my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » US Navy ship numbers help needed (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: US Navy ship numbers help needed Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 04-08-2003 03:50 PM                        I am organising and renaming the pictures I took during my recent trip to San Diego. I thought the numbers painted on the ship hulls were unique to each ship. After googling ship numbers, I found several sites listing historic and present hull numbers. Now I am confused. hullnumbers.com for instance lists "27" for several different aircraft carriers: AKV-27 USS MARCUS ISLAND CVE-27 USS SUWANNEE CVHE-27 USS SUWANNEE CVL-27 USS LANGLEY And what is the difference between CVE and CVHE?  |  IP: Logged Jason Burroughs Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 654 From: Allen, TX Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-08-2003 04:40 PM                     A good site for the world's navies is www.hazegray.org The numbers may be repeated accross different classifications, therefore not all ships will have a unique number CVE = Escort Carrier CVHE= Helicopter Escort Carrier Suwannee ex merchant Markay AO 33 - AVG 27 - ACV 27 - CVE 27 - CVHE 27 Photos: [During WWII], DANFS History Built by Federal (Kearny). Laid down 3 June 1939, launched 4 March 1940, completed as a merchant tanker (date?). Acquired by USN 26 June 1941 as oiler, redesignated AO 33 and renamed; commissioned as oiler 9 July 1941. Redesignated AVG 27 14 Feb 1942; converted to carrier at Newport News, commissioned 24 Sept 1942. Designation changed from AVG to ACV 20 August 1942 prior to commissioning. Designation changed from ACV to CVE 15 July 1943. Bombed 25 and 26 Oct 1944, damaged by internal explosion 24 May 1945. Decommissioned to reserve 28 Oct 1946. Redesignated as a helicopter escort carrier (CVHE 27) 12 June 1955 while in reserve. Stricken for disposal 1 March 1959. Sold and scrapped in 1962.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-08-2003 05:06 PM                     Jason named it correctly. BTW, the "27" number you cited is the hull number of a specific ship. However, if someone speaks of a "27" number, it might be referencing a certain class of ships designed to do basically the same job, such as aircraft carriers. The "27" in this case is the tonnage. The 27C carriers were 27,000 tons displacement. Those are of the ESSEX class, which were very popular in WWII. Here is a list of the 27,000-ton carriers of WWII: The Midway class is next. They weighed in at 47,000 tons. Next was the Forrestal class. They weighed in at 56,000 tons. As time went on, they got heavier and heavier. [ 04-08-2003, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: Paul G. Thompson ]  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-08-2003 05:20 PM                     The number means tonnage? Is that right? I'm just wondering because I have some Navy souvenir caps that don't seem to make sense. For example, I have a cap from the USS Forrestal, the first "super carrier" in the Navy's fleet. Its number is CV-59. The ship is now decommissioned; one fellow I knew who served aboard it over a decade ago called it a hunk of junk. OTOH, another cap I have is from the USS Lake Champlain, a Ticonderoga class guided missile cruiser (and the third ship in the Navy's history to carry the name). Its number designation is CG-57. That ship, while very intimidating, is a good bit smaller than an aircraft carrier. So I guess I'm a little confused about those numbers.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-08-2003 05:30 PM                     Bobby, the hull number has no real meaning for tonnage. I must apologize for the confusion. I didn't read Michael's post carefully enough. The "27" hull numbers Michael pointed out are for different ships designed for a different purpose. By the way, the picture of the carrier Michael posted is of the USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) which was named after Senator John Stennis. It is a 1,092-foot long ship, with a beam of 257 feet. The over-all height from the mast to the keel is 244 feet which is equal to a 24-story building. The area of the flight deck is 4.7 acres, and she weighs in at 97,000 tons. [ 04-08-2003, 08:34 PM: Message edited by: Paul G. Thompson ]  |  IP: Logged Jason Burroughs Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 654 From: Allen, TX Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-08-2003 08:54 PM                     The Forrestal was infact the first "super-carrier" that today's modern carriers are derived from. No 2 ships, even in the same class are exactly alike. The Forrestal was the first carrier to be designed and built with the angled deck, Other carriers in the Essex and Midway classes had the angled decks added on later. The Forrestal saw a very long active service life, and its share of mishaps - during the 60's there was a large fire on the flight deck, killing many sailors, and blowing 7 holes in the deck. After this incident it became nick-named the Forrest-fire. Pictures an histories on just about all the US Navy ships can be found at HazeGray.org They even have data on the navies of other countries, including pics of one of Australia's newest subs.