Most historically significant naval vessel...?

squeakie wrote:

searat12 wrote: Well, the Viking longship was not an American boat, but a European one, so should not count.  Also, I think you will find the Native Americans here in America by at least 14,000 years ago (some say 20,000), and that significantly predates any Chinese arrivals (I have heard some claims of stray Chinese ships on the West coast perhaps as early as 500 AD, but nothing before that, and of course, the really significant Chinese explorers weren't until the 15th century AD, and I haven't heard any actual evidence of them coming East, only to India, Africa, etc..... National Geographic has said many times that the first (and oldest) setlements in North America are Chinese, and predate the American Indian by hundreds of years. There were Chinese settelments all over the west coast. I know that in these days it's not politically correct, but this has been proven out many times over.     In the part of the country I live in there are some of the oldest settlements (Native American) anywhere, and rarely does one go back 5K years. But there are a small handfull that are about 10k years old. gary

Well, as someone with a degree in Anthropology (which I have), I can tell you that Native Americans/Indians/Paleoindians, etc, have been living happily in North and South America since at least the end of the last Ice Age 15-20,000 BP.  They are also the reason why there are no mammoths, giant ground sloths, and all the other Pleistocene megafauna that rambled around North and South America.  Yes, there is a bit of evidence that some stray Chinese ships made it to North America (evidence for which as last I can recall, consisting of a few large circular stone anchors that have been discovered), some of which might go back as old as a thousand years (it is difficult to date a piece of stone), but I haven't heard anything about any permanent settlements, or regular communication with China.  Note, I am not saying the Paleoindians made anything like settlements, as they were hunter-gatherers and constantly on the move.  But I have personally assisted in the excavation of sites in Wyoming that go back 10,000 years or more (mammoth kill and prehistoric buffalo jump sites), and certainly Native Americans had built significant cities with more than a million inhabitants at Teotihuacan and elsewhere in Mexico and Central America more than 2,000 years ago........

searat12 wrote:

Well, the Viking longship was not an American boat, but a European one, so should not count.  Also, I think you will find the Native Americans here in America by at least 14,000 years ago (some say 20,000), and that significantly predates any Chinese arrivals (I have heard some claims of stray Chinese ships on the West coast perhaps as early as 500 AD, but nothing before that, and of course, the really significant Chinese explorers weren't until the 15th century AD, and I haven't heard any actual evidence of them coming East, only to India, Africa, etc.....

National Geographic has said many times that the first (and oldest) setlements in North America are Chinese, and predate the American Indian by hundreds of years. There were Chinese settelments all over the west coast. I know that in these days it's not politically correct, but this has been proven out many times over.

    In the part of the country I live in there are some of the oldest settlements (Native American) anywhere, and rarely does one go back 5K years. But there are a small handfull that are about 10k years old.

gary

I would think a vessel like the Hunley would be significant.  From that day forward, seaman had to look below the water, as well as above.

 Grymm

searat12 wrote:

In any case, a bit more 'American' than a Viking longship,

And completely non-naval. I'm not saying insiginificant, just not within the bounds of this topic. 

searat12 wrote:

You might also say the birchbark canoe, as it certainly was distinctively American, and was used for everything from exploration to transportation to warfare...... How would the West have been won without the canoe??

taking in your thoughts, and looking back. I'd like to add the Viking "long boat" as one (but not the first) of the first boats to hit the shores of the North American Continent. Actually the Chinese were here before the Native Americans even thought about crossing the land bridge in the Artic. But wait a minute I can now see my first wife at the helm of the Viking Cruiser with her metal helmet (with the horns sticking out the sides of course). Always had an idea she was lieing about her age!

gary

searat12 wrote:

Not sure how much the boat was significant, as were the actions of its commander after it was sunk (you might say the same thing about the 'Hanoi Hilton' being significant because of its relationship to one of its survivors).......

