Why no Chester?
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
Why no Chester?
Does anybody know why nine of the ten Nimitz-class ships have full names e.g. Dwight D Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, but poor old Chester Nimitz is just plain Nimitz?
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: Why no Chester?
Ran outa room on the dotted line?
Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.
Dez caught it
Dez caught it
- Cap Mandrake
- Posts: 20737
- Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
- Location: Southern California
RE: Why no Chester?
Que?
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
- dorjun driver
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 2:17 am
- Location: Port Townsend: hex 210,51
- Contact:
RE: Why no Chester?
Going for grounders, hey?
x - ARPAnaut
x - ACM
x - AES
Current - Bum
The paths of glory may lead you to the grave, but the paths of duty may not get you anywhere.
JT
x - ACM
x - AES
Current - Bum
The paths of glory may lead you to the grave, but the paths of duty may not get you anywhere.
JT
RE: Why no Chester?
Warspite1ORIGINAL: dorjun driver
Going for grounders, hey?
WTF?
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: Why no Chester?
lost me too [&:]
RE: Why no Chester?
Looked it up on google - came up with no results [&:]
As far as the Nimitz question is concerned I'll try the World In Flames forum, there are a couple of naval types there.
As far as the Nimitz question is concerned I'll try the World In Flames forum, there are a couple of naval types there.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: Why no Chester?
We didn't know you liked to fish so much Cap'n.
Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.
Dez caught it
Dez caught it
RE: Why no Chester?
Or maybe it's because once you've said Nimitz, you've said it all.
RE: Why no Chester?
ORIGINAL: pws1225
Or maybe it's because once you've said Nimitz, you've said it all.
This pretty much sums it up.
Flipper
RE: Why no Chester?
How many of them were Presidents?
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
RE: Why no Chester?
Warspite1ORIGINAL: JeffK
How many of them were Presidents?
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Eisenhower gets a full name, but not Chester.
Rats. I really wish I hadn't noticed this fact earlier today - it is really going to bug me, After all, its not just the Nimitz-class. Our American cousins name lots of ships after their sailors and all(?) (not USS The Sullivans for obvious reasons!!) get the full works inc middle initial. SO WHY NOT THE GREAT MAN CHESTER??
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: Why no Chester?
ORIGINAL: pws1225
Or maybe it's because once you've said Nimitz, you've said it all.
Makes me wish we had a "Thanks" button on the forum, or an "Attaboy" or some such.
"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer
RE: Why no Chester?
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1ORIGINAL: JeffK
How many of them were Presidents?
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Eisenhower gets a full name, but not Chester.
Rats. I really wish I hadn't noticed this fact earlier today - it is really going to bug me, After all, its not just the Nimitz-class. Our American cousins name lots of ships after their sailors and all(?) (not USS The Sullivans for obvious reasons!!) get the full works inc middle initial. SO WHY NOT THE GREAT MAN CHESTER??
Actually, the number of ships with the complete names of the individuals is not that frequent. Most of the destroyers have the last name only, unless there are two by the same last name to be honored. Then there are some names that need to be really scrutinized. As when the USS Brinkley Bass steamed into port with both of the B's painted out in haze gray.
"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer
- Cap Mandrake
- Posts: 20737
- Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
- Location: Southern California
RE: Why no Chester?
1) The picture of the dufus-looking guy in the dweeby shorts is Dwight David Eisenhower II. The hot babe is Julie Nixon. [:)]
2) I think Dorjun is referring to "groundfish", which is a term sometimes used for fish that live in flats (like bonefish).
3) Looking back over the names of US carriers, I am guessing the change is evolutionary. Only JFK and FDR had carrier names with the first name of the honoree included before USS Nimitz. After that, they are all named after historical figures and 2 now include non-Presidents WITH their first names.
2) I think Dorjun is referring to "groundfish", which is a term sometimes used for fish that live in flats (like bonefish).
