Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

United States Navy Names Ship After Neil Armstrong

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the pride-of-the-planet dept.

Earth 71

SchrodingerZ writes "In the wake of Neil Armstrong's death, the United States Navy has announced this week that a new research vessel will be named in his honor. This ship will be the first Armstrong-class Auxiliary General Oceanographic Research (AGOR) ship in the world. This ship got its name from secretary Ray Mabus, who wanted to honor the first man to set foot on the moon. 'Naming this class of ships and this vessel after Neil Armstrong honors the memory of an extraordinary individual, but more importantly, it reminds us all to embrace the challenges of exploration and to never stop discovering,' say Mabus. Armstrong, before his career at NASA, flew in combat missions during the Korean war. 'The Armstrong-class AGOR ship will be a modern oceanographic research platform equipped with acoustic equipment capable of mapping the deepest parts of the oceans, and modular on-board laboratories that will provide the flexibility to meet a wide variety of oceanographic research challenges.' It will be 238 feet long, beam length of 50 feet, and will be able to travel at 12 knots. The ship is currently under construction in Anacortes, Washington."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Juxtaposition (4, Insightful)

dtmos (447842) | about 2 years ago | (#41489491)

. . . it reminds us all to embrace the challenges of exploration and to never stop discovering.

Placed just above the submission, "Astronomy Portfolio Review Recommends Defunding US's Biggest Telescope," the combination tells you all you need to know.

Re:Juxtaposition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41489545)

First you use honourable distractions to defend dishonourable things.

Then you convince people that the dishonourable things can be honourable.

Then you remove the things that really were honourable.

Something about an Overton window.

Re:Juxtaposition (-1, Troll)

Stickerboy (61554) | about 2 years ago | (#41489663)

. . . it reminds us all to embrace the challenges of exploration and to never stop discovering.

Placed just above the submission, "Astronomy Portfolio Review Recommends Defunding US's Biggest Telescope," the combination tells you all you need to know.

That the military is the only US government entity that can see the value in continued research in the sciences? It sure isn't the Republicrat politicians.

Re:Juxtaposition (4, Interesting)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41489895)

. . . it reminds us all to embrace the challenges of exploration and to never stop discovering.

Placed just above the submission, "Astronomy Portfolio Review Recommends Defunding US's Biggest Telescope," the combination tells you all you need to know.

That the military is the only US government entity that can see the value in continued research in the sciences? It sure isn't the Republicrat politicians.

Yea, shit like this is why I occasionally pray for a military coup d'état - hey, it's not like they could do any worse than the pirate ringmasters who currently run this freakshow, right?

Re:Juxtaposition (4, Insightful)

neurophil12 (1054552) | about 2 years ago | (#41490459)

Yea, shit like this is why I occasionally pray for a military coup d'état - hey, it's not like they could do any worse than the pirate ringmasters who currently run this freakshow, right?

Except that those who might conceivably commit a coup are NOT the ones you'd want running things. There are a lot of great people in our military, but there are some really scary people too (I'm specifically thinking of the far right "Christians" like Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley), and the good people would not be the ones to get involved in a coup. Be careful what you wish for.

Re:Juxtaposition (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41491317)

Yea, shit like this is why I occasionally pray for a military coup d'état - hey, it's not like they could do any worse than the pirate ringmasters who currently run this freakshow, right?

Except that those who might conceivably commit a coup are NOT the ones you'd want running things. There are a lot of great people in our military, but there are some really scary people too (I'm specifically thinking of the far right "Christians" like Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley), and the good people would not be the ones to get involved in a coup. Be careful what you wish for.

The problem with your theory is that some of those "scary people" you mention support the current system and regime, and thus would probably not want it to fall, as that would be detrimental to their own agendas.

That's the thing about rhetorical hypotheticals - you can't honestly say, "it will go down this way," because there's no way of knowing for sure unless said event actually occurs. While your scenario holds merit, it's equally meritorious to believe that some rather non-scary people would lead the charge, deciding to honor their oath to defending and upholding the Constitution against domestic enemies.

