New Fast-Attack Nuclear Submarines to be Named Arizona and Oklahoma

[HalcyonDaze]

I'm old school, there a lot more WWII boat names that need to reused. USS DC is an abomination.

I think it was a result of the existing SSNs and SSBNs sucking up most of the state names, as well as the aforementioned oversight regarding the potential for the lead boat to overlap with SSN-771's service life (wags may jest about having a ballistic missile submarine named after a place where little gets done, seeing as their job is ideally supposed to be dull routine). Save the WWII legacy names for the attack boats. SSBN-827 is slated to be USS Wisconsin; after that South Carolina and Kansas don't have ships named for them in service or on order but that's it. Whether or not Ohio, Michigan, Florida, or Georgia will be available depends on if the current SSGNs are retired on schedule or retained past 45 years.

SSBNs never used the legacy fish names; up until the Ohio-class they used US historical figures like George Washington, Ethan Allen, Lafayette, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin. The carriers have since nicked that convention; I liked the one suggestion that for the upcoming carriers along with Enterprise they should have reused Lexington, Saratoga, Ranger, and Yorktown.

The second ship of the new Constellation-class frigates (a little peeved that was another good historical carrier name) is supposed to be USS Congress; despite that name having a long history in the USN it doesn't exactly hit the mark in the modern era.

 

[Bob DBF]

I think it was a result of the existing SSNs and SSBNs sucking up most of the state names, as well as the aforementioned oversight regarding the potential for the lead boat to overlap with SSN-771's service life (wags may jest about having a ballistic missile submarine named after a place where little gets done, seeing as their job is ideally supposed to be dull routine). Save the WWII legacy names for the attack boats. SSBN-827 is slated to be USS Wisconsin; after that South Carolina and Kansas don't have ships named for them in service or on order but that's it. Whether or not Ohio, Michigan, Florida, or Georgia will be available depends on if the current SSGNs are retired on schedule or retained past 45 years.

SSBNs never used the legacy fish names; up until the Ohio-class they used US historical figures like George Washington, Ethan Allen, Lafayette, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin. The carriers have since nicked that convention; I liked the one suggestion that for the upcoming carriers along with Enterprise they should have reused Lexington, Saratoga, Ranger, and Yorktown.

The second ship of the new Constellation-class frigates (a little peeved that was another good historical carrier name) is supposed to be USS Congress; despite that name having a long history in the USN it doesn't exactly hit the mark in the modern era.

I've heard the " fish don't vote" remark, and it pretty much sums up how vessels are named now. I served on a couple of the 41 for Freedom boats so I have that down, but I just can't get used to attack boats named after cruisers and battleships.

Getting to be a curmudgeon in my old age, I think I'll go and yell at some clouds now.

 

[Jared0425]

I think it was a result of the existing SSNs and SSBNs sucking up most of the state names, as well as the aforementioned oversight regarding the potential for the lead boat to overlap with SSN-771's service life (wags may jest about having a ballistic missile submarine named after a place where little gets done, seeing as their job is ideally supposed to be dull routine). Save the WWII legacy names for the attack boats. SSBN-827 is slated to be USS Wisconsin; after that South Carolina and Kansas don't have ships named for them in service or on order but that's it. Whether or not Ohio, Michigan, Florida, or Georgia will be available depends on if the current SSGNs are retired on schedule or retained past 45 years.

SSBNs never used the legacy fish names; up until the Ohio-class they used US historical figures like George Washington, Ethan Allen, Lafayette, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin. The carriers have since nicked that convention; I liked the one suggestion that for the upcoming carriers along with Enterprise they should have reused Lexington, Saratoga, Ranger, and Yorktown.

The second ship of the new Constellation-class frigates (a little peeved that was another good historical carrier name) is supposed to be USS Congress; despite that name having a long history in the USN it doesn't exactly hit the mark in the modern era.

