[UPDATED DB v441] USN Renames Three Ship Classes

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

[UPDATED DB v441] USN Renames Three Ship Classes

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> [UPDATED DB v441] USN Renames Three Ship Classes

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

[UPDATED DB v441] USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/4/2015 6:06:57 PM

Juramentado

Posts: 247
Joined: 1/20/2009
Status: offline

From my friends at USNI - New Names, Same Platforms:

http://news.usni.org/2015/09/04/navy-renames-three-ship-classes-creates-expeditionary-designator-in-naming-system

< Message edited by emsoy -- 9/10/2015 6:41:30 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/4/2015 6:08:05 PM

Juramentado

Posts: 247
Joined: 1/20/2009
Status: offline

Apologies - I haven't been on the board in a while - I didn't see the new Pinned Post at the top for this kind of stuff. Please feel free to delete!

(in reply to Juramentado)

Post #: 2

RE: USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/4/2015 10:44:44 PM

cf_dallas

Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline

Interesting historical link from the USNI article:

http://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/g/general-orders/general-order-no-541-1920-standard-nomemclature-naval-vessels.html

I never realized that the pennant code for an aircraft carrier ("CV") is really a subset of the Cruiser family. Strictly speaking, they were considered "cruisers for heavier-than-air aircraft". Which sounds an awful lot like "Aircraft Carrying Cruiser" (ie the Kiev class) or a "Through-Deck Cruiser" (the UK's parliament-dodging name for the Invincible class).

They've come a long way from a couple converted battlecruisers though!

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to Juramentado)

Post #: 3

RE: USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/5/2015 3:16:16 AM

Casinn

Posts: 343
Joined: 7/27/2013
Status: offline

didn't the first couple CVs come about from the 1920 Washington Conference limiting US/UK/Japan ships, and were converted from heavy cruisers? I'll have to look that up now. heh

(in reply to cf_dallas)

Post #: 4

RE: USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/5/2015 4:04:44 AM

cf_dallas

Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Casinn

didn't the first couple CVs come about from the 1920 Washington Conference limiting US/UK/Japan ships, and were converted from heavy cruisers? I'll have to look that up now. heh

Lexington (CV2) and Saratoga (CV3) were exactly that, covered battlecruisers that would otherwise have been scrapped. I think they retained 8" guns for a while at least.

Langley (CV1) was converted from a collier. Ranger (CV4) was the first purpose built carrier in the US Navy.

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to Casinn)

Post #: 5

RE: USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/5/2015 1:10:56 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Added this to our db list.

M

_____________________________

(in reply to cf_dallas)

Post #: 6

RE: USN Renames Three Ship Classes - 9/6/2015 1:38:31 PM

SeaQueen

Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline

If only you all could have been there when I was said, "So, the LCS is a replacement frigate?" and was told, "No, it's not a frigate," and I said, "I don't understand..."

And now it's designated an FF...

I feel a little bit vindicated today.

< Message edited by SeaQueen -- 9/6/2015 2:41:03 PM >

(in reply to Juramentado)

Post #: 7