Skip to comments.
US Navy Starts Work on Next Class of Carriers [Brian's Military Ping List]
National Defense Magazine ^
| May 2003
| Harold Kennedy
Posted on 05/11/2003 6:24:45 AM PDT by VaBthang4
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-107 next last
1
posted on
05/11/2003 6:24:45 AM PDT
by
VaBthang4
To: MP5SD; Gunrunner2; MudPuppy; tomcat; Gritty; opbuzz; spetznaz; PsyOp; XBob; CIBvet; Boot Hill; ...
2
posted on
05/11/2003 6:25:30 AM PDT
by
VaBthang4
(Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
To: VaBthang4
If you move the island further aft won't there be more turbulence in the landing zone? The Enterprise's huge billboard antenna on the island created turbulence problems in the past.
To: VaBthang4
Unlike Air Force aircraft and Army ground forces, carriers and their air wings need no land bases in places such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey, Dwyer said. In fact, he noted, a carrier can substitute for an Army installation. In the early days of the Afghanistan campaign, the navy stripped the Kitty Hawk of its air wing and made it a base for special operations troops. Rapid reaction doctrine is alive and well.
4
posted on
05/11/2003 6:46:48 AM PDT
by
verity
To: VaBthang4
In keeping with the current trend of naming carriers after living Presidents, be ready for the USS Jimmie Carter -- the "Peace Ship". After all, Jimmie was a Navy officer, a nuclear officer. And after two Republican names, the liberals will howl for "fairness".
5
posted on
05/11/2003 6:56:38 AM PDT
by
AngrySpud
To: VaBthang4
6
posted on
05/11/2003 7:01:36 AM PDT
by
jdege
To: AngrySpud
The liberals have already done it, the USS Jimmy Carter is being built right now. It is the third in the Seawolf class of nuclear submarines. At least it's not a carrier.
7
posted on
05/11/2003 7:05:46 AM PDT
by
ao98
To: AngrySpud
What will the USS Bill Clinton be, an aircraft carrier, a destroyer, a submarine, or a garbage scow?
To: VaBthang4
Hmm, #77 is going to be Geo. H. W. Bush.
How about Lincoln or Theodore Roosevelt for the CVNX?
Hell, capitalize on the new nature of the ship and name it the Enterprise!
To: VaBthang4
CVN 76 named for Reagan, for winning the Cold War without firing a shot...
CVN 77 named for George H Bush for liberating Kuwait...
After the Iraqi liberation and the big hullabaloo about George W Bush landing on a carrier, it isn't too unlikely that he will have a future (super-)carrier named after him.
Hmmm, it seems like they've skipped a President in there somewhere. Now who could that be and why would they choose to not honor him? Hmmmm. Could it be that randomly bombing numerous other nations without any decisive results or plan doesn't warrant such an honor?
And looking backwards, there's a previous President who stood idly by as over 100 Americans were held hostage for 444 days who also isn't going to have a carrier named after him. Imagine that!
Carriers named for Presidents:
1945 - FDR
1968 - JFK
1977 - Eisenhower
1986 - Teddy Roosevelt
1989 - Lincoln
1992 - George Washington
1998 - Truman
2003? - Reagan
2007? - GHWBush
(Interesting... only six of the 77 carriers hulls were ever sunk by enemy action! The Langley, Lexington, Princeton, Hornet, Wasp, and Yorktown, all from 1942 to 1951.)
To: Saturnalia
Teddy Roosevelt is CVN 71, Lincoln is CVN 72, and Enterprise is CVN 65... all still active.
To: Saturnalia
A correction to my post, the Enterprise is still active.
Columbia or Constellation?
To: Teacher317
Hmmm, it seems like they've skipped a President in there somewhere. With the naming of CVN-77 for Bush senior the floodgate has been opened so wait'll the next Democrat elected to the Oval Office. There will be a carrier named after Clinton, mark my word.
To: ao98
LOL, let all of the boats named after liberal socialists forever be submarine, so we don't have to look at them too often.
(Appropriate, actually, since they work so hard to submarine the Constitution by working in the darkest, murkiest, and coldest depths of politics.)
To: Saturnalia
Constellation is CVN 64 and still active...
I like Columbia, though... or maybe Challenger.
To: Teacher317
Damn the Navy for stealing my ideas!
I'll sue! Possibly even jane them too!
To: Teacher317
Get really creative, build one with a command island that is comprised of two barely separated parts, and call it the Twin Towers.
To: Non-Sequitur
It will HAVE to be a phallically-shaped suubmarine! It just HAS to!
(Insert paint scheme jokes here)
To: VaBthang4
All the deserving presidents have been done and we're starting on the undeserving ones, so how about USS America or USS United States? Recycle some of the good ones from the recent past and make another USS Independence or USS Saratoga or USS Yorktown or USS Midway. Go with the names of famous fighting ships like they used to and name it USS Wasp or USS Hornet or USS Ranger. Give it a name to be proud of.
To: Saturnalia
A correction to my post, the Enterprise is still active. Columbia or Constellation? All of the WWII fleet carrier names should be represented: Saratoga, Lexington, Wasp, etc. Note that Britain's Royal Navy has maintained Ark Royal as an active vessel name,
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-107 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson