Author Topic: Naval Pictures VII: Underway, Shift Colors! (Read 152637 times)

Wrangler · « **on:** 23 September 2019, 10:12:39 »

New page, more ships!

USS Sullivans DDG-68

Ruger · « **Reply #1 on:** 23 September 2019, 10:45:06 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 23 September 2019, 10:12:39

New page, more ships!

USS Sullivans DDG-68

Minor correction: that should be U.S.S. The Sullivans.

Tragic story on how the original Fletcher-class destroyer got that name.

Ruger

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #2 on:** 23 September 2019, 10:50:21 »

Very sad story

On the topic of 5th, I haven't had a chance to look up which Royal Navy ships have had the number "5" but I am reminded of the fabulous 5th Batle Squadron of the Grand Fleet - at Jutland comprising HM Ships Barham, Valiant, Warspite, and Malaya

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5th_Battle_Squadron#Battle_of_Jutland

UPDATE - a quick look beyond Wikipedia tells me 05 was the pendant number for Defence (a cruiser), Ajax (a dreadnought), and Indomitable (a battlecruiser)

Sharpnel · « **Reply #3 on:** 23 September 2019, 10:55:50 »

We're on 7th edition of Naval Pictures. If iou could please change the Title, Wrangler, it would be appreciated.

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #4 on:** 23 September 2019, 10:57:25 »

Quote from: Sharpnel on 23 September 2019, 10:55:50

We're on 7th edition of Naval Pictures. If iou could please change the Title, Wrangler, it would be appreciated.

Well, poop-deck

I can't find anything as interesting for 7 immediately

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ships_with_pennant_number_7

Wrangler · « **Reply #5 on:** 23 September 2019, 11:19:03 »

Quote from: DoctorMonkey on 23 September 2019, 10:57:25

Well, poop-deck

I can't find anything as interesting for 7 immediately

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ships_with_pennant_number_7

Fixed the title of the thread. I'm idiot as usual. :-X

Colt Ward · « **Reply #6 on:** 23 September 2019, 11:21:18 »

Wrangler, you have to edit the original post's Subject.

Well, the USN 7th Fleet is based in Japan currently.

Formed in WWII in Australia, it was Mac's delivery service and was a major contributor (and I think CO) of the Leyte Gulf battles. From what I can tell, the fleet was in charge of the Korean War fleet and had the surviving BBs cycle through.

CV7 was the USS Wasp, recently located in January-

USS BB-7 was the USS Illinois, a pre-Dreadnaught built in 1897 . . . and last until 1955 as a training ship. Where they training US navy personnel to chip rust?

Sharpnel · « **Reply #7 on:** 23 September 2019, 11:22:33 »

It's a good hing that freighter/tanker is empty or that tugboat wouldn't have a snowball' chance in hell of moving it.

Luciora · « **Reply #8 on:** 23 September 2019, 11:25:32 »

I see Anchors aweigh and I think of this scene.

https://youtu.be/Vq8y6slKVUE

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 September 2019, 13:33:52 »

Some fleet action

HobbesHurlbut · « **Reply #10 on:** 23 September 2019, 14:27:53 »

USS Illinois
Couldn't find a colorized picture, so here's one, a side view sketch/painting of her.

nerd · « **Reply #11 on:** 23 September 2019, 14:35:41 »

Quote from: Colt Ward on 23 September 2019, 11:21:18

USS BB-7 was the USS Illinois, a pre-Dreadnaught built in 1897 . . . and last until 1955 as a training ship. Where they training US navy personnel to chip rust?

This is how she looked at the end of her career as a floating barracks. Not unlike Nelson's old ships that ended their lives in Ordinary, unsuitable for duty on the high seas.

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #12 on:** 23 September 2019, 15:04:18 »

Quote from: nerd on 23 September 2019, 14:35:41

This is how she looked at the end of her career as a floating barracks. Not unlike Nelson's old ships that ended their lives in Ordinary, unsuitable for duty on the high seas.

Camouflage - I'm not a battleship, I'm totally a house...

Wrangler · « **Reply #13 on:** 23 September 2019, 15:07:19 »

Wow, that certainly a houseboat.
Seem interesting ships near end of their service (past it) ended up that way. Many of the sailing ships were usually ended up in that fate, such as...

USS Constitution, a picture from 1905 prior her being rescued.

glitterboy2098 · « **Reply #14 on:** 23 September 2019, 15:22:49 »

Quote from: Ruger on 23 September 2019, 10:45:06

Minor correction: that should be U.S.S. The Sullivans.

Tragic story on how the original Fletcher-class destroyer got that name.

