| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| RN Naming Dispute: Ark Royal v Prince of Wales |
| 2010-03-22 |
| Here on the famous Ark Royal, the flagship of the Royal Navy, a crew of 770 are readying for the multinational Auriga deployment off North America this summer. After more than a year's preparation, and the recent delivery of six Harriers from the Naval Strike Wing, the excitement is intense. But the brutal fact is that the next 18 months are likely to represent the last great adventures for the ship. Launched in 1985, Ark Royal was designed to carry six Harrier jets. Once the cutting edge of naval and aviation science, a generation later both ship and planes are part of a familiar modern problem: like video recorders and in-car cassette players, they are technologically obsolete. Though she will work again as a helicopter carrier for a couple of summers, Ark Royal is likely to be decommissioned by 2015. In the 21st century, it seems aircraft carriers are all a matter of scale. When HMS Queen Elizabeth, the first of two new vessels, is launched from Rosyth in 2014, she will be twice the size of the Ark and carry six times as many jets, American-built Joint Strike Fighters. The second ship, Prince of Wales, will launch in 2018, with the same capacity. Assuming either is ever built ... If these modern carriers are a boon to the Navy, great old names are another thing altogether. Hanging heavy in the air in the Ark Royal's ward room and its messes is the absolute belief that its badge should live on, whatever happens to the old ship. Off the record, it seems every officer and crewman or woman is keen to let you know that Prince of Wales should have its name changed to Ark Royal. True, such a move might be problematic; the sensitive matter of naming is dealt with by a sub-committee of the Ministry of Defence. But it is whispered that if the Prince of Wales himself could be persuaded of the sense in preserving a powerful naval tradition, who knows what could happen. John Clink, the captain of Ark Royal, protests that he will not endorse a proposal to change the name of the second of the two new carriers. Prince of Wales is after all a famous warship name in its own right, and history shows that in the rarefied air below decks, men and women soon get used to the idea of a ship's badge. Creating a sense of pride begins in the shipyard, argues Captain Clink. "When the ship's company arrive, it's very special. There is a palpable pride. It starts with the badge: 'You're joining HMS Queen Elizabeth? Have the Queen Elizabeth cufflinks?'" That said, he will admit that when he was informed by the Admiralty that he was to captain a ship, he sent an e-mail saying: "I don't care what one it is -- as long as it has two names." This "Spirit of the Ark" is part myth, part history. The first such vessel began life as the Ark Raleigh, before it was commandeered by Queen Elizabeth I from Sir Walter Raleigh and became the English flagship at the defeat of the Spanish Armada. It took more than 300 years for a second -- a converted collier -- to sail from port, but that Ark Royal saw action at Gallipoli as an aircraft carrier. Its successor was even more illustrious, and one of its Swordfish bi-planes crippled the Bismarck in 1941. The fourth Ark never fired a shot in anger but spawned a 1970s TV series, still cheerfully remembered by the older crew. This vessel, the fifth, has seen action in the Balkans and in the Gulf. Tradition, in other words, looms large here. At his breakfast table, with his commanders around him, Captain Clink remains phlegmatic about those two words, the name of his ship. He served in Fearless, a vessel that sailed for many years after it was due to be decommissioned. When it finally docked at Portsmouth harbour for the last time, he watched as men in their 50s and 60s lined the quay and cried. So when this Ark Royal makes its last voyage, will he join the people weeping at the dockside? "Yes," he says with a smile. "Sign me up for that." But as his senior officers troop off to work, one of them says: "Listen, you never know what might happen." The first Ark Royal was built in 1587, the first Prince of Wales in 1765. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose |
| #15 that did not work out so wel the last time. Somehow, I suspect a nym like Shipman may have been aware of that. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-03-22 20:50 |
| #14 POW & Repulse... they go together. Ahem,,, that did not work out so wel the last time. |
| Posted by: Cheaderhead 2010-03-22 19:14 |
| #13 POW & Repulse... they go together. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2010-03-22 16:41 |
| #12 With Biden as Court Jester, Hillary s the Stepmother and Michelle as The Wookie. Scenery by Shep Fairey |
| Posted by: lex 2010-03-22 15:46 |
| #11 Very appropriate Lex. Let's go with your selection of ChomskyObamsky. If we plan well enough ahead, perhaps we could convince Rahm to dance Nureyev's 'The Sleeping Beauty' from the bridge as she slips down the quay. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-03-22 15:10 |
| #10 The Barryn Soetorov? byt' mozhet, the ChomskyObamsky |
| Posted by: lex 2010-03-22 14:35 |
| #9 Don't worry with the looming price of health care, the US will have to cut it's military force significantly. We shall have everything the EU has (problems and all). FOAD Nancy Pelosi |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2010-03-22 10:25 |
| #8 Blackadder and the Baldrick are still available, arguably the most famous Englishmen ever. Just so long as we never, ever, have a Barry Obama. The way his poll numbers are sinking, a submarine, ala Jimmy Carter, would be a bad idea. |
| Posted by: ed 2010-03-22 10:07 |
| #7 Two additional submarines of the Yuri Dolgorukiy class are reported to be under construction at Sevmash -- the Alexandr Nevskiy and the Vladimir Monomakh. A fourth unit is planned. The Barryn Soetorov? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-03-22 08:24 |
| #6 ...Rumor has it that the America class LHAs will get the great old carrier names, including Enterprise. Way too much precedent has been laid down now for naming CVNs after politicians. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2010-03-22 08:15 |
| #5 USN, Ret., Isn't the Lexington also a museum? In Corpus Christi? |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-03-22 07:48 |
| #4 Captain Clink- now there is a name out of military history. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2010-03-22 07:38 |
| #3 What about HMS Blasphemous? |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2010-03-22 01:43 |
| #2 I don't know, a combination garbage/sewage incinerator ship would be appropriate as the USS Obama. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2010-03-22 00:44 |
| #1 And the same battle rages in the US over naming our navy's ships. There is no 'Hornet', 'Ranger', Lexington,' just to mention a few. Intrepid is a museum, so naming a successor would be problematic. Just so long as we never, ever, have a Barry Obama. One question immediately comes to mind if that were to happen : where would it be built and what would the papers say? ( if we could even see the papers) |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2010-03-22 00:37 |