Mr. Chavez was a Navy Veteran, served 1946-48 I believe.
Which, if true, coupled with his contributions to the nation, should have made this a non-issue... right, dear designs (again, peace to you!). So, again, my question: what were you trying/hoping to provoke? Because it looks like NB (peace to you, again, as well!) bought into it.
Greetings again, dear Jeff... and, again, peace to you! Thank you for clarifying! A little more on the subject?
Apparently, neither the policies or protocols are written in stone, but are subject to the whim of the Secretary of the Navy (per this excellent… and apparently authoritative… source):
“As with many other things, the procedures and practices involved in Navy ship naming are as much, if not more, products of evolution and tradition than of legislation. As we have seen, the names for new ships are personally decided by the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary can rely on many sources to help him reach his decisions. Each year, the NavalHistoricalCenter compiles primary and alternate ship name recommendations and forwards these to the Chief of Naval Operations by way of the chain of command. These recommendations are the result of research into the history of the Navy and by suggestions submitted by service members, Navy veterans, and the public. Ship name source records at the Historical Center reflect the wide variety of name sources that have been used in the past, particularly since World War I. Ship name recommendations are conditioned by such factors as the name categories for ship types now being built, as approved by the Secretary of the Navy; the distribution of geographic names of ships of the Fleet; names borne by previous ships which distinguished themselves in service; names recommended by individuals and groups; and names of naval leaders, national figures, and deceased members of the Navy and Marine Corps who have been honored for heroism in war or for extraordinary achievement in peace.
“In its final form, after consideration at the various levels of command, the Chief of Naval Operations signs the memorandum recommending names for the current year's building program and sends it to the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary considers these nominations, along with others he receives as well as his own thoughts in this matter. At appropriate times, he selects names for specific ships and announces them.”
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq63-1.htm
Out of curiosity (and great nostalgia), I decided to look up my father’s ships (I forgot to include the “ Ticonderoga ” which was the name I loved most. Imagine the joy of a child playing with THAT on her tongue!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy
Anyway, I now wish I hadn't, as my heart is utterly broken:
CVA-63 | Kitty Hawk | 1961 | Kitty Hawk-class supercarrier, lead ship | Decommissioned , In Reserve until 2015—Docked at NISMF, Bremerton , WA |
CVA-64 | Constellation | 1961 | Kitty Hawk -class supercarrier | Decommissioned, awaiting disposal —Docked at NISMF, Bremerton , WA |
ARGGHHHH! My [almost] entire childhood… "decommissioned"… and about to be [partially] disposed of. Say it ain't SO!! I have to get up to Bremerton and say goodbye... before it's too late. Thankfully, I have a [tentative] plan to attend a wedding in Washington late this summer, so perhaps all is not lost (or disposed of before I get there!).
But... sigh…
Well, thank gawd, I guess, for the U.S. Hornet museum… just down the street (at the old Navel Shipyard in Alameda).
Memories… oh, memories… sweeee-eeeet memories…
Sorry. Anything about ships and the Navy makes me tear up.
I [really, really] miss my dad. He was one of the good guys...
Peace!
SA, on her own…
