Talk:USS Glenard P. Lipscomb

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the USS Glenard P. Lipscomb article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not 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

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

Boat class

If this vessel isn't a part of any class of submarine, and is a one-off, unique model, it should say so more clearly. I leave the article thinking "so I guess, if I interpret what was said correctly, it was a unique vessel". What does "similar to the Sturgeon class" mean? That its identical in hull but has different machinery? You could just as easily say that it's 'similar' to the LA class. They are all roughly shaped the same and laid out the same. According to the profiles in this book beside me, the Lipscomb is significantly longer and more slender than the Sturgeon, much closer to the appearance of the LA class, although all three have the same basic lines. It should say somewhere "the Glenard P. Lipscomb was a class of one vessel, similar to the preceding Sturgeon class and the succeeding Los Angeles class" so the reader doesn't have to sift through clues in the text.

64.222.107.65 (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I added the word 'unique' to the opening sentence. This word is already used in the opening sentence of the USS Narwhal (SSN-671) Wiki article. Both of these submarines were developed during the 1960's for much the same objective: to test engineering features that would increase the 'quietness' of submarines (USS Jack (SSN-605) arguably also fits this description, although the unique changes on that sub were less extensive). I also added a 'See also' section to the Lipscomb and Narwhal articles that links to the other for this reason.

It is obvious that there is no definitive Wiki article on submarine quieting. The 'acoustic quieting' article that these articles link to is much too generic. Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 07:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]