Aircraft Carrier and Aircraft Limits

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Something about seeing Enterprise, Yorktown and Kaga carrying out naval operations near the Sendaku(?) Islands would be pretty neat.
 
Nagumo was lucky too. For whatever reason he opted to not put up a CAP whilst sailing around waiting for his scouts to report in. A strike from Ceylon could have got through, and we know that IJN carriers need only a single bomb to crack into a fireball.

Put me in charge, and with the intel Britain had Nagumo is toast, lol. Set a Ceylon trap for Nagumo, March 1942
I agree, if you haven't see this it's a good read, shows how near run things can get in war time --> Armoured Aircraft Carriers
 
I wouldn't mind a Wasp, Saratoga and Lexington either with an Essex thrown in for good measure. I really don't like major fleet units named after politicians no matter which side of the aisle they were from. Although I will say that the U. S. S. Theodore Roosevelt has a nice ring to it for some reason, for me at least.
You're preaching to the choir.
 
Okay this might be out of place. A new U.S.S. Enterprise is being built. Am I the only one who wants to see the next two named Yorktown and Hornet?
Nice. I find it strange how the US names their carriers after politicians. The UK chooses military or character traits (Furious, Glorious, Invincible, Indefatigable, Victorious, etc), mythical themes (Hermes, Hercules, Leviathan, Colossus, Unicorn, Centaur, Perseus), wilderness themes (Eagle, Warrior, Pioneer), or places (Albion, Malta, Ocean).

The two QE class break this tradition by naming the carriers after royals, but there was Ark Royal, meaning the Monarch's ship, and it makes sense for today's capital ships (carriers) to take the names of capital ships of old (battleships). Still, I can't imagine naming an aircraft carrier after Tony Blair, Thatcher or even Churchill.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't mind a Wasp, Saratoga and Lexington either with an Essex thrown in for good measure. I really don't like major fleet units named after politicians no matter which side of the aisle they were from. Although I will say that the U. S. S. Theodore Roosevelt has a nice ring to it for some reason, for me at least.
USS Roosevelt: CVN-71

Named after the Bullmoose Republican himself. :thumbleft:
 
Nice. I find it strange how the US names their carriers after politicians. The UK chooses military or character traits (Furious, Glorious, Invincible, Indefatigable, Victorious, etc), mythical themes (Hermes, Hercules, Leviathan, Colossus, Unicorn, Centaur, Perseus), wilderness themes (Eagle, Warrior, Pioneer), or places (Albion, Malta, Ocean).

The two QE class break this tradition by naming the carriers after royals, but there was Ark Royal, meaning the Monarch's ship, and it makes sense for today's capital ships (carriers) to take the names of capital ships of old (battleships). Still, I can't imagine naming an aircraft carrier after Tony Blair, Thatcher or even Churchill.
U.S. carriers had been named for famous ships or battles. When FDR passed, the "original" Coral Sea was renamed for him while under CV-42 was under construction.
I think we're running out of "good" presidents so I want to see three Yorktowns again. Am I asking for much?
 
U.S. carriers had been named for famous ships or battles. When FDR passed, the "original" Coral Sea was renamed for him while under CV-42 was under construction.
I think we're running out of "good" presidents so I want to see three Yorktowns again. Am I asking for much?
The Brits have become timid and sensitive about their past battlefield successes, we're unlikely to see repeats of HMS Cressy, Nile, Boyne or Waterloo. The SSN HMS Trafalgar is gone, perhaps never to be repeated, but there is hope, as HMS Agincourt is soon to enter service.

Naming a RN submarine 'Agincourt'
 
Even tho' it's one of those days, I now feel a bit better. Some names should not be forgotten.
It's interesting that one of the Dreadnought class is to be named King George VI. It's a shame the Queen Mum didn't get to see her late husband so honoured.

Hopefully, though unlikely considering the first Dreadnought class vessel won't enter service until the 2030s, HM lives long enough to see her father's namesake KGVI launched. She'll be 104 years old in 2030, so they'd better hurry up. I think R08 should have been named HMS QE2.
 
The lead ship of the 1937 battleship type built by the Royal Navy was, in accordance with tradition, to be named "King George VI".

However, that worthy refused the honor, instead insisting that it be named after his father - thus the second battleship (and battleship class)* named King George V, laid down 1 Jan. 1937, launched 21 Feb. 1939, commissioned 11 Dec. 1940, placed in reserve June 1950, sold for scrap 1957.


* See HMS King George V, laid down 16 Jan. 1911, launched 9 Oct. 1911, commissioned 16 Nov. 1912, removed from service 26 Oct. 1926 and sold for scrap that December.
 
I wouldn't mind a Wasp, Saratoga and Lexington either with an Essex thrown in for good measure. I really don't like major fleet units named after politicians no matter which side of the aisle they were from. Although I will say that the U. S. S. Theodore Roosevelt has a nice ring to it for some reason, for me at least.

USS Wasp LHD-1, commissioned 29 July 1989, in service
USS Essex LHD-2, commissioned 17 Oct. 1992, in service.

The entire LHD class are named for previous USN aircraft carriers - mostly WW2 Essex class ships, save for Iwo Jima (was to be a long-hulled Essex, but was canceled, see LPH-2 Iwo Jima), Bataan (Independence class CVL), and Makin Island (Casablanca class CVE).
 
Most RN ship names are old. It's partly tradition, but mostly parsimony: you can re-use the bell, silverware, nameplate, etc. Yes, there has been more than one HMS Dainty, HMS Tickler and - my favourite - HMS Cockchafer.

There are a few named after people, but it tends to be admirals (or royalty) not politicians. For example, HMS Duncan. Off the top of my head the nearest was the SS Politician. She was a merchantman, but she was carrying vital war supplies* when she went down.

The first HMS Prince of Wales (of seven) was launched in 1765. First Warspite, 1596; first Ark Royal, 1587 (battle honours include Armada 1588 and Al Faw 2003). HMS Queen Elizabeth is relatively new, being a WWI-era name, but to be fair it celebrates somebody who died in 1603. These Ministry of Defence committees really can take a long time to report ....


*22,000 cases of malt whisky
 
Last edited:
During WWII the Suez Canal had a navigation channel that (at low tide) was a minimum of 110 ft wide by 42'6" ft deep at the bottom, and 197 ft wide at a depth of 33 ft deep below the water's surface. It had a minimum shore-shore distance of 440 ft, but the shore-shore distance could be much greater along some of the canal (such as in the areas of the lakes).
Was the Suez Canal widened at any point from the late 1920's to the past decade or two, or three?
 
This link has a pretty good .pdf article for the history and description of the continuing improvements and expansions:

"Redirect Notice"

The link will give you the option to download the article.
 
Last edited:
I definitely prefer our American carriers be named after battles or ships of yore rather than politicians.

Nimitz makes sense to me, as CincPAC, overseeing the largest carriers battles in history. I guess I can buy Washington, Lincoln, or Roosevelt too; but politicians who are noted for passing big Navy bills? That sounds an awful lot like naming university buildings after big donors, like buying the honor. It reeks, to me.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back