#naval yard

[carbone14]

Le cuirassé japonais Yamato en fin de construction à l'arsenal naval de Kure – Japon – 20 septembre 1941

©U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command – NH 63433

© Colorisation par Irootoko Jr

© Profils de Thomas Schmid

A côté du Yamato se trouve le porte-avions Hōshō, premier porte-avions de la Marine Impériale Japonaise, et à l'arrière-plan le navire de ravitaillement Mamiya.

Navire de 72 800 tonnes, le Yamato, le plus lourd et le plus puissamment armé des cuirassés construits, possédait initialement 9 canons de 460 mm, 12 canons de 155 mm, 12 canons anti-aériens de 127 mm, 24 canons anti-aériens de 25 mm et 8 mitrailleuses anti-aériennes de 13 mm.

Armé le 16 décembre 1941, le cuirassé Yamato fut coulé le 7 avril 1945 par 11 torpilles et 6 bombes lors de l’Opération Ten-Gō. Sur les 3 332 hommes d'équipage, il n'y eut que 277 survivants.

[vieformidable]

This is Boston

[supplyside]

USS Alabama

[advancedplacemaking-blog]

The 4/14/16 Democratic Debate is being held at the "Duggal Greenhouse" -- an old factory at the Brooklyn Naval Yard where Advanced Placemaking helped with the adaptive reuse. During demolition, we unexpectedly discovered a historic metal cannon buried under the concrete slab, and made sure it was preserved. That was fun.

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

“From 1 January 1940, four months after the outbreak of war in Europe, to the end of the war with Japan, on 2 September 1945, a period of five years and eight months, the Yard repaired, altered converted, or otherwise accomplished work on 6,850 naval vessels, aggregating more than 27 million tons. At the same time, 101 new ships and landing craft were built for the fleet, and millions of dollars worth of manufactured products were turned out for the forces afloat and for other naval establishments. The Yard's productive work in World War II reached the staggering total of well over one billion dollars.”

- Marshall W. Butt, Norfolk Naval Shipyard: A Brief History. Portsmouth, Virginia: Public Information Office, 1951.

[onequay]

The Naval Yard Shootings and Differences in Coverage

I thought today I should talk about the Naval Yard shootings that happened yesterday. I live in Washington DC, so I got a pretty good idea of the fear people were facing. Also, I was able to have the unique experience of watching the coverage of the situation unfold on two different news networks : CNN and Fox To start off, here is what happened yesterday: there was a shooting at a Naval Yard (military base) in our nation’s capital. 13 people have been confirmed dead. The shooter (only ONE shooter) has been confirmed dead (he is included in the count of 13). Nobody knows his motives yet, and there is currently an investigation underway. He has been found to have a history of gun violence though. Yesterday, I found out just how spotty immediate coverage of unfolding stories can be. At the same time CNN was reporting 12 fatalities, Fox was reporting 9. Both news sources had reporters as close to the actual scene as they could get. Both were grabbing anybody and everybody they could find to give an interview. CNN chose to cover President Obama’s response (which was really feel-goody and supportive -not that there is anything wrong with that; it was just not informative). Fox chose not to cover Obama’s response. One thing I found very interesting was that CNN chose to use a doctor’s professional opinion to confirm that the weapon was automatic. What do you think about that? Using a doctor as a weapons expert? Anyways, the point I am trying to get across is that breaking news coverage is often not accurate, and can vary a lot depending on the source you go to in order to get your news! As always, feel free to question or comment, and don’t forget to visit onequay.org!!! --Kate