Suh, as much as it pains my Southern heart to say it. I would have to admit the "infernal Yankee machine known as the Monitor would have to be one of the most historically important vessels at least in modern industrial history. It laid the foundation for the design of all modern steel warships as far as innovation much as the Renault FT-17 tank did for modern tank design. All modern warships (and armored main battle tanks) can trace their roots back to these two designs.    Rick Martin

warshipguy wrote:

Let's face it, guys.  American naval history is replete with historically significant ships.  That is part of the joy of having been professionally associated with the U.S.N. for such a large part of my life (33 years).  It also accounts for the joy of studying its history and modelling its ships! Bill Morrison

Let's face it, guys.  American naval history is replete with historically significant ships.  That is part of the joy of having been professionally associated with the U.S.N. for such a large part of my life (33 years).  It also accounts for the joy of studying its history and modelling its ships!

Bill Morrison

CG Bob wrote:

subfixer wrote: Ahhh! But the common word for both of these vessels is "boat" (PBR/Swift Boat) is it not? And be careful, those boats were armed. Going back to the original posting: "Which naval vessel in American history" .  A boat qualifies as a naval vessel - as in gunboat diplomacy.  For the common population (and even some who serve in the maritime industries/services) the terms boat and ship are the same thing.  You can't use size of the vessel as a guide, the PAUL R. TREGURTHA is a 1013 foot ore boat and is larger than most ships in the USN.

I see the Tregurtha where I work once a week locking in to go up the upper St. Mary's river to get her cargo. I work at the Soo Locks and I get to see her up close.

Two ships come to mind that no one has put on the table. One American and One English (Yeah I know but this one is important, 'cuz we copied it her idea, TAKE THAT! :)

The S.S. Savannah,  First atomic/nuclear drive freighter.  We never went anywhere it the idea because bad people could get their hands on the stockpile?

The Cutty Sark because she was the first composits ship and gave the correct idea that metal could be covered by wood without fouling cargo? 

Jake

subfixer wrote:

Ahhh! But the common word for both of these vessels is "boat" (PBR/Swift Boat) is it not? And be careful, those boats were armed.

Going back to the original posting: "Which naval vessel in American history" .  A boat qualifies as a naval vessel - as in gunboat diplomacy.  For the common population (and even some who serve in the maritime industries/services) the terms boat and ship are the same thing.  You can't use size of the vessel as a guide, the PAUL R. TREGURTHA is a 1013 foot ore boat and is larger than most ships in the USN.

jrb53 wrote:

BTW, after the Reprisal dropped off Ben (this also being the first vessel of the Continental Navy in European waters), Captain Lambert Wickes refitted and cruised Bay of Biscay capturing several prizes, and in April of '77 led group of 3 ships (Reprisal, Lexington, Dolphin) around Ireland and through the Irsh Sea.  There he captured 18 prizes (3 within sight of port) and returned to France. This all occured while the RANGER was still in New Hampshire being outfitted! Sadly, few know of this ship.  The media, then as now, has ultimate control over the construction of heroes.  Jack

Jack and others who are interested, check out the book, Patriot Pirates: The Privateer War for Freedom and Fortune in the American Revolution by Robert Patton. There's a lot of good information in there about privateers, the Continental Navy, Ben Franklin, Silas Deane, Nathaniel Greene, and a whole lot more.

Also, a good account of John Paul Jones and Ranger is on this web site: Ranger Barely Captures HMS Drake.

Regards, 

jrb53 wrote:

