Now here's a question though. When did they stop naming ships of the line after cities and switch over to LPDs? I don't want to sound like a wet blanket, but does anybody else think that our nation's largest city deserves an attack sub, or a cruiser, or some sort of front-line offensive warship? I guess they have shifted state names from battleships to subs over the years, so city names had to step down as well. But after 9/11, I wouldn't mind seeing the name New York on the most heavily armed baddest mofo in the Navy, y'know?
}:-)4
Unfortunately carriers tend to get named after politicians, which is OK when one means "Teddy Roosevelt", "George Washington", "Eisenhower", or even Reagan or GHW Bush, (the next two) but Vinson and Stennis? Stennis already had a space center named after him, he didn't need a carrier too. Besides, if we are naming them after friendly polycritters, why is there no USS Scoop Jackson? And will there be a "USS Strom Thurman"? I sort of doubt it unless it's a destroyer or frigate.
The garbage scow will be re-named the "Bent One".
The original set of LPD's -- 1 to 15 -- were all started in the 1960's and commissioned by 1972-73. They were all named after cities. I spent almost a year on the LPD-10 (USS Juneau) during construction, and got to sail on her during both her Builder's Trial and Preliminary Acceptance Trail. The ships were big and were worthy warships to carry city names.
What I find interesting is that the new class has most of the basic lines of their predecessors -- but with a lot of streamlining.