| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Is this an adequate name for a Victoria Class Submarine? |
| Absolutely |
|
8% |
[ 2 ] |
| Yes |
|
8% |
[ 2 ] |
| I do not care |
|
21% |
[ 5 ] |
| No |
|
17% |
[ 4 ] |
| Absolutely not |
|
43% |
[ 10 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 23 |
|
| Author |
Message |
JSLTIGER
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 931
Location: Duke University, Durham, North Carolina USA
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| TLAM Strike wrote: | If not Enterprise then Constitution would be my pick for the 1st of the new CV class. Come on admit it everyone wants to see a Constitution class USS Enterprise. 
Although I doubt that can/is going to happen. |
I don't think it can...USS Constitution (aka "Old Ironsides," ex-IX-21) is still in commission. Because of this, no other ship can have the name Constitution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TLAM Strike
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 4866
Location: Rochester, New York
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Exactly, I doubt the USN is going to decom Old Ironsides to insert a joke in to the name of a carrier. Although there are ways around the name already used thing. USS United States Constitution. Hay that’s an idea USS United States! That name got wasted so it would be nice to use it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dbf574
Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 52
Location: Kapolei, Hawaii
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Personally I'd prefer if submarines were named in the more traditional way, after inhabitents of the sea. And, by the way, it's Virginia Class SSN not Victoria Class, no such class type in the USN submarine service  . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSLTIGER
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 931
Location: Duke University, Durham, North Carolina USA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TLAM Strike wrote: | | Hay that’s an idea USS United States! That name got wasted so it would be nice to use it. |
Twice: In 1958, the USS United States CV-58, the original supercarrier, was cancelled after her keel had been laid by Harry Truman. In the mid-1990s, CVN-75 was originally supposed to be named USS United States, but was later renamed USS Harry S. Truman.
The problem with this name lies in the implications if the ship is ever sunk. Headlines around the world would read: UNITED STATES SUNK! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TLAM Strike
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 4866
Location: Rochester, New York
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dbf574 wrote: | | Personally I'd prefer if submarines were named in the more traditional way, after inhabitents of the sea. |
Amen to that too! 
ON the subject of the Constitution I just discovered that their was to be a Lexington class Battlecruiser called Constitution but it was cannceld. They could do this since Old Ironsides was called "Old Constitution" at the time. :hmm: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TLAM Strike
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 4866
Location: Rochester, New York
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JSLTIGER wrote: | | TLAM Strike wrote: | | Hay that’s an idea USS United States! That name got wasted so it would be nice to use it. |
Twice: In 1958, the USS United States CV-58, the original supercarrier, was cancelled after her keel had been laid by Harry Truman. In the mid-1990s, CVN-75 was originally supposed to be named USS United States, but was later renamed USS Harry S. Truman.
The problem with this name lies in the implications if the ship is ever sunk. Headlines around the world would read: UNITED STATES SUNK! |
Their was ANOTHER that go wasted a Lexington class Battle Cruiser CC-6.
BUT there was another USS United States that got built:
| Quote: | | The first United States was a sailing frigate that saw action during the War of 1812 and was later captured and commissioned by the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War, thus becoming the "Confederate States' Ship United States." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSLTIGER
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 931
Location: Duke University, Durham, North Carolina USA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TLAM Strike wrote: | | dbf574 wrote: | | Personally I'd prefer if submarines were named in the more traditional way, after inhabitents of the sea. |
Amen to that too!
ON the subject of the Constitution I just discovered that their was to be a Lexington class Battlecruiser called Constitution but it was cannceld. They could do this since Old Ironsides was called "Old Constitution" at the time. :hmm: |
They had renamed her to free up the name for the battlecruiser, but once the battlecruiser wasn't going to be built, they gave Constitution her original name back. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GunnersMate
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 225
Location: Boston, MA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I kind of like Japanese naming ie -kaze meaning wind and -ushio meaning tide. Poetic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jakobs
Joined: 14 Sep 2002
Posts: 294
Location: Madrid, España, [Spain]
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Absolutely not. :down: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JSLTIGER
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
Posts: 931
Location: Duke University, Durham, North Carolina USA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jakobs wrote: | | Absolutely not. :down: |
Absolutely not, what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
