Talk:USS New York (LPD-21)

Name?

[new comments moved to end of section.]

"to be named for the state of New York." isn't it named after the city of New York? --24.6.127.199 08:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The history channel documentary about the making of this vessel states that it is named after New York (the city). All the other vessels in the San Antonio Class are also named for cities, with the exception of the USS Somerset (named for the County where United Flight 93 crashed). http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/lpd-17.htm 66.73.165.197 01:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Governor George E. Pataki wrote a letter to Secretary England requesting that the Navy revive the name USS New York in honor of September 11's victims and to give it a surface warship involved in the war on terror. In his letter, the Governor said he understood state names presently are reserved for submarines but asked for special consideration so the name could be given to a surface ship. The request was approved August 28, 2002."

from the LPD 21 fact sheet published by the US Navy User:Pedant 22:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Of course, New York is the name of a city in the state of New York so if the Navy were reserving state names for submarines then special dispensation would have to be given to use a "state name" even if the sole intent was to name the vessel after the city of New York. Sometimes things really do turn out to be both a floor wax and a dessert topping. - Dravecky 05:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

On (not) using city names on nukey subs: Shhh. Don't anyone tell folks who are on/who were on the Albany, Los Angeles, Chicago, Augusta, Alexandria, Annapolis, Asheville, Atlanta, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, Birmingham, ..., Toledo, and Tucson, etc, etc. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_submarines_of_the_United_States_Navy. In the case extant, involving this newest LPD: IT IS OF COURSE named for the city, not the state, the observation comment in Pataki's letter-request notwithstanding.

98.164.237.198 (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The USS New York is named for the State of New York. I am a plank owner and currently serve onboard. All sailors that come to this ship are given command indoctrination and are told this. The ship's crest has many references to what happened on 9/11 in New York City, but above the phoenix rising from the flames of the World Trade Center you will see land with water in the foreground and maple leaves to the left and right side. This is to represent the state. We also have three, maybe more, placards around the boat that state the characteristics of the ship and that it is named for the State of New York. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.56.129.194 (talk) 10:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The ship is named for the City Of New York, NOT the State of New York. In the 20th century state names were reserved for battleships, and then once battleships were no longer being built, state names were reserved for ballistic missile submarines.

I contacted the U.S. Navy to specifically inquire whether the ship was named for the city OR the state. I received a reply from the a spokesman for the U.S. Navy stating that the ship is named for the city, NOT the state. (If anyone would like a copy of this email to contact the appropriate person in the U.S. Navy to verify this fact, please contact me at eagle11772@yahoo.com and I shall forward you the email for you to contact that person).

Cruisers and similar ships are named for cities. ALL ships in this class are named for cites. The ship really should have been named "USS City Of New York" as that is the legal (official) name of the city colloquially called "New York". The official name is NOT "New York City". It is akin to the "City Of Chicago" or the "City Of San Francisco". Just as the "City Of New York" is not "New York City", Chicago is NOT "Chicago City" nor San Francisco "San Francisco City".

Other ships in the U.S. Nave HAVE been named "USS City Of.....".

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Usswisconsin (talk • contribs) 18:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Only one of importance: USS City of Corpus Christi (SSN-705) — 'the "City of" prefix [was] added to placate protesters who claimed that it was improper to name a warship "the body of Christ"'. By contrast, USS New York City (SSN-696) was named for the city.

And not all the ships are named for cities, USS Mesa Verde (LPD-19) is named for Mesa Verde National Park.

Despite your Navy spokesman, there are multiple authoritative sources identifying the state as the ship's namesake:

• "USS New York (LPD 21) is the fifth U.S. ship to be named for the state of New York."
• "The sunburst [in the ship's crest] represents the crown of the Statue of Liberty. They represent the seven seas and continents of the world and also suggest a direct connection to the littoral missions of the USS New York anywhere in the world, past and present. The mountains and lakes surrounded by the maple leaves represent the natural beauty of the State of New York."
  http://www.navy.mil/ussny/ny_history.asp
• "In his letter, the Governor [Pataki] said he understood state names presently are reserved for submarines but asked for special consideration so the name could be given to a surface ship. The request was approved August 28, 2002."
  http://www.ussnewyork.com/ussny_about.html
• “From the war for independence through the war on terrorism, which we wage today, the courage and heroism of the people of New York has been an inspiration. USS New York will play an important role in our Navy’s future and will be a fitting tribute to the people of the Empire State,” [SECNAV] England said.
  http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=30979

