text:
Eurypterus

Eurypterus is an extinct genus of eurypterid, a group of organisms commonly called "sea scorpions". The genus lived during the Silurian period, from around 432 to 418 million years ago. Eurypterus is by far the most well-studied and well-known eurypterid. Eurypterus fossil specimens probably represent more than 95% of all known eurypterid specimens.

There are fifteen species belonging to the genus Eurypterus, the most common of which is E. remipes, the first eurypterid fossil discovered and the state fossil of New York.

Members of Eurypterus averaged at about 5 to 9 in in length, but the largest individual discovered was estimated to be 60 cm long. They all possessed spine-bearing appendages and a large paddle they used for swimming. They were generalist species, equally likely to engage in predation or scavenging.

Discovery
The first fossil of Eurypterus was found in 1818 by S. L. Mitchill, a fossil collector. It was recovered from the Bertie Formation of New York (near Westmoreland, Oneida County). Mitchill interpreted the appendages on the carapace as barbels arising from the mouth. He consequently identified the fossil as a catfish of the genus Silurus.

It was only after seven years, in 1825, that the American zoologist James Ellsworth De Kay identified the fossil correctly as an arthropod. He named it Eurypterus remipes and established the genus Eurypterus in the process. The name means 'wide wing' or 'broad paddle', referring to the swimming legs, from Greek εὐρύς ( 'wide') and πτερόν ( 'wing').

However, De Kay thought Eurypterus was a branchiopod (a group of crustaceans which include fairy shrimps and water fleas). Soon after, Eurypterus lacustris was also discovered in New York in 1835 by the paleontologist Richard Harlan. Another species was discovered in Estonia in 1858 by Jan Nieszkowski. He considered it to be of the same species as the first discovery (E. remipes); it is now known as E. tetragonophthalmus. These specimens from Estonia are often of extraordinary quality, retaining the actual cuticle of their exoskeletons. In 1898, the Swedish paleontologist Gerhard Holm separated these fossils from the bedrock with acids. Holm was then able to examine the almost perfectly preserved fragments under a microscope. His remarkable study led to the modern breakthrough on eurypterid morphology.

More fossils were recovered in great abundance in New York in the 19th century, and elsewhere in eastern Eurasia and North America. Today, Eurypterus remains one of the most commonly found and best known eurypterid genera, comprising more than 95% of all known eurypterid fossils.

E. remipes was designated the New York State Fossil by the then Governor Mario Cuomo in 1984.

Description

The largest arthropods to have ever existed were eurypterids. The largest known species (Jaekelopterus rhenaniae) reached up to 2.5 m in length, about the size of a crocodile. Species of Eurypterus, however, were much smaller.

E. remipes are usually between 5 and 8 in in length. E. lacustris average at larger sizes at 6 to 9 in in length. However, a single telson (the posteriormost division of the body) of a specimen of this species reaches this length, being 14.8 cm long and indicating a specimen of 55.4 cm of length, and that is the largest specimen ever described in literature. In the introduction page of E. remipes in website of University of Texas at Austin says that the largest specimen ever found was 1.3 m long, currently on display at the Paleontological Research Institution of New York. However, the text section describes the group eurypterid itself rather than Eurypterus, so it is not possible to determine in context whether the 1.3 m long specimen is actually from E. remipes or another eurypterid.

Eurypterus fossils often occur in similar sizes in a given area. This may be a result of the fossils being "sorted" into windrows as they were being deposited in shallow waters by storms and wave action.

The Eurypterus body is broadly divided into two parts: the prosoma and the opisthosoma (in turn divided into the mesosoma and the metasoma).

The prosoma is the forward part of the body, it is actually composed of six segments fused together to form the head and the thorax. It contains the semicircular to subrectangular platelike carapace. On the dorsal side of the latter are two large crescent-shaped compound eyes. They also possessed two smaller light-sensitive simple eyes (the median ocelli) near the center of the carapace on a small elevation (known as the ocellar mound). Underneath the carapace is the mouth and six appendages, usually referred to in Roman numerals I-VI. Each appendage in turn is composed of nine segments (known as podomeres) labeled in Arabic numerals 1–9. The first segments which connect the appendages to the body are known as the coxa (plural coxae).

The first pair (Appendage I) are the chelicerae, small pincer-like arms used for tearing food apart (mastication) during feeding. After the chelicerae are three pairs of short legs (Appendages II, III, and IV). They are spiniferous, with predominantly two spines on each podomere and with the tipmost segment having a single spine. The last two segments are often indistinguishable and give the appearance of a single segment having three spines. They are used both for walking and for food capture. The next pair (Appendage V) is the most leg-like of all appendages, longer than the first three pairs and are mostly spineless except at the tipmost segments. The last pair (Appendage VI) are two broad paddle-like legs used for swimming. The coxae of Appendage VI are broad and flat, resembling an 'ear'. The ophisthosoma (the abdomen) is composed of 12 segments, each consisting of a fused upper plate (tergite) and bottom plate (sternite). It is further subdivided in two ways.

Based on the width and structure of each segment, they can be divided into the broad preabdomen (segments 1 to 7) and the narrow postabdomen (segments 8 to 12). The preabdomen is the broader segments of the anterior portion of the ophisthosoma while the postabdomen are the last five segments of the Eurypterus body. Each of the segments of the postabdomen contain lateral flattened protrusions known as the epimera with the exception of the last needle-like (styliform) part of the body known as the telson. The segment immediately preceding the telson (which also has the largest epimera of the postabdomen) is known as the pretelson.

An alternative way to divide the ophisthosoma is by function. It can also be divided into the mesosoma (segments 1 to 6), and the metasoma (segments 7 to 12). The mesosoma contains the gills and reproductive organs of Eurypterus. Its ventral segments are overlaid by appendage-derived plates known as Blattfüsse (singular Blattfuss, German for "sheet foot"). Protected within which are the branchial chambers which contain the respiratory organs of Eurypterus. The metasoma, meanwhile, do not possess Blattfüsse.

Some authors incorrectly use mesosoma and preabdomen interchangeably, as with metasoma and postabdomen.

The main respiratory organs of Eurypterus were what seems to be book gills, located in branchial chambers within the segments of the mesosoma. They may have been used for underwater respiration. They are composed of several layers of thin tissue stacked in such a way as to resemble the pages of a book, hence the name. In addition, they also possessed five pairs of oval-shaped areas covered with microscopic projections on the ceiling of the second branchial chambers within the mesosoma, immediately below the gill tracts. These areas are known as Kiemenplatten (or gill-tracts, though the former term is preferred). They are unique to eurypterids.

Eurypterus are sexually dimorphic. On the bottom side of the first two segments of the mesosoma are central appendages used for reproduction. In females, they are long and narrow. In the males they are very short. A minority of authors, however, assume the reverse: longer genital appendage for males, shorter for females.

The exoskeleton of Eurypterus is often covered with small outgrowths known as ornamentation. They include pustules (small protrusions), scales, and striations. They vary by species and are used for identification. For more detailed diagnostic descriptions of each species under Eurypterus, see sections below.

Classification
The genus Eurypterus belongs to the family Eurypteridae. They are classified under the superfamily Eurypteroidea, suborder Eurypterina, order Eurypterida, and the subphylum Chelicerata. Until recently, eurypterids were thought to belong to the class Merostomata along with order Xiphosura. It is now believed that eurypterids are a sister group to Arachnida, closer to scorpions and spiders than to horseshoe crabs.

Eurypterus was the first recognized taxon of eurypterids and is the most common. As a consequence, nearly every remotely similar eurypterid in the 19th century was classified under the genus (except for the distinctive members of the family Pterygotidae and Stylonuridae). The genus was eventually split into several genera as the science of taxonomy developed.

In 1958, several species distinguishable by closer placed eyes and spines on their swimming legs were split off into the separate genus Erieopterus by Erik Kjellesvig-Waering. Another split was proposed by Leif Størmer in 1973 when he reclassified some Eurypterus to Baltoeurypterus based on the size of some of the last segments of their swimming legs. O. Erik Tetlie in 2006 deemed these differences too insignificant to justify a separate genus. He merged Baltoeurypterus back into Eurypterus. It is now believed that the minor variations described by Størmer are simply the differences found in adults and juveniles within a species. The genus Eurypterus derives from E. minor, the oldest known species from the Llandovery of Scotland. E. minor is believed to have diverged from Dolichopterus macrocheirus sometime in the Llandovery. The following is the phylogenetic tree of Eurypterus based on phylogenetic studies by O. Erik Tetlie in 2006. Some species are not represented.

Species
Species belonging to the genus, their diagnostic descriptions, synonyms (if present), and distribution are as follows:

Eurypterus De Kay, 1825
 * ?Eurypterus cephalaspis Salter, 1856 – Silurian, England
 * Uncertain placement. Only 3 of the specimens described in 1856 are probably Eurypterus, the rest probably belonged to Hughmilleriidae. Its name means 'shield head', from Greek ( 'head'), and  ( 'shield or bowl'). Specimens recovered from Herefordshire, England.

 * Eurypterus dekayi Hall, 1859 – Silurian, United States & Canada
 * No raised scales on the posterior margin of the carapace or of the three front-most tergites. The rest of the tergites each have four raised scales. Four to six spines on each podomere of Appendages III and IV. Pretelson has large, rounded epimera without ornamentation on the margins. The species is very similar to E. laculatus. The species is named after James Ellsworth De Kay. Specimens recovered from New York and Ontario.

 * Eurypterus flintstonensis Swartz, 1923 – Silurian, USA
 * Probably a synonym of E. remipes or E. lacustris. Probably named after Flintstone, Georgia (?). Specimen recovered from eastern United States.

 * Eurypterus hankeni Tetlie, 2006 – Silurian, Norway
 * Small Eurypterus species, averaging at 10 to 15 cm long. The largest specimen found is about 20 to 25 cm in length. They can be distinguished by pustules and six scales at the rear margin of their carapaces. Appendages I to IV has two spines on each podomere. The postabdomen have small epimera. The pretelson has long pointed epimera. Telson has striations near its attachment to the pretelson. The species is named after Norwegian paleontologist Nils-Martin Hanken, of the University of Tromsø. Found in the Steinsfjorden Formation of Ringerike, Norway.

 * Eurypterus henningsmoeni Tetlie, 2002 – Silurian, Norway
 * Eurypterus with broad paddles and metastoma. Postabdomen has small epimera. Pretelson has large rounded epimera with imbricate scales (overlapping, similar to fish scales). It is very similar and closely related to E. tetragonophthalmus. The species was named after the Norwegian paleontologist Gunnar Henningsmoen. Found in Bærum, Norway.

 * Eurypterus laculatus Kjellesvig-Waering, 1958 – Silurian, USA & Canada
 * The visual area of the compound eyes of this species are surrounded by depressions. The ocelli and the ocellar mound are small. No pustules or raised scales on the carapace or the first tergite. It is probably closely related to E. dekayi. Its specific epithet means 'four-cornered', from Latin laculatus ('four-cornered, checkered'). Found in New York and Ontario.

 * Eurypterus lacustris Harlan, 1834 – Silurian, USA & Canada
 * = Eurypterus pachycheirus  Hall, 1859 – Silurian, USA & Canada
 * = Eurypterus robustus Hall, 1859 – Silurian, USA & Canada
 * One of the two most common Eurypterus fossils found. It is very similar to E. remipes and often found in the same localities, but the eyes are placed at a more posterior position on the carapace of E. lacustris. It is also slightly larger with a slightly narrower metastoma. Its status as a distinct species was once disputed before diagnostic analysis by Tollerton in 1993. Its specific name means 'from a lake', from Latin lacus ('lake'). Found in New York and Ontario.

 * Eurypterus leopoldi Tetlie, 2006 – Silurian, Canada
 * Frontmost tergite is reduced. Metasoma is rhombiovate in shape with tooth-like projections at the anterior part. The pretelson has serrated edges. the epimera are large, semi-angular with angular striations. The telson is styliform with large angular striations interspersed among smaller more numerous striations. The species is named after Port Leopold and the Leopold Formation where they were collected. Found in the Leopold Formation of Somerset Island, Canada.

 * Eurypterus megalops Clarke & Ruedemann, 1912 – Silurian, USA
 * Specific name means "large eye", from Greek ( 'big or large') and  ( 'eye'). Discovered in New York, United States.

 * ?Eurypterus minor Laurie, 1899 – Silurian, Scotland
 * Small Eurypterus with large pustules on the carapace and abdomen. Does not possess the scale ornamentation found in other species of Eurypterus. It is the earliest known species of Eurypterus. They have large palpebral lobes (part of "cheeks" of the carapace adjacent to the compound eyes), making it easy to mistake their eyes for being oval. This enlargement is more typical of the genus Dolichopterus and it may actually belong to Dolichopteridae. The specific name means 'smaller', from Latin minor. Found in the Reservoir Formation of Pentland Hills, Scotland.

 * Eurypterus ornatus Leutze, 1958 – Silurian, USA
 * Ornamentation of pustules on the entire surface of the carapace and at least the first tergite. Does not possess raised scales. Its specific name means 'adorned', from Latin ōrnātus ('adorned, ornate'). Recovered from Fayette, Ohio.

 * Eurypterus pittsfordensis Sarle, 1903 – Silurian, USA
 * The posterior margin of the carapace has three raised scales. Appendages II to IV has two spines per podomere. The metastoma is rhomboid in shape with a deep notch at the front part. The postabdomen has serrated fringes at the middle with small angular epimera at the sides. The pretelson has large, semiangular epimera with angular striations at the margins. The telson is styliform with sparse angular striations at the margins. The name of the species comes from its place of discovery – the Salina shale formations of Pittsford, New York.

 * Eurypterus quebecensis Kjellesvig-Waering, 1958 – Silurian, Canada
 * Has six raised scales on the posterior margin of the carapace but does not possess pustule ornamentation. It is named after the location it was recovered from Quebec, Canada.

 * Eurypterus remipes DeKay, 1825 – Silurian, USA, Canada
 * = Carcinosoma trigona (Ruedemann, 1916) – Silurian, USA
 * The most common Eurypterus species. Has four raised scales at the posterior margin of the carapace. Appendages I to IV has two spines on each podomere. Postabdomen has small epimera. Pretelson has small, semiangular epimera with imbricate scale ornamentation at the margins. The telson has serrated margins along most of its length. It is very similar to E. lacustris and can often only be distinguished by the position of the eyes. The specific name means 'oar-foot', from Latin ('oar') and  ('foot'). Found in New York and Ontario, and is the state fossil of New York.

 * Eurypterus serratus (Jones & Woodward, 1888) – Silurian, Sweden
 * Similar to E. pittsfordensis and E. leopoldi but can be distinguished by the dense angular striations on their styliform telson. The specific name means 'serrated', from Latin ('sawn [into pieces]'). Originally discovered from Gotland, Sweden.

 * Eurypterus tetragonophthalmus Fischer, 1839 – Silurian, Ukraine & Estonia
 * = Eurypterus fischeri Eichwald, 1854 – Silurian, Ukraine
 * = Eurypterus fischeri  var. rectangularis Schmidt, 1883 – Silurian, Estonia
 * Four raised scales on the posterior margin of the carapce. Appendages II to IV each have two spines on each podomere. Postabdomen has small epimera. The pretelson has large, rounded epimera with imbricate scale ornamentation at the margins. Telson has imbricate scale ornamentations at the margins of the base which become serrations towards the tip. The specific name means 'four-edged eye', from Greek ( 'four'),  ( 'angle'), and  ( 'eye'). Found in the Rootsiküla Formation of Saaremaa (Ösel), Estonia, with additional discoveries in Ukraine, Norway, and possibly Moldova and Romania.

The list does not include the large number of fossils previously classified under Eurypterus. Most of them are now reclassified to other genera, identified as other animals (like crustaceans) or pseudofossils, or remains of doubtful placement. Classification is based on Dunlop et al.(2011).

Paleobiology

Eurypterus belongs to the suborder Eurypterina, eurypterids in which the sixth appendage had developed a broad swimming paddle remarkably similar to that of the modern-day swimming crab. Modeling studies on Eurypterus swimming behavior suggest that they utilized a drag-based rowing type of locomotion where appendages moved synchronously in near-horizontal planes. The paddle blades are almost vertically oriented on the backward and down stroke, pushing the animal forward and lifting it up. The blades are then oriented horizontally on the recovery stroke to slash through the water without pushing the animal back. This type of swimming is exhibited by crabs and water beetles.

An alternative hypothesis for Eurypterus swimming behavior is that individuals were capable of underwater flying (or subaqueous flight), in which the sinuous motions and shape of the paddles themselves acting as hydrofoils are enough to generate lift. This type is similar to that found in sea turtles and sea lions. It has a relatively slower acceleration rate than the rowing type, especially since adults have proportionally smaller paddles than juveniles. But since the larger sizes of adults mean a higher drag coefficient, using this type of propulsion is more energy-efficient.

Juveniles probably swam using the rowing type, the rapid acceleration afforded by this propulsion is more suited for quickly escaping predators. A small 16.5 cm Eurypterus could achieve two and a half body lengths per second immediately. Larger adults, meanwhile, probably swam with the subaqueous flight type. The maximum velocity of adults when cruising would have been 3 to 4 m per second, slightly faster than turtles and sea otters. Trace fossil evidence indicates that Eurypterus employed a rowing stroke when in close proximity to the seafloor. Arcuites bertiensis is an ichnospecies that includes a pair of crescent-shaped impressions and a short medial drag, and it has been found in upper Silurian eurypterid Lagerstatten in Ontario and Pennsylvania. This trace fossil is very similar to traces made by modern aquatic swimming insects that row such as water boatmen, and is considered to have been made by juvenile to adult-sized eurypterids while swimming in very shallow nearshore marine environments. The morphology of A. bertiensis suggests that Eurypterus had the ability to move its swimming appendages in both the horizontal and vertical plane.

Eurypterus did not swim to hunt, rather they simply swam in order to move from one feeding site to another quickly. Most of the time they walked on the substrate with their legs (including their swimming leg). They were generalist species, equally likely to engage in predation or scavenging. They hunted small soft-bodied invertebrates like worms. They utilized the mass of spines on their front appendages to both kill and hold them while they used their chelicerae to rip off pieces small enough to swallow. Young individuals may also have fallen prey to cannibalism by larger adults.

Eurypterus were most probably marine animals, as their remains are mostly found in intertidal shallow environments. The concentrations of Eurypterus fossils in certain sites has been interpreted to be a result of mass mating and molting behavior. Juveniles were likely to have inhabited nearshore hypersaline environments, safer from predators, and moved to deeper waters as they grew older and larger. Adults that reach sexual maturity would then migrate en masse to shore areas in order to mate, lay eggs, and molt. Activities that would have made them more vulnerable to predators. This could also explain why the vast majority of fossils found in such sites are molts and not of actual animals. The same behavior can be seen in modern horseshoe crabs.

Respiration
Examinations of the respiratory systems of Eurypterus have led many paleontologists to conclude that it was capable of breathing air and walking on land for a short amount of time. Eurypterus had two types of respiratory systems. Its main organs for breathing were the book gills inside the segments of the mesosoma. These structures were supported by semicircular 'ribs' and were probably attached near the center of the body, similar to the gills of modern horseshoe crabs. They were protected under platelike appendages (which actually formed the apparent 'belly' of Eurypterus) known as Blattfüsse. These gills may have also played a role in osmoregulation.

The second system are the Kiemenplatten, also referred to as gill-tracts. These oval-shaped areas within the body wall of the preabdomen. Their surfaces are covered with numerous small spines arranged into hexagonal 'rosettes'. These areas were vascularized, hence the conclusion that they were secondary breathing organs.

The function of the book gills are usually interpreted to be for aquatic breathing, while the Kiemenplatten are supplementary for temporary breathing on land. However, some authors have argued that the two systems alone could not have supported an organism the size of Eurypterus. Both structures might actually have been for breathing air and the true gills (for underwater breathing) of Eurypterus have yet to be discovered. Eurypterus, however, were undoubtedly primarily aquatic.

Ontogeny
Juvenile Eurypterus differed from adults in several ways. Their carapaces were narrower and longer (parabolic) in contrast to the trapezoidal carapaces of adults. The eyes are aligned almost laterally but move to a more anterior location during growth. The preabdomen also lengthened, increasing the overall length of the ophisthosoma. The swimming legs also became narrower and the telsons shorter and broader (though in E. tetragonophthalmus and E. henningsmoeni the telsons changed from being angular in juveniles to larger and more rounded in adults). All these changes are believed to be a result of the respiratory and reproductive requirements of adults.

Paleoecology

Members of Eurypterus existed for a relatively short time, yet they are the most abundant eurypterids found today. They flourished between the Late Llandovery epoch (around 432 million years ago) to sometime during the Přídolí epoch (418.1 million years ago) of the Silurian period. A span of only around 10 to 14 million years.

During this period, the landmasses were mostly restricted to the southern hemisphere of the Earth, with the supercontinent Gondwana straddling the South Pole. The equator had three continents (Avalonia, Baltica, and Laurentia) which slowly drifted together to form the second supercontinent of Laurussia (also known as Euramerica, not to be confused with Laurasia).

The ancestors of Eurypterus were believed to have originated from Baltica (eastern Laurussia, modern western Eurasia) based on the earliest recorded fossils. During the Silurian, they spread to Laurentia (western Laurussia, modern North America) when the two continents began to collide. They rapidly colonized the continent as invasive species, becoming the most dominant eurypterid in the region. This accounts for why they are the most commonly found genus of eurypterids today. Eurypterus (and other members of Eurypteroidea), however, were unable to cross vast expanses of oceans between the two supercontinents during the Silurian. Their range were thus limited to the coastlines and the large, shallow, and hypersaline inland seas of Laurussia. They are now only known from fossils from North America, Europe, and northwestern Asia, cratons that were the former components of Laurussia. While three species of Eurypterus were purportedly discovered in China in 1957, the evidence of them belonging to the genus (or if they were even eurypterids at all) is nonexistent. No other traces of Eurypterus in modern continents from Gondwana are currently known.

Eurypterus are very common fossils in their regions of occurrence, millions of specimens are possible in a given area, though access to the rock formations may be difficult. Most fossil eurypterids are the disjointed shed exoskeleton (known as exuviae) of individuals after molting (ecdysis). Some are complete but are most probably exuviae as well. Fossils of the actual remains of eurypterids (i.e. their carcasses) are relatively rare. Fossil eurypterids are often deposited in characteristic windrows, probably a result of wave and wind action.

title: Eurypterus


text:
User talk:Michael Kukielka

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Ford Taurus
I reverted your most recent change to Ford Taurus. Please don't replace current images without a little more thought; we can definitely have images of multiple Taurus versions on the same page.

In addition, please don't upload pictures that are not of compatible licenses (GFDL, some other free licenses, or public domain). In limited circumstances, we allow pictures that are Fair use but in that case, you should state the source and why you think a fair use claim is justified. This picture looks like a Ford publicity shot. If so, we might be able to support a free use claim; go to Image:Taurus.jpg and say where you got it.

However, one could so easily find a Taurus "in the wild" and take a photo of one for which there would be no question of permissions or claims, so I'd encourage that route. —Morven 13:52, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Taurus
I use www.wieck.com Public PR files since I know they are intended for public use. I prefer authorized PR photos over amateur photos. If the world is searching for info on this car, I'd like them to see the real thing and not be mislead by modified or oudated models.

I'm making it a personal project to update and contribute to all information pertaining to current Ford vehicles. I appreciate any help you can provide!

 * You may prefer authorized PR photos over amateur photos, but Wikipedia does not. We prefer photos we have the right to publish.  I don't see that we have an automatic right to use Wieck's pictures; the pictures are copyrighted, and we have not signed up for access, so we are in effect using them without permission.  Nowhere on Wieck's site does it say that these pictures are free for anyone to use; quite the contrary, in fact.  There are words along the lines of "authorised media" and "editorial purposes only".

 * That said, it's probably the case that we could, in fact, use them; PR photos are the easiest-to-argue "fair use" claim, since the creator intended them to go out "for free" to advertise their own products. We still prefer fully PD or GFDL images over fair use, though.

 * I disagree that "outdated models" are any less the "real thing" than PR photos, though. We're not a "guide to 2005 car models" or anything of the kind.  Pictures of older models are just as relevant as new ones.  Preferably, in fact, we should have both.

 * In general we should only use pictures of modified cars when we haven't yet obtained a picture of one in original form, of course, and they should be labelled as such.

 * In closing: use these images if you want, but make sure you attribute your source and make an explicit fair use claim on the image page. Don't replace existing pictures.  And don't be surprised if someone replaces the PR pictures with a fully free-to-use picture.

 * I'm definitely in support of getting the Ford pages more up to date, and I'll certainly help with whatever I can do. I'm more expert on the 50s through 70s Fords than the present day, though! —Morven 14:37, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

PR Taurus
Thanks for the information. I'm not trying to promote 2005 Fords, but I'm trying to develop consistency between the information and images posted on all the Ford Mo Co car postings. In time I will add more photos of each successive generation and enhance the information and referances.

I have a PR background so I understand the licensing agreements with providers like Wieck and the relationship with their clients. I feel this is the safest method of providing images to accomodate the Wikipedia licensing agreement.

I appreciate the time you've taken to educate me on this process. I am new at this but was concerned by the lack of information on Ford vehicles. My next project is the Mercury Sable.

 * Thanks. I'm sure you appreciate our need to be sure about crediting the sources of images and explaining under what grounds we feel we can use each particular image.  We prefer PD or GFDL licensed images because the licensing and permission issues are less complicated.

 * Mercury products are even more poorly documented than Ford ones, so any effort there will certainly be appreciated. —Morven 15:08, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Added fair use claims to all the wieck images
I added the fair use claim text to all of your images from wieck. That should give you a template to follow for future.

I didn't know where you got the Taurus SHO image from so I didn't edit that one. —Morven 22:04, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the Fair Use claim. I'm applying them to all my wieck images.

Take a look at my Sable article if you have time. I notice you linked it on the Taurus article. I can't find a descent picture of the '86 model so I've left that out.

Ford Five Hundred
I, User:NewGuy4 put in the refrence about design. It indeed, does look like the passat. There is NO ONE who would say otherwise. It's just fact. The person who designed the car even said that. It just does.

Image:1992 Mercury Topaz.jpg
Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 09:16, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:1996_Ford_Taurus.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1996_Ford_Taurus.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Gen2sable1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Gen2sable1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --– Quadell (talk) (random) 21:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Michael Kukielka


text:
Talk:Fantasia 2000

Untitled
This entry states that Fantasia 2000 was shown exclusively in IMAX theaters. However, when I saw it, it was in a normal United Artists movie theater. LJade728 13:42, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Apparently changed by now. States it went to Imax first, then other theaters.--PvtDeth 18:31, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Title
I hate to be nitpicky, but I think the correct way to write the film's title is Fantasia/2000 as a reference to it being a continuation of the original. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.252.38.253 (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, IMDb also lists the title this way. Ghostkeeper (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

 * As ever IMDb does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for being a reliable source. MarnetteD | Talk 20:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Celebrities
In August, I added the slightly POV statement that the celebrities are "attempting to be funny". This went unchallenged for three months, but was just removed. Since I feel this is a true statement (Steve Martin stands for the most embarrassing part of the whole film, IMHO), I re-inserted it, despite the slight POV. Discussion, please! --Janke | Talk 07:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

 * No response... I inserted Some of these introductions appear contrived, and fail to be funny. Is this better? --Janke | Talk 20:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I just restructured that section a little bit, as I tried to fit in the word "interstitial" (the official name given to those segments), and moved the criticism down to the end of the paragraph rather than the beginning. --Joe

 * I thought the James Earl Jones intro was kind of amusing... AnonMoos (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Criticism of Levine
I removed the section on Criticism of Levine because it seems unfounded. Below are quotations from the removed section and my commentary:

"There has also been criticism of Disney's decision to hire the controversial conductor James Levine."

Who has criticized Disney's decision? Where? When? No citations were given.

"Currently, there are allegations that Levine has engaged in unspecified criminal activity and pedophilia."

Does this qualify as an "allegation"? The article does not name Levine in the body-- only in the Usenet headline. Unless an actual allegation comes out in print from some kind of news source, this sentence is unfounded.

"These allegations against Levine were serious enough to prompt the German Green Party to demand a "certificate of good behavior" from Levine showing that he had no criminal convictions or charges pending against him when he became Music Director of the Munich Philharmonic."

The linked article does not give the reason why the Germany Green Party demanded the certificate. Whoever added the "Criticism of Levine" article to the Fantasia Wikipedia entry may know something, but unless a valid citation can back up this statement, it should be cut.

NapoleonicStudent 00:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Misunderstanding of Firebird
In the "Firebird" section, the article used to read that the mountain sprite awoke the "Firebird spirit of the volcano". That's a misunderstanding of the original music; the Firebird is the good character, representing the Phoenix, reborn from the ashes. The volcano is better imagined as corresponding to the evil Kastchei. [The final few seconds of the Firebird suite are the Firebird theme itself, victorious over evil] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.40.226 (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Think the visuals of that segment were partly based on Mt. St. Helens and its aftermath... AnonMoos (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

That may be so, person-who-spoke-first, but this isn't the original version. In the Fantasia 2000 version, the Firebird is an evil character.--216.74.195.122 (talk) 03:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The 2010 commentary describes the Firebird as being just as much a part of the natural order of things as the Sprite. The forest can't be renewed without first being purged by fire. Lee M (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Rumored sequel?
No citations, but people talk. Until there's a confirmed source for a sequel, don't bother brining it up past this thread, I suppose. All I've "heard" in these rumors is things like Mannheim Steamroller, Vanessa Mae, Yanni, Regina Spektor, etc., etc., are involved. I highly doubt it. The only thing I've ever seen was a print-out at a local library with, what I think, was either a rave or a phony logo stating Fantasia's sequel is called Fantasia 3-D for release in IMAX/OmniMax 3-D theaters. I also read in this phony paper that A Night on Bald Mountain/Ave Maria and Dance of the Hours to be redone in 3-D, along with other classics like stuff from Chopin (SHOWPAN, damnit! Not "choppin'"!), Mozart, some Russians, some Americans (Leonard Bernstein was named on the phony paper), and some classical from the Far East, if such exists.

I wholly think it's all rumor, and would prefer that nobody adds any info into the main article for a third sequel. For all we know, the rumors can evolve to the point where music by Smike.dk and The Prodigy are included! Fictional Science Sextuple Feature! 17:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MagentaTimCurryElbowSex (talk • contribs)

CGI
The article states that this is the first Disney film to use computer generate imagery. I immediately thought of the ballroom scene in Beauty and the Beast, eight years earlier, which Wikipedia confirms uses digital animation. PurpleChez — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.249.207.195 (talk) 17:00, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

 * It may be one of those hairsplitting situations where CGI was being used in 1990 on this film before it was being used on BatB but that would need sourcing. So I have performed a copy edit to fit the sourced info in the article. MarnetteD|Talk 17:29, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Distributor in infobox
Putting Walt Disney Pictures as distributor in the infobox just makes it redundant and as we all know, WDP is a releasing label, not a distribution label. That distinction belongs to Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures (formerly named Buena Vista Pictures). I already have enough problems with one IP user who puts Touchstone as distributor on infoboxes on Touchstone pages. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you would take a moment to look at the edit I linked to the same article that you did - I just refined it so the reader would be taken to the section of the article that is about BVP. This avoids the WP:EGG problems mentioned in the edit summary. MarnetteD|Talk 04:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits by ip editor
Greetings. Please refrain from making such large changes, mostly cosmetic, to an article which has just recently been through a GA review. Several of your changes are simply incorrect, or poor grammar. Others make the text less specific about details, which is not a good thing, usually.  Onel 5969  TT me 16:59, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with, especially about the poor grammar. MarnetteD|Talk 17:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You guys do a great job in keeping the quality of such articles intact. Nice work! LowSelfEstidle (talk) 22:31, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks LSE. The same edits are now being made by Rectify 54 who is clearly the same person who edited as the IP. MarnetteD|Talk 15:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Fantasia 2000. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://uk.eonline.com/news/disneys_fantasia_2000_going_imax/37717
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110312005736/http://disneydvd.disney.go.com:80/fantasia-fantasia-2000-2-movie-collection-special-edition.html to http://disneydvd.disney.go.com/fantasia-fantasia-2000-2-movie-collection-special-edition.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080424041350/http://annieawards.org/28thwinners.html to http://annieawards.org/28thwinners.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:04, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fantasia 2000


text:
Technische Hochschule

A Technische Hochschule (, plural: Technische Hochschulen, abbreviated TH) is a type of university focusing on engineering sciences in Germany. Previously, it also existed in Austria, Switzerland, the Netherlands (Technische Hogeschool), and Finland (teknillinen korkeakoulu, teknisk högskola). In the 1970s (in Germany) and the 1980s (in the Netherlands), the Technische Hochschule emerged into the Technische Universität (German) or Technische Universiteit (Dutch). Since 2009, several German universities of applied sciences were renamed as Technische Hochschulen.

Terminology
In German-language countries, the term Hochschule is more general than Universität (plural: Universitäten) and also encompasses universities which do not have the right to confer doctorates and habilitations, in contrast to Universitäten. Today, Universitäten as well as other Hochschulen call themselves Technische Hochschule for historical reasons. However, a Technische Hochschule with the status of a Universität is regarded as a Technische Universität despite the name.

History
Since the Middle Ages, higher education institutions in Europe were called a university only if a certain classical canon of subjects encompassing philosophy, medicine, law and theology was taught. When engineering sciences became more important in academica due to the Industrial Revolution, institutions of tertiary education devoted to these were denied the prestigious denomination "university", and had to use the more general term Hochschule instead.

It was a major breakthrough, then, when in the first half of the 20th century, some Technische Hochschulen in Germany and Technische Hogescholen in the Netherlands were given the right to award the doctoral degrees, and again later when they were allowed to call themselves universities. This change of status was accompanied by a broader spectrum of academic disciplines and more fundamental research.

While most former Technische Hochschulen opted to change their name to Technische Universität to reflect their new status, some of them preferred to maintain their traditional and established names, most notably the RWTH Aachen in Germany as well as ETH Zurich and EPF Lausanne in Switzerland.

Starting in 2009, several German universities of applied sciences (Fachhochschulen) with a technical focus have changed their names to Technische Hochschule.

In Austria
List of Austrian Technische Universitäten by location:

In Finland
The concept of a TH exists also in Finland as teknillinen korkeakoulu, which is equivalent to a TH. Examples include Teknillinen korkeakoulu in Espoo, Tampereen teknillinen korkeakoulu and Lappeenrannan teknillinen korkeakoulu. Similarly to German speaking countries, most of them later changed their name to teknillinen yliopisto, which is equivalent to a TU. However, Teknillinen korkeakoulu retained its old name until it merged with two other universities to form the current Aalto University.

In Germany
List of German Technische Universitäten by location:

List of Technische Hochschulen (institutions with the status of Technische Universität not included) by location:

In Switzerland
List of Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology by location:

In The Netherlands
List of Universities of Technology (Technische Universiteiten) in the Netherlands:

4TU is the federation of the four Dutch universities of technology with the following institutions as members: Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), University of Twente (UT), and Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR).

title: Technische Hochschule


text:
Landeck

Landeck is a city in the Austrian state of Tyrol, the capital of the district of Landeck.

Geography
Landeck is located in the Tyrolean Oberland in the west of the state at an elevation of about 820 m. The town is situated in the valley of the Inn River at the confluence with the Sanna tributary, between the Lechtal Alps, part of the Northern Limestone Alps in the north, and the Ötztal Alps and Samnaun Alps ranges of the Central Eastern Alps in the south.

The Inn valley is an important transport route from Tyrol to the west across the Arlberg massif. In the south, the Reschen Pass at the main chain of the Alps leads to the Vinschgau region in Italian South Tyrol.

History
In ancient times, the Via Claudia Augusta ran across the Reschen Pass and through the Inn Valley Landeck, connecting the Roman Italia peninsula with the Raetia province conquered in 15 BC. Throughout the Middle Ages the valley remained an important junction of trade routes leading to Augsburg via the Fern Pass and westwards across the Arlberg. From the late 13th century onwards the Meinhardiner counts of Tyrol controlled the area from their stronghold at Landeck Castle.

Until 1867 Landeck (then spelled Landek) formed part of the Habsburg monarchy (Austrian Empire from 1804), except for a short period during the Napoleonic wars (1806-1814) when it was ceded to the Kingdom of Bavaria along with the rest of Tyrol. From 1867 (following the compromise of 1867) it formed part of the Cisleithanian (Austrian) part of Austria-Hungary; the spelling was also changed to Landeck in that year. After 1893 the name was officially changed again to Landeck in Tirol. Throughout these periods it was the capital of the district of the same name, one of the 21 Bezirkshauptmannschaften in the Tyrol province.

From 1782 a first pass road was built across the Arlberg at the behest of Emperor Joseph II; it was significantly enlarged until 1824. Landeck received access to the Arlberg railway in 1883. In 1904 it was elevated to the status of a market town, and finally was granted town privileges in 1923.

Landeck was also used as a military base for Austrian mountain troops before the second world war, later, they became a unit of the German Wehrmacht.

During the Austrian Anschluss to Nazi Germany, Landeck was merged with neighboring Zams in 1939; however, both municipalities again split after World War II. Landeck was also the site of a UNRRA displaced person camp in the French sector of Allied-occupied Austria.

