Jump to content

Talk:Mistral-class landing helicopter dock

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

two articles

[edit]

193.248.41.90 07:35, 17 August 2005 (UTC) FS Mistral and Mistral class landing platform dock, 2 articles for one ship ???[reply]

Mistral class landing platform dock deals the with Mistral type of ship, which includes the Mistral and the Tonnerre; it will contain technical informations about the type of ship. FS Mistral deals specifically about the Mistral herself; if something particular happens to the ship, the information will be featured there. Rama 07:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

US centric

[edit]

Is it just me, or does this article only use US Navy terminology for its title? Xxxxxxxxxxx 01:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LPD or LHD ?

[edit]

For DCN, The Mistral class is a LHD (landing helicopter dock), not a LPD. That's logical, Mistral is in fact derived from the Wasp/Tarawa concept ; it has nothing to do with Trenton-class concept. TCD of the french navy (Orage...) are LPD, but not the Mistral class.  :) Look at : http://www.dcn.fr/us/offre/batiments_surface/mistral.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.197.222.163 (talk) 19:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I agree with that and I speak French very well. It's not exactly an amphibious assault ship. Bâtiments de projection et de commandement would translate as Projection and command vessels. They are more helicopter carriers and they command fleets more than they simply support amphibious assaults. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.125.144.213 (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

[edit]

Incorporating content from the French article.

Credits for the French article to: Akela NDE, Analphabot, Antonov14, Aramis, Auxerroisdu68, Aviapics, Badmood, Bazook, Bilou, Bob08, Béotien lambda, Cathbad, Chris 305, Chris93, CommonsDelinker, Cottard, David.Monniaux, Davric, Denis Dordoigne, El Zozo, Eskimbot, Eybot, Fabienkhan, Fafnir, Fredbo28, Gdgourou, GillesC, GL, HERMAPHRODITE, Heureux qui comme ulysse, Hugolapin, Isaac Sanolnacov, Jborme, Julia.taccoen, KelBot, Korrigan, L'amateur d'aéroplanes, Le Pied-bot, Like tears in rain, Liquid-aim-bot, Loveless, Lozère, Ludo29, M-le-mot-dit, MedBot, Meodudlye, MetalGearLiquid, Neuceu, Nod gwen, Nono64, Nykozoft, Patrick Rogel, Pautard, Pline, RamaR, RobotQuistnix, Romanc19s, S. DÉNIEL, SalomonCeb, Sebjarod, Sorpasso, Stéphane33, Sylvain Mielot, TCY, Ω, 71.141.143.80, 79.80.215.111, 80.125.172.55, 81.83.173.78, 82.126.76.34, 82.239.47.183, 83.52.158.26, 83.129.35.101, 83.204.137.6, 84.4.134.45, 84.6.98.47, 84.7.134.204, 84.101.240.217, 86.69.91.31, 90.47.19.243, 125.54.154.250, 131.137.245.197, 131.137.245.198, 131.137.245.200, 193.56.241.20, 194.7.9.78, 213.169.162.13.

Rama (talk) 21:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image of a French Amphibious excercice

[edit]

Regarding [1]: the image show the Foudre taking part in an amphibious excercice. The point of the image is to illustrate the French amphibious doctrine, not the Mistral herself.

There are already several other images that do no show the Mistral: one of the Sabre, one of a SIMBAD system of an unidentified ship (probably a frigate).

Furthermore, given the latest caption, confusion can occur only with people who do not read. These people will likely be confused whatever we do.

I deem the Image:Foudre-photo52.jpg to be useful in the present article because it illustrate the way in which the French carry out their amphibious operations, with a mix of Navy and Land units. The part in which the image is located deal precisely with this, not with the Mistral herself. Rama (talk) 07:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about about the Mistral class, not French Naval amphibious operations. Perhaps it's time to begin cutting back the aritcle to only the info specifically about the Mistral class. If the remainder is cited properly, then perhaps it could be used to start/expand an article about French Naval amphibious operations. This isn't the place for that, even if the French Wikipedia article covers that info. The other nonMistral pics need to go too. - BillCJ (talk) 07:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree. You are saying that any sort of context, either as text or as image, should be removed, including equipment featured on the Mistral and thus directly relevant to the subject. Rama (talk) 08:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When the "context" takes up such a large portion of the article, yes. There's nothing wrong with showing equpment in the Mistral, or entering/leaving it, or providing a paragraph of a few sentences, and that is what this article needs to get back to. Please remember that encyclopedia articles are intended to be summaries of the subject, not exhaustive treatments of tangental subject matter. - BillCJ (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that a two-paragraph subsection, which is directly relevant to the rest of the section, can hardly be said to be an exhaustive treatments of tangental subject matter. Rama (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistencies

[edit]

While doing a rough copyedit of the early parts of the article, I came across couple of inconsistencies and curiosities, which I am bringing here for the attention of the regular editors.