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-08-2003 09:20 PM                     Speaking of nicknames for the carriers, here are a few: USS Ticonderoga (CV-14) Tyco Tiger USS Hancock (CV-19)= <ahem> USS Bon Homme Richard (CV-31) = Bonnie Dick USS Kearsarge (CV-33) = Queer Barge USS Oriskany (CV-34) = Mighty "O" USS Shangri-La (CV-38) = Shitty Shang USS Coral Sea (CV-43) = Coral Maroo USS Forrestal (CV-59) = Forrest Fire USS Saratoga (CV-60) = Sarah Mahooch USS Ranger (CV-61) = USSR USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) = Shitty Kitty USS Constellation (CV-64) = Constipation USS Enterprize (CV-65) = Tunaprize...Chicken of the Sea About that time I retired from the navy, so I didn't keep up with the nicknames from that point.  |  IP: Logged Gerard S. Cohen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 975 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: Sep 2001 posted 04-08-2003 10:14 PM                     The USS Oriskany rings a memory bell. Pretty sure I witnessed her launching at the Brooklyn Navy Yard during WW II, when a schoolmate's father who worked on her construction invited us to the event.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-08-2003 10:33 PM                     The USS Oriskany (CVA-34) (CV-34) was home to me for three years, 1970 to 1973. Also, the "O" boat (another nickname) was used in the filming of the movie, "Tora Tora Tora" - the first time in history where civilian aircraft were allowed to fly off and on a military ship, so I have been told. Also, the "O" Boat was used in the movie, "Bridges over Toko-Ri." The Oriskany floats in shambles now in Beaumont, Texas. There is talk that it will be towed to Florida and scuttled off the coast as an artificial reef for Scuba divers.  |  IP: Logged Will Kutler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1506 From: Tucson, AZ, USA Registered: Feb 2001 posted 04-08-2003 10:44 PM                     American WWI thru WWII submarines were numbered SS-### and for the most part were named after fish. There are still many Fleet Type boats around the U.S. as war memorials...COD SS 224 in Cleveland, the Silversides and German U-Boat 505 in Chicago, Batfish, the one in San Franscisco on Fishermans Wharf (which has been used in many films) and the one in Hawaii. A friend of mine was a guest on the commissioning party for the USS Tucson and was able to be at her helm....  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-08-2003 11:19 PM                     The Submarine at Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco is the USS Pampanito (SS-383). One of the movies Will speaks of was "Down Persicope."  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-09-2003 12:04 AM                     Super carriers are cool, and underestimated in terms of firepower by some lay persons. During a political science class back in art school, the obviously left-leaning instructor insulted carriers as overpriced sitting ducks. So I raised my hand and asked how he would expect to conduct an attack on one. If you approach from the air, there's all kinds of surface to air missiles and three Phalanx chain guns that can be trained on you. And then you have to consider aircraft carriers are typically accompanied by a carrier task force of Aegis class battle cruisers and destroyers. There's usually an Awacs plane up in the sky someplace. And there may be one or two Ohio class nuclear submarines patrolling the depths. Supercarriers are not sitting ducks. They are one of the most effective means of power projection seen in military history. When I lived in New York I would check out the carriers that steamed into the bay for Fleet Week. I was able to visit the USS Forrestal one year and the USS America another year. More eerie was a tour of the USS Iowa battleship less than a year before that terrible gun turret accident (I have some nice photos of the ship traveling under the Verrazano Narrows Bridge with the historic Fort Wadsworth ruins in the foreground).  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 04-09-2003 06:34 AM                        So the number is unique to every ship of one class but not in the whole Navy? In other words, there may be other ships currently with nr. 74, but there is only one aircraft carrier 74? I had assumed that the number was unique throughout the Navy since I read the series of Hornblower novels, and they had a unique number for every ship which was indicated by flag signals and they could look it up or use the numbers to specifically address one ship.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-09-2003 01:22 PM                     Michael, if I understand your question correctly, the answer is yes. For instance, BB-36 was the Great Battleship Missouri, and CVA-63 is the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk. By the way....the Pampanito's engines were not run in the movie "Down Persicope." On the Pampanito's website, there is a picture of her sailing under the GG Bridge. Actually, she was being towed on a submerged towing bridle.  |  IP: Logged Chris Markiewicz Expert Film Handler Posts: 209 From: Glenaviegh, County Tipperary, Ireland Registered: Aug 2002 posted 04-09-2003 03:33 PM                     The WW2 submarine on display at Pearl Harbor is the USS Bowfin.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.