Talk:Horizon-class frigate

message: What is the origin of the name "Forbin class"? With google I found that it originates from a 1888 cruiser named Forbin - but I wonder if that one was originally named after Count (Chevalier) Claude de Forbin? andy 11:37, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That's said on the FS Forbin article Rama 16:43, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Forbin class destroyer

message: 110 petty officers and 38 seamen?  surely this is the wrong way around? Toby Douglass
: No, doesn't seem necessarly wrong; modern vessels of the French Navy seem to require highly trained personnel, so most of the crew have significant ranks. Rama 16:43, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Additionally, a Petty Officer is pretty much the same rank as a Sergeant or Corporal in the Army (depending on which navy you are comparing to etc); see Ranks_and_insignia_of_NATO_Navies_Enlisted, and as such i'm not so sure that it is a "significant" rank, but its not as though there are 110 officers and 38 "enlisted" personnel on the ship; indeed that would be very surprising. 58.7.171.182 09:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Horizon class frigate

message: Hi All
Not to be a complete pedant, but surely there are a few more ships other than carriers bigger than these? Richelieu, Jean Bart, Dunkerque, Strasbourg etc etc...
: Indeed, this statement is totally false. Firstly, there are dozens of the Ticonderoga class cruisers (at ~9500 tonnes) in the US Navy that have greater displacement, and even topping those, there are the Kirov_class_battlecruisers which at 24300 tonnes just totally outclass the Horizon frigates. Thus, i'll remove the statement now (if its not done already). 58.7.171.182 09:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  largest warships other than carriers? 

message: I have noticed that Jane's Fighting Ships 2010-2011 the dates for commissioning do not tally with the article. According to Jane's the "Andrea Doria" was commissioned in Dec-08 and the "Forbin" is listed as Dec-2010 although the suggests this date is hoped for at the time of writing. 
David 12 July 2011  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.181.25 (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commissioning 

message: Using Jane's FS 2010-2011 and the French Naval website I have the commissioning dates for the first of each class. The "Andrea Doria"  was commissioned in December 2008 and the "Forbin" was commissioned in October 2010. 
David 13 June 2011  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.181.124 (talk) 15:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commissioning dates 

message: I could not find any information regarding "bean propulsor" or "bean propulsion" apart from obvious quotes from the Wikipedia articles. Could someone explain what it is? Tupsumato (talk) 10:06, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually supposed to be beam propulsor.  I just fixed it.  Ninja138 (talk) 22:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I still can't find anything but science fiction with Google. I tried to look at the online references listed in the article, but they don't have anything either. Tupsumato (talk) 22:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Essentially, the beam propulsor is a bow thruster.  It aids the ship manueverability by providing propulsion across the beam, especially in tight spaces such as during docking.  Whether the Horizon-class ships have a traditional bow thruster (impeller in a tunnel) or an externally mounted pod like an azimuth thruster is unknown.  If you look at the profile photos of Caio Duilio, you will notice an X inside a circle painted on the side; that's the internationally recognized symbol indicating the location of a bow thruster/propulsor.  Ninja138 (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know what a bow thruster is, but I have never seen anyone referring to it as "beam propulsor". I guess that's clear then. Tupsumato (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bean propulsor 

message: 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/horizon2/
*: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 13:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: it is claimed (not here, of course) that the left-right asymmetry reduces the RCS. it is possible to confirm this and give a simple explanation (I feel a destructive interference due to a different distance). pietro151.29.249.152 (talk) 08:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  asymmetric structure 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 09:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress