Aircraft Carrier naming

[Bob]

Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
(CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.

[Krztalizer]

absolutely concur, although Reagan, with his rewarded efforts to end the
40-year Cold War, I think an exception could be made. We could do with a USS
England ("they'll always be a USS England" - only warship to locate and sink
six enemy submarines!). Just glad they had a USS (The) Sullivans. Is it still
in commission..?

[Mike Kanze]

I've always been bothered by this trend, even if the namesake has been dead
for a while.

Unfortunately I suspect this was / still is a necessary "evil" for the Navy
to get the force it needs. Especially concerning those ships named for
congressional bigwigs.

And I know exactly which ship type I'd like named for SEN Clinton.
(Actually, a whole class of ships honoring the likes of Hilary Clinton, Pat
Schroeder, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi . . . and of course Monica Lewinski.)
<g>

--
Mike Kanze

"If it's good enough to get shot at in, it's good enough to wear to
McDonalds."

- CDR Doug "Woody" Beal, USN (Referring to the wearing of military uniform
clothing, like flight suits, off-base.)


"Bob" > wrote in message
om...
> Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
> people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
> (CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
> carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
> carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
> in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.

[George Shirley]

Mike Kanze wrote:

> I've always been bothered by this trend, even if the namesake has been dead
> for a while.
>
> Unfortunately I suspect this was / still is a necessary "evil" for the Navy
> to get the force it needs. Especially concerning those ships named for
> congressional bigwigs.
>
> And I know exactly which ship type I'd like named for SEN Clinton.
> (Actually, a whole class of ships honoring the likes of Hilary Clinton, Pat
> Schroeder, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi . . . and of course Monica Lewinski.)
> <g>
>

Either tramp steamers or ships that go down.

George

[Joe Delphi]

Bob > wrote in message
om...
> Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
> people who were still living at the time?

Yes. The risk is that the person will do something to disgrace their name
and then the name of the ship. If the person is deceased, then that risk
goes down considerably.

I remember a situation in the midwest where a University (which had no
building naming policy) named a building after a beloved football coach that
was still alive and still coaching and not all that old either. Later
someone filed a complaint against the coach for something and there was an
investigation which revealed all types of wrongdoing - financial,
recruiting, and otherwise. After that, the University changed the name of
the building which caused an even bigger scandal because then the coach and
the family felt that they were wronged...etc..etc. Changing the name of
the building cost the University quite a bit of money too. You can rest
assured that after that incident, the University came up with a building
naming policy that included, among other things, that the person had to be
deceased for five years before their name could be submitted for a building.
Its not foolproof, but I guess they decided that if something bad was going
to show up, it would show up within five years of the person's death.

And in answer to another poster's question, I believe that the USS (The)
Sullivans is still a commissioned ship.


JD

[Vaughn]

"Joe Delphi" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> And in answer to another poster's question, I believe that the USS (The)
> Sullivans is still a commissioned ship.

From: http://www.buffalonavalpark.org/sullivan.htm
USS THE SULLIVANS ( DD-537 )
Fletcher Class Destroyer
Launched April 4, 1943 at Bethlehem Steel Corporation, San Francisco CA.
Commissioned September 30, 1943
Decommissioned 1965

Vaughn


>
>
> JD
>
>

[Jim Carriere]

"Vaughn" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Joe Delphi" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> > And in answer to another poster's question, I believe that the USS (The)
> > Sullivans is still a commissioned ship.
>
> From: http://www.buffalonavalpark.org/sullivan.htm
> USS THE SULLIVANS ( DD-537 )
> Fletcher Class Destroyer
> Launched April 4, 1943 at Bethlehem Steel Corporation, San Francisco CA.
> Commissioned September 30, 1943
> Decommissioned 1965

Hmm, you learn something new every day. I didn't realize there was a
previous ship bearing that name.

http://www.sullivans.navy.mil/

(DDG-67)

[Joe Delphi]

There are two USS Sullivans - the first one, referred to below, was used in
WW2 and Korea, the second ship DDG-668 was the one to which I was referring.

JD


Vaughn > wrote in message
...
>
> "Joe Delphi" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> > And in answer to another poster's question, I believe that the USS (The)
> > Sullivans is still a commissioned ship.
>
> From: http://www.buffalonavalpark.org/sullivan.htm
> USS THE SULLIVANS ( DD-537 )
> Fletcher Class Destroyer
> Launched April 4, 1943 at Bethlehem Steel Corporation, San Francisco CA.
> Commissioned September 30, 1943
> Decommissioned 1965
>
> Vaughn
>
>
> >
> >
> > JD
> >
> >
>
>

[John Fitzpatrick]

Wait until the Navy starts accepting commercial sponsors in order to
increase their budget. We could be looking at the USS Taco Bell some day.
Before you laugh, don't forget that local and state governments are already
renaming public sport and civic centers after commercial investors as a
source of income. Lets face it, nothing is sacred when it comes to money.

