A new Ark Royal ?

[Paul K]

It seems Prince Charles has agreed that the second carrier will now be christened Ark Royal rather than HMS Prince of Wales

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... Royal.html

Presumably, since its so vitally important that we have an 'Ark' in service, the Queen Elizabeth will go into mothballs instead ?

[DarrenL]

Queen Elizabeth will go into mothballs instead ?

[FlyTexas]

She doesn't look too pleased about it.

Brian

[Paul K]

Some wag on the Key Aero site suggested that since she'll probably host more Rafales than FAA F-35s, she should be named Ark de Triomphe. Nice !

[dodger]

Hi,

Well i think its great news and fitting to keep some tradition, seeing everything esle has gone for a burton!!

To qoute"A senior Navy officer said it was virtually unheard of to change the name of a ship that was already being built." unqoute.

So who are these people that name our ships anyway? just goes to show they are in the wrong job i'd say,

Anyway, good on you Charles,{sir}

Cheers.

Roger.

[Badgerman]

Hi,

According to Naval tradition - it's considered extreme bad luck to re-name a ship, but that usually only applies if she's actually started construction. As for who names them - officially it's the "Admiralty Ships Names board" and all of the Commonwealth Navies subscribe to the same list (in days of old we used to trade names routinely - I was working in a Canadian Shore establishment named Gloucester - and there was a bit of bother when the RN wanted to re-use the name for something that actually floated...)

Ark's a good name - but I'd have been happier with Eagle or Bulwark! I'm certainly not sad to see PoW gone...

Mark

[DarrenL]

No need to rename PoW, the Ark is still sailing (rowing).

[SkippyBing]

According to Naval tradition - it's considered extreme bad luck to re-name a ship, but that usually only applies if she's actually started construction.

To honest I don't think the RN pays a lot of attention to that, the last Endurance was originally MV Polar Star, the latest Ark was going to be called Indefatigable and the one before was going to be called Irresistible in both cases the name was changed after construction had started but before they were launched. In 1920 Victorious was renamed Indus II for no obvious reason as the next Victorious didn't come into being until 1939.

[tango234]

I have here a verbatim letter from the Daily Telegraph on that issue about renaming RN ships.

Sir-Changing the names of ships either during construction or later is far from unusual-as the "senior naval officer" who informed your report (May 2) should know.
Changing the new carrier HMS Prince of Wales to Ark Royal is particularly ironic, as the recently decomissioned Ark Royal had her name changed from Indomitable on the day her keel was laid at Swan Hunters on the Tyne.
If keel-laying does not constitute "already built", better examples are the three Tiger class cruisers which had their names changed during construction, as did three out of five King George V class battleships during the Second World War.
In future, this Unseen (ex-HMS P51) senoir officer must remain more Vigilant (ex-HMS A382) and Wakeful (ex-HMS Zebra) when dealing with the press or face a Thunderbolt (ex-HMS Thetis). In such circumstances a Decoy (ex-HMS Dragon) is a useful Defence (ex-HMS Lion) and Eagle (ex-Audacious) eyed.
If he is reading this letter, and has had sufficient Endurance (ex-HMS Polar Circle) to reach the end, I hope he can see Howe (ex-Beatty) by the Untiring (ex-Upstart) efforts of this retired officer, he can learn to take Delight (ex-Disdain, ex-Ypres) in naval history.

So it isn't really that rare at all, and if that isn't an incredible put-down I don't know what is.

[Paul K]

Nice letter! Its almost a bit 'Cyril Fletcher' from Thats LIfe