Talk:Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ship
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Iwo Jima-class amphibious assault ship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg){kind=small}
Space Program
editHi, If you take a look at Essex class aircraft carrier, you'll see that I've put a bit of work into documenting the role of those carriers in the US space program. The Iwo Jimas also played a significant part -- if anyone wants to document this, then I think you'll find the references I cited helpful.
BTW, if anyone can find a reference for why these ships were used, please let me know -- that's the one thing I've been searching for. (The anecdote is that the Essexes were chosen for their 4 independent shafts, but obviously that doesn't apply to the IJs.) Cheers, — Johan the Ghost seance 15:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting - There is an article I think on Splashdowns that also documents that, & locations of splashdown. No references held but for the time frame of early 1970s . I'd say these were the next best. These have a hanger deck to take the space capsule, and space to work around the capsule. And better is several respects not removigng an aircraft carrier from Vietnam. Wfoj3 (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
SECNAVINST 5030.8
editMaking some editing to bring these U.S. Navy ships in line with SECNAVINST 5030.8 which covers hull classifications. There never was any such thing as a "Landing Platform, Helicopter" in the U.S. Navy register. LPH stands for "Amphibious Assault Ship" and is not and acronym. Per the Navy History and Heritage Command: "It is important to understand that hull number letter prefixes are not acronyms, and should not be carelessly treated as abbreviations of ship type classifications." --Jaiotu (talk) 06:47, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
All right, I'm going to question this. It appears that SECNAVINST 5030.8 dates to 21 November 2006. According to U.S. Amphibious Ships and Craft (Friedman 2002), the U.S. Navy DID intend when it created the LPH designation in the late 1950's that it stood for 'Landing ship, Personnel, Helicopter' ('Landing Platform, Helicopter' is the British equivalent recognized under NATO standards). So it would appear that the SECNAVINST 5030.8 text is an attempt to re-write history and that 'There never was any such thing [other than] "Amphibious Assault Ship" is factually untrue. Certainly the SECNAVINST 5030.8 text by itself is not enough to justify this position. P.S., the LPH designation does not even appear in SECNAVINST 5030.8, since these ships were all retired prior to publication of this document. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk • contribs) 06:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Aviation Support
editok it states: "Aviation facilities - 25 helicopters or AV-8 Harriers". This is a little misleading. I think these ships only rarely operated the AV-8 Harriers. - and that was the Guam in 1972-1974. - if you go the page for the individual ships multiple one state "20 CH-46 and 10 CH-53" Per N. Palmer ~1980 "the hanger deck can accommodate 19 CH-46 Sea Knights or 11 CH-53 Sea Stallions. - the flight deck could simultaneously launch up to 7 CH-46 or 4 CH-53 Same source picture of one in Honk Kong with 3 CH-53 and 10 CH-46 on deck. Also usually slightly less and a few AH-1 Cobra and UH-1 Huey. Interesting Comparision - Pretty close in size to the Independence Class Light Aircraft Carriers (CVL) Wfoj3 (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)