Jump to content
VonLippe

Navy with the best ship names

35 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

23
[GOFU]
Beta Testers
96 posts
5,752 battles

Hands down winner is the Royal Navy.  Germany, US, France, Italy, and to some extent Japan all named their capital ships after territories (States, provinces, counties, cities, etc).  The Brits?

Indomitable, Invincible, Audacious, Glorious, and most awesome name of all....DREADNOUGHT.  Literal meaning "Fear Nothing".  Which was also the ships motto...."Fear Nothing, and Dread Nought"

Of course, they also named ships for famous leaders (Nelson, Queen Elizabeth), but those stirring, almost arrogant sounding ones are by far the best.  Can you imagine walking into a sailors bar between the wars and stating "I served on the Invincible"?  Besides that, even proud names like Moltke are shamed

 

What's your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,244
[SCCC]
Members
1,132 posts
5,576 battles

The German ships have the best names hands down.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
755
[SF-A]
Members
2,850 posts
5,548 battles

Certainly the Brits. Nobody else calls their ships "Conqueror" or "Invincible" or "Glorious".

 

Meanwhile we're over here naming ships "Gabrielle Giffords" or "Harvey Milk"

 

Got to hand it to our friends across the pond, their names sound better.

Edited by pewpewpew42
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,086
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,700 posts
10,043 battles

I do have a major soft spot for the Italian crazy-long cruiser names:

Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta

Luigi di Savoia Duca Degli Abruzzi (LdSDDA for short?!)

 

The fewer ships you have named after towns and politicians the better.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[BRZKR]
WoWS Community Contributors
293 posts

While I agree that the RN has some great names for their ships, I can also understand the reasoning behind naming a ship after a region.  At least here in the US during both World Wars, national support was a huge factor.  No better way to get millions of people behind the navy than having a ship named for where they're from.  It's like giving really big guns to your favorite sports team.

Edited by Vulgarr
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,336
[NDA]
[NDA]
Supertest Coordinator
6,188 posts
4,592 battles

For me, it's a tie between the Japanese and British.

The Japanese destroyers in particular can be poetic in their names, while mountains and rivers for cruisers invoke some strength and imposing features of nature.

The British as the OP said, the literal meaning of the names have a sense of power behind them.

Also a little offtopic, but thanks to the British, we have some nice names for our tanks too... how bland would 'Medium, Tank, M3' have been compared to 'General Lee/Grant'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
782
[MIA-I]
[MIA-I]
Supertester
2,713 posts
4,699 battles

And keeping with British tradition they're still giving us awesome boat names.

  7y1MD6T.jpg

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
296 posts
39 battles
1 hour ago, VonLippe said:

Hands down winner is the Royal Navy.  Germany, US, France, Italy, and to some extent Japan all named their capital ships after territories (States, provinces, counties, cities, etc).  The Brits?

Indomitable, Invincible, Audacious, Glorious, and most awesome name of all....DREADNOUGHT.  Literal meaning "Fear Nothing".  Which was also the ships motto...."Fear Nothing, and Dread Nought"

Of course, they also named ships for famous leaders (Nelson, Queen Elizabeth), but those stirring, almost arrogant sounding ones are by far the best.  Can you imagine walking into a sailors bar between the wars and stating "I served on the Invincible"?  Besides that, even proud names like Moltke are shamed

 

What's your opinion?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_Viking

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[GOFU]
Beta Testers
96 posts
5,752 battles

Remember, they're Brits.  "Gay" means "Happy", not "Homosexual".  Just like "fog" with an A instead of an "O" is a cigarette.  (Forum blocked word)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[GOFU]
Beta Testers
96 posts
5,752 battles
59 minutes ago, Vulgarr said:

While I agree that the RN has some great names for their ships, I can also understand the reasoning behind naming a ship after a region.  At least here in the US during both World Wars, national support was a huge factor.  No better way to get millions of people behind the navy than having a ship named for where they're from.  It's like giving really big guns to your favorite sports team.

