Conversely, to Timothy Francis’s list of the ships built from the
National Industrial Recovery Act, and the point about shipbuilding
capacity – >Warship< Construction, for cruiser size and up, remained concentrated on the East Coast during WWII with the important exception of the Kaiser Coffins - the CASABLANCA class escort carriers, and the 'ultimate' COMMENCEMENT BAY class escort carriers, built at Todd-Pacific. I am drawing attention here to the difference between warship construction as a special skill and shipbuilding in general. WWII US East Construction, including Two-Ocean Navy ships, included: ALL the ESSEX class, and all the MIDWAY class ALL the BB-55 and later Battleships ALL cruisers (and therefore light carriers) EXCEPT for some ATLANTA and/or repeat/modified ATLANTA class. However, the 50 CASABLANCA class were all constructed at a new yard specifically built for them. Destroyer and mercantile-standard construction was fairly significant on the West Coast however. One reason for this is likely that what heavy warship construction there had been on the US West Coast was concentrated in the Navy Yards, which were far better employed in battle damage repair and overhaul, in time of Pacific War. I noted this when i started trying to get an output capacity of US WW2 shipyards. I was trying to figure out why the production system of SPI's WAR IN THE PACIFIC typically generated US ships at a greater rate than historical.. Turns out it models raw material/expenditure capacity fairly well, but doesn't model the actual slipway capacity, so the system doesn't put a numerical limit on types/sizes that can be under construction at any given time. And for some reason, information on ships doesn't easily give you an idea of the capacity of the shipyard that built them.... 🙂 -Brooks