That is how it works in the USN.Grouchy Imp said:Give each class of ship a theme, not just a theme for the whole navy. For example here in the UK our subs are named after attributes, such as the Vigilant and the Tireless but our destroyers tend to be named after dukes, like the Richmond and the Northumberland. Stuff like that. So rather than have your entire fleet named after WWII engagements, give each of your classes a theme, like state capitals or presidents or national parks or famous generals - whatever takes your fancy.
Don't the marines still have smaller carriers? Fairly sure they've done so at least fairly recently?StarCecil said:That is how it works in the USN.Grouchy Imp said:Give each class of ship a theme, not just a theme for the whole navy. For example here in the UK our subs are named after attributes, such as the Vigilant and the Tireless but our destroyers tend to be named after dukes, like the Richmond and the Northumberland. Stuff like that. So rather than have your entire fleet named after WWII engagements, give each of your classes a theme, like state capitals or presidents or national parks or famous generals - whatever takes your fancy.
CVNs are named after Presidents and Senators (and a few offbeat names like Kitty Hawk, Enterprise and one named after Admiral Nimitz). The newest class of CVNs will be the Gerald Ford class, and the newest CVN in the fleet is the George H.W. Bush.
SSGNs and SSBNs are named after states, and other SSNs are named after cities.
FFs/DD/CGs are named after cities and important naval officers, depending on the role of the ship and what class it is.
My problem is that I'm trying to name a class of ship that the United States Navy no longer operates. CVLs, or escort carriers, or light carriers, whatever, are WWII vintage for the USN so the only names I have to work with are from the era.
The Navy operates AAVs from which a battalion or so of Marines can deploy, and that's where the naming scheme gets sticky. They aren't carriers per se, because they carry only eight Harrier IIs and a whole smattering of helicopters to support amphibious operations. Many of them share names with the old CVLs from WWII; Bataan, Makin Island, Iwo Jima, Boxer. They also rip off the names of WWII era fleet carriers.Petromir said:Don't the marines still have smaller carriers? Fairly sure they've done so at least fairly recently?StarCecil said:That is how it works in the USN.Grouchy Imp said:Give each class of ship a theme, not just a theme for the whole navy. For example here in the UK our subs are named after attributes, such as the Vigilant and the Tireless but our destroyers tend to be named after dukes, like the Richmond and the Northumberland. Stuff like that. So rather than have your entire fleet named after WWII engagements, give each of your classes a theme, like state capitals or presidents or national parks or famous generals - whatever takes your fancy.
CVNs are named after Presidents and Senators (and a few offbeat names like Kitty Hawk, Enterprise and one named after Admiral Nimitz). The newest class of CVNs will be the Gerald Ford class, and the newest CVN in the fleet is the George H.W. Bush.
SSGNs and SSBNs are named after states, and other SSNs are named after cities.
FFs/DD/CGs are named after cities and important naval officers, depending on the role of the ship and what class it is.
My problem is that I'm trying to name a class of ship that the United States Navy no longer operates. CVLs, or escort carriers, or light carriers, whatever, are WWII vintage for the USN so the only names I have to work with are from the era.
Edit my post while you were writing this suspecting something like that.StarCecil said:The Navy operates AAVs from which a battalion or so of Marines can deploy, and that's where the naming scheme gets sticky. They aren't carriers per se, because they carry only eight Harrier IIs and a whole smattering of helicopters to support amphibious operations. Many of them share names with the old CVLs from WWII; Bataan, Makin Island, Iwo Jima, Boxer. They also rip off the names of WWII era fleet carriers.Petromir said:Don't the marines still have smaller carriers? Fairly sure they've done so at least fairly recently?StarCecil said:That is how it works in the USN.Grouchy Imp said:Give each class of ship a theme, not just a theme for the whole navy. For example here in the UK our subs are named after attributes, such as the Vigilant and the Tireless but our destroyers tend to be named after dukes, like the Richmond and the Northumberland. Stuff like that. So rather than have your entire fleet named after WWII engagements, give each of your classes a theme, like state capitals or presidents or national parks or famous generals - whatever takes your fancy.
CVNs are named after Presidents and Senators (and a few offbeat names like Kitty Hawk, Enterprise and one named after Admiral Nimitz). The newest class of CVNs will be the Gerald Ford class, and the newest CVN in the fleet is the George H.W. Bush.
SSGNs and SSBNs are named after states, and other SSNs are named after cities.
FFs/DD/CGs are named after cities and important naval officers, depending on the role of the ship and what class it is.
My problem is that I'm trying to name a class of ship that the United States Navy no longer operates. CVLs, or escort carriers, or light carriers, whatever, are WWII vintage for the USN so the only names I have to work with are from the era.
The best way to put infantry ashore is via the air, really. The current Wasp-class LHDs can carry upwards of 20 V-22 Ospreys. They still have well decks, though, to put armor and LAVs ashore. The newest America-class are supposed to have one without a well deck to speed up build time, and there was going to be another with a well deck but it's now in development hell since the Marines are downsizing. No point in making room for another battalion or two if we're cutting half a division.Petromir said:Edit my post while you were writing this suspecting something like that.StarCecil said:The Navy operates AAVs from which a battalion or so of Marines can deploy, and that's where the naming scheme gets sticky. They aren't carriers per se, because they carry only eight Harrier IIs and a whole smattering of helicopters to support amphibious operations. Many of them share names with the old CVLs from WWII; Bataan, Makin Island, Iwo Jima, Boxer. They also rip off the names of WWII era fleet carriers.Petromir said:Don't the marines still have smaller carriers? Fairly sure they've done so at least fairly recently?StarCecil said:That is how it works in the USN.Grouchy Imp said:Give each class of ship a theme, not just a theme for the whole navy. For example here in the UK our subs are named after attributes, such as the Vigilant and the Tireless but our destroyers tend to be named after dukes, like the Richmond and the Northumberland. Stuff like that. So rather than have your entire fleet named after WWII engagements, give each of your classes a theme, like state capitals or presidents or national parks or famous generals - whatever takes your fancy.
CVNs are named after Presidents and Senators (and a few offbeat names like Kitty Hawk, Enterprise and one named after Admiral Nimitz). The newest class of CVNs will be the Gerald Ford class, and the newest CVN in the fleet is the George H.W. Bush.
SSGNs and SSBNs are named after states, and other SSNs are named after cities.
FFs/DD/CGs are named after cities and important naval officers, depending on the role of the ship and what class it is.
My problem is that I'm trying to name a class of ship that the United States Navy no longer operates. CVLs, or escort carriers, or light carriers, whatever, are WWII vintage for the USN so the only names I have to work with are from the era.
8 harriers plus helicopters is getting on for a fair air wing for something that isn't a carrier of sorts.
Never liked LPH style ships being designated as amphibious assault ships , if its deploying them by air thats not really amphibious now is it.
LPDs (HMS Bulwark for example) with internal docks and designed to deploy their troops primarily by sea rather than air (LPDs can mange about a brace of suitably sized helicopters) are clearly so, not convinced that LPHs are.
The sadly defunct Invincible class (CVAs) was a through deck cruiser.
If the assualt ships are taking carrier names then that seems like a good place to start.