HMS Portsmouth
Thirteen
Portsmouth. I have heard that the reason there is not is because, once
there was an HMS Portsmouth, and she is the only RN ship ever to
surrender to the enemy.
Is this true?
13
Tom Schoene
"Thirteen" <th13t...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:24a6fa69.02041...@posting.google.com...
Almost certainly not, especially not phrased that way. A number of RN ships
have surrendered over the services history, though usually after a hard
fight.
The legend you mention usually says that an HMS Portsmouth surrendered
/without a fight/ to John Paul Jones. But there's a slight snag in that
story, as there was no HMS Portsmouth at the time Jones was active and no
HMS Portsmouth is mentioned in records of Jones' exploits. Since the 1800s,
the name has been used, though only a couple of times, once for a stores
ship in 1811 and once for a trawler taken up in 1915.
(This based on research posted at http://smmlonline.com/archives/VOL1272.txt
(item 13))
--
Tom Schoene (replace "invalid" with "net" to email)
We must welcome the future, remembering that soon it will be the
past; and we must respect the past, knowing that once it was all that
was humanly possible. - George Santayana
Andrew Toppan
>there was an HMS Portsmouth, and she is the only RN ship ever to
>surrender to the enemy.
Utter rubbish. CONSTITUTION alone captured GUERRIERE, JAVA, CYANE, LEVANT,
and maybe some others...
--
Andrew Toppan --- acto...@gwi.net --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
gTo
news:rqqbbu0m0i24245g2...@4ax.com:
> On 11 Apr 2002 04:02:29 -0700, th13t...@hotmail.com (Thirteen) wrote:
>
>>there was an HMS Portsmouth, and she is the only RN ship ever to
>>surrender to the enemy.
>
> Utter rubbish. CONSTITUTION alone captured GUERRIERE, JAVA, CYANE,
> LEVANT, and maybe some others...
The Enterprise too. :)
Thirteen
the modern Navy have we not had a ship called HMS Portsmouth.
Keith Willshaw
> the modern Navy have we not had a ship called HMS Portsmouth.
That depends on what you describe as modern.
There WAS an escort called HMS Portsmouth
in WW1.
In any event given the number of differing Lords of
The Admiralty over the last 100 years or so there's
unlikely to be a single answer.
Keith
Jeremy Olver
wrote to the Navy asking them to name one of the two new carriers HMS
Portsmouth...!
Thirteen
asked as to why they would not use Portsmouth as a name. It just seems
a little strange that all the other Naval bases have ships named after
the cities in which they are located. i.e. Rosyth Plymouth Chatham,
but no Portsmouth.
George Smiley
There have been 15 ships in the Royal Navy since 1649; most of which
were lost or sunk in short order. It has become an unlucky name, and
our sailors are still superstitious! In any case, there are too many
famous names to keep alive for poor old Pompey to go afloat again.
And I speak as Portsmouth born and bred!
Simon [sjen...@enterprise.net]
Curator of the Seaslug site at homepages.enterprise.net/sjenkins/seaslug
George Smiley
George Smiley wrote:
>
> There have been 15 ships in the Royal Navy since 1649; most of which
Oh gawd...the words "called HMS Portsmouth" should have been after
ships; fniger trouble again.
Curator of the Seaslug site at homepages.enterprise.net/sjenkins/seaslug
Simon [sjen...@enterprise.net]
Bradley Perrett
> I read a story a while ago, that some local Portsmouth councillors
> wrote to the Navy asking them to name one of the two new carriers HMS
> Portsmouth...!
That particular process, invariably supported by naval
public-relations officers, is a key reason for navies being burdened
with so many dreadfully dull geographical names.
When local government officials can't do any better on crime and
garbage collections, they can always tell the local press that they
have written to the navy asking that some ship get the name of their
town -- which might be fine for a town but, in my opinion, is
invariably dreary for a ship.
Then the navy PR flacks, eager to generate fond feelings among the
populace, urge the powers that be to make it so.
Of course, many dull geographic names have great battle honors. (I'm
Australian, so I know that our most prestigious name is 'Sydney'.
Yawn.) But many unused names -- especially 'fighting' names -- are
better and also have great histories.
Brad
Stephen Shepherd
To get around that, ie have a 'fighting' name and still create local PR, you can always offer the Freedom of the
City/Borough/Town etc - ie the right to march through with "drums beating, flags flying and bayonets fixed". As a
current example, HMS COLLINGWOOD is exercising the right in Fareham for the Queens Jubilee.
Chris Jones
greater the distance of the town from a naval base the better the
affiliation visits!!! I wouldn't thank you for a visit to Portsmouth on a
HMS Portsmouth or a visit to Plymouth on a HMS Devonport as matelots aren't
exactly the most popular people in these areas. It makes you feel very proud
to be marching through a city centre where the locals are lining the streets
and cheering you, and they can be very hospitable at the civic reception
which usually follows! I've had excellent runs ashore in namesake cities
when serving on both HMS London, and HMS Lancaster. Admittedly though I
don't fancy a draft to the St Albans, it doesn't sound too exciting there
(and I haven't got a clue where it is!!!)
Jonah RN