What’s
the name of the game?
Lately,
the RAN has in the main, quite rightly taken to naming its combatants
and auxillaries after famous former RAN warships. The major exception
to this has been the Collins class submarines named after famous
or heroic RAN personnel.
It does now seem an RAN custom that the major surface combatants
of the RAN are named for not only previous RAN capital ships but
concurrently, Australian capital cities; the Perth class DDGs
and the Adelaide class FFGs are examples.
Whilst some would say that “the plot was lost” with
the Anzac class FFHs, being a historic potpourri of Battle class,
Tribal Class, River class, Bathurst class and Town class warships’
names, it is almost “taken as gospel” that the next
major surface combatants, the three air warfare destroyers, will
be named for Australian cities.
In reverence to the warrior ethos that brought us the aforementioned
stirring and bold Nelsonian ship names, I make the suggestion
that we keep with the tradition of naming our ships after former
RAN warships, but in this case go with names that inspire a deeper
emotion.
I would suggest the names Vampire, Vendetta and Voyager. All three
are names of long standing in the RAN. All not only have a historical
context but also stir a passion and emotion.
It may also be the right time to reintroduce Voyager into the
RAN lexicon after a just period of mourning of nearly 50 years.
After many years away from naming ships starting with the same
letter it is also interesting to note that the Royal Navy’s
new air warfare destroyers, the Type 45s will be known as the
Daring class. The RAN’s new AWDs should therefore be known
as the Voyager class.
There is also a certain amount of timely irony in the fact that
our previous Vampire, Vendetta and Voyager and also the later
Duchess were all Daring class destroyers.
LCDR Robert Curtis on exhange with United States Navy.
Right
of reply
The following information has been provided by the Director of
the Sea Power Centre – Australia.
When a new class of RAN ship is announced, the Naval History Section
at the Sea Power Centre – Australia carries out some initial
research, and forwards advice on potentially suitable names to
the Chief of Navy (CN) based on the guidelines contained in DI
(N) ADMIN 4-4 “Naming of RAN Ships Establishments and Facilities”.
Many factors are taken into consideration by CN before a final
decision. These include requests from civil communities and ex-service
groups to have ships carry a particular name, the actual suitability
of the name to be used, the service record and history of ships
that may have carried the name previously, and the long-term geographical
and demographic representation of ship names.
Many requests seek to perpetuate the names of former RAN warships
that have served our country with distinction, and every effort
is made during the selection process to ensure that each individual
representation received is carefully assessed.
Regrettably, the number of names will always exceed the number
of future ships available to carry them: a quick survey of the
ship histories provided on the Sea Power Centre’s web site
at http://www.navy.gov.au/spc/history/shiphistorymain.htm
will give you some idea of the breadth of choices available.