Fitz
"Bob" > wrote in message
om...
> Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
> people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
> (CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
> carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
> carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
> in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.

[Bill Kambic]

"John Fitzpatrick" wrote in message

> Wait until the Navy starts accepting commercial sponsors in order
to
> increase their budget. We could be looking at the USS Taco Bell some day.
> Before you laugh, don't forget that local and state governments are
already
> renaming public sport and civic centers after commercial investors as a
> source of income. Lets face it, nothing is sacred when it comes to money.

One of our local jurisdictions is putting into service police cars carrying
commercial advertisements.

I would guess bail bondsmen and defense lawyers might be very interested in
this concept.

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

[Lynn in StLou]

Joe Delphi wrote:

> There are two USS Sullivans - the first one, referred to below, was used in
> WW2 and Korea, the second ship DDG-668 was the one to which I was referring.
>
> JD
>
>
> Vaughn > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Joe Delphi" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>>
>>>And in answer to another poster's question, I believe that the USS (The)
>>>Sullivans is still a commissioned ship.
>>
>>From: http://www.buffalonavalpark.org/sullivan.htm
>>USS THE SULLIVANS ( DD-537 )
>>Fletcher Class Destroyer
>>Launched April 4, 1943 at Bethlehem Steel Corporation, San Francisco CA.
>>Commissioned September 30, 1943
>>Decommissioned 1965
>>
>>Vaughn
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>JD
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
You are completely forgetting there is an Arleigh Burke
class The Sullivans. DDG-68

--
Lynn in StLou
REMOVE anti-spam measure to reply

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 1/17/04 7:18 PM, in article , "Mike
Kanze" > wrote:

> I've always been bothered by this trend, even if the namesake has been dead
> for a while.
>
> Unfortunately I suspect this was / still is a necessary "evil" for the Navy
> to get the force it needs. Especially concerning those ships named for
> congressional bigwigs.
>
> And I know exactly which ship type I'd like named for SEN Clinton.
> (Actually, a whole class of ships honoring the likes of Hilary Clinton, Pat
> Schroeder, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi . . . and of course Monica Lewinski.)
> <g>
>

Owl, I respect your opinion immensely, but it kind of reminds me of Charles
Durning (Senator) in "The Final Countdown" Protesting about ADM Nimitz's
name being on CVN-68.

I understand the risks (what if the namesake disgraces the name
post-christening), but I've never put that much thought into it, so it's
never bothered me. Perhaps I need to gel an opinion. That having been
said...

> --
> Mike Kanze
>
> "If it's good enough to get shot at in, it's good enough to wear to
> McDonalds."
>
> - CDR Doug "Woody" Beal, USN (Referring to the wearing of military uniform
> clothing, like flight suits, off-base.)
USNR actually

What's THIS! You're quoting me?

Now THAT'S something new. Truth be told, I'm not the original author. I
plagiarized the phrase from a buddy (anonymous Naval aviator?). I'm just
the first to say it in RAMN--even though I still stand by the belief.

Can't take credit for another man's greatness.

--Woody

>
>
> "Bob" > wrote in message
> om...
>> Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
>> people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
>> (CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
>> carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
>> carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
>> in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
>> Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.

[Lynn in StLou]

Lynn in StLou wrote:
> Joe Delphi wrote:
>
>> There are two USS Sullivans - the first one, referred to below, was
>> used in
>> WW2 and Korea, the second ship DDG-668 was the one to which I was
>> referring.
>>
>> JD
>>
>>
>> Vaughn > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> "Joe Delphi" > wrote in message
>>> ink.net...
>>>
>>>> And in answer to another poster's question, I believe that the USS
>>>> (The)
>>>> Sullivans is still a commissioned ship.
>>>
>>>
>>> From: http://www.buffalonavalpark.org/sullivan.htm
>>> USS THE SULLIVANS ( DD-537 )
>>> Fletcher Class Destroyer
>>> Launched April 4, 1943 at Bethlehem Steel Corporation, San Francisco CA.
>>> Commissioned September 30, 1943
>>> Decommissioned 1965
>>>
>>> Vaughn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> JD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> You are completely forgetting there is an Arleigh Burke class The
> Sullivans. DDG-68
>
My bad...only two, but DDG-68 is the correct hull number,
not DDG-668

--
Lynn in StLou
REMOVE anti-spam measure to reply

[T Bird]

And how about another USS Yorktown . Served on CV-10 . 2-63 to 6-65 .
Good duty , Two WestPacs , Loved my homeport . Long Beach .

[Mike Kanze]

>Wait until the Navy starts accepting commercial sponsors in order to
increase their budget. We could be looking at the USS Taco Bell some day.
Before you laugh, don't forget that local and state governments are already
renaming public sport and civic centers after commercial investors as a
source of income. Lets face it, nothing is sacred when it comes to money.

A concept that may work well for getting the ship built, but that founders
(pun intended) if the ship is heavily damaged or sunk.

In the civilian world, consumer products companies weigh this risk all the
time when choosing their media. Think of the risk / reward trade-off for
plastering your brand's logo on a race car and you'll get the idea.

******

On a humorous note, would anyone in r.a.m.n. wish to contribute to a list of
ship classes with corresponding prospective commercial name sponsors?

For example:

Fleet oilers:
USS Chevron-Texaco, USS Valero, USS Arco, USS Beacon, USS Rotten Robbie,
etc.

(I think you get the idea.)

--
Mike Kanze

"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society."

-Mark Twain


"John Fitzpatrick" > wrote in message
...
> Wait until the Navy starts accepting commercial sponsors in order
to
> increase their budget. We could be looking at the USS Taco Bell some day.
> Before you laugh, don't forget that local and state governments are
already
> renaming public sport and civic centers after commercial investors as a
> source of income. Lets face it, nothing is sacred when it comes to money.
>
> Fitz
> "Bob" > wrote in message
> om...
> > Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
> > people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
> > (CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
> > carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
> > carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
> > in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> > Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.
>
>

[Mike Kanze]

>What's THIS! You're quoting me?
>
>Now THAT'S something new. Truth be told, I'm not the original author. I
>plagiarized the phrase from a buddy (anonymous Naval aviator?). I'm just
>the first to say it in RAMN--even though I still stand by the belief.
>
>Can't take credit for another man's greatness.

Woody,

Thanks for clarifying your role in the evolution of the quote, and for
crediting your bud. However, you were the first (AFAIK) to put it into
print.

And there are your ~15 minutes of fame. <g>

--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society."

-Mark Twain


"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" > wrote in message
...
> [rest snipped]

[Ogden Johnson III]

(Bob) wrote:

>Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
>people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
>(CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
>carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
>carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
>in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
>Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.

Many, as evidence by the numerous threads in s.m.n over the
years. To no noticeable effect on the current naming policies of
SecNav [with the advice of the current President, Congress,
etc.]. As the KOG pithily observed, "Fish don't vote."
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

[Jim Carriere]

"Mike Kanze" > wrote in message
...
> On a humorous note, would anyone in r.a.m.n. wish to contribute to a list
of
> ship classes with corresponding prospective commercial name sponsors?
>
> For example:
>
> Fleet oilers:
> USS Chevron-Texaco, USS Valero, USS Arco, USS Beacon, USS Rotten Robbie,
> etc.

What about the composite squadrons that provide target services?

"Bubba's Skeet Shooting Emporium"

[Mike Kanze]

Jim,

In reality, I sorta recall that one of the WWII-era VU (utility) squadrons
had a patch with a stork or a pelican carrying an obviously well-used
diaper. The motto below this figure read, "We Haul All The Sh*t", or
somesuch.

--
Mike Kanze

"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society."

-Mark Twain


"Jim Carriere" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Kanze" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On a humorous note, would anyone in r.a.m.n. wish to contribute to a
list
> of
> > ship classes with corresponding prospective commercial name sponsors?
> >
> > For example:
> >
> > Fleet oilers:
> > USS Chevron-Texaco, USS Valero, USS Arco, USS Beacon, USS Rotten Robbie,
> > etc.
>
> What about the composite squadrons that provide target services?
>
> "Bubba's Skeet Shooting Emporium"
>
>

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
on 17 Jan 2004 15:20:41 -0800,
Bob attempted to say .....

> Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
> people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
> (CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
> carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
> carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
> in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.
>

AMEN

No ship should be named for a living person.



--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
on Sat, 17 Jan 2004 19:35:14 -0600,
George Shirley attempted to say .....

> Mike Kanze wrote:
>
> > I've always been bothered by this trend, even if the namesake has been dead
> > for a while.
> >
> > Unfortunately I suspect this was / still is a necessary "evil" for the Navy
> > to get the force it needs. Especially concerning those ships named for
> > congressional bigwigs.
> >
> > And I know exactly which ship type I'd like named for SEN Clinton.
> > (Actually, a whole class of ships honoring the likes of Hilary Clinton, Pat
> > Schroeder, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi . . . and of course Monica Lewinski.)
> > <g>
> >
>
> Either tramp steamers or ships that go down.

Tramp Steamers.

Ships that go down (submarines) are named after fish !

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[gizmo-goddard]

"Tank Fixer" > wrote in message
.net...

<SNIPPED>

> Ships that go down (submarines) are named after fish !

Actually, only three of them are currently named for fish/aquatic animals,
the Seawolf (SSN-21), the Dolphin (AGSS-555) and the Cutthroat (LSV-2) that
I can find. Most are named for cities and states:

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/ffiletop.html#subs

You can check out each class of submarine from this website.

__!_!__
Gizmo

[William Hughes]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:58:57 -0500 (EST), in rec.aviation.military.naval
(T Bird) wrote:

> And how about another USS Yorktown . Served on CV-10 . 2-63 to 6-65 .
> Good duty , Two WestPacs , Loved my homeport . Long Beach .

I'm still holding out for a new LANGLEY.

[Andrew.Venor]

Tank Fixer wrote:

> In article >,
> on 17 Jan 2004 15:20:41 -0800,
> Bob attempted to say .....
>
>
>>Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
>>people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
>>(CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
>>carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
>>carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
>>in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
>>Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.
>>
>
>
> AMEN
>
> No ship should be named for a living person.
>
>
>
While I would normally agree, I can think of two exceptions.

I think it was an appropriate when the Navy named a destroyer after Adm.
Arleigh Burke and a supply ship after Bob Hope while they were still alive.

ALV

[Pechs1]

<< Would it not be great to have
> in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.
>><BR><BR>

You bet, along with the Shangri-La....
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Frank Minich]

> Fleet oilers:
> USS Chevron-Texaco, USS Valero, USS Arco, USS Beacon, USS Rotten Robbie,
> etc.

Arco was purchased by BP a few years ago - would USS Arco get a name
"upgrade"?

Regards,
Frank

"Mike Kanze" > wrote in message
...
> >Wait until the Navy starts accepting commercial sponsors in order to
> increase their budget. We could be looking at the USS Taco Bell some day.
> Before you laugh, don't forget that local and state governments are
already
> renaming public sport and civic centers after commercial investors as a
> source of income. Lets face it, nothing is sacred when it comes to money.
>
> A concept that may work well for getting the ship built, but that founders
> (pun intended) if the ship is heavily damaged or sunk.
>
> In the civilian world, consumer products companies weigh this risk all the
> time when choosing their media. Think of the risk / reward trade-off for
> plastering your brand's logo on a race car and you'll get the idea.
>
> ******
>
> On a humorous note, would anyone in r.a.m.n. wish to contribute to a list
of
> ship classes with corresponding prospective commercial name sponsors?
>
> For example:
>
> Fleet oilers:
> USS Chevron-Texaco, USS Valero, USS Arco, USS Beacon, USS Rotten Robbie,
> etc.
>
> (I think you get the idea.)
>
> --
> Mike Kanze
>
> "Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on
society."
>
> -Mark Twain
>
>
> "John Fitzpatrick" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Wait until the Navy starts accepting commercial sponsors in order
> to
> > increase their budget. We could be looking at the USS Taco Bell some
day.
> > Before you laugh, don't forget that local and state governments are
> already
> > renaming public sport and civic centers after commercial investors as a
> > source of income. Lets face it, nothing is sacred when it comes to
money.
> >
> >
Fitz
> > "Bob" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > Anybody else bothered by the naming of US aircraft carriers after
> > > people who were still living at the time? I'm sure that Carl Vinson
> > > (CVN-70) & John C. Stennis (CVN-74) did good thing but to have a
> > > carrier named after them? I wish the US Navy would go back to naming
> > > carriers after famous battles & ships. Would it not be great to have
> > > in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> > > Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.
> >
> >
>
>

[Jim McCartan]

> You bet, along with the Shangri-La....
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

AND America

[T Bird]

The USNS Bob Hope is not a navy warship . It is U.S. Gov \ Navy ship .
Commanded by a Civ Capt. from M.S.C. With a civ crew from M.S.C. or can
be contracted out to private company to run . I spent 15 yrs with M.S.C.

[Andrew Venor]

T Bird wrote:
> The USNS Bob Hope is not a navy warship . It is U.S. Gov \ Navy ship .
> Commanded by a Civ Capt. from M.S.C. With a civ crew from M.S.C. or can
> be contracted out to private company to run . I spent 15 yrs with M.S.C.
>
Yes I know that USNS Bob Hope is not a warship. My point being that the
ship (and the ship class) was named while Mr. Hope still alive.

ALV

[Andrew Toppan]

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:45:55 -0500 (EST), (T Bird) wrote:

>The USNS Bob Hope is not a navy warship . It is U.S. Gov \ Navy ship .
>Commanded by a Civ Capt. from M.S.C. With a civ crew from M.S.C. or can
>be contracted out to private company to run . I spent 15 yrs with M.S.C.

So? We all know this....

It's still a US Navy vessel, still completely relevant to the discussion of
Navy ship naming.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

[Penta]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 04:52:02 GMT, "Andrew.Venor" >
wrote:

>
>While I would normally agree, I can think of two exceptions.
>
>I think it was an appropriate when the Navy named a destroyer after Adm.
>Arleigh Burke and a supply ship after Bob Hope while they were still alive.
>
>ALV

Maybe.

However, I must admit to a definite prejudice when it comes to how the
US names its ships.

We just....well...

We suck at it, alright?

In WAR (a Play-by-email sim I play in), I was trying to create
something of a naming policy for the Israeli Navy (just so I had a
post in, and because I was bored, and because I figured I may want to
do a round of naval expansion later on, so I may as well set down such
things.). So I wander over to FAS, Navy sites, etc. See how the US
does it, since I don't speak Hebrew IRL.

Policy? What policy?
Besides the fact that most of the names suck. (When compared to, say,
the British naming traditions.)

We need standards. Badly.

[Peter Twydell]

In article >, Penta
> writes
>On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 04:52:02 GMT, "Andrew.Venor" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>While I would normally agree, I can think of two exceptions.
>>
>>I think it was an appropriate when the Navy named a destroyer after Adm.
>>Arleigh Burke and a supply ship after Bob Hope while they were still alive.
>>
>>ALV
>
>Maybe.
>
>However, I must admit to a definite prejudice when it comes to how the
>US names its ships.
>
>We just....well...
>
>We suck at it, alright?
>
>In WAR (a Play-by-email sim I play in), I was trying to create
>something of a naming policy for the Israeli Navy (just so I had a
>post in, and because I was bored, and because I figured I may want to
>do a round of naval expansion later on, so I may as well set down such
>things.). So I wander over to FAS, Navy sites, etc. See how the US
>does it, since I don't speak Hebrew IRL.
>
>Policy? What policy?
>Besides the fact that most of the names suck. (When compared to, say,
>the British naming traditions.)
>
Names like Invincible and Illustrious are fine, but Indomitable and
Indefatigable are a bit of a mouthful.

I always liked the alternative names for the old RN carriers Glorious,
Furious and Courageous - Curious, Spurious and Outrageous!

I've always found the USN system of naming carriers after presidents a
bit odd, probably because if we did something similar the navy would end
up having to persuade tars that it would be an honour to serve in HMS
Harold Wilson or HMS Tony Blair (shudder). Imagine having to walk around
with "Margaret Thatcher" on your cap band!

>We need standards. Badly.

Naming major ships after politicians loses you the traditional names, as
a previous poster pointed out. Surely a sailor would be happier in the
USS Saratoga than in the USS Wilbert Z. Bloggs?
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

[John Dallman]

In article >,
(Penta) wrote:

> Policy? What policy?
> Besides the fact that most of the names suck. (When compared to, say,
> the British naming traditions.)
>
> We need standards. Badly.

You used to have quite reasonable ones, as far as I've deduced from
reading:

Battleships: States
Carriers: Battles
Cruisers: Cities
Destroyers: Err, well, anything - there are so many of them.
Submarines: Fish
Small craft: Integers.

And re-using the States and Cities for missile and attack subs was also
plausible, since they could fairly claim to have inherited similarly
important (though not really analogous) roles.

The really old names, like _Constitution_ and _President_ were quite
reasonable too, although there probably aren't that many "republican"
names that wouldn't sound silly. A few of those got used on semi-recent
carriers like _Independence_ and _America_, and you always ought to have a
carrier named _Kitty Hawk_.

But the naming of things after political figures has definitely gone too
far.

---
John Dallman

[Andrew Toppan]

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:44:27 -0500, Penta > wrote:

>We need standards. Badly.

We have standards, and they'e followed fairly well. Yes, there are exceptions
and oddball cases (always have been), but those are only exceptions. The big
gripe seems to be naming for politicians, which is unavoidable.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

[Mike Kanze]

Peter,

>I've always found the USN system of naming carriers after presidents a bit
odd, probably because if we did something similar the navy would end up
having to persuade tars that it would be an honour to serve in HMS Harold
Wilson or HMS Tony Blair (shudder).

You think that's bad? How about HMS Neville Chamberlain? Yeesh!

On the other hand Britain has had many glorious national figures either
predating Parliament (Boudica) or extraneous to it (Hotspur, Black Prince,
Lionheart). These have provided the RN a wonderful source of inspirational
ship names.

>Imagine having to walk around with "Margaret Thatcher" on your cap band!

Or tattooed anywhere. <g>

******

Digression on cap bands with ship's names:

My Dad started his naval service as a gunner's mate on the USS TENNESSEE
(BB-34) during the mid-1930s. At that time US Navy enlisted were still
issued flathats, with one's ship's name on the hat ribbon like the RN still
does.

Sometime around the late 1930s, the US Navy switched to a standard hat
ribbon that simply read "US NAVY." According to Dad, the Navy did this
because having a ship's name on the hat ribbon was an invitation to
fisticuffs if crew from more than one ship found themselves drinking in the
same bar.

Not unlike gang clothing / "colors" in the US today.

Dad adds that this was a time when there was considerable unit pride within
individual ships. More positive expressions of this pride were found in
athletic activities like softball leagues, boxing "smokers," liberty boat
races (these had oars back then) and the like. It was quite an honor, for
example, to be the Pacific Fleet boxing champion in one's weight class.

******

>Surely a sailor would be happier in the USS Saratoga than in the USS
Wilbert Z. Bloggs?

I suppose.

I've always thought it somewhat ironic that USS SARATOGA (CV-3) found itself
serving with HM Indian Ocean forces at one point in WWII. But probably
preferable to the RN having to endure the presence of USS YORKTOWN (CV-5).
<g>

******

Another anomaly about US Navy ship names - until fairly recently in our
ship-naming history it was very difficult - maybe even impossible - to find
ships named after US Civil War battles in which the South prevailed. For
example only recently have we now a USS CHANCELORSVILLE (CG-62), named for
what was perhaps Lee's most brilliant victory in that conflict. But we've
yet to see a USS MANASSAS, other than in an episode of "JAG" that ran in
2000. And we probably never will since Manassas (also called Bull Run,
located in Virginia near Washington, DC) is where the North lost not one,
but two battles.

This simply proves that winners get to write the history - and name the
ships after *their* brilliant victories.

--
Mike Kanze

"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society."

-Mark Twain


"Peter Twydell" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Penta
> > writes
> >On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 04:52:02 GMT, "Andrew.Venor" >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>While I would normally agree, I can think of two exceptions.
> >>
> >>I think it was an appropriate when the Navy named a destroyer after Adm.
> >>Arleigh Burke and a supply ship after Bob Hope while they were still
alive.
> >>
> >>ALV
> >
> >Maybe.
> >
> >However, I must admit to a definite prejudice when it comes to how the
> >US names its ships.
> >
> >We just....well...
> >
> >We suck at it, alright?
> >
> >In WAR (a Play-by-email sim I play in), I was trying to create
> >something of a naming policy for the Israeli Navy (just so I had a
> >post in, and because I was bored, and because I figured I may want to
> >do a round of naval expansion later on, so I may as well set down such
> >things.). So I wander over to FAS, Navy sites, etc. See how the US
> >does it, since I don't speak Hebrew IRL.
> >
> >Policy? What policy?
> >Besides the fact that most of the names suck. (When compared to, say,
> >the British naming traditions.)
> >
> Names like Invincible and Illustrious are fine, but Indomitable and
> Indefatigable are a bit of a mouthful.
>
> I always liked the alternative names for the old RN carriers Glorious,
> Furious and Courageous - Curious, Spurious and Outrageous!
>
> I've always found the USN system of naming carriers after presidents a
> bit odd, probably because if we did something similar the navy would end
> up having to persuade tars that it would be an honour to serve in HMS
> Harold Wilson or HMS Tony Blair (shudder). Imagine having to walk around
> with "Margaret Thatcher" on your cap band!
>
> >We need standards. Badly.
>
> Naming major ships after politicians loses you the traditional names, as
> a previous poster pointed out. Surely a sailor would be happier in the
> USS Saratoga than in the USS Wilbert Z. Bloggs?
> --
> Peter
>
> Ying tong iddle-i po!

[Pechs1]

Peter-<< I always liked the alternative names for the old RN carriers Glorious,
Furious and Courageous - Curious, Spurious and Outrageous! >><BR><BR>

Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty
"Sinking' Sara
USS Indigestion
Bonnie Dick
Ammmerikka
Midway-Maru

Sure their are others......

P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Allen Epps]

In article >, Pechs1
> wrote:

> Peter-<< I always liked the alternative names for the old RN carriers
> Glorious,
> Furious and Courageous - Curious, Spurious and Outrageous! >><BR><BR>
>
> Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty
> "Sinking' Sara
> USS Indigestion
> Bonnie Dick
> Ammmerikka
> Midway-Maru
>
> Sure their are others......
>
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

TR = Teddy Ruxpin
Coral Sea = Coral Maru
Vinson = Chucky V


Pugs

[José Herculano]

> Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty

Forest Fire...

> Bonnie Dick

And remember the Dike, when the Ike sailled for the first time with a female
component....

_____________
José Herculano

[Nice Again]

Hay, 'Old Phart'! Which carriers did you fly off/on? I was on ten? or so
(maybe more (can't remember exactly)).

"Pechs1" > wrote in message
...
> << Would it not be great to have
> > in the fleet carriers again named USS Hornet, Lexington, Saratoga,
> > Oriskany. It would honor the sailors that served on these great ships.
> >><BR><BR>
>
> You bet, along with the Shangri-La....
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

[Leanne]

There was also the Happy Valley and the Sweet Pea.