We could wax philosophic about this all day, but you and I both know there's really only one way we'll ever find out...

Re:Juxtaposition (2)

neurophil12 (1054552) | about 2 years ago | (#41492041)

While I would not completely rule out your scenario, let me go into more detail about why I see it as being far less likely. While an extremist Christian with sufficient support within the military (as opposed to some other type of extremist who probably does not have such a power base) may support the structure of our government, such a person/group might be spurred to action by a liberal administration that has held power for long enough and/or holds sufficient majorities in Congress. I would imagine these extremists acting in the interest of "restoring the Christian nation to the ideals of the Christian founders" or something like that.

On the other hand you have those in the military who have a better grasp on the Constitution and our nation's history and ideals. At some point in the future our government may degrade the system and its adherence to the Constitution sufficiently to provoke a coup of the sort you'd like to see. However we are nowhere near such a scenario because many people still believe that we can fix the government through traditional means (elections and political pressure). Moreover, there is great risk in a coup and so it would only be undertaken by such people in the scenario in which it is fully clear that traditional means will fail AND the current administration is clearly surpassing its Constitutional authority in an irreversible manner.

A coup would result in a standoff between parts of the military and in a divided nation could lead to serious bloodshed and martial law. The unknowns of such a scenario are so great that responsible individuals would be much less likely to make such an attempt compared with those of a more extremist attitude.

Re:Juxtaposition (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41492257)

...

Well said, dude.

I tip my hat.

Re:Juxtaposition (3, Interesting)

wcrowe (94389) | about 2 years ago | (#41491497)

Well, I don't know about that. "Oceanographic Research" vessels in the Navy are not exactly what they appear. Any scientific research they are doing is in support of improving our own naval warfare capabilities, or spying on and testing the capabilities of other nations.

Re:Juxtaposition (2)

charlesr44403 (1504587) | about 2 years ago | (#41493937)

My first thought at seeing "AGOR-1" was "AGER-2" (Auxiliary General Environmental Research) aka USS Pueblo which was hijacked and still now held by North Korea. Pueblo was really a spy ship, and categorizing the USS Armstrong so very similarly leaves so little doubt about its real purpose too.

Re:Juxtaposition (1)

wcrowe (94389) | about 2 years ago | (#41494107)

Exactly. It's not like they're out there trying to figure out how to save the whales or whatever.

Re:Juxtaposition (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41496113)

That's not true at all. Lots of Navy Oceanographic Research Vessels are used by universities to do basic oceanographic and meteorological science work. The RV Knorr is a ship owned by the US Navy, operated by WHOI, and is the ship that discovered the remains of the Titanic. The RV Melville, the RV Thomas Thompson, the RV Kilo Moana are all Navy ships that do basic research. Sure they do mapping, and are available for Navy work, but they mostly do research.

Re:Juxtaposition (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41489667)

'The Armstrong-class AGOR ship will be a modern oceanographic research platform equipped with acoustic equipment capable of mapping the deepest parts of the oceans, and modular on-board laboratories that will provide the flexibility to meet a wide variety of oceanographic research challenges.'

It's a research ship, with a different funding path than the telescope. If there is any case of money from the telescope being spent on this, then it's a good tradeoff because this might actually help us understand a little bit more about the wet rock we live on. I'm in favor of looking at distant rocks and plasmas, but immidiate surroundings are a little more useful to understand.

Re:Juxtaposition (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 years ago | (#41490121)

Here, here! More funding for the study of those mysterious contrails...

Re:Juxtaposition (1)

Sqr(twg) (2126054) | about 2 years ago | (#41490553)

If you could build a telescope that could make detailed underwater maps of strategic, potentially oil-rich, regions in the North Atlantic, it'd get funded too.

Would Neil want this? (5, Insightful)

nucrash (549705) | about 2 years ago | (#41489633)

Neil Armstrong was both a humble man and a great pioneer. I can't help to ask if this is something that he would want. Yet I am proud that they at least picked a ship that would be used for exploration and not some destroyer or cruiser.

