Talk:Island-class patrol boat

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ships This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips Military history: Maritime / North America / United States C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Maritime warfare task force North American military history task force United States military history task force

It seems relevant to note that the Island Class was a (minor) modification of a successful British design also used in several other countries.Billymac00 (talk) 23:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• @Billymac00: References? Geo Swan (talk) 01:24, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

here are two: uscg.mil

Bollinger shipyards --Billymac00 (talk) 22:54, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As there are, or have been, other USCG Cutters, should this article be moved to (renamed) Island Class Cutter or Island Class Patrol Boat? The PB in WPB refers to patrol boat. Pustelnik (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The correct capitalisation would be either 'Island class cutter' or 'Island class patrol boat'. Benea (talk) 15:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment I'd also choose 'Island class cutter', to try to avoid confusion with the Island class patrol vessels. Benea (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- I agree the article should be renamed. I started it, when I was a fairly new contributor, and I made a bad choice of names -- basing it on one of the first documents I read. Both Island Class Cutter and Island Class Patrol Boat are better choices than the current name. I think Island Class Cutter is the better of the two choices. I made the same mistake when I started the article on the "USCG Coastal Patrol Boat" -- trusting the first document I read about the vessels, for the choice of the article name. In retrsopect I think that article should have been named the "Marine Protector class". Geo Swan (talk) 16:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree with a rename. It would seem that Island class cutter (note the capitalization} would be the best title. --Brad (talk) 22:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• New Proposal Sounds good to me. I would like to propose Island class cutter (USCG) to prevent confusion with the above named Island class patrol vessel. Pustelnik (talk) 00:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If both classes had the same name then we could start a disambiguation page. But the solution in this case would be to place a note on top of the Island class cutter article which says something like: Not to be confused with Island class patrol vessel. And then a similar note can be placed on Island class patrol vessel to point readers in the opposite direction. --Brad (talk) 00:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That sound like a solution to me. Pustelnik (talk) 01:20, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See if this works for you. Pustelnik (talk) 20:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should have been more specific. The article should have been moved to Island class cutter and then have the explanations placed on each article. Island class cutter is more inline with the ship naming conventions on ship classes. --Brad (talk) 15:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And the template to use at the top of each article is {{distinguish}} --Brad (talk) 22:53, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When this article was started the USCG either had not realized or had not acknowledged that the Matagorda and the other refitted vessels were unseaworthy. There was a very convincingly video showing the Matagorda deploy and retrieve its jet powered pursuit craft, at high speed, from its stern launching ramp. But, since the refitted vessels, with the stern launching ramp were all retired (scrapped?) perhaps this section should be deprecated. The smaller Marine Protector class were all built with basically the same stern launching ramp -- which, I presume, works fine in brand new vessels. Too bad there is no compelling video showing its used from one of those vessels. Geo Swan (talk) 16:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please - personal gut thoughts here- verify before taking as fact ( I have never seen any Internet collaborating information) . The stern launching ramp is also on several other vessels. It is not they are un-seaworthy, but modifications opened up the hull and did not stiffen/ build strength into what was done and added, modifications to hull weakened it to a point that heavy seas may subject hull to stress to snap or destroy vessel. Also see the Cyclone class Navy Patrol Craft. Per this page -ships engines are either Paxman Valenta or Caterpillar. When vessels are which for engines? Is it all were Paxman Valenta as built - later replaced by Caterpillar on some. Or were some built wiht Caterpillar ? Wfoj2 (talk) 20:25, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How was something as basic as a construction date left out of this article?? Monolith2 (talk) 07:24, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Monolith2: I agree. And I found the answer in the Czech version of the article (linking to an article in English): 1985-1992. --Н Француз (talk) 08:08, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]