UK: Tour navy's £1.2bn super sub (paper given exclusive look at HMS Astute)

The Sun (U.K.) ^ | May 9, 2007 | TOM NEWTON DUNN

[Oztrich Boy]

"Astute?" How hath the mighty fallen?

When you find a Royal Navy name to match USS Manlove get back to me

[Eye of Unk]

I think the brits are ahead of the game at subs, the Perishers are of the highest caliber in seamanship and subsurface warfare. They may be a smaller force but in todays technological warfare one sub like an Ohio in one shot would have ended WW2.

[paddles]

The USS Manlove [DE-36] was named after Warrant Officer Arthur Manlove, a native of Tipton, Ind., who was killed aboard the battleship USS Arizona on 7 December 1941.

[MadMitch]

USS Manlove

Seaman Staines and Roger the Cabin boy reporting for duty!

[Vanders9]

for 11 passengers read “11 special boat service”. :)

[Vanders9]

I helped build Astute (in a rather minor capacity, I should add).

It is absolutely awesome (and so it should be, it took long enough to make). When it goes into service later on this year (by tradition they get handed over to the navy at sea) it will be the finest SSN on the planet The US Virginias currently under construction will probably be a match for it (one ahead in some respects, the other ahead in others, but by and large, pretty much on a par).

I took some photos from the commissioning ceremony and will post on this site later on today :)

[Vanders9]

It works like this:

The naming of ships is considered by the “Ships’ Names and Badges Committee”. They produce a list which is given to the First Sea Lord, who makes a reccomendation to the Queen. Yes, that’s right. One of the few powers her Maj still has is a veto on the naming of ships. It’s only fair if you think about it. They are after all “HMS” - “Her Majesties Ship”. If they are hers she should at least have a say in naming them! Normally of course she just accepts the reccomendation. The last time a monarch exercised the veto that I know about was during the naval arms race with Germany just before the first world war, when the navy wanted to call a battleship “HMS Oliver Cromwell”, and the then King argued most strenously that he wasnt going to name a major warship after a republican and regicide! In the end he relented and allowed a destroyer to be called “Cromwell”!

Policy for naming ships of the Royal Navy is informed by a number of guiding principles. For example, many ship names have a long and illustrious heritage, and a name with a tradition of Royal Navy use is preferred. Other factors in making a selection include the number of battle honours associated with a name, and whether a name is already classically associated with a particular type of vessel. “Ark Royal” for example, will always be an aircraft carrier (although the first one was a cruiser back before the Napoleonic wars). The RN is very big on reusing names from famous ships of the past. Many such names come from famous battles (on land or sea), great admirals, or intimidating words like Dreadnought or Invincible. These names usually go to the big, impressive ships.

Alternatively, a ship’s name might commemorate historically strong links between the Royal Navy and a particular town or district. In the case of submarines, the first batch of nuclear attack subs was the “Swiftsure” class, followed by the “Trafalgar” class. Then came the diesel electric “Upholder” class, then the Trident boomer “Vanguard” class. Get the pattern? The class beginning with “W” got cancelled, and they skipped X, Y and Z as being far too difficult to get enough decent names from!

“Astute” is a famous submarine from the past. The next one is “Ambush”, then “Artful”, and number four is apparently going to be called “Audacious” (I must admit I like that name best!)