Talk:USS Hornet (CV-12)

needs an intro

to be a start class article in project california, it needs to have an introduction. Anlace 03:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe that's fixed. — Johan the Ghost _seance 01:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Pictures

There are a lot of pictures of Hornet in the Commons category: commons:Category:USS Hornet (CV-12). If you want pics, check there first. If you upload new pics, add them there. I recently added some of the space exhibit. — Johan the Ghost _seance 14:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Movie Location

So I was just on Hornet (again... did the flashlight tour, very cool) and one of the volunteers was talking about how the ship was used for filming xXx: State of the Union. Apparently Ice Cube was aboard for some time; seems like the hangar and flight decks were used, including a spectacular dive off the flight deck (by an ex navy Seal stuntman). They even had tanks aboard. So... does anyone know where we can find a source of info that can be referenced for this? I found something, but it ain't great... — Johan the Ghost _seance 01:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I did do a tour aboard the Hornet and the guide mentioned that a lot of the painted lines on the flight deck were not a part of the original paint scheme of the Hornet at any time during its Navy service. Instead, they were painted that way for the movie stealth--Daishi808 (talk) 18:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe he/she confused the movie title? The Stealth page says it was shot on USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Carl Vinson. XxX was definitely on Hornet, and you'd have thought they would mentioned it if they'd had 2 movies aboard. — Johan the Ghost _seance 14:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The Hornet museum now has a page on this. I expanded the section. johantheghost (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

the mention of 'phantom-themed shows' requires explanation. ghosts? mcdonnell-douglas f-4 phantoms? what?Toyokuni3 (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Fixed by WL'ing "phantom". Normal usage for the aircraft is to use proper-noun, so the common-noun usage for these phantoms is another clue.--S. Rich (talk) 15:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

i should have seen that the common noun use indicated the former. nonetheless, i think the clarification was worthwhile. thanks.Toyokuni3 (talk) 23:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

1945 Roster of Officers for USS Hornet CV-12

According to Wikipedia guidelines under External Links and specifically What Should Be Linked: 3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.

A link to an external document showing the 1945 Roster of Officers for the USS Hornet CV-12 was added in the External Links section of the article. That document contains neutral material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to amount of detail.

MBK004 deleted the link to the roster of officers. According to MBK004, the link does "not comply with our guidelines for external links" and was removed.

I believe MBK004 is in error on the deletion per the guidelines quoted above, and I believe the link to the 1945 roster of officers should be restored.

BowmanBass (talk) 14:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

CV-12 Recommissioning

According to other online sources I have read on this USS Hornet, she was recommissioned in a formal ceremony on 17 October, 1998 where she was commissioned formally as a museum ship. YouTube as a video of CV-12's recommissioning ceremony. 68.236.155.234 (talk) 02:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Date error considering JAG

I was reading the article on CV-12 while watching the episode of "JAG" that was filmed on her. The Wikipedia article credited the episode as being filmed in 1999, whereas it was actually done in 1997. The particular episode is titled "Ghost Ship," Season3, Episode 1, first aired on September 23, 1997. Please see the following link for verification:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0613269/

98.91.4.219 (talk) 21:12, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Benjamin Harrington

It is the Hornet.

Somehow, someone has managed to comment (without signing, or adding a headline. How does that work, anyway?) that the overhead shot of the Hornet is actually a "supercarrier", appearently of the Nimitz Class. This person needs to take a closer look. See the number 12 on the flight deck? That is the Hornet's number. She was updated with an angular flight deck during a modernization overhaul in the 1950s, with the advent of jet aircraft. Also, the Nimitz Class are designated as CVN-68 through CVN-77. Not a 12 among them.Helensguy1 (talk) 04:20, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on USS Hornet (CV-12). 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/20100405084644/http://hnsa.org/doc/plans/index.htm to http://www.hnsa.org/doc/plans/index.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 18:18, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on USS Hornet (CV-12). 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/20071012115530/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=2130&ResourceType=Structure to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=2130&ResourceType=Structure

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on USS Hornet (CV-12). 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/20110717022434/http://thepostandreview.com/site/hornet-plus-three/ to http://thepostandreview.com/site/hornet-plus-three/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120515231316/http://maritimeghostconference.com/uss-hornet/ to http://maritimeghostconference.com/uss-hornet/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 19:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Possible Participation Inaccuracy

Respectfully, the article suggests Hornet support in the Battle off Samar Island. It may be that Hornet's planes attacked the center fleet at some previous or future date as that fleet was leaving, but not during the battle itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:442:4480:4D40:98E5:72C0:1B59:CBB3 (talk) 14:14, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Hornet (CV-12)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 05:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