Personalities

 * Raoul Schrott (born 1964), author
 * Anna Schuppe (1829-1903), author and composer

Transport
Landeck-Zams station is an important hub for regional coach lines as well as a noteworthy stop for international trains on the Arlberg railway from the Tyrolean capital Innsbruck via the Arlberg Railway Tunnel to Bludenz in Vorarlberg. Landeck is also the terminus of the parallel Inn Valley Autobahn, which continues as S 16 Schnellstraße to the Arlberg Road Tunnel in the west.

title: Landeck


text:
List of battleships of France

Between 1889 and 1949, the French Navy built a series of pre-dreadnought, dreadnought, and fast battleships, ultimately totaling thirty-four vessels: twenty-three pre-dreadnoughts, seven dreadnoughts, and four fast battleships. Another seven—five dreadnoughts and two fast battleships—were cancelled in various stages of construction (one of which was converted into an aircraft carrier while being built) and seven more were cancelled before work began. The first battleship construction program followed a period of confusion in strategic thinking in France over the optimal shape of the fleet. At the time, the French naval command consisted of competing factions, with one that favored building fleets of capital ships, continuing the program of traditional ironclad warships that had dominated the fleet in the 1860s and 1870s. The other major faction preferred the Jeune École doctrine, which emphasized the use of cheap torpedo boats to destroy expensive capital ships. During the period, naval construction decisions often depended on the Minister of the Navy in office at the time.

A pair of ironclad battleships were cancelled by Admiral Théophile Aube, an adherent of the Jeune École, but one of the two was redesigned as the pre-dreadnought FRENCH BATTLESHIP Brennus following Aube's departure. By the end of the decade, the British Naval Defence Act of 1889 that considerably strengthened the Royal Navy provided the justification the battleship faction needed to embark on a similar naval expansion program. The French replied with the Statut Naval (Naval Law) of 1890 that projected a total force of twenty-eight battleships. The initial program ordered four ships, with a fifth added during the design process: FRENCH BATTLESHIP Charles Martel, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Carnot, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Jauréguiberry, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Masséna, and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Bouvet. These were experimental ships, built to different designs but all to the same broad specifications; they were all characterized by pronounced tumblehome and a lozenge arrangement of a mixed-caliber main battery. All five proved to be disappointments, owing to poor stability and poor resistance to underwater attacks.

The navy then began a series of standardized ships designed by a single architect; these were the three Charlemagne-class battleship and the derivatives FRENCH BATTLESHIP Iéna and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Suffren. The initial series of French battleships saw relatively little activity, being primarily occupied with training activities through the 1890s and 1900s. They alternated between the Northern and Mediterranean Squadrons before being withdrawn from front-line service at the end of the first decade of the 20th century as more modern battleships entered service. In 1900, the French government passed a new Statut Naval to counter growing German naval strength, which resulted in the two République-class battleship- and four Liberté-class battleships; they were very similar but differed in their secondary battery. These vessels proved to be much more successful than the earlier battleships of the French fleet, and they formed the backbone of the Mediterranean Squadron when war came in 1914.

A new Statut Naval in 1906 brought about the construction of the six Danton-class battleships and the seven dreadnoughts of the Courbet-class battleship and Bretagne-class battleshipes. The Dantons were pre-dreadnought vessels built after the launch of the British "all-big-gun" HMS Dreadnought (1906) rendered such vessels obsolescent, though the French at that time preferred the higher rate of fire of the lighter secondary guns. Convinced of the need to follow suit with dreadnoughts of their own, the French ordered the four Courbets in 1910 followed by three Bretagnes in 1912. These would be the last battleships completed for two decades, as World War I forced the French to cancel the Normandie-class battleship and Lyon-class battleshipes (ordered for the 1913 and 1915 programs) as industrial and financial resources were diverted to the French Army and financial limitations after the war prevented further construction. During the war, the bulk of the French fleet was occupied with guarding the southern end of the Adriatic Sea to contain the Austro-Hungarian Navy, while older vessels were used elsewhere, particularly during the Dardanelles campaign, where Bouvet was sunk in 1915. After the war, the surviving pre-dreadnoughts were either scrapped or reduced to secondary roles.

By the mid-1930s, the French again embarked on a naval construction program to counter the German and Italian fleets, resulting in the two Dunkerque-class battleships and fourRichelieu-class battleships; of the four Richelieus that were planned, two were cancelled by the start of World War II, and only one was completed in time to see action during the war. A final design, the Alsace-class battleship, was authorized in 1940 after the war began but were cancelled following France's defeat in the Battle of France. The two Dunkerques saw limited action during the war, with FRENCH BATTLESHIP Dunkerque being sunk during the British attack on Mers-el-Kébir to prevent her from being seized by the Germans. FRENCH BATTLESHIP Bretagne and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Provence were also sunk there, and the third member of the class, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Lorraine, was seized by the British and turned over to the Free French Naval Forces. Refloated and returned to Toulon, Dunkerque and Provence were later scuttled there with the former's sister ship FRENCH BATTLESHIP Strasbourg when the French intentionally scuttled the fleet to prevent German soldiers from capturing the vessels. Richelieu meanwhile was overhauled in the United States and served with the Free French from 1943. FRENCH BATTLESHIP Jean Bart, with only one main battery gun turret operational, briefly engaged United States forces during Operation Torch in November 1942, and was eventually completed in the late 1940s. Both she and Richelieu served as training ships before eventually being decommissioned in 1968.

Brennus

Brennus, built in the late 19th century, was the first pre-dreadnought battleship of the French Navy. During this period, the French Navy experimented with the Jeune École, which emphasized cheap torpedo boats and cruisers instead of the expensive ironclad warships that had dominated naval construction in the 1860s and 1870s, and so the navy ordered a series of experimental designs to determine the most effective ship types. Admiral Théophile Aube, then the Minister of the Navy and a proponent of the Jeune École, cancelled a pair of ironclad battleships in 1886, but after Aube left office his successor allowed one of the vessels to be redesigned as a modern pre-dreadnought battleship. Brennus was the only vessel built to her design, which had been prepared by Charles Ernest Huin, though it provided the basis for several subsequent ships. She departed from earlier French ironclad battleship designs by introducing a number of innovations. These included a main battery of heavy guns mounted on the centerline, homogeneous steel armor, and the first use of Belleville boilers.

Brennus spent the majority of her career in the Mediterranean Squadron, initially serving as its flagship. In 1900, she accidentally rammed and sank the destroyer Framée. As newer battleships were commissioned into the fleet, Brennus was relegated to the Reserve Squadron in the early 1900s; she spent this period largely inactive with a reduced crew, being reactivated for training exercises with the rest of the fleet. She was used as a training ship from 1908 to 1914. By the outbreak of World War I in August 1914, her old age and poor condition prevented her from seeing action and she was instead reduced to a hulk. She was ultimately stricken from the naval register in 1919 and sold for scrap three years later.

Charles Martel

Charles Martel was the first of a group of five broadly similar battleships ordered during the 1890 construction program as part of the French response to a major British naval construction program. The five ships were built to the same basic design parameters, though the individual architects were allowed to deviate from each other in lesser details. The ships were ordered in response to the British Naval Defence Act of 1889, which had authorized the construction of the eight Royal Sovereign-class battleships; the French law aimed to keep the fleet in a position of relative parity with the Royal Navy. A total of twenty-eight battleships were to be built throughout the program. To keep costs down and minimize objections from the Chamber of Deputies, the displacement of the new ships would be limited to 12000 MT. The basic design for the first ship, Charles Martel, was also prepared by Huin, who based it on Brennus, though the armament was arranged in the lozenge layout that had been used on a number of older ironclad battleships like the Magenta-class ironclad. The ship proved to be a disappointment in service, as did her four half-sisters, all of which suffered from poor stability, largely a result of their pronounced tumblehome and overloaded construction.

The ship spent her career with the Mediterranean Squadron. In 1897, she joined the International Squadron sent to intervene in the 1897–1898 Greek uprising on Crete against rule by the Ottoman Empire. Charles Martel served as the flagship of the 2nd Division of the Mediterranean Squadron beginning in 1900 before being transferred to the Reserve Squadron in 1902. There, she served as the flagship until she was replaced in 1903. Charles Martel was assigned to the 2nd Battle Squadron in 1910 and was then moved to the newly created 3rd Battle Squadron the next year. She returned to reserve status in 1912 and saw no further activity, ultimately being scrapped in 1922.

Carnot

Carnot was ordered under the same program that produced Charles Martel, and like the other vessel, she was largely based on Brennus and Magenta. But rather than simply repeat the same design, the French Naval Staff decided to allow different naval architects to build several different designs to evaluate the competing proposals for future programs. Carnot was designed by Victor Saglio, the Under-director of Naval Construction in Toulon. Compared to Charles Martel, Carnot was broadly similar, with the same main battery, though she had a smaller superstructure in an attempt to minimize topweight and thus instability that plagued many French capital ships during this period. The ship was nevertheless still too top-heavy and proved to suffer from insufficient stability. Modifications were made to the ship after she was completed, but they did not solve the problem, and like the rest of the ships of the 1890 program, Carnot was not a particularly successful vessel.

