Talk:USS Franklin (CV-13)/Archive 1

March 19 Losses
There's considerable variation in official and semi-official accounts of the 3-19-45 conflagration. Morison and DANFS says 724; Polmar 832; counting up the various departments on the CV-13 Association web site yields 803. Can anyone explain the discrepancies? BT 9 Apr 08  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BTillman (talk • contribs) 21:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

In regards of the attack on 19 th of March 1945, could it be that the Japanese plane was a Grace? That would explain the two bombs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thestor (talk • contribs) 22:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

One of my friends originally suggested the Grace as a possibility, however, the recent book by Springer gives strong evidence that it was only one bomb and since its publication he has been able to identify the aircraft as a Judy. Brooksindy (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Aircraft
Interesting history. However, I kept wondering what specific types of planes Franklin carried. Sca (talk) 15:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The Franklin Comes Home
The Saga of the most decorated ship in Naval History. - By A. A. Hoehling. Why no mention of this book in the article? Bizzybody (talk) 09:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Most decorated crew, not ship. Most decorated ship was CV-6, Enterprise. (JSpringer, author of INFERNO) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.234.61.46 (talk) 02:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Was the arrogant Captain Gehres responsible for the near sinking?
Why was the Franklin only 50 miles off shore in the first place? Very dangerous. Captain Gehres also seemed an interesting character, if he was the pig of a man claimed by some that would be worth elaborating on. How did he gain and retain command? Tuntable (talk) 01:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The ship was hardly alone there; the entire task group was there. The captain would not be the person making this decision; this would be under the orders of the admiral commanding the task group and overall orders of the task force commander. Brooksindy (talk) 16:10, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Error in photo caption - can it be fixed?
Hi, I noted that the photo which shows the Franklin and the Belleau Wood burning, implies that they were both hit by kamikazes, which is incorrect. The Belleau Wood shot down a kamikaze, which landed on her rear deck, while the Franklin was kit by two bombs. I noticed that the extended photo caption when you click on the photo makes the same mistake. Is there any way of correcting this? Resinguy (talk) 05:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

The photo caption is correct - please note the date - this is the October 1944 damage, not the March 1945 damage. The October 1944 damage was caused by a Kamikaze as clearly described in the article text. Brooksindy (talk) 16:07, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

This does not appear to have any citation either.

This page is a great deal more specific than the USS Franklin page. I would assume that is because this page uses a Japanese source, and the USS Franklin page uses a US source. Either way, either the USS Franklin page could use this information, if verified, or this page should recognize the existence of contradicting sources, if there is not sufficient reason to establish this version with certainty." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.123.31.144 (talk) 22:01, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

More details of fighting the 1945 bombing
On the bridge, Captain Gehres ordered Franklin's magazines flooded but this could not be carried out as the ship's water mains were destroyed by the explosions or fire. Admiral Ralph Davison transferred his flag to the destroyer USS Miller by breeches buoy, and suggested to abandon ship, but Gehres refused to scuttle the Franklin as there were still many men alive below deck. After six hours, the fire was said to be under control, and Admiral Davison deployed five destroyers to search for any of Franklin's men which had been blown overboard or jumped into the sea. JoshDonaldson20 (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Coordination with Yokosuka D4Y page
I originally posted this to the Yokosuka page, but it applies here too:

"On 19 March, the carrier USS Franklin was hit with two bombs from a single D4Y, which then escaped despite heavy anti-aircraft fire. Franklin was so heavily damaged that she was retired until the end of the war. Another D4Y hit the carrier USS Wasp."

I don't see any citation, but when referring to the same event, the USS Franklin page says:

"Suddenly, a single aircraft – possibly a Yokosuka D4Y "Judy" dive bomber, though other accounts suggest an Aichi D3A "Val", also a dive bomber – pierced the cloud cover and made a low level run on the ship to drop two semi-armor-piercing bombs. The damage analysis came to the conclusion that the bombs were 550 pounds (250 kg). Accounts differ as to whether the attacking aircraft escaped or was shot down."

This does not appear to have any citation either.

This page is a great deal more specific than the USS Franklin page. I would assume that is because this page uses a Japanese source, and the USS Franklin page uses a US source. Either way, either the USS Franklin page could use this information, if verified, or this page should recognize the existence of contradicting sources, if there is not sufficient reason to establish this version with certainty." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.123.31.144 (talk) 22:01, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I am waiting ...
... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8108:49BF:F01C:8C08:5493:A05F:9A7B (talk) 17:27, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If you want to change the article to add the theory that it was hit by a B7A, then you need to provide sources - see Verifiability and in particular WP:BURDEN - these have to conform to the requirements for reliable sources and be of sufficient quality to overrule any sources that say that a D4Y was responsible. That you have so far failed to provide.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

fuso and yamashiro
the article says that these battleships were damaged in the battle of Sibuyan sea, but they were not there. I am almost sure that Yamashiro is a misprint of Yamato, while Fuso is probably a misprint of Nagato.151.29.59.56 (talk) 21:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you provide any sources to support these claims? - w o lf  04:01, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * My first sentence points out that the Fuso and the Yamashiro were sunk in the battle of the Surigao strait and therefore could not be involved in the Sibuyan battle. This should be a common notion, however is explained in the WIKI articles Fuso-class, Fuso, Yamashiro, Battle of Leyte Gulf. I may add several italian references, but I do not feel that the UK/US reader likes sources that are hard to find in his country.
 * My second sentence suggests probable corrections and/or misprint causes and is intended to help the work of a corrector. To my knowledge, Yamato and Nagato suffered slight damages and the and Haruna very slight ones; the slight damages are very difficult to be documented.
 * The damage of the Yamato is documented in the article Battle of Leyte gulf by the photo of the bomb that explodes on it. The Yamato/Yamashiro exchange is suggested by their Yama-start.
 * For the Nagato I may quote "Grandi Battaglie della Seconda Guerra Mondiale" (Peruzzo Editore), that spends about 10 words and surely cannot be found in UK/US.
 * Ah, the article Battle ... states that Yamato and Nagato were hit. 151.29.59.56 (talk) 00:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)