It is requested that an image or photograph of book cover be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Australia may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77) is currently considered the last Nimitz-class ship. Depending on developments, by 2021 she might be reconsidered as the first of a new class. Alternately, if something bad happened to her circa 2010, CVN-78 might be named USS George Bush.
Is this the same as Littoral combat ship?
Is "Nemesis" the name of a US Navy ship, a RN ship, or a technology like Aegis?
USS Shreveport (LPD-12) is of the Cleveland (LPD-7) class, which is being replaced by the San Antonio (LPD-17) class.
—wwoods 22:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
There are two ships in the MNF which don't appear at all in Weapons of Choice post-transition, but are important in Designated Targets: the HMS Vanguard (which landed in the Arctic ice and was stripped by the USSR), and the Dessaix (captured and stripped by the Germans, and used by the Japanese to attack Hawaii). At the time of Weapons of Choice, as far as the rest of the MNF knows, these ships either didn't go through the Transition or were destroyed by it.
How should these ships be listed in the Order of Battle? Currently the "Ships of the MNF" section is inconsistent--it lists the Vanguard as "lost and presumed destroyed", but describes the Dessaix's fate as we readers know it from Designated Targets. Any opinions? Narsil 01:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Huh? The main issues with the 1942ers seem to be their racist and sexist attitudes. I thought those two were no longer considered liberal issues. Sexual orientation plays a minor role but even here all that we see is acceptance which is shared (at least officially) by all mainstream Republican politicians. So what is so *heavily* tainted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.135.67.221 ( talk • contribs) 03:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I am currently trying to read this book, and so far have found the quality of the research to be horrible. The author has a Marine Battalion being led by a Colonel (the job of a Lt. Col.), the S-4 Logistics officer being a Lt. Col. (the job of a Captain), and the chief medical officer being a Navy Captain (the job of a Navy Lieutenant). He also has the 3rd Battalion 9th Marine Regiment (3/9) being part of the 5th Marine Division, when it is really a part of the 3rd Marine Division. He also has 3/9 having a "C Company". C Company would belong to 1/9, and 3/9 would have comppanies lettered I, J, andK (plus L if at full wartime strength). An MEU is the equivelant of a Regiment, with a Colonel leading it (who outranks the LtCol that leads the GCU (Infantry) section). The MEU is composed of seperate units combined, and they do not loose their unit designation. 3/9 (or 3rd Bn or Btn, not "3 batt" as the author calls it - Batt is short for "Battery", an Artillary unit) would still be 3/9. The individual armour and artillary units would also keep their designations. The MEU is only a temporary unit, and once the operation is complete it is disbanded. And if it was an MEU of the 5th Division, it would be named a 2 digit number, starting with a 5 (51st MEU, 52nd MEU, etc). An MEU designation of 82nd MEU would belong to the 8th Marine Division (which like the 5th, does not exist - the most ever was 6 during WWII). The author also has new classes of ships (including Amphibious Ships) thrown all over the place, apparently not realizing the length of service that the US Navy actually puts it's ships through. The USS Iwo Jima (LPH-2) was in service from 1961-1993. The current Wasp class ships (7 built - 1 under construction) is so new, I can't see the reason for the author designing an entire new class of Amphibious ship. Especially considering what they normally stick the Marines with (20-30+ years is the average life span of an amphib ship). Speaking as a former Marine infantryman, the author should have talked to a few Marines as research before publishing this book. I am only on page 7, and have found a huge number of glaring inconsistancies. No matter what changes may happen (such as women being in an infantry battalion), they would never make such huge changes in the rank structure, or build entire new classes of Amphib ships. A Tom Clancy, Harry Turtledove, or W.E.B. Griffin this guy is not. Mushrom 00:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Its actally worth than than mushroom suggests. The Surgeon mentioned above is supposedly a Marine Officer, she gets promoted to Major in the second book. All medical staff in support of Marine corps units are naval officers or enlisted men. The author seems to have little idea of the correct order of seniority between commisioned ranks in teh various armed forces and often has ground force captains (O3) senior to Lieutenant Comanders (O4). Any officer involved in flying a plane of O3 grade (Captain - army/airforce or Lieutenant - navy) is titled Flight Lieutenant whether thay are in the Royal Air Forces or not, in fact not is more likey the case because we don't meet any RAF personnel till the second book) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iainmbrown ( talk • contribs) 19:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Wasn't this character an SAS officer, rather than a Royal Navy officer? I no longer have a copy, so I cannot check myself. Kevin 00:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Harry's second name is Wales not Windsor. As British Princes never hold surnames, he's chosen, as tradition dictates, the name of the area over which his father, The Prince of Wales, holds title. His name, therefore, is Harry Wales. Quite sloppy research to be honest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.167.105 ( talk) 17:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Would anyone object if this article was changed to C'wealth English as it is written by and Australian and initially released in Australia? BradK ( talk) 14:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The article mentions an admiral named Otto Caliax. Shouldn't this be Otto Ciliax, who was the German admiral in command of the Channel Dash? Also it states that Hermann Hoth was an oberführer when in fact he was a regular army officer and not SA or SS. Are these historical mistakes in the book or errors by the editor of the article? -- fdewaele, 10 February 2014, 16:25 (CET).