The ship's early career followed a similar trajectory to Charles Martel's; she spent much of it in the Mediterranean Squadron, and she too served with the International Squadron in 1897. She thereafter began alternating stints in the Northern and Mediterranean Squadrons; she was with the Northern Squadron in 1901, followed by a brief return to the Mediterranean as part of the Reserve Squadron in 1903. The year 1904 saw her back with the Northern Squadron, where she remained until 1907, when she was assigned to the 2nd Battle Squadron in the Mediterranean. In early 1911, the unit was moved to Brest, France, before returning to Toulon later that year, where it was renumbered as the 3rd Squadron. Carnot was reduced to reserve in 1913 and was ultimately broken up in 1922.

Jauréguiberry

Jauréguiberry was designed by Amable Lagane, the naval architect who had overseen the construction of one of the Magneta-class ironclads, and as a result, the ship was heavily influenced by the earlier vessel, particularly in the vessel's comparatively short and wide hull. The Chilean ironclad CHILEAN BATTLESHIP Capitán Prat, then being built in the same shipyard and also designed by Lagane, also proved to be influential. Capitán Prat's secondary battery was mounted in twin-gun turrets to save weight and space, and Lagane adopted that innovation for Jauréguiberry, the first time such an arrangement was used on a French battleship. Like her other French contemporaries, she was unstable and suffered from poor seakeeping, a result of their limited displacement.

As with the other battleships built during this period, Jauréguiberry had a relatively uneventful peacetime career. She suffered several minor accidents, including a pair of accidental explosions of torpedo compressed air chambers in 1897 and 1905. Also in 1897, she joined Charles Martel and Carnot in the International Squadron for operations off Crete. In 1913, the ship was assigned to the Training Division, thereafter serving with the Special Division in 1914. After the outbreak of World War I, the ship was sent to cover troopship convoys from North Africa to France and was later stationed in the Syrian Division in early 1915. Jauréguiberry then joined the Dardanelles Division for operations against the Ottoman Empire, including supporting the Landing at Cape Helles in April 1915. She then returned to Syria, where she remained largely until 1918 when she was reduced to reserve status. Decommissioned in 1919, she was converted into a barracks ship in 1920 and was ultimately broken up in 1934.

Masséna

Masséna was designed by Louis de Bussy, who had also designed the revolutionary armored cruiser FRENCH CRUISER Dupuy de Lôme; like the other members of the 1890 program, Masséna was built within the same displacement limitations and accordingly suffered from the same stability and seakeeping problems. She also retained the same lozenge arrangement of her half-sisters. The ship introduced one significant innovation to French capital ship design: the three-shaft arrangement for her propulsion system. All previous French capital ships had used two screws. She was also the first ship to mount the improved 1893 versions of the 305 mm and 274 mm main guns—albeit of an experimental 45-caliber (cal.) version that was later reduced to 40-cal. in later vessels—that was to equip all French battleships for more than a decade.

The ship's career was uneventful; she served as the flagship of the Northern Squadron for her first years in service. In 1903, she was transferred to the Reserve Division of the Mediterranean Squadron. For the next several years, she was periodically reactivated to take part in training exercises with the rest of the fleet, before being reduced to reserve again in 1913. Hulked in 1915, Masséna was ultimately scuttled in November 1915 to form a breakwater to protect the vessels that evacuated the Allied army that had been defeated in the Gallipoli campaign.

Bouvet

Bouvet was the last and most successful member of the 1890 program; she was the third vessel designed by Huin. He used the experience gathered with Charles Martel to produce an improved version in an attempt to correct the faults of the other vessels ordered under the program. Bouvet's superstructure was smaller than the other vessels, and though she was not as top-heavy as the other ships, she still had insufficient stability, which contributed to her eventual loss in 1915. This was largely a result of the pronounced tumblehome and an insufficiently subdivided hull that was not able to cope with underwater damage. The ship was the first major French warship to be completed with an integrated fire-control system that coordinated the rangefinders, observers, and the gun crews with a central command post to direct the aiming of her main guns.

Bouvet spent her career in the Mediterranean Squadron, occupied primarily with training exercises and cruises. In 1903, she was involved in a collision with the battleship FRENCH BATTLESHIP Gaulois that saw both vessels slightly damaged and both ships' captains relieved of duty. She assisted with relief efforts after Mount Vesuvius erupted in 1906 and the following year she was transferred to the 2nd Battle Squadron, part of what was then the Mediterranean Fleet. Unlike her four half-sisters, she remained in active service with the fleet at the outbreak of World War I, and after covering convoys from North Africa, she was sent to the Dardanelles. From February to March 1915, she participated in several attacks on the Ottoman coastal fortifications guarding the straits, culminating in a major attempt to force the straits on 18 March. During the battle, Bouvet was heavily engaged by Ottoman artillery, suffered eight hits, but had neutralized one fortress's guns before she struck a naval mine that caused uncontrolled flooding. She capsized and sank with heavy loss of life; 24 officers and 619 enlisted men were killed in the sinking.

Charlemagne class

The Minister of the Navy, Auguste Burdeau, instructed the naval design staff to prepare a new battleship proposal that was limited to 11000 t in 1892. The weight reduction was to be achieved by returning to twin-gun turrets for the main battery, which would halve the number of turrets and thus reduce the weight that would be expended armoring them. Burdeau initially suggested a battery of two 305 mm guns in a turret forward and two 274 mm guns in a turret aft, but it was determined that the smaller gun would be incapable of penetrating the armor on the latest British battleships, so a uniform battery of 305 mm guns was adopted. The Navy requested several proposals for the new ships, but negative experience with the experimental series of battleships ordered under the 1890 program led to a decision to build three ships to the same plan. During the design process, the various designers found it difficult to stay within the 11,000-ton limit while incorporating the necessary offensive and defensive characteristics. The naval command accepted the growth of the design and in 1893 selected the proposal prepared by Jules Thibaudier, the director of the Arsenal de Rochefort shipyard, with construction beginning on the first of three vessels later that year.

The first two ships—Gaulois and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Charlemagne—were briefly assigned to the Northern Squadron before being moved to the Mediterranean Squadron in 1899, where they were joined by FRENCH BATTLESHIP Saint Louis the next year. The last member of the class became the squadron flagship. The ships were involved in a number of accidents: Gaulois collided with the destroyer FRENCH DESTROYER Hallebarde in 1900 and Bouvet in 1903, Saint Louis was struck by the destroyer FRENCH DESTROYER Poignard and rammed the submarine FRENCH SUBMARINE Vendémiaire in 1911 and 1912, respectively. The new battleship FRENCH BATTLESHIP Suffren replaced Saint Louis as the flagship in 1904, and the three Charlemagnes were moved to the North Sea in 1909 and returned to the Mediterranean in 1912. They escorted convoys at the start of World War I and later took part in the Dardanelles campaign, where Gaulois was badly damaged by Ottoman artillery fire. Gaulois was later torpedoed and sunk by a German U-boat in 1916 and the other two vessels saw little activity thereafter, being withdrawn from service in mid-1917. Charlemagne was sold for scrap in 1923, while Saint Louis remained in the navy's inventory as a barracks ship until 1931, when she was struck from the naval register and sold two years later.

Iéna

The Board of Construction requested an improved version of the Charlemagne class in 1897, which was to correct the stability problems that perennially plagued French battleships of the period. The Navy Minister asked Thibaudier to design a larger version of the ship, with displacement increased to 12,000 t, as the naval staff had determined that, like the ships of the 1890 program, the Charlemagnes represented an attempt to fit too much into a limited displacement. Thibaudier prepared the next design, which was in many respects a simple repeat of the Charlemagnes, incorporating relatively minor improvements, including a more effective armor layout (the result of using Harvey armor to reduce the thickness but not the effectiveness of armor) and a heavier secondary battery. Iéna retained the pronounced tumblehome of the earlier French battleships, which was a primary cause of the ships' poor stability. She was nevertheless a good sea-boat and very maneuverable.

On entering service, Iéna became the flagship of the 2nd Battle Division in the Mediterranean Squadron. She thereafter embarked on the routine of training exercises and cruises with the rest of the fleet. Her career passed uneventfully, apart from a collision with a torpedo boat off Toulon in 1906 that resulted in the latter's sinking. The ship's career was cut short in March 1907 when, while in drydock in Toulon, a magazine explosion destroyed the ship. An investigation blamed Poudre B, the smokeless propellant used by the French Navy for its shells. The wreck was repaired to make her watertight and was refloated in 1909 for use as a target ship, being partially broken up between 1913 and 1914 off Porquerolles, though parts of the ship remained there until 1957 when final demolition was completed.

Suffren

The Navy Minister issued a request for a new battleship in 1898 that was to be an improved version of the basic Charlemagne/Iéna design. The funding for the ship had already been authorized and so displacement was limited to the same as that of Iéna. As a result, Thibaudier was constrained in what he could accomplish with the design, and so he considered improvements to stability, the caliber and arrangement of the secondary battery, and the armor layout of the hull. He considered the use of twin-gun turrets for the secondary battery, but concerns over the risk that damage would disable two guns rather than just one and the arrangement for effective fields of fire led the command to reject them. Requests from the various technical sections of the French Navy for increased ammunition storage, improved armor for the secondary battery, and accommodations for a flag officer and his staff complicated Thibaudier's task. As a result of the competing requests, the secondary battery could only be strengthened by the addition of a pair of guns. Increases in the ship's length necessitated improvements to the Arsenal de Brest shipyard before work could begin.

