Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Her Majesties Ship Dreadnought

For anyone who might want to have a side're welcome here!
Her Majesties Ship Dreadnought
Post by Larry   » Sat Oct 22, 2016 3:27 am

Lieutenant Commander

Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:12 pm

Thought about posting this to the Honor forum and to the Safehold forum, but it doesn't really fit either so...
In the discussions about Naval ships and star-ship classes and such it's clear that many of you are nautical historians and have a keen interest in the various vessels that have influenced ship design and tactical and strategic navel thinking over the years. Me, I'm more a pure historian in that the story behind the ships and the thinking and times that influenced their development interests me more than the details of the design. Yet the name Dreadnought has been one that has constantly marked British ship building since Sir Francis Drake first sailed one against the Spanish so long ago. Ships of that name tend to tell you something about the Royal Navy and where it's power projection thinking is. Therefore I find it fascinating that the boat carrying that name today isn't a huge multi-gun warship upon the surface, but a deadly killer under the sea. It's targets will no longer be opposing vessels, but opposing countries. The focus of how Britannia defends itself is no longer a seagoing armada of battleships, but the threat of retaliation in the event of attack. Ladies and gentleman I give you, the HMS Dreadnought, latest of the name. ... ght/46057/
Re: Her Majesties Ship Dreadnought
Post by munroburton   » Sat Oct 22, 2016 2:58 pm

Vice Admiral

Posts: 1974
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 10:16 am
Location: Scotland

I view it as more of a lack of originality. The other three subs of the new class will also be given names with "historical resonance". I'm betting on Warspite being one of the next.

HMS Vanguard - previously the RN's last commissioned battleship, struck in 1960 - is the lead ship of the current-generation SSBNs. The first British SSBN was HMS Resolution(sharing the name with at least ten precedessors), commissioned in 1966.

I don't think nuclear missile submarines qualify as direct power projection. That job still rests with the battleship's executioner - the aircraft carrier. SSBNs mostly fit into the deterrence/MAD pact side of things, although nuclear weaponry does provide a permanent seat on the UN security council.
Re: Her Majesties Ship Dreadnought
Post by MAD-4A   » Thu Nov 10, 2016 10:33 am

Captain of the List

Posts: 705
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:48 pm
Location: Texas

munroburton wrote:I view it as more of a lack of originality.
You are confusing 'lack of originality' with 'over developed sense of tradition'. the British (especially the Royal Navy) link EVERYTHING to tradition, not unlike the US Navy having so many USS Texas (not that I mean that as a complaint!) 4, since 1895, so far. Or more the USS Washington 10 (+2 others, 'USRC Washington' 1837 & just 'Washington' SP-1241 (coal barge) 1917) since 1775. Naming a ship with a previously famous (or inspiring) name, links the new ship to that ship which inspires, not only the crew, to live up to the name, but also the Captains not to dishonor the name as well as the public, the families of the crew and the builders ('My daddy's in the Navy, on the Dreadnought!' or 'built the Dreadnought') as well as the general populace of the city/state/province/etc... it was built in. (something most Americans wouldn't get but, I would have thought you Scotts would :) )
munroburton wrote:...submarines qualify as direct power projection... SSBNs mostly fit into the deterrence/MAD pact side of things...
That would make them the epitome of ultimate 'power projection'. Without their ability to project power over an entire country (or multiple cities at-least) they would be completely useless in deterrence/MAD. The fact that none ever had to actually carry out that projection doesn't negate it.

Return to Free-Range Topics...