Talk:Hull classification symbol

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
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.
B rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
High rated as high-importance on the assessment scale

Contents

[edit] General Comments

Any reason for the ordering within categories? - UtherSRG 02:04, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I thought it was alphabetical, but in the yard craft it seems like there might be some hidden scheme - a little Googling might turn up a Navy page. I would just rearrange to alpha, trying to follow bureaucrat logic will hurt people's brains. :-) Stan 04:03, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I'll try and dig around and find a page, but the existing scheme as shown in the article is pretty much the 'standard' listing IIRC. Elde 04:06, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Links to the symbols are going to be a deadend BTW, since almost every one of those is ambiguous with random other things in WP, and sooner or later someone will come along and replace these link with their idea of something unambiguous. Instead, the "expansions" should have appropriate articles, as is the case for some already. In other cases, it would be better to redirect to an aggregate article that discusses several together - for instance, US aircraft carrier hull symbols could elucidate the short and sordid lives of the "CVA" and "CVB" designations, instead of having rather thin weak articles a la SSBN. An explanatory section at the end of this article would also work, since most of the symbols, such as CL, are completely obvious and the light cruiser link explains the general concept. Stan 04:53, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I like the idea of aggreating the major ship types (CA, CV, SS, I.E. the two-letter level) with a general explanation there of the sub-types.
Frankly however, most of the material at [light cruiser] belongs in a CL page (as it's about US light cruisers, rather than covering the concept of light cruisers). Elde 05:52, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)
That's mostly because I didn't know much about other navies' light cruisers. :-) (I'm more of a sailing era specialist.) One of the things that works better in practice is to develop material breadth-first than depth-first - in other words, develop cruiser until it gets unwieldy or complicated, then split off light cruiser, protected cruiser, etc, then go from there to United States light cruisers, and so on. Depth-first tends to end up with isolated articles not connected to anything else, and it's exhausting to write all the material that sets context. But, the most important thing is to work on material that is energizing and interesting. Stan 07:02, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

(Sorry for the late reply) For better or for worse, projects like E2 and the Wikipedia emphasise depth first writing. Partially, as you point out, because of the difficulty of writing all the material that sets context, and because most folks that have deep knowledge don't generally think breadth wise. (And most of the folks that do think breadth wise are academics or professionals.)

Anyhow, I'm working on an article on Radar Picket Submarines, which I'll point SSR and SSRN to, Then I'll do the same with Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSB/SSBN). This brings some of the little stubs up full article status. Elde 06:44, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Why V?

On the issue of the Carrier hull symbols, doesn't the "V" in e.g. CV or CVN stand for "Vessel"? One source for this: A factbook @ http://www.acq.osd.mil/log/mppr/ indicates CVN = Carrier Vessel Nuclear powered.
Rackham 23:40, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, all the other types are vessels too. Since aircraft squadrons are V*, I guess CV stands for Carrier, Aircraft. Now why V stands for aircraft...
—wwoods 02:16, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The V comes from Aviation (cf. AVB Aviation Logistics Support Ship). Interestingly, the RN (and most European navies?) use R instead of CV to designate carriers, because they use a single letter system and C=Cruiser. Journeyman 02:21, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
AFAIK, and according to this site: http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/index_ships_list.htm, the V comes from the designation for heavier-than-air craft (lighter-than-air craft had the letter Z). The site also mentions a pretty credible source, United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995, Appendix 16: US Navy and Marine Corps Squadron Designations and Abbreviations which I would trust. I'm not changing anything on the page until I get a confirm on this though. Elisson 18:40, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
From what I've read, "V" refers to "heavier than air", to distinguish from "Z" (LTA; Zeppelin?). Trekphiler 00:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


V comes from the French "Voler" which means "to fly." lemursjlr —Preceding comment was added at 16:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missing symbol

Symbol "AV" is missing from the article. Gdr 21:57, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)

As a former US Navy Air Controller I can accurately state that the "V" in any area of aviation weather on hull classification or squadron designation stands for "Fixed Wing".

CVA=Carrier Fixed Wing Attack CVS=Carrier Fixed Wing Antisubarine Warfare VF=Fixed Wing Fighter Squadron VA=Fixed Wing Attack Squadron etc.