Suffren became the flagship of the 1st Battle Division after her commissioning. Her peacetime career was marked by a number of accidents: she collided with Saint Louis in 1905 and the submarine FRENCH SUBMARINE Bonite in 1906, nearly sinking the latter. She was moored next to Iéna when the latter vessel exploded in 1907; the blast hurled burning fragments that set Suffren on fire. She broke her starboard propeller shaft while underway in 1910 and lost power during maneuvers in 1911 and collided with the battleship FRENCH BATTLESHIP Démocratie, though she was not seriously damaged in any of these incidents. During World War I, she took part in the Dardanelles campaign through the end of 1915. In 1916, she joined the main French fleet in Greek waters, where she saw little activity. While en route to Lorient for a refit in November 1916, she was torpedoed and sunk by the German U-boat SM U-52 off the coast of Portugal, killing her entire crew.

République class

The two République-class ships were ordered under the 1900 Fleet Law, which was a reaction to the German 1898 Naval Law; the French law called for six new battleships, which were initially to be a homogeneous class. Louis-Émile Bertin prepared the design for the new ships, with an allowed displacement of up to 15000 t, a major increase over earlier vessels. Bertin correctly perceived the flaws of the narrow belt armor of earlier French battleships, and so designed what was to become République with a more comprehensive arrangement. Developments with heavier secondary batteries abroad, particularly with the British King Edward VII-class battleships, led to the last four ships being redesigned with more powerful secondary guns, resulting in four-ship Liberté-class battleship. Like many late French pre-dreadnoughts, their lengthy design and construction periods resulted in their completion after the revolutionary British "all-big-gun" battleship HMS Dreadnought (1906).

Both vessels served with the Mediterranean Fleet throughout their careers, initially with the 1st Squadron and, after the Danton-class battleship ships entered service, with the 2nd Squadron. They took part in convoy escort operations in the first days of World War I and then deployed to the southern Adriatic Sea to engage the Austro-Hungarian Navy. The Austro-Hungarians refused to take the bait, and the French only caught the small protected cruiser SMS Zenta, which they sank in the Battle of Antivari. FRENCH BATTLESHIP République and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Patrie were later involved in Allied efforts to force Greece to enter the war against Germany and Austria-Hungary, which ultimately succeeded in 1917. République was partially disarmed in early 1918 to provide guns for the French Army and thereafter became a training ship, but Patrie remained in service until 1919, when she, too, was reduced to a training role. The lead ship was sold for scrap in 1921, but Patrie was retained for training purposes until 1936, when she was finally decommissioned and sold the following year.

Liberté class

Initially meant to be identical to the Républiques, the four Liberté-class ships were redesigned after foreign battleships began to carry heavier secondary guns; these included the British King Edward VII class, armed with 9.2 in secondaries, which were in turn a response to American and Italian battleships armed with 203 mm guns. Accordingly, the Naval General Staff requested the last four members of the 1900 program to be redesigned to carry 194 mm guns. Ironically, Bertin had suggested the exact same caliber during the initial design process, which the General Staff rejected over fears that the rate of fire would fall. The two classes were otherwise nearly identical, which has led some historians, including John Jordan and Philippe Caresse, to consider them to be one class with two variants.

The four ships' service history largely mirrored that of the République class. In 1909, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Liberté, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Justice, and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Vérité traveled to the United States for the Hudson–Fulton Celebration and, in 1911, they joined the Républiques in the 2nd Squadron. In September that year, Liberté was destroyed by an accidental explosion while moored in Toulon; the cause of the blast was determined to be the same unstable Poudre B that had destroyed Iéna in 1907. Along with their squadron mates, the three surviving Libertés escorted convoys early in World War I and took part in the Battle of Antivari. Vérité briefly took part in operations against the Ottomans in November and December, and later took part in the operations in Greece in 1916 and early 1917. After securing Greece's alliance, the ships returned to the fleet's main wartime anchorage at Corfu, where it remained for the rest of the war. Immediately after the German surrender, Justice and Démocratie were sent to the Black Sea to oversee German demilitarization and then to take part in the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War. War-weary sailors later mutinied in several vessels and forced the French to withdraw in 1919. The three ships saw no further significant service and all were discarded in 1921–1922

Danton class

Following the beginning of construction of Liberté, France began planning for the next major construction program. By this time, France had concluded the Entente Cordiale with Britain, and the increasingly powerful German fleet was viewed as the most significant threat; the program of 1906 called for a total of sixteen new battleships to be built by 1919 to counter the Germans. In an effort to control the cost of the next ships to be built, the Minister of the Navy, Gaston Thomson, imposed a limit of 18000 t. The design staff began its work in the aftermath of the Battle of Tsushima; the French Navy determined that Japanese success in the battle had been the result of the high speed of their ships and the large number of medium-caliber guns that inflicted significant damage to the unarmored superstructures of the Russian warships. As a result, the navy decided to adopt a heavier secondary battery than the preceding Libertés, but decided against following many other major navies then building "all-big-gun" battleships. The naval command determined that replacing the planned 240 mm guns with single 305 mm guns would have increased displacement over the limit and reduced the rate of fire. The navy did introduce a new, longer 45-cal. version of the 305 mm gun, the Modèle 1906 type. Pressure from Parliament to keep technological pace with foreign navies led the designers to adopt steam turbines, the first time they were used in French capital ships. The navy had initially intended to build three ships as the first stage of the program, but delays during the design process led to the authorization of six ships to account for the slowdown.

After entering service in 1911, all six ships were assigned to the 1st Battle Squadron, where they remained until the outbreak of World War I. Like the rest of the fleet, they escorted convoys from North Africa at the start of the war and then went to the Adriatic, seeing action at the Battle of Antivari, with the exception of FRENCH BATTLESHIP Mirabeau, which was being refitted in Toulon at the time. The six Dantons remained based at Corfu and Malta for much of the war to blockade the Austro-Hungarian fleet. During this period, portions of the ships' crews were stripped to provide men for anti-submarine warships to combat the German and Austro-Hungarian U-boats; combined with coal shortages that curtailed operations, the reduction in crews led to crippling morale problems for the fleet. In March 1917, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Danton was sunk by a German U-boat. After the war, the surviving ships participated in the intervention in Russia in 1919 and Mirabeau was damaged after running aground off the Crimea; she was never repaired and was eventually broken up. The other vessels were modernized in the early 1920s, with the exception of FRENCH BATTLESHIP Vergniaud, which was in poor condition. They continued on in secondary roles into the 1930s, and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Condorcet remained in use as a depot ship until 1942, when she was captured by German forces in Toulon, ultimately being bombed and sunk in 1944.

Courbet class

The French naval command had become convinced by 1909 that the so-called dreadnought battleships were superior to the mixed-battery ships like the Dantons, and so the new naval minister, Augustin Boué de Lapeyrère, instructed the design staff to prepare an all-big-gun proposal. Displacement was limited to 21000 t, which corresponded to contemporary foreign dreadnoughts. Consideration was given to uniform batteries of 240, 274, and 305 mm guns; the Technical Section prepared three designs, the first of which was essentially a repeat Danton with increased ammunition storage, the second was a Danton variant with the six 240 mm wing turrets replaced by four 305 mm turrets, bringing the total number of guns to twelve. The turrets were arranged in a superfiring pair forward, two wing turrets amidships, and another superfiring pair aft. The third version included a mix of twin and triple turrets, but Boué de Lapeyrère ordered a modified version of the second proposal, and the first two ships were ordered for the 1910 budget. Two more followed in 1911.

Three of the four ships were completed shortly before World War I, and FRENCH BATTLESHIP France and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Jean Bart carried President Raymond Poincaré on a visit to Russia during the July Crisis, the proximate cause of the war. The ships operated with the main fleet during the conflict and saw little activity after the Battle of Antivari; they suffered the same fate as the Dantons, with crews being thinned to provide men for more important vessels. France and Jean Bart were involved in the intervention in Russia in 1919 and after returning to France later that year, were assigned to the new Western Mediterranean Squadron. In 1922 France struck an uncharted rock in Quiberon Bay and sank. The three surviving ships were refitted in the late 1920s and early 1930s. They thereafter served in secondary roles, including as training ships and later as barracks ships. FRENCH BATTLESHIP Courbet remained in service as a training vessel early in World War II and she shelled German forces during the Battle of France in June 1940 before fleeing to Britain and eventually being sunk as a breakwater for the Normandy invasion. Jean Bart, which had been renamed Océan in 1937, was seized by the Germans in 1942 and used for weapons tests before being bombed and sunk in 1944. Paris, the last surviving member of the class, was also evacuated to Britain after the German invasion and was used as a depot ship first in Britain and then in France until 1955.

Bretagne class

The Bretagne class was modeled on the preceding Courbet class, using the same hull design as a result of the size constraints of French shipyards. Design work began before the Courbets had been ordered, and the emphasis was on increasing the caliber of the main battery to match foreign development of the so-called superdreadnought type such as the British Orion-class battleship. The naval high command initially specified a maximum displacement of 23500 t and a main battery of twelve 340 mm guns. The 340 mm turrets were significantly heavier than the 305 mm versions used in the Courbets, and the design staff found it impossible to retain six turrets within the prescribed displacement. They submitted a five-turret design, removing one of the wing turrets and moving the other to the centerline amidships, which kept the same ten-gun broadside. In addition, the belt armor was reduced slightly to accommodate for the greater weight of the main battery. A new naval law was passed in 1912 that projected a fleet of twenty-eight battleships by 1920; three ships were authorized for the 1912 budget, which became the Bretagnes.

