Talk:USS America (LHA-6)

Well decks

The Wasp (LHA-1) class ships were the 1st U.S. amphibious assault ships to have both a full length flight deck for helicopters, and a well deck for landing craft. The LPH amphibious assault ships (the 7 ships of the Iwo Jima (LPH-2) class, 3 converted Essex class aircraft carriers, and one converted Casablanca class escort aircraft carrier) had only flight decks. Wjwtk (talk) 00:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

See Talk:America class amphibious assault ship#Well decks for my response. - BillCJ (talk) 01:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

LPH

With no well deck for landing craft, the new USS America should be numbered as an LPH.Wjwtk (talk) 23:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The Navy apparently disagrees. You'll have to ask them why. Please remember that talk pages are not forums for general discussion, but rather for improving the article. Still, if you find the answer in a reliable source, it would be worth having in the article. - BillCJ (talk) 23:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Other US warships bearing the name

There seem to be conflicting claims on this article and USS_America_(CV-66). This article states that the USS America (LHA 6) "will be the fourth American warship to bear this name." The article for the previous USS America (CV 66) says of the carrier, "She was the fifth U.S. Navy ship to bear the name..." The disambiguation page shows four USS America previous to LHA 6 (five if you count the yacht America, which is not technically the same name). However, one of these ships was a troop transport (not technically a warship), and another was a Stone_Fleet ship over which there seems to be some confusion (see comment on Talk:Stone_Fleet). I believe this is the source of the differing claims, but I'd like to see someone better-versed in naval designations address the question. MolotovH (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Great question. I don't know that the group reading this here will be big enough to get a good answer. If no one responds, you might try reposting the question here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships HornColumbia (talk) 03:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The 4th designation is from a navy source, it does not count the two civil war vessels, neither the yacht nor the boat with a different name. Suggest changing to read USN; american might be more appropriately used for a combination of USN and USCG vessels, CSA ships, Revenue Cutters, etc.. 144.183.224.2 (talk) 00:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Capable of carrying a brigade?

A Marine Expeditionary Brigade is nine times larger than the stated 1600+ troop capacity stated elsewhere in the article and in the references. Can someone please clarify how this is possible? If they are referring to cross-decking troops from other ships across the assault ship's deck this is plausible, but this is certainly not what you would assume from the text. Should the text say "Marine Expeditionary Unit" (MEU) instead or "...Brigade"? This is far more likely and would conform to capabilities of the previous Tarawa class. Pmarshal (talk) 09:39, 19 August 2011 (UTC) Changed "marine expeditionary brigade" to "marine expeditionary unit" since this conforms to the capabilities of the previous Wasp and Tarawa classes which are similar sized ships. Pmarshal (talk) 04:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Fourth Warship to be named for the USA?

USS America (ID-3006) (originally 'SS Amerika') was not named for the USA, but instead the continent with the same name. In German, 'Amerika' refers to the continent exclusively, and never the USA. Rob (talk) 11:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsuss-america-lha-6-successfully-completes-acceptance-sea-trials-4172016

  Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 13:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 21:21, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on USS America (LHA-6). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20171028093258/http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2016/pdf/navy/2016ssdforlha.pdf to http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2016/pdf/navy/2016ssdforlha.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/06/navy_america_name_063008w/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC)