I know this is outside the Sci-Fi world of these forums, but there is an online petition to have the third Ford class nuclear carrier, CVN-80, be named "Enterprise". The current vessel CVN-65 is scheduled to be decommissioned in either 2013 or 2014.
For me, it was my fondness for the name Enterprise from my WW2 history studies that led me into the world of Star Trek as a kid. The series would not have been the same to me if the ship had been named "Yorktown" or such. There has always been something about the name ENTERPRISE that has resonated with me from the legendary exploits of Halsey to the battles of Midway and Guadalcanal. There should ALWAYS be a U.S.S. Enterprise in the United States Navy.
I totally agree. Unfortunately the naming of these ships is a hugely political affair these days, and naming aircraft carriers after people is the trend (almost anoyingly so - they've been naming ships after still-living retired politicians lately).
I seriously hope they can name a ship Enterprise too, but I'm pretty pessimistic on the chances. It worked for a space shuttle, but it won't for a zillion dollar war machine which is built on politics as much as it is steel...
I read that a bunch of vets tried to get the second Ford-class carrier named "America", which failed (they named her after JFK) but an amphibious assualt ship ended up as "America". It's not the most glamourous ship ever, but if the next Enterprise ends up as an LHA (it's still a carrier, but more for helicopters and VTOL aircraft like the hopefully-still-coming F-35B), it's not a bad consolation prize.
Still, Trek history never said anything about another sea-going vessel named Enterprise after the current one. As such, I'm holding out for NASA to suddenly unveil a ring-shaped FTL ship...
Mark
[ February 21, 2012, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Erm, I know she's not American, but the Royal Navy do have an Enterprise.
She's just not as big and showy as the Big-E - I think (perhaps more appropraitely for her fictional namesake) she's a research vessel.
Removeing my tongue from my cheek though, and not being American myself, the name has never held as much ressonance with me. To me Enterprise is the one off Star Trek. Could easily heve been anything else.
As for cocking about with navies, the MOD decided to scrap our flagship carrier, Ark Royal five years early. A troop carrier landing vessel became flagship and we won't have a carrier until at least 2016. They even hope to have F-35s flying off it by 2020. Marvellous.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
At least you guys still HAVE a carrier. Not that we ever really needed one, but Canada's been without an aircraft carrier or naval planes for forty years...
Mark
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Everyone has already forgotten that the reason the name Enterprise is famous in the first place is because the CV-6 was one of the most successful and most decorated warships in the history of the US Navy.
The names for carriers has gotten more and more ridiculous. Many of these politicians had little to do with the Navy. (I mean, Gerald Ford? Really?)
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I hate to defend Ford, but he was in the Navy for 4 years on carriers during the Second World War and went on to be president.
So he wasn't a very good one, but when was that ever important?
Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
Not to mention all the recent politician names have all been US Presidents who technically are the highest ranking members of the military. So I guess that is the reasoning behind the relevance between the Navy and these "politicians"
Speaking of which, has there been any carriers named after Democratic Presidents?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Truman and Kennedy were both Democrats.
And yes, the President is Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, along with all the other military services.
Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
Well Truman was POTUS during WWII and JFK was just a badass so that explains those two. Somehow, I don't feel there's going to be a USS William Clinton.
And if they name a carrier after the current prez, they're most definitely going to include the Hussein like I see fashionable among the super-conservatives on the interwebz.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
Until the last several carriers, they didn't seem to have a naming pattern. Like USS Ranger and USS Constellation. USS Kitty Hawk I get, named for Kitty Hawk, North Carolina where the Wright brothers built and tested their aircraft.
Most subs are usually named for cities and states, cruisers for military battles, and destroyers for notable enlisted and officers.
Currently it seems carriers are named after presidents.
But then I also read about a new ship and who it's named after and I think, "Really? This guy?" For example the John C. Stennis, a senator from Mississippi who, according to wikipedia, "Stennis was a strong supporter of racial segregation. In the 1950s and 1960s he vigorously opposed the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and he signed the Southern Manifesto of 1956..." The only reason I think they named a carrier after him was to make the US Senate Committee on Armed Services happy.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I miss the days when names like "Tigerfish" and "Nautilus" where thrown around. I don't wish the action back but, you know.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
They may not name a carrier after Slick Willie but I can just see a big ol' supertanker named the "H.R. Clinton".
I actually think I remember that line from Seaquest DSV.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hobbes: Until the last several carriers, they didn't seem to have a naming pattern. Like USS Ranger and USS Constellation. USS Kitty Hawk I get, named for Kitty Hawk, North Carolina where the Wright brothers built and tested their aircraft.
Most subs are usually named for cities and states, cruisers for military battles, and destroyers for notable enlisted and officers.
Currently it seems carriers are named after presidents.
But then I also read about a new ship and who it's named after and I think, "Really? This guy?" For example the John C. Stennis, a senator from Mississippi who, according to wikipedia, "Stennis was a strong supporter of racial segregation. In the 1950s and 1960s he vigorously opposed the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and he signed the Southern Manifesto of 1956..." The only reason I think they named a carrier after him was to make the US Senate Committee on Armed Services happy.
Well didn't they name that plane that Dubya flew the Spirit of Strom Thurmond, another "great" American. At this rate I think we'll have ships named after John Wilkes Booth and Jefferson Davis.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
They should crew the Stennis with all african-Americans. Just as a post-mortem fuck you to that bozo. They could call it a tribute- after all, he was for segregation... Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Gerald Ford was also never elected to the executive office either, replacing Agnew, then Nixon.
Yeah, being a LtCDR in the Navy, serving aboard a carrier, on which he lead the fire brigade and saved the ship, the CLV-26 USS Monterey, after Admiral Halsey had ordered it abandoned. Ingersoll, Monterey's CO had Ford lead the fire brigade after this order was issued.
It could be construed as a fitting name....
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: They should crew the Stennis with all african-Americans. Just as a post-mortem fuck you to that bozo. They could call it a tribute- after all, he was for segregation...
LOL. I would hate to be a black sailor on the Stennis. But I'll see your post and raise you a black commanding officer of the Stennis. Now that would be irony. A black captain of a ship named after a white racist.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)