USS Reprisal - 16 guns (later 18), great account at DANFS Index of naval ships This is the ship that carried Ben Franklin to France in '76.  Ben Franklin was the guy who finally convinced the French to save the Colonists.  People have a tencency to forget that Washington's army fought with French muskets (Charleville Mod. 69), fired French gunpowder (or Dutch gunpowder bought with French gold at St. Eustatia) with French infantry beside them at Yorktown while the French fleet drove off the Brit rescue ships.  The French addition also turned the conflict into a "World War " with the Brits having to cover the Carribean plus sending fleet and troops to India.  Face facts fellows, Montreal would be the capital if Franklin hadn't sweet-talked the French. BTW, after the Reprisal dropped off Ben (this also being the first vessel of the Continental Navy in European waters), Captain Lambert Wickes refitted and cruised Bay of Biscay capturing several prizes, and in April of '77 led group of 3 ships (Reprisal, Lexington, Dolphin) around Ireland and through the Irsh Sea.  There he captured 18 prizes (3 within sight of port) and returned to France. This all occured while the RANGER was still in New Hampshire being outfitted! Sadly, few know of this ship.  The media, then as now, has ultimate control over the construction of heroes.   Jack

USS Reprisal - 16 guns (later 18), great account at DANFS Index of naval ships

This is the ship that carried Ben Franklin to France in '76.  Ben Franklin was the guy who finally convinced the French to save the Colonists.  People have a tencency to forget that Washington's army fought with French muskets (Charleville Mod. 69), fired French gunpowder (or Dutch gunpowder bought with French gold at St. Eustatia) with French infantry beside them at Yorktown while the French fleet drove off the Brit rescue ships.  The French addition also turned the conflict into a "World War " with the Brits having to cover the Carribean plus sending fleet and troops to India.  Face facts fellows, Montreal would be the capital if Franklin hadn't sweet-talked the French.

BTW, after the Reprisal dropped off Ben (this also being the first vessel of the Continental Navy in European waters), Captain Lambert Wickes refitted and cruised Bay of Biscay capturing several prizes, and in April of '77 led group of 3 ships (Reprisal, Lexington, Dolphin) around Ireland and through the Irsh Sea.  There he captured 18 prizes (3 within sight of port) and returned to France. This all occured while the RANGER was still in New Hampshire being outfitted!

Sadly, few know of this ship.  The media, then as now, has ultimate control over the construction of heroes.

Jack

CG Bob wrote:

subfixer wrote: Oh boy, here we go! The dadburn Coasties are weaseling their way into it now. The subject doesn't include vessels that, if sunk, the crew can wade to shore and await rescue! (Now to hunker down and prepare for the inevitable onslaught of return fire) The US Navy never operates more than 7 miles from land.  The Mariana Trench is just under 7 miles deep.  As for wading ashore when the ship sinks, we can eliminate the Swift Boats and PBR's along with the MONITOR and VIRGINIA.

Ahhh! But the common word for both of these vessels is "boat" (PBR/Swift Boat) is it not? And be careful, those boats were armed.

JMart wrote:

[quote user="Manstein's revenge"]Hmmmmm...careful where this is going...the political police might be watching...Anyway, history was changed; good or for the bad depends on your perspective...I. myself, don't wake up every day loathing myself because of something that happened hundreds of years ago.. I do loath (almost) every day the fact that I did not buy $2,000 worth of Microsoft shares in College, when a geek-friend told me about this "great new unknown company". Would be worth 2-4 million dollars now (if left untouched and allowed to split/roll-over). Imagine the size of the stash I could have. Heck, I could be my own Model Maniac

[quote user="Manstein's revenge"]Hmmmmm...careful where this is going...the political police might be watching...Anyway, history was changed; good or for the bad depends on your perspective...I. myself, don't wake up every day loathing myself because of something that happened hundreds of years ago..

I do loath (almost) every day the fact that I did not buy $2,000 worth of Microsoft shares in College, when a geek-friend told me about this "great new unknown company". Would be worth 2-4 million dollars now (if left untouched and allowed to split/roll-over).

Imagine the size of the stash I could have. Heck, I could be my own Model Maniac

bbrowniii wrote:

Lufbery wrote: Which naval vessel in American history, in your opinion, is the most significant from a historical perspective? Which one, but most importantly, why? So I'm arguing that those three ships helped make American history possible. Strictly speaking, those three ships made European American history possible.  Some Native Americans might consider them signficant for far greater reasons...

True enough, and well said.

Regards,