Talk:Unsinkable aircraft carrier

Magazine cover

I recall a magazine cover (either Time or Newsweek) with an aircraft carrier in the shape of Taiwan and (IIRC) Jiang Zemin across the coast. Anyone willing to sniff it out? -- 我♥中國 23:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

"Secret weapons of WWII"

TV series about WWII Secret Weapons described work (British?) on an Aircraft Carrier made of water ice composit that would resist melting and torpedoes and bombs (but probably not burning aviation fuel.) Also note the (1982?) movie "Firefox" where an improptu landing strip is made from Arctic pack ice. Shjacks45 (talk) 21:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

MacArthur

The reference to a Time story in 1950 actually shows MacArthur saying that if the PRC captured Taiwan then its then short-range fighter planes could reach the Philippines. He did not in fact say that Taiwan is an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" for the US. --JWB (talk) 08:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC) See also [1] --JWB (talk) 19:07, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Nineteen Eighty Four

In the article there is reference to George Orwell's book Nineteen Eighty four. Firstly the book title is not 1984 (numbers) but Nineteen Eighty Four (words). secondly it makes reference to the UK being called 'Airstrip One' by the 'Party', and it says that this is because during the cold war the US considered the UK a 'unsinkable aircraft carrier', however the book was written in 1948, and the US wasn't concerned with Soviet expansion into Europe until 1949 with the events of the 'Berlin blockade' and the 'Berlin airlift'. Before this point (and possibly still after this Point) the US was just concerned with 'containing the spread of communism' not with the USSR's expanding control over eastern Europe. this means that Orwell probably wouldn't use the idea of the 'unsinkable aircraft carriers' thus removing them as the reasoning for the renaming of the UK to 'Airstrip One' It is possible however that Orwell may have done this, but having looked into the unsinkable aircraft carriers, they were generally small atolls, just large enough for a runway, not landmasses the size of the UK, they also only tended to have 1 runway per island (not unlike actual aircraft carriers). Orwell was not a stupid man, not by a stretch, and for this reason, I doubt that he would uses such a stressed basis for naming. If the author can give proof that this is the reason behind naming, feel free to amend my change i.e. (removal of the offending piece of text).JJIHARKER (talk) 23:58, 30 April 2018 (UTC)