The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Off Topic Discussions > Ending a 51 year career.
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-20-2012, 03:01 PM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akula2ssn View Post
Right, I just saw that. It's not the first time that they've named ships for political reasons. That's the main reason why every 688-class except for maybe one was named after a major city.

Didn't even realize the Zumwalt was back in the works. I thought that disaster died years ago. Well I suppose that's not entirely true. They just reinvented it with the DDX. As for JSF, that was just a bad idea from its very inception. Trying to spin it as a "lower cost" alternative to the F-22 didn't help either. It left the F-22 in the dust a while ago in terms of cost.

As far as the name...It's the oldest name in the US Navy with a history that really is unlike any other ship in the fleet, particularly during WWII. If he can't see past a pop culture reference to the importance that name has in his own Navy then quite frankly it's not a problem with the name, it's his problem. A ship's name should have meaning like Yorktown, Lake Champlain, Bob Hope, John Paul Jones, Higgins, Mercy, Comfort, Bunker Hill, and on occasion a political figure such as Washington or Lincoln. But I digress. Afterall I'm nothing more than a puddle pirate. Hell we have a buoy tender named the Henry Blake, the first lighthouse keeper at New Dungeness.
I've seen some Navy Guys actively campaigning against the the political naming trend through private sites. Who want to see ships named fore their significant engagements that defined and honored those that sacrificed their lives for the country. They say it's the best way to honor them all without individual names. I think I agree. I think ships like the USS Laffey should be moved on.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-20-2012, 10:42 PM
Akula2ssn's Avatar
Akula2ssn Akula2ssn is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
I've seen some Navy Guys actively campaigning against the the political naming trend through private sites. Who want to see ships named fore their significant engagements that defined and honored those that sacrificed their lives for the country. They say it's the best way to honor them all without individual names. I think I agree. I think ships like the USS Laffey should be moved on.
Kind of like the USS President and USS Congress back in the day. Not named for an individual but for the office.
__________________

"Don't confuse facts with reality."
-Robert D. Ballard
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-21-2012, 03:11 PM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Exactly. (which I had no idea such names existed)

I'm sure it doesn't help that Space Ship One was Named VSS Enterprise and Space ship Two was named VSS Voyager...I'm sure Defiant will be Space Ship Three. Strangely I think those names fit exactly what Virgin is doing.
They are turning themselves rather audaciously into a Space Voyaging Enterprise.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-22-2012, 12:00 AM
Akula2ssn's Avatar
Akula2ssn Akula2ssn is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,454
Default

Not surprised you haven't heard of them. They're both obscure, especially USS President which was the name of 2 warships that served in the US Navy at the same time. Both ended up captured by the British. I'm aware of 6 ships in to have born the name USS Congress. The most famous was the 4th ship launched in 1841. The only reason she is known to me is because she was one of 2 blockade ships sunk by the CSS Virginia.

Interestingly enough, Enterprise is a fairly common name. If the US Navy wants to abandon the name, many others will carry it on. The Royal Navy arguably has held the name longer than the US Navy, the most recent one launched in 2002. I would hate to think that the admiral you mentioned would end up proving the rather snide remark that one of the beef eaters at the Tower of London once made to me and a friend that unlike, Americans, the British hold on to their traditions to be quite true. Well...Actually...He certainly didn't get any argument from me at the time...And he still wouldn't get any argument from me at the time. Not that I'm the kind of person to hang on to tradition for the sake of tradition.
__________________

"Don't confuse facts with reality."
-Robert D. Ballard
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:10 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.