  • Tanks and armoured vehicles: The lead section claims these ships carry 70 vehicles, including a 13-strong tank squad. The "Amphibious capabilities" section says that 59 vehicles or the tank squad can be carried.
  • In a similar vein, the comparison of the Mistral’s deck space and capability does not crrespond with Foudre’s: the latter ship has less than half as much space, but carries more vehicles.
  • What is the purpose of listing the Troups de Marine regiments and that they are under Army control at this point of the article? Could this be reworked somehow?

Hopefully those more knowledable than I can resolve this. -- saberwyn 05:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • It depends on the sort of vehicles. It does not sound impossible that 13 Leclerc and 70 P4 cars would not use more space than 40 Leclerc ([2] states that the maximum load of Leclerc would be 40 tanks; I assume that this is a theoretical configuration because the squadron would operate without support from other vehicles. A workable force would combine fewer main battle tanks and more trucks, or be part of a large invasion fleet which is not the most likely scenario today). Also, a tank squadron is 13 tank strong; a group of squadrons is 40 strong (half a 80-strong Leclerc regiment [3]).
  • The French article (from which this article is partly translated) stressed the counter-intuitiveness that a bigger space allows fewer vehicles to be loaded (but it neither explains why, nor provides a source). Furthermore, it compares 13 Leclerc on the Mistral and 22 AMX-30 on the Foudre; but the Leclerc weights 55 tonnes, the AMX-30 only 36. I mean, with that kind of reasoning, I can claim that the Flamant can carry hundreds of vehicles, which is probably true if you pile up dismantled motorbikes...
  • The Troupes de Marine are the units used for the sort of operations that involve ships like Mistral; that they are under Army control is mentioned probably as a habit because it is a common mistake to mix up the Troupes de Marine (Army) and the Fusiliers marins (Navy), and also to stress the "joint operation" nature of the use of these ships. That being said, the "Troupes de Marine are Army not Navy" point is strongly stressed in the relevant article already, no it is not crucial to have it here.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 08:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS: sorry, I got all mixed up in the cavalry terms, and apparently that is also what happened to the sailors of Netmarine. A squadron (escadron) is a company-sized cavalry unit, with 13 tanks (1 + 3x4, typically) commanded by a captain (chef d'escadron); a groupe d'escadrons is a battalion-sized unit with 40 tanks (1+3x13) commanded by a commandant (chef d'escadrons, mind the plural). Rama (talk) 08:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair enough, like you said, most of these are the result of different emphasises (is that even a word) in French and English, or the result of a manky translation. I'll keep picking at bits and pieces over the next few weeks, then do a thorough copyedit once my studies finish for the year. -- saberwyn 09:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gradually chipping away at a copyedit of this article in my userspace. Any comments so far?

Russian deal implodes

[edit]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2011/03/mil-110316-rianovosti03.htm

Ouch! Time to update the article? Hcobb (talk) 03:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

French Translation

[edit]

The article says:

Referred to as "projection and command ships" (bâtiments de projection et de commandement or BPC)

My French is very rusty, but I think bâtiments are "buildings" and ships/boats should be bâteaux'... however, I'm willing to be called wrong by someone who knows better. Brickie (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know absolutely no French, but the French WP article calls it "Les bâtiments de projection et de commandement de la classe Mistral (BPC210)". So that appears to be the correct name in French. There's even an article at fr:Bâtiment (marine) about the word's naval usae. - BilCat (talk) 19:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to confirm, yes "Batiment" is perfectly correct. It's used to say both "ship" or "building" and as BilCat mentioned, we also have the french article to confirm. --McSly (talk) 20:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm French. Without context bâtiment definitely means building, it's the more common use of the word. For ships, it's mainly used to talk about large military ones, like the Mistral. "Navire" is the most common term for ship, and "bâteau" is boat, but can be used for big ships too, for example you'll often ear about "bâteaux de croisière" for cruise ships, even if "navire de croisière" would be more correct. Aesma (talk) 01:31, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Stocznia Remontowa de Gdańsk" most probably refers to "Gdańska Stocznia "Remontowa"" which has English wikipedia page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remontowa" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.96.117 (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed

[edit]

The other navies interest in this ship is mentioned in Naval forces, No.III/2013, Vol XXXIV, page 81.

Decision delayed

[edit]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i74NabTFMG_A9QuqBMc1Yb_7H0Hg?docId=70652890-b309-469c-bcd5-6ebfb2c411e5&hl=fr

Can we use as is, or do we need an English translation? Hcobb (talk) 13:57, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/mistral/
    Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 20:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

on many articles about ships it is comon taht is have section with similiar ships/classes from other navys. Is anyone willing to add them here ? 2A00:1028:9199:52F6:F545:B98C:FF71:263F (talk) 13:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sale to Egypt confirmed

[edit]

See here. Parsecboy (talk) 15:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Mistral-class amphibious assault ship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Mistral-class amphibious assault ship. 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) 09:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mistral-class amphibious assault ship. 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) 16:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:28, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mistral-class_landing_helicopter_dock&oldid=1249255421"