..And I was lucky enough to serve aboard USS Casimir Pulaski.  Yeah.  A Polish count.  No real bragging rights there.  At least my buddy on the Tecumseh had that going for him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,749 posts
5,473 battles

I personally like the more poetic names of the IJN destroyers. When translated roughly to English, you get some neat names such as, Lightning, Blizzard, Snowy Wind, Morning Fog, Mountain Wind, Stormy Tide, etc, etc.

Edited by GhostSwordsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
10,914 posts
2,566 battles
1 hour ago, Vulgarr said:

While I agree that the RN has some great names for their ships, I can also understand the reasoning behind naming a ship after a region.  At least here in the US during both World Wars, national support was a huge factor.  No better way to get millions of people behind the navy than having a ship named for where they're from.  It's like giving really big guns to your favorite sports team.

 

But surely that only works if the ship isn't sunk? I can't imagine the sinking of the "USS United States" or the "USS George Washington" being great for morale.

 

Personally, I like the names of older USN carriers, Ranger, Enterprise, Hornet, Intrepid, are all a step above the names of RN ships, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[BRZKR]
WoWS Community Contributors
293 posts
Just now, Legendary_Typo said:

 

But surely that only works if the ship isn't sunk? I can't imagine the sinking of the "USS United States" or the "USS George Washington" being great for morale.

 

Personally, I like the names of older USN carriers, Ranger, Enterprise, Hornet, Intrepid, are all a step above the names of RN ships, in my opinion.


Precisely the problem towards the end of the Battleship era.  Ships like Iowa, and Yamato, and Tirpitz weren't sent out after each other because their nations governments were afraid of what it would do to morale if they were lost.  2 out of 3 of those proved them correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,086
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,700 posts
10,043 battles
1 minute ago, Legendary_Typo said:

But surely that only works if the ship isn't sunk? I can't imagine the sinking of the "USS United States" or the "USS George Washington" being great for morale.

I don't know, I think my morale would suffer if I were on Deutschland and it was renamed Lutzow to avoid that.

Do the bosses know something I don't about how likely this ship is to sink?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
10,914 posts
2,566 battles
Just now, mofton said:

I don't know, I think my morale would suffer if I were on Deutschland and it was renamed Lutzow to avoid that.

Do the bosses know something I don't about how likely this ship is to sink?!

 

That's kind of my point though, anything bad happening to a ship named after a state/province or w/e is probably bad for morale. I'd be a lot less affected personally if the "HMCS Generic Battleship Mk I" sank, than if the "HMCS Canada" sank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,062
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,238 posts
8,815 battles
1 hour ago, Jinxed_Katajainen said:

Also a little offtopic, but thanks to the British, we have some nice names for our tanks too... how bland would 'Medium, Tank, M3' have been compared to 'General Lee/Grant'.

Medium Tank M3 was the official designation but US tanks also carried names, Lee, Stuart & Sherman for example. The modified Lee, it had a much larger turret so the radios could be accessible to the commander, in British service was named the Grant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
461
[MAHAN]
Beta Testers
1,371 posts
5,025 battles

Royal Navy hands down. Most ship names are boring. Just people, rivers, cities, provinces/states, etc. The Royal Navy actually mixed it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[JFSOC]
Members
916 posts
2,648 battles

The Japanese ones are kind of poetic and invoke a degree of mysticism into naval warfare other navies lack in their ship names.

Kongo:  The invincible Buddhist

Akagi:  Red Castle

Taiho: The great (or majestic) Phoenix (mythical bird type Phoenix)

The British and French have some excellent ones in terms of their aggressiveness sound:

Invincible, Le Terrible, Fantastique, Colossus, Scorpion...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
940 posts
4,083 battles

meh nothing beats the USS Enterprise colloquially called "the Big E" on three occasions during the Pacific War, the Japanese announced that she had been sunk in battle, resulting in her being named "The Grey Ghost". Enterprise even held her own against the IJN being the sole carrier in the Pacific

 

 

sure the Brits got great name but actions speaks louder than words, Enterprise saw more action than your average British warship

and to top it all of she's the most decorated ship in WW2 and survive the war  from start to finish earning her name "Lucky E"

f5f5daf7e9b3605e905f301981e1a000--angel-

 

now apply that to ships

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
[VVV]
Beta Testers
223 posts
1,916 battles
On 8/31/2017 at 2:34 PM, VonLippe said:

..And I was lucky enough to serve aboard USS Casimir Pulaski.  Yeah.  A Polish count.  No real bragging rights there.  At least my buddy on the Tecumseh had that going for him...

Wonder when they'll retcon the names of the Robert E Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Stonewall Jackson and John C Calhoun...probably half of the "41 for Freedom" SSBNs were named for doubleplusungood persons.

On 8/31/2017 at 3:12 PM, Legendary_Typo said:

 

But surely that only works if the ship isn't sunk? I can't imagine the sinking of the "USS United States" or the "USS George Washington" being great for morale.

 

Personally, I like the names of older USN carriers, Ranger, Enterprise, Hornet, Intrepid, are all a step above the names of RN ships, in my opinion.

There hasn't been a USS United States since the famous "Old War Wagon" in the days of Wooden Ships and Iron Men......and the frigate United States was a contemporary of the ships whose names were passed on to those carriers you name....but not for a lack of trying. One of the Lexington Class CCs was slated to get the name, but was cancelled by the Washington Treaty, and the lead ship of the first class of post war Carriers was to be named USS United States (CVA-58) but was cancelled a few days after the keel was laid because the Truman Administration accepted the argument of the Chair Force that strategic bombing would solve all our problems and we no longer needed a Navy, , sparking the "Revolt of the Admirals".

On 8/31/2017 at 3:14 PM, Vulgarr said:


Precisely the problem towards the end of the Battleship era.  Ships like Iowa, and Yamato, and Tirpitz weren't sent out after each other because their nations governments were afraid of what it would do to morale if they were lost.  2 out of 3 of those proved them correct.

Germany only had two modern Dreadnoughts and two Battlecruisers, so after Bismarck had a train pulled on her they realized the remaining vessels were more valuable by merely existing than anything they could possibly do in a surface engagement. As for Yamato and Iowa, they were assigned tasks considered more important at the time, like Iowa escorting carriers and Yamato being used to transport troops, of all things. As far as Ten-Go, why would the Admirals choose a surface engagement and risk losing thousands of men if a BB or multiple cruisers or DDs were sunk when they could throw nearly 400 aircraft at the Japanese formation and kill them with sky cancer instead? The USN only lost 12 lives sending Yamato to the bottom...one Iowa class BB sunk could have cost them over 2500. If I were in ADM Mitscher's shoes, I'd have opted for sky-cancer like he did....why risk thousands of lives just to prove a point? 

 

 

Edited by Tiberius67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[GOFU]
Beta Testers
96 posts
5,752 battles

Ok, as pointed out, the US Navy did have some cool names...hearkening back to the Revolutionary war with Enterprise, Saratoga, Lexington.  But they were cool because of the past events, not because of the meaning of the word itself.  Even if you just look at the non-place name CV's, Enterprise, Intrepid.  Alright, they're good, descriptive adjectives.  Now contrast with Indomitable, Fearless, Courageous, DREADNOUGHT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
863
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
3,851 posts
4,224 battles
On 8/31/2017 at 3:30 PM, VonLippe said:

Remember, they're Brits.  "Gay" means "Happy", not "Homosexual".  Just like "fog" with an A instead of an "O" is a cigarette.  (Forum blocked word)

NOT true. If you go over to Britain and call a cricket-player "gay," expect to lose most of your teeth and probably your jawbone as well.
The other one can mean both, depending on if your using it in a question, "Hey, pass me a ___, will you?" or if you're saying, "He's such a...."

Again, if you say that last sentence to a cricket-player, you can expect to lose most of your teeth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×