Leanne

"José Herculano" > wrote in message
...
> > Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty
>
> Forest Fire...
>
> > Bonnie Dick
>
> And remember the Dike, when the Ike sailled for the first time
with a female
> component....
>
> _____________
> José Herculano
>
>
>

[Yofuri]

Bonnie Dick - Boney Dick
Dry "I" - Intrepid
Benny Boat - Bennington
Filthy Phil - Philippine Sea
SeaVan 65 - Reusable Container 65 - Enterprise
CVA Sick One - Ranger (ate twelve boilers between Bremerton and Pearl,
1964?)

--
My real e-mail address is:




"José Herculano" > wrote in message
...
> > Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty
>
> Forest Fire...
>
> > Bonnie Dick
>
> And remember the Dike, when the Ike sailled for the first time with a
female
> component....
>
> _____________
> José Herculano
>
>
>




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
on Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:19:46 GMT,
gizmo-goddard attempted to say .....

> "Tank Fixer" > wrote in message
> .net...
>
> <SNIPPED>
>
> > Ships that go down (submarines) are named after fish !
>
> Actually, only three of them are currently named for fish/aquatic animals,
> the Seawolf (SSN-21), the Dolphin (AGSS-555) and the Cutthroat (LSV-2) that
> I can find. Most are named for cities and states:
>
> http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/ffiletop.html#subs
>
> You can check out each class of submarine from this website.


I know, just further examples of the madness......

;')




--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[Michael Wise]

In article >,
Allen Epps > wrote:


> > Peter-<< I always liked the alternative names for the old RN carriers
> > Glorious,
> > Furious and Courageous - Curious, Spurious and Outrageous! >><BR><BR>
> >
> > Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty
> > "Sinking' Sara
> > USS Indigestion
> > Bonnie Dick
> > Ammmerikka
> > Midway-Maru
> >
> > Sure their are others......
> >
> > P. C. Chisholm
> > CDR, USN(ret.)
> > Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer
>
> TR = Teddy Ruxpin
> Coral Sea = Coral Maru
> Vinson = Chucky V


Kitty Hawk = ****ty Kitty


--Mike

[Pechs1]

beg-<< Hay, 'Old Phart'! Which carriers did you fly off/on? I was on ten? or so
>><BR><BR>

In airwings based on Independence, Midway and Forrestal. Have traps on Sara,
Ike, Enterprise, Lex, Kennedy, Nimitz....
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Penta]

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:57:00 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
> wrote:

>
>Dad adds that this was a time when there was considerable unit pride within
>individual ships. More positive expressions of this pride were found in
>athletic activities like softball leagues, boxing "smokers," liberty boat
>races (these had oars back then) and the like. It was quite an honor, for
>example, to be the Pacific Fleet boxing champion in one's weight class.

You'll pardon me for saying that I wonder how we could get that back,
including in the Army and other services.

Thoughts, all? How WOULD one work on unit pride/unit
identification/unit cohesion in the modern environment?

John

[Penta]

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 09:57:35 -0500, Allen Epps
> wrote:

>
>TR = Teddy Ruxpin

Hey, I *liked* Teddy Ruxpin.

Then, I am 20, so I woulda been...3 when they still had those?

John

[Tom Clarke]

Kearsarge = Queer barge

[William Hughes]

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:55:33 -0500, in rec.aviation.military.naval Penta
> wrote:

> Thoughts, all? How WOULD one work on unit pride/unit
> identification/unit cohesion in the modern environment?

Not real well. Too much turnover in personnel. Way back when it was possible to
stay with the same ship or unit for several years. Nowadays, I think the average
time on station is two years.

[Mike Kanze]

According to my Dad, part of this was due to the circumstances of the
Depression. For many, the armed forces were - literally - a better
alternative to whatever was available at home. So there was a stronger
motivation to treat one's unit as a real "home" and not just as a waypoint.
And thus easier to get folks interested in "community" stuff like softball
leagues.

Also there was a stronger sense of community in the US 70 years ago. We
were a much more homogeneous society then and diversity (as we know it
today) essentially did not exist in the armed forces.

From the command side, there were many collateral duties for junior officers
like Athletics Officer on the larger afloat units - and these really meant
something as JOs were in part evaluated on how well they performed here as
well as with their more traditional duties. For example, if you were the
boxing coach on a battleship you were expected to find and develop
contenders within your ship's company for the fleet Battle Force boxing
championships. Today, with administrivia overflowing from JO in-baskets,
such attention to things like unit athletics has fallen by the wayside.

Having said the above, I'm very impressed by the various expressions of unit
pride I see emanating from the Iraq occupation. We've all read any number
of stories about wounded service members expressing concern for their
unit-mates and wanting to get back with them as soon as possible.

So maybe the old-fashioned kind of pride hasn't disappeared at all, but
taken on a new form.
--
Mike Kanze

"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society."

-Mark Twain


"Penta" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:57:00 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >Dad adds that this was a time when there was considerable unit pride
within
> >individual ships. More positive expressions of this pride were found in
> >athletic activities like softball leagues, boxing "smokers," liberty boat
> >races (these had oars back then) and the like. It was quite an honor,
for
> >example, to be the Pacific Fleet boxing champion in one's weight class.
>
> You'll pardon me for saying that I wonder how we could get that back,
> including in the Army and other services.
>
> Thoughts, all? How WOULD one work on unit pride/unit
> identification/unit cohesion in the modern environment?
>
> John

[Penta]

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 19:11:56 -0600, William Hughes >
wrote:

>Not real well. Too much turnover in personnel. Way back when it was possible to
>stay with the same ship or unit for several years. Nowadays, I think the average
>time on station is two years.

Why do we do that, anyway?

Actually, I'm pondering starting a new thread on this. Hold on.

[Penta]

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 19:11:56 -0600, William Hughes >
wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:55:33 -0500, in rec.aviation.military.naval Penta
> wrote:
>
>> Thoughts, all? How WOULD one work on unit pride/unit
>> identification/unit cohesion in the modern environment?
>
>Not real well. Too much turnover in personnel. Way back when it was possible to
>stay with the same ship or unit for several years. Nowadays, I think the average
>time on station is two years.

All,

William Hughes's reply brought a number of thoughts to mind, from
the inane to the complex.

Eventually, however, I settled on something.

As an exercise for the group, let me lay out multiple scenarios.

1. The US Navy, or a fictional copy thereof, is (on a whim, basically)
scrapping everything. RAMN contributors have been directed to produce
a replacement. Cover all issues, from uniforms to living conditions to
regulations, including every aspect of personnel policies and general
"cultural" stuff, as well as force structure and equipment buys.
However, limits are: Pay changes must keep in mind Congress. Cultural
stuff: Do keep in mind the general society.

2. The navy of a major NATO ally or an important regional country* is
doing the same thing. Describe the projected local security situation,
also, and keep it in mind. In this case, nothing is off-limits.

3. A small country is looking at the same thing. Examples: Panama,
Philippines. No limits, just describe and remember the projected
security situation

*Definition: flippable. Basically, say who you're using, then run with
it.

Thoughts:

1. To organize this and allow for filters, let's try to agree on a
common subject header? [RAMNEX 1: <topic>, RAMNEX 2: <topic>, and so
forth?]

2. Sources are, as always, a good idea.

3. Does anybody have free, non-ad-filled webspace we could compile and
host this on? It'd be a cool thing to keep around, but I dunno how to
get access to my school's webserver.

John

[Allen Epps]

In article >, Mike Kanze
> wrote:

> According to my Dad, part of this was due to the circumstances of the
> Depression. For many, the armed forces were - literally - a better
> alternative to whatever was available at home. So there was a stronger
> motivation to treat one's unit as a real "home" and not just as a waypoint.
> And thus easier to get folks interested in "community" stuff like softball
> leagues.
>
Mikes Good sense snipped.

If you look at the make-up of the service it has also changed.
Certainly among the enlisted and the JO's many more are married now
than were in the 1920's through the 40's and most live off base. In the
past base housing was much more prevelent for those that were married
and most of the single folks lived in either in the barracks or the Q
and not many of the lower grade E's (or o's) had cars so all were much
more dependent on Navy sponsored activities. Even at in the modern era
I found my squadrons at NUW the squadron was much tighter than in
VAQ-209 where every lives spread all over the DC metro area and
basically gets together for manditory fun and that's about it.

Pugs

"If they can put a man on the moon why can't they put a man on Lifetime
TV?"

Colin Quinn

[Rich]

From TF-38 days

Shangri La = Showboat

Rich

"Yofuri" > wrote in message >...
> Bonnie Dick - Boney Dick
> Dry "I" - Intrepid
> Benny Boat - Bennington
> Filthy Phil - Philippine Sea
> SeaVan 65 - Reusable Container 65 - Enterprise
> CVA Sick One - Ranger (ate twelve boilers between Bremerton and Pearl,
> 1964?)
>
> --
> My real e-mail address is:
>
>
>
>
> "José Herculano" > wrote in message
> ...
> > > Forrestal-FID-First in Diffuculty
> >
> > Forest Fire...
> >
> > > Bonnie Dick
> >
> > And remember the Dike, when the Ike sailled for the first time with a
> female
> > component....
> >
> > _____________
> > José Herculano
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----