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Weapons of Choice/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
This needs sources and some genuine critiquing, not fancruft.-- Grahame ( talk) 14:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC) |
Last edited at 14:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
It is requested that an image or photograph of book cover be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Australia may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
USS George H. W. Bush (CVN-77) is currently considered the last Nimitz-class ship. Depending on developments, by 2021 she might be reconsidered as the first of a new class. Alternately, if something bad happened to her circa 2010, CVN-78 might be named USS George Bush.
Is this the same as Littoral combat ship?
Is "Nemesis" the name of a US Navy ship, a RN ship, or a technology like Aegis?
USS Shreveport (LPD-12) is of the Cleveland (LPD-7) class, which is being replaced by the San Antonio (LPD-17) class.
—wwoods 22:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
There are two ships in the MNF which don't appear at all in Weapons of Choice post-transition, but are important in Designated Targets: the HMS Vanguard (which landed in the Arctic ice and was stripped by the USSR), and the Dessaix (captured and stripped by the Germans, and used by the Japanese to attack Hawaii). At the time of Weapons of Choice, as far as the rest of the MNF knows, these ships either didn't go through the Transition or were destroyed by it.
How should these ships be listed in the Order of Battle? Currently the "Ships of the MNF" section is inconsistent--it lists the Vanguard as "lost and presumed destroyed", but describes the Dessaix's fate as we readers know it from Designated Targets. Any opinions? Narsil 01:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Huh? The main issues with the 1942ers seem to be their racist and sexist attitudes. I thought those two were no longer considered liberal issues. Sexual orientation plays a minor role but even here all that we see is acceptance which is shared (at least officially) by all mainstream Republican politicians. So what is so *heavily* tainted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.135.67.221 ( talk • contribs) 03:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I am currently trying to read this book, and so far have found the quality of the research to be horrible. The author has a Marine Battalion being led by a Colonel (the job of a Lt. Col.), the S-4 Logistics officer being a Lt. Col. (the job of a Captain), and the chief medical officer being a Navy Captain (the job of a Navy Lieutenant). He also has the 3rd Battalion 9th Marine Regiment (3/9) being part of the 5th Marine Division, when it is really a part of the 3rd Marine Division. He also has 3/9 having a "C Company". C Company would belong to 1/9, and 3/9 would have comppanies lettered I, J, andK (plus L if at full wartime strength). An MEU is the equivelant of a Regiment, with a Colonel leading it (who outranks the LtCol that leads the GCU (Infantry) section). The MEU is composed of seperate units combined, and they do not loose their unit designation. 3/9 (or 3rd Bn or Btn, not "3 batt" as the author calls it - Batt is short for "Battery", an Artillary unit) would still be 3/9. The individual armour and artillary units would also keep their designations. The MEU is only a temporary unit, and once the operation is complete it is disbanded. And if it was an MEU of the 5th Division, it would be named a 2 digit number, starting with a 5 (51st MEU, 52nd MEU, etc). An MEU designation of 82nd MEU would belong to the 8th Marine Division (which like the 5th, does not exist - the most ever was 6 during WWII). The author also has new classes of ships (including Amphibious Ships) thrown all over the place, apparently not realizing the length of service that the US Navy actually puts it's ships through. The USS Iwo Jima (LPH-2) was in service from 1961-1993. The current Wasp class ships (7 built - 1 under construction) is so new, I can't see the reason for the author designing an entire new class of Amphibious ship. Especially considering what they normally stick the Marines with (20-30+ years is the average life span of an amphib ship). Speaking as a former Marine infantryman, the author should have talked to a few Marines as research before publishing this book. I am only on page 7, and have found a huge number of glaring inconsistancies. No matter what changes may happen (such as women being in an infantry battalion), they would never make such huge changes in the rank structure, or build entire new classes of Amphib ships. A Tom Clancy, Harry Turtledove, or W.E.B. Griffin this guy is not. Mushrom 00:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Its actally worth than than mushroom suggests. The Surgeon mentioned above is supposedly a Marine Officer, she gets promoted to Major in the second book. All medical staff in support of Marine corps units are naval officers or enlisted men. The author seems to have little idea of the correct order of seniority between commisioned ranks in teh various armed forces and often has ground force captains (O3) senior to Lieutenant Comanders (O4). Any officer involved in flying a plane of O3 grade (Captain - army/airforce or Lieutenant - navy) is titled Flight Lieutenant whether thay are in the Royal Air Forces or not, in fact not is more likey the case because we don't meet any RAF personnel till the second book) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iainmbrown ( talk • contribs) 19:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Wasn't this character an SAS officer, rather than a Royal Navy officer? I no longer have a copy, so I cannot check myself. Kevin 00:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Harry's second name is Wales not Windsor. As British Princes never hold surnames, he's chosen, as tradition dictates, the name of the area over which his father, The Prince of Wales, holds title. His name, therefore, is Harry Wales. Quite sloppy research to be honest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.167.105 ( talk) 17:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Would anyone object if this article was changed to C'wealth English as it is written by and Australian and initially released in Australia? BradK ( talk) 14:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The article mentions an admiral named Otto Caliax. Shouldn't this be Otto Ciliax, who was the German admiral in command of the Channel Dash? Also it states that Hermann Hoth was an oberführer when in fact he was a regular army officer and not SA or SS. Are these historical mistakes in the book or errors by the editor of the article? -- fdewaele, 10 February 2014, 16:25 (CET).
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Weapons of Choice/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
This needs sources and some genuine critiquing, not fancruft.-- Grahame ( talk) 14:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC) |
Last edited at 14:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC)