Naming of US Navy ships (and Enterprise)
- Thread starter J.T.B.
- Start date
Presumably, Starfleet went at least 84 years without an Enterprise after NX-01.
^ True dat. Also there was a fairly sizable gap in between 1701-C and D.
Sorry, I only counted the years that have actually happened so far...
We will, most likely, never see a Trek series or film that actually fills in those gaps (ENT to TOS, and Ent-C to Ent-D), so as far as I'm concerned, we're all free to fill them in as we choose.
It would be interesting to hear the in-universe reasons, if there are any, as to why the name went unused for so long.
It would be interesting to hear the in-universe reasons, if there are any, as to why the name went unused for so long.
Suspect that parts of the reason would correlate to periods where the US was more isolationist, and thus didn't replace decommed ships as quickly. That, and while it's a name with a lot of history, the 'biggest' one was the WWII one, so most of those dormant periods weren't screaming out for a new Enterprise.
Only a 14 year period between the WWII Enterprise and the current (due to be decommed) carrier. With time required to design and build the new class, plus it being in a post-WWII period that had lots of ships that were kinda surplus, that's pretty much as soon as it came time to name a new one. Not really a gap there.
Coming up next year is the first real gap where there's now a history of it being an honored namenand not being an active ship. And it'll likely resolve itself as soon as there's an opportunity. They announce names well in advance of making the ships, so there's a backlog of announced ships that haven't been completed yet, so might be a bit to work through to needing more names.
Only a 14 year period between the WWII Enterprise and the current (due to be decommed) carrier. With time required to design and build the new class, plus it being in a post-WWII period that had lots of ships that were kinda surplus, that's pretty much as soon as it came time to name a new one. Not really a gap there.
Coming up next year is the first real gap where there's now a history of it being an honored namenand not being an active ship. And it'll likely resolve itself as soon as there's an opportunity. They announce names well in advance of making the ships, so there's a backlog of announced ships that haven't been completed yet, so might be a bit to work through to needing more names.
While there was a fourteen year period between the two aircraft carriers with no active ship named Enterprise, there was a plan in place to name the current ship in 1956. So, to me, there is no gap at all.
For those who don't already know, the current Enterprise did not receive the name because the Navy wanted to give that name to her. The name was bestowed on her because the Navy entered into a contractual agreement with a non-profit group to whom they had donated the WWII ship in order to get that group to allow them to remove the ship from the mothball fleet and dispose of (scrap) her so that the Navy would not be stuck with the expense of maintaining the ship in mothball status (required in a previous contract) for the years it would take for the non-profit to come up with the cash to convert her to a museum.
For those who don't already know, the current Enterprise did not receive the name because the Navy wanted to give that name to her. The name was bestowed on her because the Navy entered into a contractual agreement with a non-profit group to whom they had donated the WWII ship in order to get that group to allow them to remove the ship from the mothball fleet and dispose of (scrap) her so that the Navy would not be stuck with the expense of maintaining the ship in mothball status (required in a previous contract) for the years it would take for the non-profit to come up with the cash to convert her to a museum.