Re:Would Neil want this? (1)

Narnie (1349029) | about 2 years ago | (#41489799)

I would find it more appropriate to name a human exploration rocket, lunar lander, or mars lander after him than a boat. It's about the same as naming a covered 'exploration' wagon after Columbus.

Re:Would Neil want this? (4, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41489859)

Then you know little about the man. Going to the moon is something he did, but he was much, much more then that.
The man was a nerd, engineer, teacher, astronaut.

Re:Would Neil want this? (3, Informative)

RadioTV (173312) | about 2 years ago | (#41489985)

He was also a Navy fighter pilot.

Re:Would Neil want this? (1)

P-niiice (1703362) | about 2 years ago | (#41490099)

we need to name the first dreadnought-class interplanetary conquest carrier after him. that should cover all aspects of in him some way

Re:Would Neil want this? (1)

idontgno (624372) | about 2 years ago | (#41492879)

No, this is good. Scientific research ships should be named after astronauts, cosmonauts, tyconauts, and other kinds of space-faring exploring types.

Maybe they'll name one after Gus Grissom. And then the Klingons can blow it up. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Would Neil want this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490105)

they are called aviators.
they are better than pilots.

Re:Would Neil want this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41491999)

Yeah, it's too bad they can only name one thing after him ever.

Re:Would Neil want this? (1)

sycodon (149926) | about 2 years ago | (#41492933)

How about the first Warp Drive [wired.com] ship?

Re:Would Neil want this? (2, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 years ago | (#41489853)

"Yet I am proud that they at least picked a ship that would be used for exploration and not some destroyer or cruiser."

What, you think that a ship named Armstrong wouldn't be good for strong-arming other people?

Re:Would Neil want this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490269)

If elected president my first goal would be to commission the construction of the first ever Space Air Craft Carrier the U.S.S. Neil ArmFuckingStrong.
A multipurpose naval, air, and space defense and exploration ship capable of launching manned space flight to mars as well as naval and air defense.

Re:Would Neil want this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41493405)

Mr Coward you just got my vote.

Re:Would Neil want this? (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about 2 years ago | (#41490127)

Yet I am proud that they at least picked a ship that would be used for exploration and not some destroyer or cruiser.

I'm disgusted that they didn't pick a destroyer - because that's the traditional reward for sailors and marines who accomplished great things. (Even ADM Peary and ADM Hopper got tin cans named after them.) Even though this has lead to the amusing result of having ASW ships names after submarine commanders...

Re:Would Neil want this? (5, Insightful)

networkBoy (774728) | about 2 years ago | (#41490755)

I'm not. While you are correct that a destroyer *may* be the traditional reward, Neil was not a traditional sailor. A vessel class of exploration is fitting, as he was one of our country's most iconic explorers (that was real...).

-nb

Re:Would Neil want this? (3, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#41490503)

Also he was in the Navy so I think it would made him a little proud.

Re:Would Neil want this? (2)

Like2Byte (542992) | about 2 years ago | (#41491039)

Also he was in the Navy so I think it would made him a little proud.

Not knowing the man; but, hearing just how humble he was, I'd think he'd be even more humble after this. Proud? No.

Just my 2 cents.

Re:Would Neil want this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490991)

Neil Armstrong was both a humble man and a great pioneer. I can't help to ask if this is something that he would want.

If he wouldn't want it then it's good timing to do it after he's dead. It's not like it's going to bother him now.

Yeh right ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41489645)

Yeh right, forget the inventors and honour the drivers.. Schumacher might also get one in other part of world after his death.

Could it be? (-1, Offtopic)

na1led (1030470) | about 2 years ago | (#41489655)

Quatrain 62: Nostradamus Mabus will soon die, then will come, A horrible undoing of people and animals, At once one will see vengeance, One hundred powers, thirst, famine, when the comet will pass. I know I'll get modded down, or flamed, but what the hell.

Re:Could it be? (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41489881)

Don't be stupid. Please learn to think critically and apply those skills to this shit.

Re:Could it be? (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#41489971)

Wat?

