Jump to content

Talk:Izumo-class destroyer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please move article to "22DDH class destroyer"

[edit]

The current name is completely inaccurate - the official name of the ship's class is "22DDH class destroyer" - and it's not "22DDH class helicopter destroyer", either, just as a preemptive comment: The Japanese call all their carriers "destroyers" for political reasons. There is no mention in the ships class that it carries helicopters or jets, so the name of the wiki article about the 22DDH's predecessor, the 16DDH class destroyer, should also be fixed to reflect this reality. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 14:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean ?

[edit]

"The ship will be the largest combatant ship of the Japanese navy, superseding Hyūga class helicopter destroyers."

This seems to be a rather strange statement. The Hyuga class ships are only a couple of years old. Needs to be clarified.Eregli bob (talk) 08:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It means that this ship will take the mantle as the largest ship in the JMSDF from the Hyūga class, and not that the Hyūga class are to be replaced by the ship. Nick-D (talk) 08:26, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Amended paragraph to explicit state that they will take over the mantle of largest combat ship.Glevum (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated Info

[edit]

The following sentence is outdated: "Not to mention that the ongoing technical and budgetary problems being suffered by the latter program may have anyway seriously undermined the prospects of any JSDF procurement of one or more variants of the F-35, at least for the foreseeable future." Japan placed an order for the F-35 in December 2011, as documented on the F-35 page. Rugz (talk) 00:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Queries on Construction, paragraph 2

[edit]

"can also be carried" - this means the ship an carry all these men + equipment as well as its (presumably full) helicopter complement! I suspect the this number of men can only be carried if the number of helicopters is reduced, in which case the 'also' should be removed by 'instead'.

"initially intended ..." - this implies that there was a subsequent change of intention! What was the revised intention? If there wasn't one, remove 'initially'.

"originally scheduled ..." - this implies a change in the schedule! What is the new schedule? If there isn't one, remove 'originally'.Glevum (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV on carrier claims

[edit]

The article seems to be leaning too far towards "F-35 Carrier", when the Japanese do not have any indicated interest in the F-35B and the ship has neither the clear front nor the thermal protection required on American F-35B carrying amphibs. Hcobb (talk) 04:10, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Izumo-class helicopter destroyer. 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:

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) 12:50, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

rename, since plans to retrofit for jet fighters?

[edit]

Rename per Japan to have first aircraft carriers since World War II; maybe Izumo-class destroyer/carrier?

  • Disagree for the time being. They aren't carriers yet and will officially be called "multi-purpose escort destroyers" to comply with Japan's constitution.[1][2] Maybe wait until after the refit as politics will play a big part in it. Not forgetting the Invincible-class were initially called "Through-Deck Command Cruisers" for political reasons. 203.8.131.32 (talk) 03:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The term "mutli-purpose destroyers" is a translation of the term "多目的運用護衛艦" which in itself has only been confirmed by secondary sources of media reports at the time. The Ministry of Defense refers to them as "multi-function helicopter carrier destroyers" in their Medium Term Defense Program. Provided it's a "provisional" translation of the term "多機能のヘリコプター搭載護衛艦" found in its Japanese counterpart, but it's more official than the widely used term "multi-purpose destroyer" (which was based on hearsay to begin with), and appears to reflect their designation within the MoD at this stage, before the retrofit and acquisition of F-35Bs. I propose that the article be edited accordingly. 216.15.24.178 (talk) 06:19, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 December 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Tol (talk | contribs) @ 15:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Izumo-class multi-purpose destroyer → Izumo-class destroyer – The name "multi-purpose destroyer" was never adopted: the official name is "destroyer" as shown in Defense Programs and Budget of Japan Overview of FY2021 Budget Request (p.15). Panda 51 (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 14:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:44, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Izumo-class_destroyer&oldid=1213131285"