The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.
There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).
Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.
roadtester wrote: ↑Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:44
One suggestion was that one of the Royal Navy's still-to-be-built Type 26 frigates should be named after him - one symbolic point of significance is that one of the planned jobs of the Type 26s is to escort the UK's new aircraft carriers, so the frigate HMS Duke of Edinburgh/HMS Prince Philip would escort HMS Queen Elizabeth, rather as the D of E escorted HMQ in life.
As long as the other carrier doesn't get an HMS Camilla
As I understand it, HMS Edinburgh has yet to be launched, so it would an ideal, symbolic, move - especially as none of the Type 23 "Duke Class" frigates were named Edinburgh.
The last Edinburgh was a Type 42 destroyer - in fact most of the Type 26s' names are recycled from that class.
Usually, once the Navy has decided on a pattern of names for a class of ship - e.g. all starting with the same letter, or all being named after Dukes or British cities or whatever, they seem to be pretty inflexible in terms of allowing exceptions.
I think the last time they did any non-standard names was when two of the Type 22 frigates were named Coventry and Sheffield after the two Type 42 destroyers lost in the Falklands, even though it didn't really fit in with the naming scheme for the Type 22s.
That would be a precedent of sorts for calling the proposed HMS Edinburgh HMS Duke of Edinburgh instead.
Sheffield is due to appear again as a 26, but not Coventry.
roadtester wrote: ↑Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:44
One suggestion was that one of the Royal Navy's still-to-be-built Type 26 frigates should be named after him - one symbolic point of significance is that one of the planned jobs of the Type 26s is to escort the UK's new aircraft carriers, so the frigate HMS Duke of Edinburgh/HMS Prince Philip would escort HMS Queen Elizabeth, rather as the D of E escorted HMQ in life.
As long as the other carrier doesn't get an HMS Camilla
As I understand it, HMS Edinburgh has yet to be launched, so it would an ideal, symbolic, move - especially as none of the Type 23 "Duke Class" frigates were named Edinburgh.
The last Edinburgh was a Type 42 destroyer - in fact most of the Type 26s' names are recycled from that class.
Usually, once the Navy has decided on a pattern of names for a class of ship - e.g. all starting with the same letter, or all being named after Dukes or British cities or whatever, they seem to be pretty inflexible in terms of allowing exceptions.
I think the last time they did any non-standard names was when two of the Type 22 frigates were named Coventry and Sheffield after the two Type 42 destroyers lost in the Falklands, even though it didn't really fit in with the naming scheme for the Type 22s.
That would be a precedent of sorts for calling the proposed HMS Edinburgh HMS Duke of Edinburgh instead.
Sheffield is due to appear again as a 26, but not Coventry.
The Type 22s not named after port cities seemed to be jinxed, as well as Coventry & Sheffield, Birmingham had to be withdrawn early & Nottingham hit a reef in the Pacific.
roadtester wrote: ↑Fri Apr 30, 2021 13:23
Perhaps the A1 should be named after a significant figure who links London and Edinburgh.
The D of E would presumably fit on that score but it could also be e.g. Gordon Brown Way (ducks for cover), a bit like the way Brian Clough Way connects Derby and Nottingham, the cities that are the homes of the two main clubs he managed during his illustrious career.
I believe that King James VI and I established the first regular postal service between the two cities, so maybe he should get it?
Throw the A6 into the bargain, and you could name each road after each of his regnal numbers!
roadtester wrote: ↑Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:44
One suggestion was that one of the Royal Navy's still-to-be-built Type 26 frigates should be named after him - one symbolic point of significance is that one of the planned jobs of the Type 26s is to escort the UK's new aircraft carriers, so the frigate HMS Duke of Edinburgh/HMS Prince Philip would escort HMS Queen Elizabeth, rather as the D of E escorted HMQ in life.
As long as the other carrier doesn't get an HMS Camilla
As I understand it, HMS Edinburgh has yet to be launched, so it would an ideal, symbolic, move - especially as none of the Type 23 "Duke Class" frigates were named Edinburgh.
The last Edinburgh was a Type 42 destroyer - in fact most of the Type 26s' names are recycled from that class.
Usually, once the Navy has decided on a pattern of names for a class of ship - e.g. all starting with the same letter, or all being named after Dukes or British cities or whatever, they seem to be pretty inflexible in terms of allowing exceptions.
I think the last time they did any non-standard names was when two of the Type 22 frigates were named Coventry and Sheffield after the two Type 42 destroyers lost in the Falklands, even though it didn't really fit in with the naming scheme for the Type 22s.
That would be a precedent of sorts for calling the proposed HMS Edinburgh HMS Duke of Edinburgh instead.
Sheffield is due to appear again as a 26, but not Coventry.
I think they could do DoE quite easily. DoE has been a battleship name in the past and it doesnt wreck the “Town” class theme.
Plus Scotland might be independent before it hits the water so naming it after him may neatly avoid any embarassment!
marconaf wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 22:15
Plus Scotland might be independent before it hits the water so naming it after him may neatly avoid any embarassment!
Might cause some problems with the first-of-class HMS Glasgow, though, which is well advanced in construction!