—WWoods (talk) 22:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

What do you think the next: "USS New York City (SSN-696) was a Los Angeles-class submarine and the only warship of the United States Navy to be named specifically for New York City (as distinct from the U.S. state)." In my opinion, it is clear that the submarine was named after the Big Aple and this newly built ships isn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.63.164 (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

References

order

According to San Antonio class amphibious transport dock list is the fifth not the sixth --Jor70 19:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Article name

This ship's name is the New York, not the USS New York. It won't be USS until its commisioning in 2009. User:Pedant 22:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

References

The link to HullNumber.com might need to be removed because the website in question has many mistakes regarding the facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.53.42 (talk) 15:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

USS New York LPD-21 origin

Could any of you editors look at this information and see if its pertent to this article, it involves me so its a COI for me to post. Scott

http://www.ussnewyork.com/wordpress/?p=350 http://www.ussnewyork.com/wordpress/?p=36

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/broadside/2009/02/18/bonded-by-a-miracle/

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.70.134.59 (talk • contribs) 12:59, August 6, 2009

William Jefferson - an insult

It is an insult to the Navy, victims of 911 and the people who serve to defend this country to have the name of the convicted felon, William Jefferson, highlighted in the text of LPD-21 as follows: Several dignitaries were in attendance, including Louisiana Congressman William J. Jefferson, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, members of the New York Police Department and New York Fire Department, and family members of 9/11 victims.

Jefferson is a disgrace to the nation. His name in the text adds nothing to the value of the information and should not be in the same sentence as the reference to Police Dept, Fire Dept victims etc.

9-11-09

Yelodog (talk) 15:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I removed him due to the fact that I believe removing him would not change the integrity of the topic he was listed under. Feel free to talk about it more here.

Stevied019 (talk) 19:12, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I added him back. There is no reason to remove his name from the list of dignitaries. He was a Congressman and he was there. Wikipedia is not partisan, nor revisionist. Neutralis (talk) 23:41, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Can I just second this, I think it's disturbingly Orwellian to edit someone out of a WP page because he's fallen out of favor.--203.58.0.142 (talk) 00:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is INDEED partisan, revisionist, retaliatory, and dishonest. The man (whoever he is) was, nevertheless, THERE. ~AJ REDDSON, the only HONEST Wikipedia user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.10.167.111 (talk) 00:54, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Why was the USS New York oriented west,when it was constructed?

I would think that in retaliation, the ship would ahve been constructeded in the east ward position, considering that's the deriction from which the attacks came from.24.2.198.231 (talk) 18:06, 2 November 2009 (UTC)11/02/09 D.Capers.

Neither the Northrop Grumman Ship Systems or the U.S. Navy practice feng shui. Ships are built with their bow facing out of the dry-dock where they are being constructed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.244.188.41 (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Name is still confusing

I am still confused over the name. If this class of ships is named for states, then why would her sister ships be named Somerset (town in Pennsylvania) and Arlington (city in Virginia)? Wouldn't those name choices suggest that this one is actually for New York (city in New York)? It doesn't make much sense to me that one of three would be named for a state, while the other two are named for municipalities. --Mfwills (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

there used to be conventions re. naming of u.s. warships. for the duration of their existence, all battleships were named for states. during this period, heavy cruisers were named for major cities, and light cruisers for prominent smaller cities. submarines were named for fish, and dd's and de's for individuals.initially, aircraft carriers were named for revoltionary war sites, or for warships of that period.after the day of the battleship, missle submarines (boomers)were often, but not always, named for states, and attack submarines for cities. notable among these were the ohio class of boomers, and the los angeles class of hunter-killers. given the proliferation of new ship types, these conventions have largely been abandoned. i can't remember if the text makes it clear, but one of the reference articles points out that these three are named after sites involved in the events of 9/11. Toyokuni3 (talk) 07:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

That's precisely my point: the ships are supposedly named for the sites of the 9/11 attacks. If the site in the state of Virginia is the city of Arlington and the site in the state of Pennsylvania is the town of Somerset, then it stands to reason that the site in the state of New York is the city of New York.--Mfwills (talk) 09:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The modern convention was (and with the exception of this ship, still is) that the names of States of the Union are reserved for capital ships, i.e. the most powerful ships in the fleet. When post-Dreadnought battleships were considered as such, they were always named for States; more recently, the "capital ship" designation has shifted to ballistic missile submarines. The USS New York (assuming it is named after the State of New York) is only the second vessel in the history of the U.S. Navy to break this convention - the first occasion was when the intended name of USS Rhode Island was changed to USS Henry M. Jackson shortly after Senator Jackson's death in 1983. (HoraceCoker) 19.49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The governor of New York wrote the Secretary of the Navy, asking that a surface ship be named after New York City. The request was granted in 2002 and this ship was named New York, despite not being a submarine.71.244.188.41 (talk) 22:44, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

There's also USS John Warner (SSN-785). And the Seawolf class is a mess, namingwise, with one 'denizen of the deep', one state, and one ex-president.