Re:Could it be? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 2 years ago | (#41490045)

Of course you'll be modded down. So will I, and deservedly: offtopic. Hope your karma is excellent...

Re:Could it be? (4, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#41490093)

Oh no! A random vague "prophecy" that can be interpreted to fit events from nearly any period in human history! The end is nigh*!

*For some definition of "nigh" that includes anytime from tomorrow to the heat-death of the universe. So, in other words, just about as precise as this "prophecy".

Re:Could it be? (1)

bruce_the_loon (856617) | about 2 years ago | (#41490513)

Quatrain 62: Nostradamus Mabus will soon die, then will come, A horrible undoing of people and animals, At once one will see vengeance, One hundred powers, thirst, famine, when the comet will pass. I know I'll get modded down, or flamed, but what the hell.

And me with no mod-points to preserve this better. The great prophet was once again out with his timings.

Re:Could it be? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41492485)

Ah, yes it could!

then will come, A horrible undoing of people and animals,

equipped with acoustic equipment capable of mapping the deepest parts of the oceans

Soon in the news: "Armstrongs kill squid hunting whales!"

the irony (0)

Dan667 (564390) | about 2 years ago | (#41489673)

you cannot do any space exploration because the US is spending huge amounts of money on the military (that it does not need), but here have a ship named after a space pioneer to make you feel better.

cannot do any space exploration?~! (5, Informative)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 2 years ago | (#41490155)

>> you cannot do any space exploration because the US is spending huge amounts of money on the military

Seen any news about Mars lately? Thought so. Then also check out:
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/current/index.html [nasa.gov]

Re:cannot do any space exploration?~! (2)

Dan667 (564390) | about 2 years ago | (#41496217)

the US is building several aircraft carriers it does not need (it already has 11). Imagine what real work could be done if the billions wasted on these unneeded military projects was spent on something useful.

Re:the irony (1)

Penurious Penguin (2687307) | about 2 years ago | (#41490379)

Well, here's a motivational [eccentrici...gency.info] to help keep morale up. Normally I prefer demotivational posters, but Neil was a good exception. And although I'm glad the military reserved the honor for a research vessel, I definitely wish more --or most -- of the enormous budget of military could be directed toward exploring rather than what seems to me exuberant and sometimes reckless "defense". While we bicker over resources and paranoid fears, a whole universe is neglected, not least the endless one of human potential. Idealistic perhaps, but I can't resist imagining this world if all the efforts of conflict were spent on positive progress instead. But then, there may be too many Neils.

Re:the irony (2)

Dan667 (564390) | about 2 years ago | (#41496221)

the US has not defended anything since WWII.

Nice, but..... (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about 2 years ago | (#41489835)

Ok, so they decided to honor the man. Great. They even named a research vessel class after him. Spiffy.

But am I the only though who is somewhat depressed that we named an ocean vessel after him, and not a class of spaceships? I mean..... isn't that just a bit a step backwards?

Sigh. Today doesn't seem to be a good day for space, research or the human race.

Re:Nice, but..... (2)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 2 years ago | (#41489943)

not a class of spaceships?

Maybe the Star Trek folks will pick it up.

That's the best that you can hope for in our lifetimes . . .

Re:Nice, but..... (1)

Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) | about 2 years ago | (#41490523)

According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] they already have. Challenger class, NCC-57537.

Re:Nice, but..... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490005)

There's no reason he can't have a class of spaceship one day too. I don't understand why everyone is so bleak that he got a boat.

Re:Nice, but..... (3, Insightful)

erice (13380) | about 2 years ago | (#41490693)

There's no reason he can't have a class of spaceship one day too. I don't understand why everyone is so bleak that he got a boat.

Because looking forward from the era of Apollo 11, it seemed so certain that there would be suitable space ships within Neil Armstrong's lifetime. Now the hero is gone and the best we can offer is a boat with a hope that "someday" there may be a space ship. Our ambitions and expectations have truly diminished.

Re:Nice, but..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490065)

Spot on Sir!

