-
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
USN CVN-82 & 83
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
I thought this thread was not true until I took a closer look. I also feel they could have done better at picking names.
I hope the US Gov’t can acquire the infamous Clinton oil painting for the wardroom. https://nypost.com/2019/08/16/artis...d-no-idea-it-was-hanging-in-epsteins-mansion/
The navy could place them both in the same task force under the call sign BUSH LEAGUE.
It's an almost magical lack of imagination, isn't it? Hell, I think I'd rather they didn't name them at all, and we just used their CVN numbers. With every other carrier named Bush, that's probably what they'll do, similar to people referring to "Bush 43" vs. "Bush 41".
Well, these are certainly non-controversial names that will attract no big discussions. I mean, I you want to honor both Bushes, then just rename CVN-77 to “George Bush” (sort of like USS John McCain honors JSM Sr, Jr, and III). Less trouble in the long run than having two carriers with almost the same name.
As cool as it would be to have Midway and Ranger and so on back in service, there’s no getting around that naming capital ships is political and always has been. The first Chesapeake was named that because the SecNav at the time was a Marylander, despite it not fitting the naming scheme of the rest of the “Six Frigates.” Given that, naming them for Presidents is as good a scheme as any, but I really really wish they’d get away from naming them for recent, living ones. Why not John Adams, for example? Or Ulysses Grant?
As cool as it would be to have Midway and Ranger and so on back in service, there’s no getting around that naming capital ships is political and always has been. The first Chesapeake was named that because the SecNav at the time was a Marylander, despite it not fitting the naming scheme of the rest of the “Six Frigates.” Given that, naming them for Presidents is as good a scheme as any, but I really really wish they’d get away from naming them for recent, living ones. Why not John Adams, for example? Or Ulysses Grant?
So, who knew there were two infamous blue dresses?
I believe boomers are named after states.
You might be on to something here. I’m reading elsewhere that this decision has caused a tempest in a political tea pot. A lot of people are going to push for a name change, so adding “W” to the Bush carrier is good horse trading, I also like naming one the John Adams for both John and John Q and the other Grant. After that…no more politicians.
I much prefer them to be named after our major Naval victories.
If they have to be people, why not the Naval Aviators who flew to and/or walked on the moon?
Real American accomplishments, not politics.
I agree.
I would include major American victories, period. That includes such storied names like Saratoga, Lexington, Midway, Coral Sea and Yorktown among many others. Bonus, the ones I listed are all famous carrier names too.
I think Spruance and Armstrong are pretty good candidates.
In addition to those famous ship names to include Hornet, Intrepid and Ranger have all been used as famous carrier names as well.
An interesting note, most of the ones I've mentioned have not been used since many of their carrier predecessors were decommissioned (apparently Intrepid is going to be the name of DDG-145?!).
Who wants to read drivel like that from some random jackass?!
But seriously, I like it except the carrier names. Would love to see Saratoga, Lexington and Midway sail as carriers again.