• Is there a better version of the badge? If not no worries.
• The licensing for File:Samar.jpg is pretty sketchy
  • Fixed
    • Thanks Kees08 (Talk) 21:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
• Any interest in making this file page match the others in terms of style? File:Battleship_Yamato_under_air_attack_April_1945.jpg
  • What do you mean?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:38, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I don't think it is actionable, but I like the machine-readable templates (like the Commons Information template). So you can ignore this if you please. Kees08 (Talk) 21:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
      • I do too, but I was kind of burnt out while working through the images and external links and was wishing that Commons would stop expecting us to fix problems caused by their uploaders. Maybe some sort of equivalent of NPP? Well, a fellow can dream, n'est-ce pas?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• Would perhaps this photo or any other from here be more appropriate in the Apollo 11/12 section?
  • It's a beautiful photo, but it's actually a training exercise. File:USS Hornet (CVS-12) approaches Apollo 11 space capsule 1969.jpg is far less pretty, but it's the real thing. Which do you prefer?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:03, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I suppose the file you suggest, I was aware it was a training exercise but not aware that a photo from the mission existed. Since the mission has more encyclopedic value, makes sense to use that. I could go either way though so whatever your preference is. Kees08 (Talk) 21:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

That's all for images. That was a lot to check! Still have to review the article for prose etc. Kees08 (Talk) 05:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

• Should this be 'the Philippines Campaign'? The ship then participated in Philippines Campaign in
• For some reason this sentence is tripping me up; is there a better way to word it? Their designed complement was approximately 268 officers and 2,362 enlisted men, but this was inadequate from the beginning; the addition of more light weapons and other equipment greatly increased the overcrowding so that Hornet's sister Intrepid had a crew of 382 officers and 3,003 enlisted men in 1945.
• One too many was's here Hornet was built with a single hydraulic catapult was fitted on the forward part
• Seems phrased a little odd and little additional damage appears to have been done for the loss of one aircraft shot down by AA guns.
• Remove 'on' the southern Marianas on six days later
• What is a snooper? about a dozen snoopers and attack
• Is there a way to avoid the double negative? was not certain that the Americans were not merely attacking
• Needs fixed: and the carriers turned into the wind to being launching 140 fighters
• The previous sentence has the Japanese as the subject, which implies the Japanese gave the battle that nickname. I presume they did not. Not without cause they did nickname the battle "The Marianas Turkey Shoot"
  • Umm the last word of the previous sentence is "Americans"--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:26, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Right, I think it is fine as-is. Kees08 (Talk) 21:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
• Rephrase The first, of about 20 torpedo bombers, was shot down to an aircraft by fighters and anti-aircraft fire
• Just making sure, the sources are saying that the Japanese numbers are correct and the American estimates are wrong and there is no OR right? The American pilots claimed to have shot down 110 aircraft and destroyed 95 on the ground, although the First Air Fleet lost less than two dozen aircraft to all causes.
  • Yes, we have partial Japanese records for this period.
• they proceeded north awith the mission
• the detonation knocked out all of the her boilers
• to have destroyed? to have shot down 26 Japanese aircraft and to destroyed 29 on the ground
• landings were done? With his obligation to cover the Lingayen Gulf area until the landings done
• others? and two other were splashed
• Rephrase this After the airstrikes flew off further attacks crippled her sister Franklin.
• How were they able to launch their aircraft? The previous paragraph said they could not. Clark ordered that the damaged sisters steam backwards at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph) and launch their aircraft on 7 June as they provided the CAP over the task group.
• repairs,[71],
• Why are there so many quotation marks starting in this section Peacetime tensions: 1951 to 1959
  • 'Cause I'm quoting the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
    • Hmm okay. For the PD material I have seen quoted from NASA, I have never seen quotation marks used (since I suppose they are not required), but if this is something that you normally do and is accepted than it is fine. Kees08 (Talk) 21:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
      • If you look at the examples given in MOS:PMC, they all have quotation marks before and after the quote, so I've always assumed that Wiki quotes use the same general procedures as ordinary English, quotation marks or a block quote fore and aft of the quote, plus a cite.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:49, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
        • I think that is only for quoting individuals, like Captain Seabridge said, "The sea is wet." I do not really care either way, but I am pretty sure you can take the quotation marks out. It will not hold up the review either way. Kees08 (Talk) 01:31, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, see if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:26, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

I just need to review the last couple sections for prose, verify the sources, and we should be good to go. Kees08 (Talk) 21:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