Ruger

seems like it would be unlucky to have just one boat for all five brothers. they should have named 5 boats after them, using each brother's full name.

David CGB · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 September 2019, 16:00:38 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 23 September 2019, 15:07:19

Wow, that certainly a houseboat.
Seem interesting ships near end of their service (past it) ended up that way. Many of the sailing ships were usually ended up in that fate, such as...

USS Constitution, a picture from 1905 prior her being rescued.

sad way to go, thankfully she did not go that way

Daryk · « **Reply #16 on:** 23 September 2019, 16:51:17 »

Speaking of tweaking the thread title, it should be "Underway, Shift Colors!" (says the former OOD...)

Charlie 6 · « **Reply #17 on:** 23 September 2019, 18:55:27 »

Quote from: Daryk on 23 September 2019, 16:51:17

Speaking of tweaking the thread title, it should be "Underway, Shift Colors!" (says the former OOD...)

Or go with the usual 0700 call of, "Sweepers, Sweepers, man your brooms. Give the ship a clean sweep down both fore and aft! Sweep down all decks, ladders and passageways!"

Next thread, take 8 O'clock Reports.

Daryk · « **Reply #18 on:** 23 September 2019, 18:57:11 »

Not a bad idea, but it's "ladderbacks", not "ladders"... ^-^

Charlie 6 · « **Reply #19 on:** 23 September 2019, 18:59:35 »

I thought so but used the one on the "1 Main Circuit" article on Wikipedia instead of going with my flagging memory.

Daryk · « **Reply #20 on:** 23 September 2019, 19:06:54 »

Ah, Wikipedia... I'm really beginning to hate that site. I keep having to tell students it's not something to cite in their papers... ::)

Wrangler · « **Reply #21 on:** 23 September 2019, 19:07:31 »

Quote from: Charlie 6 on 23 September 2019, 18:59:35

I thought so but used the one on the "1 Main Circuit" article on Wikipedia instead of going with my flagging memory.

I've fixed it. Its been multiple decades since i heard that 1MC. I couldn't find exact words using the internet.

On another, ship related.
Anyone have clue what submarine Class or name this is? I think it's USS Holland?

Daryk · « **Reply #22 on:** 23 September 2019, 19:10:48 »

Very well, Boats! :thumbsup:

(And thank you!)

hoosierhick · « **Reply #23 on:** 23 September 2019, 19:25:21 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 23 September 2019, 19:07:31

I've fixed it. Its been multiple decades since i heard that 1MC. I couldn't find exact words using the internet.

On another, ship related.
Anyone have clue what submarine Class or name this is? I think it's USS Holland?

USS Plunger, SS-2. The same pic is on the (and I hate to say it) Wikipedia page for the Plunger in much higher resolution. It looks like the sub behind it is the Shark.

Wrangler · « **Reply #24 on:** 23 September 2019, 19:36:29 »

Quote from: hoosierhick on 23 September 2019, 19:25:21

USS Plunger, SS-2. The same pic is on the (and I hate to say it) Wikipedia page for the Plunger in much higher resolution. It looks like the sub behind it is the Shark.

I forgot how they had interesting names like that on ships. Shame, but people today would think "plunger" as being a plumbing implement...

chanman · « **Reply #25 on:** 23 September 2019, 21:42:45 »

#7 Should be the Perry!

The Perry-class is also important as your starting point for the old EA classic Desert Strike

Weirdo · « **Reply #26 on:** 23 September 2019, 23:20:03 »

Is that supposed to be a Cheyenne?

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire · « **Reply #27 on:** 24 September 2019, 00:33:07 »

Quote from: Daryk on 23 September 2019, 19:06:54

Ah, Wikipedia... I'm really beginning to hate that site. I keep having to tell students it's not something to cite in their papers... ::)

When I was in college, I found Wikipedia to be a good resource for finding information on a subject via going straight to the citations and following those links. The Wiki articles themselves, not so much.

glitterboy2098 · « **Reply #28 on:** 24 September 2019, 01:50:06 »

Quote from: MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on 24 September 2019, 00:33:07

When I was in college, I found Wikipedia to be a good resource for finding information on a subject via going straight to the citations and following those links. The Wiki articles themselves, not so much.

same. it is handy for getting a rough overview of a topic, and some handy links and keywords/names to start serious research with.

that said, the quality of wikipedia has definitely improved over the years. at least for hard science and historical topics. (current politics and anything popculture is a major gamble as to how reliable it is)

Daryk · « **Reply #29 on:** 24 September 2019, 03:39:56 »

Exactly... it's OK as a starting point for research, but it should never be what you cite in a paper.