Talk:USS Bunker Hill (CV-17)

Holiday Express / Holiday Inn

I've found at least one contemporary source which says that the nickname of the ship was "Holiday Inn", vice "Holiday Express" as some other sources have it.

"Holiday Inn" was the nickname which spread quickly over the ship.

Olds, Robert (March 1944). Helldiver Squadron: The Story of Carrier Bombing Squadron 17 with Task Force 58. Dodd, Mead & Company. p. 150.

This does make a certain amount of sense, considering that the movie Holiday Inn had come out a mere two year before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.27.173 (talk) 16:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Photograph of Kamikaze pilot

Hero Worship? The picture of the specific kamikazi pilot in this article strikes me as inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Is it standard procedure to show portraits of the participants in historical battles? I think not. This might be appropriate if they were a high-ranking commanding officer. But the kamikazi pilot's portrait should be removed from this article. Comments? Foregoing comments added by 192.158.61.140 15:0, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

At the 60th anniversary (and last) reunion of the USS Bunker Hill Association held in 2005 in Boston near the ship's birthplace, there was a display on this kamikaze pilot and the return of his personal effects to his family from the grandson of a sailor who served on the Bunker Hill and had found these items with the body of the deceased pilot. (A newspaper article on the return of those effects is linked in his Wikipedia article.) My point? Even the survivors and victims of this action recognize that this was something that happened a long time ago, in wartime, among young men serving their respective countries. It is not hero worship, but something that happened-- a part of history. For that reason the photo does not seem to me to be inappropriate. Whether the photo should stay or go should not depend on any emotive content which we may see in it, but rather, as you suggest, whether is is encyclopedic. As his attack almost caused the loss of the ship the pilot is relevant to the subject of this article. His photo appears both in the Kamikaze article and in his article, Kiyoshi Ogawa. Whether its inclusion here as well is beneficial appears to be debatable. Kablammo (talk) 17:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

One other thought: The photo occupies a relatively large portion of this page only because the article itself is so short. As the article is developed the part given over to the kamikaze attack will not appear so disproportionate. Kablammo (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2008 (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:

• USS Bunker Hill hit by two Kamikazes.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Bunker Hill attack

The kamikaze attacks on the Bunker Hill are the basis for the movie Battle Stations. Verbatim. 2600:1700:9366:E040:1B9:8688:8B6D:F435 (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

I have restored the foregoing comment as it does bear on the subject of this article. The 1956 film Battle Stations includes footage of the 11 April 1945 attack on Bunker Hill. The carrier was the flagship of the fleet off Okinawa with many media on board, and was also the subject of film from accompanying vessels taken during and after the attack. It may be an overstatement to assert that the attack was "the basis" for the film (the March 1945 attack on the Franklin was also a source), but it is a reasonable assertion. But to include it in the article we need sources other than fansites, IMDB, and a comparison of scenes in the film and the source newsreel footage of the actual attack, which could be viewed by purists as "original research". Kablammo (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

This book and its entry on the film may be an adequate source. Kablammo (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

The man who saved the ship . . .

. . . was Joseph Michael Carmichael, in charge of the engineering plant. He kept his crew below deck in extremely high temperatures (~140 degrees F) to keep the boilers running and supplying steam to the turbines. Had he not done so the ship may have been lost. The ship made high-speed turns (shown in newsreel footage) to slosh the burning avgas overboard from the hanger and flight decks, and the pumps continued to spray the flames with sea water. For this Carmichael was awarded the Navy Cross. Postwar he was a banker in New York. This is one source for a separate article on him, and there also was a short article in the New York Times, I believe, when he died. I will look for more sources but if anyone wants to start a separate article on him I would be happy to assist. Kablammo (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Kablammo: is this for an edit you're proposing to make to the article? - wolf 03:57, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but not with all the detail I gave here. There should be a mention of him in this article, cited to the original NYT article from which the Bend Bulletin article was taken (which I did not realize when I made my post; the NYT article I remembered and mentioned above was just a one-paragraph death notice.)

Carmichael also deserves his own article, and I will do some more research for that. Kablammo (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)