RichardA626 wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 21:59
The Type 22s not named after port cities seemed to be jinxed, as well as Coventry & Sheffield, Birmingham had to be withdrawn early & Nottingham hit a reef in the Pacific.
The ships were of course Type 42's and they were really not very satisfactory in their main role of fleet air defence. The single twin arm Sea Dart Launcher could only fire two missiles at a time and even had they been able to do so the electronic of the Batch 1's were simply not capable of handling the tracking of multiple targets. Essentially it was a system designed in 1960 and by 2000 it was well past its useful life. As I recall the main radar set (type 965) was a 1950's design that still used vacuum tubes aka valves.
The type 23 which replaced it had better radar and electronics and could launch and control multiple missiles from its VLS launcher
RichardA626 wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 21:59
The Type 22s not named after port cities seemed to be jinxed, as well as Coventry & Sheffield, Birmingham had to be withdrawn early & Nottingham hit a reef in the Pacific.
The ships were of course Type 42's and they were really not very satisfactory in their main role of fleet air defence. The single twin arm Sea Dart Launcher could only fire two missiles at a time and even had they been able to do so the electronic of the Batch 1's were simply not capable of handling the tracking of multiple targets. Essentially it was a system designed in 1960 and by 2000 it was well past its useful life. As I recall the main radar set (type 965) was a 1950's design that still used vacuum tubes aka valves.
The type 23 which replaced it had better radar and electronics and could launch and control multiple missiles from its VLS launcher
Yes, the Sea Dart was not considered a great system even when it was new, but it did have a number of kills in the Falklands and IIRC is, or at least was, the only ship-borne anti-aircraft missile to have shot down incoming missiles.
Strictly speaking, the direct replacement for the T42 is the T45, which is often claimed to have the best air defence radar/missile combination in the world.
Ok yes, the coronation was 1953, but she ascended to the throne in 1952, but why so long between the two?
There is usually a gap of about a year between the two for some reason. I know Edward VIII (the Queen's uncle) never had one.
The reason? There's a fair bit to organise, you can't just hold one on the hoof. The Duke of Norfolk ("the country's leading lay Roman Catholic", what happens if the Duke converts to CofE?) traditionally has the job of organising a coronation, so he's finding a date when most of the foreign dignitaries that you'd want there can be there, preferably when the weather is likely to be good (ok, that didn't work in 1953), you need to make sure the Abbey clears its diary, you have to give people time to have the formal dress and funny costumes ordered and run up, book the musicians, commission composers to write some new music, the security chaps have to get their game plan written up and rehearsed ... George VI was lucky, he just took over the coronation that was being planned for big bro.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums? Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
marconaf wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 22:15
Plus Scotland might be independent before it hits the water so naming it after him may neatly avoid any embarassment!
Might cause some problems with the first-of-class HMS Glasgow, though, which is well advanced in construction!
Of course there's always the option of returning to the absolutely ferocious names of the Flower class ships
marconaf wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 22:15
Plus Scotland might be independent before it hits the water so naming it after him may neatly avoid any embarassment!
Might cause some problems with the first-of-class HMS Glasgow, though, which is well advanced in construction!
Of course there's always the option of returning to the absolutely ferocious names of the Flower class ships
I suppose one of the advantages of having a smaller navy these days is that there are usually enough decent names to go around without having to have many silly ones.
RichardA626 wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 21:59
The Type 22s not named after port cities seemed to be jinxed, as well as Coventry & Sheffield, Birmingham had to be withdrawn early & Nottingham hit a reef in the Pacific.
The ships were of course Type 42's and they were really not very satisfactory in their main role of fleet air defence. The single twin arm Sea Dart Launcher could only fire two missiles at a time and even had they been able to do so the electronic of the Batch 1's were simply not capable of handling the tracking of multiple targets. Essentially it was a system designed in 1960 and by 2000 it was well past its useful life. As I recall the main radar set (type 965) was a 1950's design that still used vacuum tubes aka valves.
The type 23 which replaced it had better radar and electronics and could launch and control multiple missiles from its VLS launcher
Yes, the Sea Dart was not considered a great system even when it was new, but it did have a number of kills in the Falklands and IIRC is, or at least was, the only ship-borne anti-aircraft missile to have shot down incoming missiles.
Strictly speaking, the direct replacement for the T42 is the T45, which is often claimed to have the best air defence radar/missile combination in the world.
In fairness, the Argentinian view of Sea Dart, based on them having 2 ships equipped with it, was that any aircraft at medium or high level approaching UK forces defended by it, would be shot down long before they could attack.
Hence why all their missions were at ultra low level in 1982, that meant they were at the extreme end of their range, had limited carrying capacity and had virtually no time to accurately target our ships or forces and certainly no time to engage our fighters. As a result they were unable to use their (arguably superior) air power and our fighters were able to attack from positions of advantage.
So Sea Dart acheived a huge amount actually, albeit passively, by denying them effective use of their air power - and that proved decisive.
Sorry - contirbuted to off topic, but then some Tory wanting to rename the A1 needs moving on from anyway