Talk:Japanese aircraft carrier Ryūjō

Mystified
That "Nonetheless" in the second paragraph of the article is mystifying. It probably needs to be rewritten to clarify the point. Hue White 17:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

This is an Error
This phrase is incorrect: "During this operation, one of the Zero fighters from the Ryūjō, flown by Petty Officer Tadahito Koga, crash landed on the island of Akutan. Koga was killed in the crash due to a broken neck, but the aircraft remained largely intact. This was the first Zero fighter to fall into the hands of U.S. military intelligence."

A Japanese Zero was obtained in China BEFORE the US entered the war and shipped to the USA. Unfortunately, it was ignored as "everybody" knew Japanese planes were inferior. Henryjones000 (talk) 03:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Name Meaning
At the start of the article we're told that the name means 'prancing dragon.' However, at the start of the section on the vessel's construction we are told the name means 'dragon horse.' If the name meant both of these, that sounds important enough to explain. If it only means one of them, then the other should be dropped. If I had to guess which was right, I suspect that the first 'prancing dragon' is correct because dragon horse makes far less sense. Also, I vaguely recall some discussion elsewhere that the character whose meaning is in question is a very obscure one which indicates a meaning of 'position a horse makes,' so that while prancing is what it actually means horse is a plausible guess. Now I have no clue if that is right, and it has a citation so I'd rather not be the one to change it, but this incongruity should be dealt with. Sebsmith0 (talk) 00:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:24, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Carrier Ryujo 1936 colorized.jpg

Timeline off
The timeline in the last two paragraphs doesn't make sense. How'd this pass FA? It goes: ...??? WhoAmIYouDoNotKnow (talk) 23:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Around 14:40, the Detached Force was spotted again
 * at 14:55, three minutes before
 * reinforced the patrol shortly after 15:00, just in time
 * Ryūjō turned north at 14:08, but her list (here is where it goes awry, why is this and the 14:20 entry after the 14:40 entry?}
 * caused her to stop at 14:20.
 * 15:15 and the destroyer Amatsukaze moved alongside to rescue the crew.
 * multiple B-17s without effect before Ryūjō capsized about 17:55 a

Ryujo's Commander's Incompetence?
Watching/listening to a YouTube video that seems to be a narrative of a Japanese Destroyer's Commander's memoirs, who was present at the time of Ryujo's sinking, and this Destroyer's Commander alleges that Ryujo failed to provide adequate air cover to protect the ship from American air attack, to the extent that the Destroyer Commander sent a personal signal to his friend on the Ryujo to admonish him that the aircraft carrier's Commander and Flight Officer were derelict in failing to launch CAP aircraft to protect the ship.

The response to this signal was immediate, and 7 CAP aircraft were brought up on the flight deck, but too late to launch them before the American aircraft attacked. Meaning the carrier's survival may have depended on this 1+ hour delay in launching CAP aircraft. There was also one other example given in this narrative where the Ryujo Commander directed his aircraft to land on some island, rather than returning to the aircraft carrier to protect and possibly intercept an anticipated American airstrike. To me that indicates incompetence and blunder, and if this is true, would make a valuable inclusion to the Article. It's one thing to lose a carrier in battle, but quite another if the sinking was due to the carrier Commander's incompetence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCWxRnKZSIo

Signal of admonition sent at 10:50 in the video.

2603:8081:3A00:414A:6569:6514:A9ED:2BE5 (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2024 (UTC)