| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 BB64 |
Naming question .... |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 585 (18-Jun-2008 04:40:41) |
I was wondering about this for sometime… what if there is a need for the Iowas to return, I wondering what will become of the U.S.S. Missouri BB63 namesake and her number. Since the name is now on a sub. Would they have to rename the sub or the battleship? I would think the navy would have to rename the sub since the Missouri has a long history as a battleship. But if they had to rename the battleship, I would name her U.S.S. Kentucky or Montana. |
||
|
BOBC 59 |
Whats in a name | ||
|
Posts: 1210 (18-Jun-2008 04:59:15) |
afaik the hull number is always gonna be assigned to the U.S.S. Missouri like example the BB2 is and still known as U.S.S. Massachusetts as is the BB59 U.S.S.
Massachusetts as the BB1 known as the U.S.S. Indiana and the BB58 is The U.S.S. Indiana
NUFF SAID BOB
For those that fought for it,Freedom has a taste and meaning ,The protected will never know.
|
||
|
Captain Cee J |
|||
|
Posts: 1325 (18-Jun-2008 05:16:21) |
Yes, however there can be only 1 ship in commission with the same name. When the USN authorized BB-65 as Illinois, they changed the name of the the previous
USS Illinois to USS Prairie State. I highly doubt this will ever be a problem, however as Mighty Mo will not be returning.
|
||
|
BB64 |
|||
|
Posts: 586 (18-Jun-2008 05:25:43) |
I never said she will return but then again if the situtation calls for it ....it had me wondering...
|
||
|
Captain Cee J |
|||
|
Posts: 1326 (18-Jun-2008 05:34:36) |
It would be unprecedented AFAIK. I do not know how it would turn out. I can see arguments on both sides. They might even bend the rule and allow two very
different ship/boat to have the same name. My guess would be the latter.
|
||
|
BB64 |
|||
|
Posts: 587 (18-Jun-2008 06:22:27) |
ok i give what is AFAIK?
|
||
|
BOBC 59 |
afaik | ||
|
Posts: 1211 (18-Jun-2008 08:37:52) |
AFAIK=as far as I know
NUFF SAID BOB
For those that fought for it,Freedom has a taste and meaning ,The protected will never know.
|
||
|
bager1968 |
|||
|
Posts: 2995 (19-Jun-2008 04:09:22) |
Not to be confused with "AFLACK".
|
||
|
BOBC 59 |
naming | ||
|
Posts: 1212 (19-Jun-2008 06:26:59) |
BEN or quack
nuff said bob
For those that fought for it,Freedom has a taste and meaning ,The protected will never know.
|
||
|
jemb |
Kentucky | ||
|
Posts: 715 (19-Jun-2008 22:33:22) |
is already an SSBN - 738, I think.
Illinois, Vermont and Montana have waited long enough for ships, so maybe they'll be up for the next SSNs. Kansas City (AOR) and Oregon City (CA) haven't done KS and OR justice, either - especially considering the favoritism for Virginia and Texas! Is BB63 'restorable' to combat status? I don't think it's possible now - if they need one, they've kept IO and Wisc for mobilisation just in case... |
||
|
Captain Cee J |
|||
|
Posts: 1328 (22-Jun-2008 05:09:14) |
All of the fast battleships are theoretically capable of being restored to combat status. The Iowa's are by far the easiest. All the discussion would be
about is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
|
||
|
Ichigo Kurosaki |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 22 (22-Jun-2008 18:13:57) |
More money than anyone in their right mind would consider justifiable in spending...
I will NEVER give up!!
|
||
