ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
That was pretty much the USN's policy till the Arleigh Burke was launched. The feeling was , "he's a man in his 90's , in a nursing home , who can hardly stand. He's not going to embarrass himself or the Navy". And the flood gate was opened. Presidents Carter and Bush (41) had ships named for them while alive and active. (OK Reagan was in a nursing home with Alzheimer's...not exactly a threat).
CV's were NEVER named for presidents till the FDR.
The only thing that is consistent about the USN's current naming policy is that it is never consistent. Look at the Seawolf class. There are only 3 boats. The Seawolf, The Jimmy Carter , and the Connecticut. If there is a pattern there . I fail to discern it. [:(]
Only "pretty much." USS Rickover. Mendel Rivers was dead when his boat was commissioned, but don't know about when it was named. Same with Richard B. Russell. Scoop Jackson was dead but still warm when they converted his boomer over in mid-construction. While I was on mine there three SSBNs named "USS Jackson" at the same time. We got the other two's mail frequently.
I believe the statute empowers SecNav to name warships, but Congress makes "suggestions" and SecNav does what they want. Golden Rule and all.
As far as submarine naming it's a dog's breakfast. We can't seem to figure out if subs are cruiser analogies or battleship analogies. Certainly the main battery of an SSBN qualifies them as a capital ship. I don't know any bubbleheads who wouldn't be in favor of going back to fish. My favorite was always USS Sand Lance. Sounds like a warship.
My understanding was that the administration was so concerned that some of Rickover's "pet congressmen" would name a CVN after him, that they changed the name of the next LA boat to Rickover , then named the next two CVN's Washington and Lincoln ASAP so that no one would dare change them.
Once again , who's responsible for the "Non-fish" naming of subs? Hyman Rickover who's most famous quote was "Fish don't vote", congressmen do. So you have the LA class, originally named for the districts of congressmen who supported Rickover. And ov course he was the driving force (and most vocal defender of) the "Famous American" class....SSBN's. He wrote a book and had a government movie done (41 for Freedom) to defend his choice. [8|]
In my view , SSBN's are the baddest capital ship we own. They should be captained by....well, captains. And named after states. [:D]
I think you've been told some sea stories. [:)]
USS Rickover was ordered in 1973, USS G. Washington not until 1982. Rickover was not unloved in the Nixon administration, although Zumwalt probably hated him. Rickover did say "fish don't vote." But I don't see LA-class naming following any pro-Navy congressional districts. They started with big cities and went down to smaller ones. Actual urban areas also tend to be highly Democratic and not as pro-defense as rural and suburban areas. If Rickover were looking to reward pro-navy congressmen it would have been the Norfolk-class.
I also would not say he was the driving force for the SSBNs. Adm. Raborn maybe. Rickover had nothing to do with the weapons system. USS George Washington was a cut-in-half SSN (ex-Scorpion I think) with a missile house dropped in the middle. If you were looking for a non-military cheerleader for the boomers I'd nominate LBJ when he was Senate Majority Leader.
The only reference to a book by Rickover I can find is a Government Printing Office pamphlet from 1972, a collection of letters from Rickover on the bios of the original 41 namesakes. The class was built out by then.
There ARE a lot of Rickover stories. I was in my CO's off-crew office one time when he called to ask about a training report. (He read every training report from every nuke ship every month. Every, single, one.) My CO was a frocked O-6 at the time, but he went ridgid as a board in his desk chair, sat at attention, white as a sheet.
