-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Uss missouri .. Ssn-780??
- Thread starter Cleonard19
- Start date
The Brits have never reused a name in another class then? In all their naval history?
Brett
I'm pretty sure they have, but I don't care to look it up (oh well I did anyways)...
Invincible, Invulnerable, Inexorable, Indefatigable, Indecisive, Immeasurable, Intercontinental, Incontinent, Intrepid, Indomitable, Inflexible, Implacable, Irresistable, Illustrious, India, India (Emperor of), Incomparable, and INCONVEIVEABLE!
Seriously, most of those are real. And that's forgetting such gems as the (aforementioned) Glowworm, Active, and Ascot. The British, along with many of their ugly airplanes, do NOT always get it right.
I just found this website if you care to peruse the rest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Royal_Navy_ship_names
Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to trying to figure out what class of ship somebody is referring to name.
If I asked a random sailor if O'Keefe or O'Kane was a FFG or DDG, they wouldn't know unless they knew the ship specifically.
In contrast, if you know the Brit naming convention you know HMS Turbulent is a Trafalgar class sub.
Like I said, not terribly important, but convenient.
I thought that's what you meant, but I had to look it up. It only works for the submarines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_Navy_ships
The Brits have renamed many ships ...
One of their most famous: HMS ARK ROYAL --- the name goes all the way back to the defeat of the Spanish Armada
The Brits got one name perfect: HMS DREADNOUGHT. Not only is the name pretty cool, but she is considered not just the lead ship for a class in the Royal Navy, but every battleship afterwards was compared to her.
Battleships in World War I and beyond are classified as pre-DREADNOUGHT or as a 'Dreadnought'.
The Dreadnoughts were so expensive that the resulting arms race to build these ships resulted in the Washington Navy Treaty which placed limits on how many of each ship each country could have.
Pretty freakin' impressive when you build the ship that becomes the standard world wide and results in international treaties!
I would like to think that the Nimitz class sets a similair standard. Right now the PLAN, Japanesse Navy and the Royal Navy are all considering building a super carrier.
When a country considers building them, there is only one place to go, the U.S. Recently a delegation from China visited North Island to get a tour of one of the CVNs that was in port.
Battleships in World War I and beyond are classified as pre-DREADNOUGHT or as a 'Dreadnought'.
The Dreadnoughts were so expensive that the resulting arms race to build these ships resulted in the Washington Navy Treaty which placed limits on how many of each ship each country could have.
Pretty freakin' impressive when you build the ship that becomes the standard world wide and results in international treaties!
I would like to think that the Nimitz class sets a similair standard. Right now the PLAN, Japanesse Navy and the Royal Navy are all considering building a super carrier.
When a country considers building them, there is only one place to go, the U.S. Recently a delegation from China visited North Island to get a tour of one of the CVNs that was in port.
Also pretty cool that four Ark Royals (i.e., all of them except Sir Walter Raleigh's) have been aircraft carriers.
One thing the Brits do very, very well is 'tradition'.
This is where I'm going to share some little known history as passed on to me by my late Uncle Bill who served on the USS San Diego (CL 53) during WW2. San Diego had 18 battle stars and as far as I can tell only Enterprise had more. Uncle Bill told many stories about the ship's battles in the Pacific and how they never lost a man. The ship's service was recognized in the fleet and the surrender was slated to be signed on San Diego, but Truman being from Missouri insisted that his state's namesake was to be the ship used. San Diego was still given the task of being the lead ship into Tokyo Bay.
So yes, to say that Missouri is sacred is IMO an overstatement.
And in my world, we'd name the next carrier Enterprise after CVN-65 retires and have that be the lead name for the new class of carrier.
I think after the current USS Enterprise is retired it will be pretty tough not to give that name to a new carrier. I have noticed that Saratoga, Lexington, Ranger and Yorktown have not been used since the last ones were retired, I would like to think the Navy as saving them for carriers, whenever we get the chance to name them again.