• Missing the end of the sentence Following a similar cruise, 6 January – 2 July 1958,"
• Unless this is an ENGVAR this, deployement
  • Good catches, both.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Sources

• The awards and decorations are unsourced
  • Hidden--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• What makes arlingtoncemetery.net a reliable source?
  • legacy that I never looked at. At any rate, redundant and deleted.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• You have Palomar instead of Polmar in a couple spots
  • I always type the name of the observatory, persistent bad habit. More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• Missing accessdate: AS-202, NASA (NSSDC ID: APST202)
  • Can't do accessdate with archived URLs.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• Apollo 11 Archived 18 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine, NASA (NSSDC ID: 1969-059A) and A Front Row Seat For History at Archive.today (archived 19 March 2006), NASAexplores, 15 July 2004. Retrieved 10 May 2008. are formatted differently (also "Film & TV Location Rentals". USS Hornet Museum. Archived from the original on 18 December 2015. Retrieved 19 May 2019.. This is because of the access-date. I think it is caused by templates.
  • I knew there was a reason why I didn't want to tackle these. Some of them were archived when they didn't need to be.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• Apollo 12, NASA (NSSDC ID: 1969-099A). missing accessdate
• Are there any better sources than the IMDB reference?
  • That movie seems to have sunk without a trace and is often confused with a movie of the same title starring Chris Pine that came out a few years later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• endash for the date? Whirlwind: The Air War Against Japan, 1942-1945
• endash? The Marianas Turkey Shoot, June 19-20
• This is a blog. Saturday, Alameda Naval Base, CA, Eudaemonic blog. Retrieved 14 June 2008.
• This citation is incomplete "Hornet Plus Three" at the Wayback Machine (archived 17 July 2011)
• You might be able to replace citation 1 with this, it has 1991 as the date (then you will not need the note about the source being wrong)
  • Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
• Is there anyway you can paraphrase a little more so the text matches [thisdayinaviation.com/tag/uss-hornet-cvs-12 This Day in Aviation] less?

I think that should be all. Kees08 (Talk) 22:30, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

OK, I think that I've covered all of these; see if my changes are satisfactory. Thanks for your thorough review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Just a couple more

• Missing pp? Citation 59 right now. Tillman 2010, 119, 123
  • Sigh.
• You could probably get rid of the IMDB citation since the USS Hornet page covers it, I will leave it to you.
  • It's needed to source the bit about the movie being about the ship and not just aboard it.

So really just the pp issue and we are good to go here I believe. Sorry if I was a bit too hard in the review, been doing FA reviews more lately so might have gone a tad overboard. Kees08 (Talk) 01:31, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Not to worry, nothing here was really out of line for a thorough GA review, so we're good. Dunno if I ever want to take this past GA, but if I do, it will be pretty well prepared. Thanks for reviewing this so promptly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:57, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

The Typhoon

So I went to the USS Hornet and learned a lot about it. In that experience, I learned that sometime after the typhoon there was a Japanese submarine squad sent to destroy the Hornet. The only reason that it survived was because of the crushed bow. This encouraged the submarine squad to think it was one of there own. I just wondered if you would like to include this in the article. --Random Person117 (talk) 04:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

That's not be substantiated in any of the histories of the ship that I've read.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Damage to the Flight Deck

My father was assigned to the flight deck of the USS Hornet when a plane landed on the deck with a bomb that was not released rolled out of the bomb bay. The bomb exploded he and two men were blown into the second deck. One man died. One man lost his legs and father received a concussion. Because of the hole in the flight deck planes had to land in the water next to the aircraft carrier and pilots did not survive.

During the typhoon, the men were ordered below to their bunks. They took turns looking out a porthole and saw the flight deck pulled back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.125.80.224 (talk) 05:26, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Namesake

@Davidships: Found some sources that state this Hornet was named in honor of Hornet (CV-8); [1], [2], [3], [4]. Though you changed the infobox, in the "Construction and career" section it states;

...although the ship that later became Hornet originally had the name Kearsarge with the hull number of CV-12. ... The seventh Hornet (CV-8) was sunk in the Battle of Santa Cruz on 26 October 1942, and the CV-12 hull was renamed Hornet shortly afterwards.

References

There is another ref in that quote, though it's a book and I don't have ready access to it to evaluate it further. Cheers - wolf 01:46, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, as with Lexington and Yorktown, that explains why the name was chosen but not what the name means, for which see DANFS (which doesn't even mention CV-8). I believe that this approach is consistent with the template guidance: If the ship's name originates from a particular person, location, event, or object, it may be added here. (my emphasis). Of course, the context belongs in the article proper. Davidships (talk) 03:08, 7 March 2022 (UTC)