Talk:Exercise Grand Slam

Article launched
Revised this date, too.Marcd30319 (talk) 13:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Request move
Operation Grand Slam (NATO) → Exercise Grand Slam — Per WP:TITLE. Reference #1 of the article (A U.S. Navy source) repeatedly calls it "Exercise Grand Slam" and refers to it as an exercise. I don't see any mention of the exercise's name in other references. NortyNort (Holla) 11:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Exercise dates: 1951 or 1952?
Reference #1 states the exercise was held in 1951, not 1952. I also can't find the dates "25 February and 16 March 1952" in their cited reference; #1. This appears to be wrong and I am not sure where the dates came from. If the dates are in fact wrong, than the Marine units derived from the USMC chronology are wrong as well. The research for this article is really good but the dates appear to have been a bad foundation. If I am wrong, please state so. --NortyNort (Holla) 11:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Although I believe that Operation Grand Slam was the first major naval exercise by NATO (see Background section), I have revised my opening paragraph to read "was an early major naval exercise." See note 1 and note 2 which verified that this event took place in 1952, with Note 1 giving the precise date of 25 February and 16 March 1952.  Both Note 1 and Note 2 refer to the event in question as being Operation Grand Slam.  Note ! is from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships, an official U.S. Navy historical project, and Note 2 was published by the U.S. Air Force Historical Foundation.  Also, multi-media versions of the 1952 cruise books for the USS Cabot (CVL-28 and USS Lloyd Thomas (DDE-764) also refer to Operation Grand Slam.  I believe that the reference to 1951 in the All Hands September 1952 article (Note 3) to be a typographical error. I do recognize that there is a paucity of sources for this event while I was researching Operation Mainbrace which has always been referred to as NATO's first major naval operation.  However, regarding this article, I believe that I have reconciled the various dating and nomenclature issues.Marcd30319 (talk) 13:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Please note that this contemporary British Pathé newsreel identified this NATO exercise as "Operation Grand Slam" and the issue date of this newsreel is 17/03/1952.Marcd30319 (talk) 23:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, that is some good sourcing. I agree with you, it seems like a typo in the original reference which had me confused. I was surprised with the research put into this article, a lot of creators wouldn't go so indepth on unit chronologies. I have seen a lot of references to it as both operation and exercise. It is hard to go a Google search because you have to negate so many other things related to Operation Grand Slam like the Pakistan operation and James Bond movie references. I couldn't find anything about it on NATO's website either. --NortyNort (Holla) 00:08, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * We can thank Ian Fleming and Auric Goldfinger the difficultly doing a Google search for NATO Operation Grand Slam. Regarding the Operation vs. Exercise issue, I have nothing but a strong suspicion that during the first decade of its existence, NATO called all alliance exercises "operation" to promote the military importance of the alliance by harkening back to such wartime operations as Operation Overlord.  It may be a public relation ploy for the Europeans or to remind the Soviet Union of NATO's presence or to enhance the prestige of NATO's operation.  In any case, NATO called its exercises as Operation.  For example, in the wiki article Operation Strikeback, there is mention to Operation Deep Water and Operation Counter Punch.  in the article for Operation Mainbrace, there is mention of Operation Blue Alliance, Operation Equinox, and Operation Holdlast.  Finally, in the September 39, 1953 edition of Der Spiegel , an article on 1953 NATO exercises mentioned Operation Monte Carlo, Operation Grand Repulse, Operation Mariner, and Operation Weldfast.  See German language version and English translation.  Hoever, Americans being Americans, they saw these event as being simply exercises and hence the All Hands article.  Later, NATO exercises were simply called Exercise Reforger or simply Northern Wedding.  Hope this helps!Marcd30319 (talk) 12:27, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. I see a real mixture of uses and it is hard to judge what is best. The different warship chronolgies are pretty conistent though. The "All Hands" reference has demonstrated its lack of reliability anyway. I originally proposed the name change because of that reference but see no reason to carry it on as do you so I will withdraw it. Thanks for addressing the issue. --NortyNort (Holla) 15:17, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. It has made for this article better.Marcd30319 (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Combined vs. Multi-lateral
For the purposes of this article, the term "combined" will be used for all NATO-sponsored military exercises and operation since NATO is a military allaince that has its own command structure (i.e., SHAPE, SACLANT, and ACT) while the term "Multi-lateral" refers to international military exercises that have no set military command structure (i.e., RIMPAC).Marcd30319 (talk) 13:20, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Info Box
Info Box added Augist 1.Marcd30319 (talk) 12:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Strategic background
In order to understand Exercise Grand Slam, a brief summary of the strategic background in necessary to place this event into proper historical context.Marcd30319 (talk) 21:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)