[edit] Coast Guard?

Should symbols used by the United States Coast Guard be integrated into this article? Do they play by the same book? I'm just wondering, because I wanted to add WLB (seagoing buoy tender), but wasn't sure if it goes here or not. —User:Mulad (talk) 02:02, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

The USCG has its own system it seems. All Hull symbols begin with a 'W' - similar to the US Military Sealift Command which designates it's ships with a leading 'T'. Some USCG ships (eg. Icebreakers) have a regular designation trailing the leading 'W', others such as Cutters do not occur in the general system summarised in the article.

Here is a list of Hull classification symbols from the USCG's site:

  • 420' Icebreaker (WAGB)
  • 399' Polar Class Icebreaker (WAGB)
  • 378' High Endurance Cutter (WHEC)
  • 290' Inland Icebreaker (WAGB)
  • 295' Training Barque Eagle (WIX)
  • 282' Medium Endurance Cutter (WMEC)
  • 270' Medium Endurance Cutter (WMEC)
  • 230' Medium Endurance Cutter (WMEC)
  • 225' Seagoing Buoy Tender (WLB)
  • 213' Medium Endurance Cutter (WMEC)
  • 210' Medium Endurance Cutter (WMEC)
  • 180' Seagoing Buoy Tender (WLB) Updated indicator
  • 175' Coastal Buoy Tender (WLM)
  • 160' Inland Construction Tender (WLIC)
  • 140' Icebreaking Tug (WTGB)
  • 123' Patrol Boat (WPB)
  • 110' Patrol Boat (WPB)
  • 100' Inland Buoy Tender (WLI)
  • 100' Inland Construction Tender (WLIC)
  • 87' Coastal Patrol Boat (WPB)
  • 75' River Buoy Tender (WLR)
  • 75' Inland Construction Tender (WLIC)
  • 65' River Buoy Tender (WLR)
  • 65' Inland Buoy Tender (WLI)
  • 65' Small Harbor Tug (WYTL)
  • 52' Motor Life Boat (MLB)
  • 47' Motor Life Boat (MLB)
  • 44' Motor Life Boat (MLB)
  • 41' Utility Boat (UTB)
  • 38' Deployable Pursuit Boat (DPB)
  • 21'-64' Aids to Navigation Boats
  • 25' Transportable Port Security Boat (TPSB)
  • Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat (RHI)

Journeyman 02:34, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Still in use

Shouldn't we compile a list of hull class symbols still in use? A lot are retired, and it's hard to find what are still used. 68.98.162.253 18:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with List of hull classifications

It has been suggested that these two articles be merged. Seems reasonable to me. One is in alphabetical order, and one is grouped by function. Both sequences are useful, and any merging should retain both. Lou Sander 12:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

How about moving the function sequence to List of Hull Classification and keep Hull classification symbol as a definition and redirect page? --Harlsbottom 12:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Lou Sander 14:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. This page is much more useful. Trekphiler 00:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment

I gave it an "NA" because this article should be a list.--Looper5920 10:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Submarine Types

The list of submarine types has many errors.

SS - still very much in use. SS is the USN designator for diesel-electric attack submarines (Romeo, Song, Ming, 209, Kilo, etc). SSK is a British term that is only used colloquially by the US Navy and should not be included in a list of USN terms except for explanatory reasons.

SSA - Russia still has D-E SSA's in service.

SSB/SSG - Several nations still have conventional ballistic and guided missile subs in their OOB's.

SSC/SSM - needs a designator noting that SSC is 150+ tons, while SSM is under 150 tons. Both are D-E.

SSP/SSI - SSP is the USN official designator for AIP submarines, while SSI is a largely British term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lemursjlr (talk • contribs) 17:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BBCV

Weren't the Ise class battleships of the IJN classed as BBCV for being hybrid carrier/battleships? 172.209.205.230 (talk) 19:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] K for Corvette

Is there actually any reference for the snigle-letter designation K being used for corvettes? I've certainly never heard of it, although I admit it's not really in my field. —Chris Buckey (talk) 11:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Confusion with the flag superior of pennant numbered British corvettes and frigates? GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)