—WWoods (talk) 22:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps it is not so odd after all. USS New York (named for a state), USS Somerset (named for what I now know is a county, not a town) and USS Arlington (named for a city). Not consistent, but somewhat understandable.--Mfwills (talk) 04:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

There's also a ship named for Mesa Verde National Park, so the class doesn't have a strict naming policy. Why LPD-21 was named for the whole state rather than the city is unclear. Possibly because USS New York City had only recently been taken off the Navy List. Perhaps Gov. Pataki felt that the attack had struck more than just the city.

—WWoods (talk) 17:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Exceptions to the protocol are made from time to time based on extraordinary sotuations, to which detailed measure is not necessarily possible (for example, naming another LPD, I think it was, for a Marine Corps Medal Of Honor recipient). ~AJ REDDSON — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.10.167.111 (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

The OP makes a mistake - "If this class of ships is named for states..." The whole point is that these sorts of ships are generally not named for states. State names have been reserved for some years now for submarines. Submarines do not always take the name of a state, but a state name is almost invariably assigned to a submarine. Special dispensation was granted for this one vessel, most of the rest of the class have continued with the usual practice and are named for cities, with special cases being Somerset, named for a county involved in the 9/11 attacks, Mesa Verde, named for a National Park, and John P. Murtha, named for a prominent individual with strong navy associations. 82.39.49.182 (talk) 23:29, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

• See United_States_ship_naming_conventions#Contemporary_ship_naming_conventions - it should answer any question about ship names. The San Antonio-class (LPD-17) are named for U.S. cities, with some exceptions that are noted on that page. - ^theWOLFchild 23:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Dead Links

There are many dead links as well as duplicates. The dead links in the references are #2, #5, #9, #12, #13, #11 does not contain history information, and #16 does not contain a article about the subject. In external links #3 is dead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.228.157.18 (talk • contribs)

Some of those were fixed a week or so ago. Think they are all fixed now. Try to help fix these type things in the future. Sign your posts on talk pages with 4 tildas (~~~~) next time. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Dead links

Can someone please fix the links here, these listed below are either dead or do not lead to a reference indicated

Notes

1. 3 dead link

^ a b USS New York (LPD 21) Official Site – Commissioning Dead link https://www.pms317.navy.mil/ships/lpd21.asp

1. 7 dead link

^ http://www.ussny.org/faq.php

1. 8 Link does not go to reference/story

^ Baldwin, Tom (22 May 2005). "Warship Built Out of Twin Towers Wreckage", The Times. Accessed: 2009-11-02.

1. 9 Link does not go to reference/story

^ Deepti Hajela (2 November 2009). "Ship Built With WTC Steel Comes to Namesake City". Associated Press. Accessed 2009-11-02.

1. 10 link does not go to reference/story

^ History of the USS New York

1. 11 link does not go to reference/story (domain possibly has been transferred and no previous content is available from ussny.org)

^ http://www.ussny.org/faq.php

1. 16 Link does not go to reference/story

^ Reilly, Corinne. "Newly Commissioned New York Faces Repairs".Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, 12 January 2010.

External links Dead link Official site of the USS New York commissioning Link does not go to reference/story Baldwin, Tom. "Warship built out of Twin Towers wreckage", The Sunday Times, May 22, 2006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.70.26.54 (talk) 10:03, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Lost Symbolism

The article cites the amoung of WTC steel used as "symbolic," yet fails to mention WHY it is symbolic; I can't for the life of me see how such a relatively small amount is symbolic, only the fact that her BOW (the pointy end, and therefore the point of the tip of the spear she is supposed to represent) is modestly symbolic. Probably want to explain that someday. That is, if it's not so terribly inconvenient. ~AJ REDDSON — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.10.167.111 (talk) 01:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on USS New York (LPD-21). 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/20130304091744/http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/articles/2012/086.html to http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/articles/2012/086.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131102034136/http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20131030-new-york.html to http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20131030-new-york.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20021229095444/http://www.ussnewyork.com/ to http://www.ussnewyork.com/

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) 20:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Mighty Ships

Hello This ship was featured in a Discovery Channel show calledMighty Ships, season 6 episode 4. Is there a good place in the article to mention this? thanks. 199.101.61.34 (talk) 02:50, 20 March 2019 (UTC)