Upon completion, the ships were assigned to the 1st Battle Squadron and sent to join the fleet at Corfu; by this point, the fleet had settled into the blockade of the southern Adriatic and so the Bretagnes saw little activity during the war. The ships spent the 1920s and 1930s in the Mediterranean and Atlantic Squadrons, undergoing periodic refits and modernizations, and in the late 1930s, they took part in the non-intervention patrols off Spain during the Spanish Civil War. After the start of World War II, they operated as convoy escorts in the Atlantic and in 1940, as war with Italy became increasingly likely, they were concentrated with the bulk of the French fleet in the Mediterranean as a deterrent. FRENCH BATTLESHIP Bretagne and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Provence were in Mers El Kébir when Germany defeated France in June 1940, and during a British operation to neutralize the French fleet, were attacked in the port by the British Force H. Bretagne was destroyed and Provence was badly damaged, later being refloated and returned to Toulon for repairs, where she was scuttled in 1942 to prevent her capture by the Germans. Meanwhile, FRENCH BATTLESHIP Lorraine was seized by the British while she was moored in Alexandria, Egypt and then turned over to the Free French Naval Forces. She saw action during the last years of the war bombarding German forces in occupied France. After the war, she was used as a training vessel and later a barracks ship, ultimately being scrapped in 1953.

Normandie class

Before work on the Bretagne class had even begun, the French Navy's Technical Committee issued a report in late 1911 criticizing the decision to adopt a centerline, amidships turret based on previous experience with ships in the 1880s; the center turret inflicted excessive blast damage on the superstructure. Work on the next design began in early 1912 and three initial versions were prepared; the first was essentially a repeat of Bretagne but the other two attempted a radical solution to the problem identified by the Technical Committee. To avoid the central turret, they proposed a new quadruple turret; the first variant used two of these turrets, each with a twin-turret superfiring above them, and the second incorporated four quadruple turrets with 305 mm guns. The General Staff decided to retain the 340 mm gun and preferred the quadruple turret if development could be completed in time, ultimately settling on a finalized version equipped with three quadruple turrets, one forward and two aft. The 1912 naval law had initially called for two ships to be ordered in 1913 and two more in 1914, but an amendment increased the pace to four in 1913 and a fifth in 1914, owing to the increased tension in Europe during this period.

The first two ships were ordered in April 1913, followed by two more in July, and a fifth vessel in January 1914. Work was halted after the outbreak of war, as resources were diverted to more critical projects for the Army and to complete the Bretagnes, then much further along in construction. Much of the material that had been assembled for the ships was used for other purposes, including boilers to replace those of older vessels, and main guns converted into railway guns for the Army. After the war, the first four ships were cancelled and parts of those vessels were used to complete FRENCH AIRCRAFT CARRIER Béarn as an aircraft carrier. She remained in service during World War II and the French Indochina War and was ultimately scrapped in 1967.

Lyon class

The amendment to the 1912 naval law called for four ships to be ordered in 1915. Design work for the new vessels began in mid-1913, and since longer graving docks would soon be completed in Brest and Toulon, the new ships would not be limited by infrastructure. The naval command considered increasing the caliber to 380 mm to keep pace with the latest British battleships of the Queen Elizabeth-class battleship, but the French did not yet have a gun of that caliber completed, and the delays necessary to design and test it were deemed unacceptable. Additionally, the French expected to be fighting at ranges where the existing 340 mm gun was able to defeat heavy armor, so there was little need to step up to the larger caliber. The 340 mm gun was adopted, but to improve the ships' firepower, a fourth quadruple turret was added. The ships were allocated to shipyards in late 1913, with work to begin on the first two in January 1915, with the second pair to follow at an unspecified time. Work to complete the design continued into 1914, but the details of the ships' underwater protection system had not yet been finalized by the time war broke out in August 1914. With the start of the war, the project was cancelled; no work was done and no material was assembled for the vessels.

Dunkerque class

In the early 1920s, the major naval powers concluded the Washington Naval Treaty to limit battleship construction; under the terms of the treaty, France was limited to a total of 175000 LT of battleship tonnage. All members of the treaty system were barred from building battleships for a decade, apart from France and Italy, both of which had 70000 LT allotted, since their fleets consisted of older vessels. Financial weakness after the war, coupled with indecision over what type of ship to build delayed the construction of new French battleships. The navy initially conceived of small, fast battleships to counter new Italian heavy cruisers that threatened France's lines of communication in the Mediterranean. The advent of the German Deutschland-class cruisers, armed with 283 mm guns, necessitated larger, more capable battleships, with armor heavy enough to defeat the German large-caliber guns. This process eventually produced the Dunkerque class.

FRENCH BATTLESHIP Dunkerque and FRENCH BATTLESHIP Strasbourg were commissioned in the late 1930s; they spent the majority of their peacetime years conducting training. Following the German invasion of Poland in September 1939 that started World War II, the ships were initially used as part of the Force de Raid (Raiding Force) to hunt down German commerce raiders and to escort convoys. The ships were moored in Mers El Kébir to deter Italy from joining the war when Germany defeated France in May and June 1940, and were to be demilitarized there under the terms of the Armistice of 22 June 1940. Concerned that the Germans would seize the French fleet, the British launched Operation Catapult to neutralize the vessels; during the attack on Mers-el-Kébir, Force H damaged Dunkerque but Strasbourg was able to escape the harbor and reach Toulon. After a second attack that sank her, Dunkerque was refloated and returned to Toulon as well, before both ships were ultimately scuttled in the harbor to prevent the Germans from seizing them in 1942. Both vessels were eventually broken up in the 1950s.

Richelieu class

The Italian response to the Dunkerques, the first two Littorio-class battleships, which displaced 35000 LT and were armed with nine 380 mm guns, prompted France to respond in kind. The French considered a scaled-up version of the Dunkerque design armed with eight 380 mm or 406 mm guns, or a version with three triple-turrets. The design staff quickly determined that the weight of the 406 mm battery would preclude the other technical requirements for the ships and decided that 380 mm was the largest caliber that could be carried in the specified displacement. The design was finalized by August 1935 and two ships were ordered and quickly laid down; because the ships were larger than the shipyards available, the builders adopted a plan to build the bulk of the hull on the slipway and then add bows and sterns after moving them to drydocks. Beginning construction of the ships in late 1935 placed France in violation of the naval arms treaty, as the total tonnage exceeded the 70,000 tons allowed before the building holiday expired in 1936. But the French government had objected to Britain failing to uphold its obligations under the Treaty of Versailles by signing a separate Anglo-German Naval Agreement earlier in 1935, which directly undermined the limitations of German armament imposed by Versailles. Two more ships, to be built to modified designs, were projected, but only Clemenceau was laid down before the start of the war. She was quickly cancelled, as was the fourth vessel, Gascogne.

Neither FRENCH BATTLESHIP Richelieu or FRENCH BATTLESHIP Jean Bart was ready in time to see action before France was defeated in 1940. Jean Bart was moved to Casablanca and Richelieu fled to Dakar before they could be captured by German forces. The latter was attacked by British forces in July and September to prevent her from being turned over to the Germans, but Jean Bart was far from complete and so was ignored. In November 1942, the Allies invaded French North Africa and Jean Bart initially fired on the invasion fleet before being disabled by the US battleship USS Massachusetts (BB-59). After the invasion, which resulted in French forces in North Africa turning to Free France, Richelieu was sent to the United States to be completed and modernized. She thereafter served with the British Home Fleet in the Indian Ocean and later in French Indochina, where she ended the war. Jean Bart was finally completed after the war; both vessels continued on in service with the French fleet, primarily as training vessels, before being decommissioned in 1968 and broken up.

Alsace class

After work on the Richelieus began and the international naval treaty system fell apart following Japan's and Italy's refusal to sign the Second London Naval Treaty, the French Navy began design studies on the next class of battleships that would take advantage of the escalator clause in the treaty that allowed displacement to be increased to 45000 LT and the main battery to be increased to 406 mm (the treaty had added a limit of 356 mm guns). The design staff prepared several studies in 1939, all of which were derivatives of the three-turret design that had been drawn up during the Richelieu design process. The first variant had nine 380 mm guns in triple turrets, with slightly improved protection over the Richelieus and a more powerful secondary battery. The second version was essentially the same, but scaled up for 406 mm guns, and the third featured three quadruple 380 mm turrets. The navy settled on the first version, as the second variation would have introduced a fourth shell caliber to the fleet, thus complicating logistics, and the third design was too large and expensive. Two ships were authorized in April 1940, with construction to begin in 1941 after the aircraft carrier FRENCH AIRCRAFT CARRIER Joffre was launched, but following the French collapse in June, the program was cancelled.

title: List of battleships of France


text:
List of battleships of the Netherlands

This is a list of Dutch battleships of the period 1894-1944. Also considered in the list are shortened versions of battleships, coastal defense ships (sometimes also called coastal defense battleships).
 * Evertsen-class coastal defence ship
 * Evertsen (1894) - BU 1914
 * Piet Hein (1894) - Discarded 1914
 * Kortenaer (1894) - Discarded 1920
 * Koningin Regentes-class coastal defence ship
 * Koningin Regentes (1900) - Discarded 1920
 * De Ruyter (1901) - Discarded 1923
 * Hertog Hendrik (1902) - Hulked 1945
 * Marten Harpertszoon Tromp (1904) - BU 1932
 * Jacob Van Heemskerck (1906) - Hulked 1948
 * De Zeven Provincien (1909) - Sunk 1942, salvaged by Japan and recommissioned, sunk 1943
 * ? class (not built)
 * 6 ships?

Dreadnoughts
 * 1913 proposal (none begun)
 * (up to 9 ships planned)

Battlecruisers
 * Design 1047 (none begun)
 * (3 planned)

title: List of battleships of the Netherlands