Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.PCS 1/10/84; site ahuta.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ahuta!jrrt
From: jrrt@ahuta.UUCP (r.mitchell)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Digression on Naval naming
Message-ID: <587@ahuta.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Apr-85 16:02:09 EST
Article-I.D.: ahuta.587
Posted: Tue Apr  9 16:02:09 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Apr-85 05:57:33 EST
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 24

>there have been at least 7 ships in the US Navy with the name Enterprise,
>not including the current one.  CVA's are the only ships nowadays in
>the US Navy that are allowed to have the names of other ships and
>famous presidents, admirals, etc.  how do i know?  well, that's a whole
>'nother question.
>Herb Chong...

Well, Herb, I'd like to ask how you know that.  The ENTERPRISE is a CVN,
not a CVA ("N" representing Nuclear-powered).  Perhaps a nit.  What
about SSBNs (Ballistic Missile Submarines)?  Whan I was aboard
the USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (SSBN 640), I didn't see a single
airplane.  There are several dozen SSNs (Fast-attack Submarines)
that carry the names of World War 2 subs that were sunk by enemy
action.  Lastly, I'm familiar with several destroyer/frigate classes
whose names commemorate WW2 ships.

Refering to the original article in this series, certainly the
US Navy today does not use numbers in its ships` names (e.g.
Enterprise II).  This doesn't say squat about what Starfleet would
do, of course, since there are numerous examples of differences between
current Naval traditions/policies and the way Starfleet does things.

Rob Mitchell (LT USNR)
{allegra,ihnp4}!ahuta!jrrt