# Why no WWII carrier USS Trenton? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 15, 2011, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097 "2011-07-15T03:41:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Ranchoth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranchoth/32/1066_2.png) [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2011, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/41 "2011-07-17T10:08:48Z")
> [@David42](#): > > Now if you overlooked Trenton in your story, we’re gonna have to hang you out to dry. 🙂 > > JK I, uh, did get “_Taku Forts_.” That count for anything? ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2011, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/42 "2011-07-17T17:58:43Z")
> [@Ranchoth](#): > > I, uh, did get “_Taku Forts_.” That count for anything? We’ll let you off the hook on a theory that although Trenton may have been small, it was NOT minor in its effect and repercussions. The war may have ended soon thereafter if Trenton had not roused the spirits of the troops and the people, therefore Trenton was not minor. Either that or we’ll give you a chance for a rewrite to correct this OBVIOUS problem. ---
**Author:** ![mac\_bolan00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b3f665/32.png) [@mac\_bolan00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mac_bolan00)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/43 "2011-07-18T03:37:56Z")
if so, then why isn’t/wasn’t there a carrier named uss constitution? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![cerberus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@cerberus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cerberus)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/44 "2011-07-18T04:27:43Z")
Because the original [USS Constitution](http://navysite.de/ships/const.htm) is still in service. They tried to move the name, but it did not stick. ---
**Author:** ![mac\_bolan00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b3f665/32.png) [@mac\_bolan00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mac_bolan00)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/45 "2011-07-18T04:58:14Z")
good on you mate. what do you mean “move” and “did not stick?” ---
**Author:** ![paperbackwriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/53a042/32.png) [@paperbackwriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paperbackwriter)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/46 "2011-07-18T13:43:34Z")
In 1917, the USS _Constitution_ was renamed USS _Old Constitution_ so that the name could be “freed up” for a new class of planned battlecruisers, one of which would by [the (new) USS _Constitution_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexington_class_battlecruiser#Ships). The entire class was canceled as a result of the [Washington Naval Treaty](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty), however, and building on the new Constitution ended when she was only 13.4% complete. After that hull was scrapped, the name of the frigate reverted to her original one and it is extremely unlikely that there will ever be a movement to try something like that again. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/47 "2011-07-18T13:48:29Z")
Maybe they’ll just name the next one _USS Amendment_. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/48 "2011-07-18T14:32:07Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Maybe they’ll just name the next one _USS Amendment_. Or U.S.S. Suspended-for-the-NWO. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/49 "2011-07-18T14:57:44Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Well, how many carriers are named for battles in other wars? There were a couple of late WWII carriers named after earlier WWII battles, like _Coral Sea_ and _Midway_. But generally there were more Civil War battles and WWII battles than Revolutionary battles, and they don’t seem as well represented by carrier names…not sure I can even think of a carrier named after a Civil War battle. Ah, no wonder I couldn’t think of Antietam as a WWII carrier: [QUOTE=Wikipedia] _Antietam_ was commissioned in January 1945, too late to actively serve in World War II. [/QUOTE] > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Maybe because every American victory in the Civil War was also an American _loss_. Except Antietam? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/elmer_j.fudd/32/1211_2.png) [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elmer_J.Fudd)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/50 "2011-07-18T17:52:07Z")
There have been plenty of USN ships named after Civil War battles: USS Gettysburg, USNS Bull Run, USS Mobile Bay, USS Shiloh, and several more. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/51 "2011-07-18T19:52:34Z")
The USS _Constitution_ was also honored during the Civil War with a quasi-namesake: [USS New Ironsides - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_New_Ironsides) > [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](#): > > There have been plenty of USN ships named after Civil War battles: USS Gettysburg, USNS Bull Run, USS Mobile Bay, USS Shiloh, and several more. Indeed there have been, and are: [http://clevelandcivilwarroundtable.com/articles/naval/todays\_navy.htm](http://clevelandcivilwarroundtable.com/articles/naval/todays_navy.htm) ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2011, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/52 "2011-07-18T22:06:09Z")
> [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](#): > > There have been plenty of USN ships named after Civil War battles: USS Gettysburg, USNS Bull Run, USS Mobile Bay, USS Shiloh, and several more. But no carriers, excepting Antietam. ---
**Author:** ![Damfino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Damfino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damfino)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/53 "2011-07-20T21:21:13Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Isn’t there a tradition that it’s bad luck to rename a ship? A superstition but not something you’d want to do unnecessarily to a naval crew during a war. Yes, it’s something I read in C.S. Forester. Many French ships captured during the Napoleonic Wars retained their names. Example : [The Fighting Temeraire](http://www.google.co.in/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/9/94/20090723120458!Turner,_J._M._W._-_The_Fighting_T%C3%A9m%C3%A9raire_tugged_to_her_last_Berth_to_be_broken.jpg&imgrefurl=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Turner,_J._M._W._-_The_Fighting_T%25C3%25A9m%25C3%25A9raire_tugged_to_her_last_Berth_to_be_broken.jpg&usg=__qlB5mOqYrmCHtgcypYdHKyGofdc=&h=742&w=1000&sz=510&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=UTCg-8kIG58iXM:&tbnh=163&tbnw=244&ei=JUYnTrKMG4L5rQeWwoiTCQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dthe%2Bfighting%2Btemeraire%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D668%26gbv%3D2%26tbm%3Disch&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=467&vpy=106&dur=4938&hovh=193&hovw=261&tx=129&ty=111&page=1&ndsp=13&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0&biw=1280&bih=668) ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2011, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097/54 "2011-07-20T21:38:18Z")
Some ships were renamed while still in active service to free up their names for new construction. This class: [Pennsylvania Class armored cruisers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_class_cruiser), for example. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-wwii-carrier-uss-trenton/589097.md?page=2)