Talk:Carrier air wing

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / North America / United States

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 met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Name

Perhaps the name should be changed to Carrier Air Wing (United States) as this article does not appear to have a world view, and is more in line with a US CVW. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus for move.
— $V = I * R$ (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carrier air wing → Carrier air wing (United States) — See above comment for reason for change. Scope of article only talks about US Carrier Air Wings, where as historically the Royal Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy also had embarked Air Wings when the operated full sized Carriers. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Other nations generally have other names for carrier compenents, such as group, etc. Also "(United States)" is a disambiguator, which is unnecessary unless there is a another article with the same title. All that needs to be done is to make it clear in the Lead that the article is about the USN. - BilCat (talk) 20:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment perhaps a general article should be written about this aerial force based on a single carrier. Aero element of an aircraft carrier ? 76.66.192.144 (talk) 04:04, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose — If the term really is specific to the US, then it doesn't need a disambiguator. If it is not limited to the US, then the article should be extended rather then renamed to pigeon hole it into a limited subset of the topic.
— $V = I * R$ (talk) 16:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Ω. If you feel that the article doesn't provide a worldwide view, then by all means add information about other countries. Bracketed disambiguation qualifiers like "(United States)" should only be used when there's more than one article that the reader can be expected to be looking for. Jafeluv (talk) 10:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Composition History

As I am not an expert, I hesitate to do any edits here, that being said I am wondering if the Composition section should be expanded to include a Composition History sub-section which gives a decade by decade description of a typical carrier air wing would have looked like during that time in history. For I understand at one point F-14s, F/A-18s, A-7s, A-6s, and SH-3s all shared deck space aboard a US Carrier, but a F-14 didn't share deckspace with an A-5 Vigilante. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE. Tomcat and Vigi; Yes they did. Example is Carrier Air Wing EIGHT having RVAH-6 aboard her when she hosted VF-41 and VF-84's first cruise with F-14's from USS Nimitz (also first deployment of Tomcats aboard Nimitz) between September 1977 to July 20 1978. 101.174.62.94 (talk) 14:23, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While it would be useful, some eras of the USN's Carrier Air Groups/Air Wings were quite complicated, especially the 1940s and 50s, when so many different types performing the same roles were in service. One way might be to pick one or two air wings that have existed since the 30s (perhaps under different group/wing numbers), and give snapshots of their aircraft by decade. That might be a good start for the research, anyway. - BilCat (talk) 05:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Article is perhaps short on references, compared to the content amount. I think a lot has been added since my last visit. In the section of the typical composition during Vietnam - it includes the airwing for a Essex Class Carrier as a ASW carrier, but no entry for a Essex operating as an attack carrier (say off Vietnam) Hum - did any Essex as an ASW carrier deploy near Vietnam? - Adding to my own here - A fun item might be a table of Air Wing to Carrier by year. - Does not address BillCat request - but user can then see how the Airwing frequently shift aircraft carrier.(airwing change carriers when their carrier goes into major overhaul or homeport shift. Wfoj3 (talk) 00:26, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

S-3 to H-60

Would be interesting to expand the transition from the 8 S-3+6 SH-60F to 20 MH-60S/R, Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.165.242.55 (talk) 15:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carrier air wing. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/naval-aviation-history/united-states-naval-aviation-1910-1995/appendix-15-evolution-of-carrier-air-groups-and-wings.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.history.navy.mil/download/history/app15.pdf
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.history.navy.mil/avh-1910/APP23.PDF
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.history.navy.mil/download/history/app15.pdf
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.cnaf.navy.mil/air
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051124171403/http://www.airpac.navy.mil:80/units/wings.asp to http://www.airpac.navy.mil/units/wings.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 06:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Escort Carrier Air Groups

This might be the wrong place for this, but is there any information on the structure of Escort Carrier air groups? For example I know on British escort carriers there was typically only one composite squadron flying multiple aircraft types, whereas on US escort carriers there were often separate squadrons (although they could fly the same aircraft types) - eg. USMC Corsair squadrons supporting amphibious operations. 80.111.44.102 (talk) 11:07, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carrier Air Group abbreviation

The actual abbreviation for "Carrier Air Group" was "CVG", not "CAG". When Carrier Air Groups (CVG)s became Carrier Air Wings (CVW)s the Carrier Air Wing was not abbreviated "CAW", it was abbreviated "CVW" (replacing the "G" for "group" in the designation CVG with "W" for "wing" in the new designation CVW). The abbreviation "CAG" was and still is informally used as the title of the then CVG (now CVW) commander. See "List of United States Navy Aircraft Wings" article for a full list of "CVG"s which have existed throughout the history of U.S. Naval AviationNavalaviator84 (talk) 00:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]