3) Looking back over the names of US carriers, I am guessing the change is evolutionary. Only JFK and FDR had carrier names with the first name of the honoree included before USS Nimitz. After that, they are all named after historical figures and 2 now include non-Presidents WITH their first names.
- YankeeAirRat
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:59 am
RE: Why no Chester?
I think (and most of my more important references from that time are locked up in a moving van) when the ship was authorized in FY68 (calendar year 1967) funding budget it was as the USS Chester W. Nimitz. However, that was changed as the keel was laid in 1968 to just Nimitz since most could identify with just that name based on the press reports. The rest of the hulls were to be named after the rest of the five stars from through out the nation's history (Bradley, Ike, Dewey, etc; though I don't think that good Ol'Mac was going to be authorized as a name. It was only after Vinson raised a stink that someone in the CNO's office turned the Nimitz class over to being named after dead presidents
Take my word for it. You never want to be involved in an “International Incident”.
- sandman455
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:26 am
- Location: 20 yrs ago - SDO -> med down, w/BC glasses on
RE: Why no Chester?
ORIGINAL: JeffK
How many of them were Presidents?
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Not much on American history I see. [8|]
Anyway, I remember asking this many years ago while I was in the USN and the best answer I got from someone was that it was related to the presidents names being used for the carriers. Their status supposedly warranted that they be identified by their full names. Nimitiz got the initial hull, but he wasn't a civilian so the Navy named it as they wanted it. As soon as they got to the second ship, someone informed them it isn't appropriate to use the name of a president with anything less than his first and last name. Hence the change. The third boat was after another politician, Carl Vinson. He too got the full name just to match up with the Ike and the follow on vessels. Same story with the Stennis.
Not sure if it is correct, but it was what I was told long ago.
Gary S (USN 1320, 1985-1993)
AOCS 1985, VT10 1985-86, VT86 1986, VS41 1986-87
VS32 1987-90 (NSO/NWTO, deployed w/CV-66, CVN-71)
VS27 1990-91 (NATOPS/Safety)
SFWSLANT 1991-93 (AGM-84 All platforms, S-3 A/B systems)
AOCS 1985, VT10 1985-86, VT86 1986, VS41 1986-87
VS32 1987-90 (NSO/NWTO, deployed w/CV-66, CVN-71)
VS27 1990-91 (NATOPS/Safety)
SFWSLANT 1991-93 (AGM-84 All platforms, S-3 A/B systems)
RE: Why no Chester?
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1ORIGINAL: JeffK
How many of them were Presidents?
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Eisenhower gets a full name, but not Chester.
Rats. I really wish I hadn't noticed this fact earlier today - it is really going to bug me, After all, its not just the Nimitz-class. Our American cousins name lots of ships after their sailors and all(?) (not USS The Sullivans for obvious reasons!!) get the full works inc middle initial. SO WHY NOT THE GREAT MAN CHESTER??
Ike did manage to make the Presidency [:'(]
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
RE: Why no Chester?
Warspite1ORIGINAL: JeffK
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1ORIGINAL: JeffK
How many of them were Presidents?
Nimitz was the only one who did anything worthwhile.
edited. there were 2 other non-prez who got a full name [&:]
Eisenhower gets a full name, but not Chester.
Rats. I really wish I hadn't noticed this fact earlier today - it is really going to bug me, After all, its not just the Nimitz-class. Our American cousins name lots of ships after their sailors and all(?) (not USS The Sullivans for obvious reasons!!) get the full works inc middle initial. SO WHY NOT THE GREAT MAN CHESTER??
Ike did manage to make the Presidency [:'(]
JeffK, I don't know whether to be:
- insulted by the fact you thought I didn't know that [&:][:-], or
- more angry with myself that in putting your quote in full, my comment (which was meant to refer to Ike being no more important a figure (imo) in WWII than Nimitz) gives that impression [8|][:@]
I guess I will have to take the blame for my own schoolboy error...but yes, I am fully aware that Dwight D Eisenhower was a US president - not least because of Suez and all that.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815