlisted quarters. Trekphiler (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, good eye. Here's a cutaway of a Fletcher-class on an outside site [1]. Not sure what the source is, but it certainly appears to contradict the location of the enlisted quarters on that diagram. I'd imagine it's probably a typo on the diagram; it looks like the Fletchers featured alternating boiler and engine rooms, so that first huge EQ should read ER, and the second should read BR. TomTheHand (talk) 23:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
IIRC, you're right about the sep ER/BR. I'd wonder at the source of the mislabled diag, too; pretty obviously, that's the source of the error. My hope was somebody had a correct 1. Trekphiler (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)