Quite correct, and I am simply pointing out that some level of
priority should be given to honored names before adding
additional "questionable" ones. Your point on the DD's is very
accurate, and illustrates how a ship's historical contribution can
elevate a minor ships name to one of honor and fame. Names like
Hoel, Samual B Roberts, Enterprise, Wasp, etc come from tiny ships
making heroic efforts (trying to not humanize the ships, but its
hard... crews actually did all the sacrificing) and will hopefully
always honor an active USN ship.
It pains me to see a "State" class ship mis-named when the great
state of Montana remains capital ship-less, and the USS Oklahoma
should have a new bearer... aside from heroes from it's compliment
like USS England (as in John C England, not the country). Just my
opinion however.
Erik


--- In NavWarGames@yahoogroups.com, "Brooks" <brooks.rowlett@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In NavWarGames@yahoogroups.com, "airxx" <airxx@> wrote:
>
>
> > So long as historic names remain available, such as Yorktown or
> even
> > State's names for that matter, I see little reason for adding the
> John
> > Warners of our times.
>
>
> But most of those historic names ARE in use. Also, the BURKE class
> is probably over 1/3 and maybe higher, a re-user of historic
> destroyer names.
>
> One interesting aspect - has anyone noticed how often DEs sunk late
> in WWII in valorous circumstances, had their names 'promoted' to
full
> DDs of late war construction?
>
> On the suggestion of the number of Medal of Honor winners - I took
> the original post as suggesting NAVY AND MARINE MOH winners, which
> are indeed too few to employ as 100% of the name source for a
> reasonable fleet.
>