I think having a USS Chesapeake will make that vessel particularly unlucky. The runt of the litter of the original six and she had the worst luck. USS President was some nonsense too on the captain's part.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

I think having a USS Chesapeake will make that vessel particularly unlucky. The runt of the litter of the original six and she had the worst luck. USS President was some nonsense too on the captain's part.

USS President was commanded at the time of her capture by Stephen Decatur, who was something of a real-life adventure story and remains the youngest person ever to make captain in the USN. His primary claim to fame was sneaking into Tripoli with a raiding party on a captured ketch to retake the USS Philadelphia from Barbary pirates and burn the ship - a job that got effusive praise from one Horatio Nelson. Fittingly, at the time Decatur was captain of the second incarnation of USS Enterprise. At the start of the War of 1812 he was in command of USS United States and managed to defeat and capture the frigate HMS Macedonian before being blockaded at New London with his squadron in 1813.

Decatur had the misfortune of taking command of USS President in 1814 after she had been blockaded in New York harbor by a British squadron including three frigates and a razee ship of the line; a winter storm in January 1815 blew the British ships out of position and Decatur tried to slip out for a raiding cruise in the Caribbean. That plan went down the tubes because the harbor pilots had screwed up marking the channel and President went aground on a sandbar and took major structural damage (President did have a construction flaw in that she was prone to hogging and twisting). The wind direction didn't permit a return to port, so Decatur tried to sail away from where he thought the blockade squadron was; unfortunately she was spotted and overhauled by the 40-gun frigate HMS Endymion. Decatur first tried getting Endymion close enough to board and pull a Grand Theft Frigate a la John Paul Jones, but President was too badly crippled to outmaneuver Endymion and Plan B was to try and knock out the masts and rigging so he could shake pursuit. Endymion managed to rake President astern three times, which caused the American ship to surrender after almost six hours of fighting. However, as Endymion also needed repairs and was short on boats not turned to matchwood, Decatur tried to run, but within hours the other two British frigates caught President and broadsided her into surrender again.

The British repaired and recommissioned the ship as HMS President, although by 1818 it was in poor condition and was broken up. The British being the British, they constructed a new HMS President along similar lines in 1829 (despite the design being obsolete), which aside from a long service career (including the Crimean War and various auxiliary roles until its final dismantling in 1903) spent much of its early service as the flagship of the North American and West Indies station as a cheeky two-finger salute to the USN (adding insult to injury, the station commander at the time was Admiral George Cockburn, who oversaw the burning of Washington D.C.). The latter returned the favor by frequently sending both the original USS Macedonian and its successor (likewise carrying on the name for trolling purposes) to the same area.

Tangential to your reference to USS Chesapeake, Decatur served on the court-martial for Chesapeake's captain following the Chesapeake-Leopard incident of 1807, and 13 years later Decatur was killed in a dueling challenge by said officer after publicly opposing his reinstatement. The USN has had other ships named Chesapeake since, but only as auxiliaries or training vessels.

 

[Jared0425]

Decatur had the misfortune of taking command of USS President in 1814 after she had been blockaded in New York harbor by a British squadron

Decatur was warned multiple times not to venture out until spring. Several of his officers expressed grave doubts about trying to sneak the ship out as he had no pilot. This comes from the "Navy's War: The War of 1812" by George Daugen.

Decatur's ego had always got the better of him. To the point where he compromised several operations.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

Decatur was warned multiple times not to venture out until spring. Several of his officers expressed grave doubts about trying to sneak the ship out as he had no pilot. This comes from the "Navy's War: The War of 1812" by George Daugen.

Decatur's ego had always got the better of him. To the point where he compromised several operations.

Tried looking that source up, but couldn't find it online. Aside from the matter which lead to his death (which may have involved intrigue from his second, William Bainbridge), I was under the impression Decatur's biggest career controversy was in December 1813 when he attempted to break out of New London in USS United States, which he abandoned due to sighting blue lanterns along his route and voiced suspicions that British-sympathetic Federalists had betrayed him.

There's some context to the President's ill-fated mission - by 1814, the USN was, to put it bluntly, screwed. Aside from a few sloops, the entire nascent fleet had either been blockaded in port, captured, or sunk. The former was what had happened to Decatur's former command USS United States; the frigate was actually hulked at New London and towed up the river due to the threat of British raiding parties trying to capture her. With Napoleon (temporarily) removed from France the Royal Navy was free to give the USN its near-undivided attention, and in addition to adding formidable units like razee fourth-rates that could overmatch a US heavy frigate the British had learned some lessons (the captain of Endymion took some pointers from HMS Shannon's defeat of USS Chesapeake prior to the battle). Bad weather was about the only way a USN ship or squadron would get out without being overwhelmed. The big question is whether or not Decatur was acting entirely on his own initiative in trying to break out and could thus elect to let his squadron sit idle under blockade, or whether he had orders to break out and was thus obligated to carry them out to the best of his ability.

Back onto submarines, it looks like there are plans to build a "special projects" example of the Virginia-class to either supplement or replace USS Jimmy Carter.

Virginia Class Seabed Espionage Submarine Is In Development

A new variant of the Virginia class nuclear submarine is being developed to execute espionage missions on the seafloor.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Jared0425]

formidable units like razee fourth-rates that could overmatch a US heavy frigate the British had

I asked a naval historian (Drachnafil) about Razees vs US Frigates while I was doing research on the HMS St. Lawrence vs USS New Orleans/ Chippewa match up on Lake Ontario.

Anyways, a Razee would be evenly matched against the 44s.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

I asked a naval historian (Drachnafil) about Razees vs US Frigates while I was doing research on the HMS St. Lawrence vs USS New Orleans/ Chippewa match up on Lake Ontario.

Anyways, a Razee would be evenly matched against the 44s.

Drach covered that in one of his older videos:



The razee frigates had a couple of edges. First, as former ships of the line, they had 32-pounder long guns on the lower deck as opposed to the 24-pounders on the American heavy frigates. Second, the more heavily-built hulls made them tougher and better able to maintain speed in rough seas. The example Drach uses for such a vessel, HMS Majestic, was actually leading the squadron that captured USS President (albeit she did not get into the fight) and would have had about a 40% advantage in broadside weight over the American frigate.

 

[Jared0425]

Badly Damaged Nuclear Submarine USS Connecticut Seen In New Images

The battered Seawolf class submarine that hit a seamount will not be repaired till sometime in 2026 at the earliest.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Jared0425]

Drach covered that in one of his older videos:



The razee frigates had a couple of edges. First, as former ships of the line, they had 32-pounder long guns on the lower deck as opposed to the 24-pounders on the American heavy frigates. Second, the more heavily-built hulls made them tougher and better able to maintain speed in rough seas. The example Drach uses for such a vessel, HMS Majestic, was actually leading the squadron that captured USS President (albeit she did not get into the fight) and would have had about a 40% advantage in broadside weight over the American frigate.

I did not see your comment when I browsed this thread last so my apologies.

As for the HMS Majestic and USS President, I think the President's condition at the time of the breakout precluded any attempt for a one on one comparison. If we are dealing with peak condition ships with peak crews, I'd give the edge comfortably to Majestic as her number of carronades would make her an absolute monster to engage in at close range. But for sailing qualities and construction to take a beating during the heat of battle the President wins with her SC oak hull. The Majestic's or other Razee's larger crew compliment would simply overwhelm any American 44.

However from my research, I'd pit an American 74 or First Rate (Pennsylvania 134 guns, Philadelphia 122, and Washington 122) against any British Ship of the Line until HMS Warrior in the 1850s. Comparing them to their British counterparts shows that American construction and materials were better and we built Pennsylvania like a brick outhouse.