Why no Chester?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

Why no Chester?

Post by warspite1 »

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
User avatar
jeffk3510
Posts: 4143
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:59 am
Location: Merica

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by jeffk3510 »

Ran outa room on the dotted line?
Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Dez caught it
User avatar
Cap Mandrake
Posts: 20737
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by Cap Mandrake »

It's so people don't accidentally think she is named after this "fortunate son"

Image
Image
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by warspite1 »

Que?
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
dorjun driver
Posts: 641
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 2:17 am
Location: Port Townsend: hex 210,51
Contact:

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by dorjun driver »

Going for grounders, hey?
x - ARPAnaut
x - ACM
x - AES
Current - Bum

Image

The paths of glory may lead you to the grave, but the paths of duty may not get you anywhere.
JT
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: dorjun driver

Going for grounders, hey?
Warspite1

WTF?
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
pompack
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 1:44 am
Location: University Park, Texas

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by pompack »

lost me too [&:]
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by warspite1 »

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.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
jeffk3510
Posts: 4143
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:59 am
Location: Merica

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by jeffk3510 »

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
pws1225
Posts: 1166
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:39 pm
Location: Tate's Hell, Florida

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by pws1225 »

Or maybe it's because once you've said Nimitz, you've said it all.
User avatar
wworld7
Posts: 1726
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:57 am
Location: The Nutmeg State

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by wworld7 »

ORIGINAL: pws1225

Or maybe it's because once you've said Nimitz, you've said it all.

This pretty much sums it up.
Flipper
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by JeffroK »

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 [&:]
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by warspite1 »

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 [&:]
Warspite1

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
User avatar
RevRick
Posts: 2615
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Thomasville, GA

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by RevRick »

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
User avatar
RevRick
Posts: 2615
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Thomasville, GA

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by RevRick »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

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 [&:]
Warspite1

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
User avatar
Cap Mandrake
Posts: 20737
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by Cap Mandrake »

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.

Image
User avatar
YankeeAirRat
Posts: 633
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by YankeeAirRat »

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”.
User avatar
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?

Post by sandman455 »

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)
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

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 [&:]
Warspite1

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
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Why no Chester?

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: warspite1

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 [&:]
Warspite1

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 [:'(]
Warspite1

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
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”