NASA would have, but... (2)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 2 years ago | (#41490111)

How many different spacecraft are there coming on line in the next couple of years to afford naming rights?

Let's face it, the military is the only branch of government with a budget big enough to have a fleet of vessels anymore.

Re:Nice, but..... (1)

neurophil12 (1054552) | about 2 years ago | (#41490501)

Ok, so they decided to honor the man. Great. They even named a research vessel class after him. Spiffy.

But am I the only though who is somewhat depressed that we named an ocean vessel after him, and not a class of spaceships? I mean..... isn't that just a bit a step backwards?

Sigh. Today doesn't seem to be a good day for space, research or the human race.

Ocean exploration is just as important as space exploration, arguably more so. I'm certainly an advocate of space exploration, but I think the idea of naming a class of research vessels after the man is both a great way to honor him and to recognize his passion for exploration of all sorts, not just space.

Re:Nice, but..... (3, Insightful)

tomhath (637240) | about 2 years ago | (#41491361)

He was a Navy pilot before becoming an astronaut. So an ocean research ship is appropriate. Maybe some day they'll name the first permanent Moon base after him too.

Re:Nice, but..... (1)

Xtifr (1323) | about 2 years ago | (#41496065)

I'm too busy being pleased that they're honoring an explorer instead of just someone else with a high body count. In any case, there's a good chance it'll get re-used later. In case you haven't noticed, that tends to happen a lot with vehicle names.

"In the wake of..." (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41489923)

...Is a phrase that needs to be retired. Seriously, not every event has a "wake" in the manner the phrase implies. (In this case, of course a funereal wake is to be expected, but that's not the kind meant by "In the wake of...").

Buzz Aldrin must be spinning in his grave... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41489929)

Oh wait.

Re:Buzz Aldrin must be spinning in his grave... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41492607)

Oh wait.

Well, that and the fact that he was Air Force. He'll probably have to wait until the Air Force has things that spend their time outside the atmosphere.

Macho name (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490015)

It probably helps that the name "Armstrong" is evocative of strength, force and martial power. Would they still have named ships after him had he been named "Neil Wetlegs"?

wrong arm (1)

alphatel (1450715) | about 2 years ago | (#41490123)

I was certain they named this vessel after Lance, the world's most celebrated undecororated, non-ever-having-won the tour-de-france, non-medalist ever.

Re:wrong arm (1)

tibman (623933) | about 2 years ago | (#41491269)

He has to die first. Then they can name things after him.

Who's navy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490171)

Was this a US or Russian ship?

Butt Stallion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41490561)

nah, wait. That was in honor of someone else...

One day... (1)

gman003 (1693318) | about 2 years ago | (#41491351)

One day they'll name cities after him. On the Moon, or perhaps on Mars. One day there will be an Armstrong City on a planet with a Gliese number.

One day. For now, though, it seems the best we can do is a ship.

At least the US Navy got it right this time around (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41492225)

Ships should be named after a Hero, not a victim, like the stupid USS Gabrielle Giffords crap.

CVN-79 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41496829)

...and CVN-79 needs to be fuckin' named USS Enterprise to replace CVN-65 which is getting retired next year.

At least he has a good name for it... (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about 2 years ago | (#41492493)

What would happen if the first man on the moon's name was "Wussy McSissypants" or something.

Sailor: "Sigh, yes I have just been assigned to the USS Sinkable, a McSissypants class cruiser..."

For the future, I think for the next big step (pardon pun) in human achievement the US needs to find someone with the name Manly Bigpenis or something.

Neil Armstrong Has Been A Hero For Decades (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41493049)

Why do we wait until someone dies before we honor them? Is it in case they make an ass out of themselves down the road we're not stuck with tangible proof we once hailed them?

Im surprised (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | about 2 years ago | (#41493507)

Im surprised, they haven held names out to the highest bidders like USS Comcast or USS Wellsfargo.

Neo Armstrong Cyclone Jet Armstrong Cannon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41493519)

Look it up

Punny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41497089)

"In the wake of ..." I see what you did there

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?