Talk:RP FLIP

message: Someone could perhaps redirect the term "FLoating Instrument Platform" to this page. I don't know how to do redirects yet. Kat, Queen of Typos 23:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -FZ 00:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect Needed

message: :"Because of the potential interference with the acoustic instruments, FLIP has no engines or other means of propulsion."
This seems an odd reason for having no means of propulsion. Why not simply turn the engines off when the ship has reached its destination and wants to carry out acoustic measurements?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.119.40 (talk) 01:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It does seem odd from an engineering standpoint, but that doesn't make it a flaw in the article. Or are you requesting clarification/justification be added there? KMeyer (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 18:28, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to think the principal reason is just to simplify the design. It can be towed to its destination, so engines and related infrastructure are not essential. The nautical architect was free to concentrate on the Craft's mission.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.223.130.32 (talk) 01:12, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  No engines 

message: reading the article Spar buoy, it seems that this vessel is such a buoy when flipped. could someone with deeper knowledge of either topic confirm this? both articles would profit from cross-linking, this would gain some theoretical background, and that could use some visuals. --HOPAJPQTU3LC (talk) 18:29, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  spar buoy? 

message: I have moved this from RP FLIP to RV FLIP.  I hope that this is not an improper procedure.
"RP" is a nonstandard ship prefix, not included in Ship prefix, and not explained in the article.  It is not used by either the vessel operator Scripps Institution of Oceanography or the owner Office of Naval Research.  FLIP is correctly described in the article as a Research Vessel and, if to be given a prefix, should be "RV".
"RP", in "R/P" format, is used sometimes by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution on its website - though again without any explanation of meaning.   Otherwise most uses of of "RP" seem to derive from WP. Davidships (talk) 02:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This should be fine, given that "RP FLIP" redirects to this name, and the other redirects should help any searcher trying to find it. ONR's page on the vessel uses R/V, but a search of the ONR website reveals many uses of R/P as well, but again, no definite explanation of the meaning that I could find, though almost certainly it means "Research Platform" (see  and PDF ). — Huntster (t @ c) 05:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, RV is the usual prefix for a research vessel. Mjroots (talk) 11:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

text: I don't have any paper sources that give FLIP's prefix at all. However it should, IMHO, remain as RP (Research Platform), as RV (Research Vessel) would imply that it's a "vessel", i.e. capable of making its own way. It's more of a semi-submersible platform, as for any number of oil platforms, and we don't call those vessels. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  To equate "vessel" with self-propelled is very restrictive.  The expression "non-propelled vessel" is commonly used in relation to a wide range of sizeable floating objects - including dredgers, barges, even floating platforms (eg Kulluk) - by governments, shipping organisations and the media.Davidships (talk) 00:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move RP > RV 

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.ship-technology.com/projects/flip-ship/
*:Triggered by \bship-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 10:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed; cited the Scripps 1995 Annual Report instead. KMeyer (talk) 18:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on RP FLIP. 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://www.webcitation.org/6EPuwx35D?url=http://www.onr.navy.mil/focus/ocean/vessels/surface1.htm to http://www.onr.navy.mil/focus/ocean/vessels/surface1.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: According to the current version of the page:
"There were overhead lights on the surfaces that were the ceilings in both the towing (horizontal) and flipped orientations."
This doesn't seem possible. When the platform is flipped by 90 degrees, ceilings (or deckheads) become bulkheads and vice versa. Can someone who is familiar with the now defunct platform comment? Dmichelson (talk) 01:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems clear enough to me that there were two sets of ceilings with overhead lights (especially if not quoted in isolation). - Davidships (talk) 13:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a logical inconsistency here?