Talk:USS Hancock (CV-19)

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 articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / Asian / Japanese / North America / United States / World War II

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Claims: first carrier with steam catapults to be able to launch high performance jets, last carrier with wooden deck flight deck

These claims need some references. I think I previously found a claim that another ship (maybe Randolph) had the first steam catapults. Is this the same claim, or a claim that Hancock had bigger ones. As for wooden decking, I think it needs to be clarified. I doubt the ship had wooden decks throughout her career, so when did the decking get replaced?Busaccsb (talk) 18:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Randolph never had steam catapults; her original H-4 units were replaced with H-8s in the early 50s, and she kept those for the rest of her career. Hancock was the first of the class to undergo the SCB-27C refit, which included C-11 steam cats.--Solicitr (talk) 08:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

USS Hancock (CVA-19) was the first to have steam catapults, according to every history I've ever read. (Hydraulic, not steam, cats were used in earlier ships, including, I THINK, the Ticonderoga.) I was public affairs officer aboard USS Hancock (CVA-19) from 1967-69. I should be noted that Hancock was named after the John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, which ran the bond drive to fund construction of the ship; while the name carries the name recognition of John Hancock, the ship was not actually named after that founding father, though the resemblance carried considerable PR value. The ship, according to my records, was commissioned Hancock on Apr. 15, 1944, at the Fall (not Fore) River Shipyard, Quincy, Mass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.124.108 (talk) 12:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was no Fall River shipyard in Quincy, MA. The Bethlehem Steel Company, Quincy, MA shipyard was located on the Weymouth Fore River and was previously operated by the "Fore River Ship & Engine Company" of Quincy. Fall River, MA is 40 miles away. As for the naming, I think that's been hashed out before in this article, the US Navy Historical Center says she was named for John Hancock as does a period newspaper article (Jan 1944). --Dual Freq (talk) 14:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recommended addition re: SCB-125 conversion

New user to Wiki. Recommend more experienced user add/edit section on the SCB-125 conversion to indicate that it took place at Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco, CA in 1954 per the History section of the 1968 - 1968 Cruise Book, see identified source on the Wikimedia page.

Dates can be pinned down by citing the NavSource page on the ship that states it was decommissioned 13 Apr 1956 until 15 Nov 1956 for this conversion.

Since I am not yet Wiki-savvy, I leave it to those that are to consider my input and make adjustments as they see fit. User The Dude (talk) 15:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]