Talk:Naval architecture

message: Means of Navigation seems to me to have very little to do with Naval Architecture per se.  It has more place in articles on Navigation Lights (usually mount green to starboard and red to port?) and in ones on Navigation. I have suggested this section be split and moved/merged into those two articles
Fiddle Faddle 16:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: agree re rewrite.  I have also performed both merges today Fiddle Faddle 10:03, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Means of Navigation 

message: "Generally, the speed of a vessel is critical to its efficiency.  The basic speed of a vessel is its hull speed.  For hull speed of displacement (non-planing) vessels, adding more energy to the propulsion has little effect on the speed.  For this type of vessel the maximum efficient speed increases as the square root of the waterline length.  This relationship is known as the Froude number Fn = ( Speed in knots / (Waterline length in feet)^0.5)"
Is this number the same as that in Froude number?
Fiddle Faddle 22:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be great.  I've split "Naval Architect" away form "Naval architecture" on the basis that one is the science and the other the profession, but I've run out of technical ability to do more than tidy things.  To stay in metaphor, that is deck chair re-arrangement, so it needs a subject expert to make it work :) Fiddle Faddle 07:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Froude Number 

message: The topic deserves more information gathered into sections that are less rambling.  There are many good parts to this, but they warrant organising.
We have a mish-mash of pleasure craft and commercial craft.  But that is, surely, not what naval architecture is about.  It is about the mixture of practical and aesthetic design to create a vessel that does its job efficiently and economically - as true for a racing yacht as for a container ship.
Additionally there are items that simply do not belong here.  Those are highlighted with merge tags already, but there may be others, too.
This is a large task, and would be best performed by a knowledgeable person rather than a casual "editor of language"
Fiddle Faddle 22:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Looking way back this article was about Naval Architects, not really about Naval Architecture.
I'm removing the extraneous matter, thatwhich has nothing whatsoever to do with Naval Architecture, and also suggest a split into Architects and Architecture
the page "Naval Architect" is a redirect page to this article, but that is not correct.  One is the role and the other is what they do.  Thus one shoudl tal about qualifications and the other about the job itself and techniques etc.  Thsi means the redirect page needs to become a disambig page.  Will do that, too.
Fiddle Faddle 22:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge / Split suggestion

message: I rewrote the introduction. Added sections Overview and Elements of naval architecture. The previously existing content has been only slightly modified. I have rearranged a few paragraphs. Linked references like COLREG guidelines and some terms from the Textbook Principles of Naval Architecture. Removed several external links, especially those related to academic institutions. There are hundreds of them. A separate article can be created for those later. I have linked various technical terms and expanded the descriptions. The article will no longer be obscure to a non-technical person. I am working on a History section and I am currently facing a situation where I have very little published valid references. Some data from a few biographies and some non-commercial websites is all I have. ChrysalSnowlax (talk) 08:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modifications 

message: Hey, I'm wondering if it would be appropriate to add to the external links a reference to a naval architecture wiki, Narciki (http://wiki.neely-chaulk.com) or its wikinode page, to the external links. It's not an authoritative site (being a wiki), but it would seem relevant. Hate to contribute any sort of spamming, either. Guidance?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.126.103 (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be inappropriate.Please go through Wikipedia guidelines on External links. The suggested website falls under points 2, 4 and 12 of Links normally to be avoided. Thank you. ChrysalSnowlax (talk) 10:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Naval architecture. 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/20081226035256/http://www.navalengineers.org:80/About/Brochure/naval_engineering.html to http://www.navalengineers.org/About/Brochure/naval_engineering.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090512122916/https://www.opm.gov/fedclass/gs0800P.pdf to http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/gs0800P.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:15, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: If searching for "Naval" in wiki - this article being not shown in results-list while it's best match for the search.
213.95.148.172 (talk) 11:57, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article can't be found by search 

message: Per this discussion, you all may want to consider what the scope of this article ought to be vs. that of shipbuilding. Sdkb (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: VA is too broken (especially at the pokemon levels) to care what it decides. Scope for naval architecture and shipbuilding should be based on object RS, not an internal and unrelated project, known for making bizarre judgements and the "all must have prizes" approach of "one from each group", rather than weighing actual significance of topics. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:22, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is clearly pertains to the principles by which ships (and other marine structures) are designed, whereas shipbuilding clearly is about how ships are built. It is very inappropriate to combine the two articles, as is being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/4#Remove_Naval_architecture. HopsonRoad (talk) 01:40, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope of this article vs. [[shipbuilding]] 

message: For my own notes, I often expand Wikipedia leads into bullet structure. 
For this page, I got this: 
Naval architecture is an engineering discipline incorporating elements of:
* mechanical
* electrical
* electronic
* software
* safety engineering
as applied to:
* engineering design process
* shipbuilding
* maintenance
* operation
of:
* marine vessels
* marine structures
Naval architecture involves:
* basic and applied research
* design
* development
* design evaluation (classification)
* calculations
during all stages of the life of a marine vehicle.
Main activities involved include:
* preliminary design of the vessel
* detailed design
* construction
* trials
* operation and maintenance
* launching and dry-docking
Ship design calculations are also required for ships being modified:
* conversion
* rebuilding
* modernization
* repair
Naval architecture also involves:
* formulation of safety regulations
* damage-control rules
* approval and certification of ship designs
to meet:
* statutory requirements
* non-statutory requirements
I don't think I've seen another lead that expanded into so many consecutive, shallow listicles (and I've seen tens of thousands). — MaxEnt 02:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead as bullet points