New Yorktown?

[Bob Dedmon]

The local paper Daily Press (Depress) published an article on 18 March 2026 that advocates are pushing for the next name for a Ford class ship be Yorktown. This would be the 6th ship to bear the name, their hope is that said ship would be commissioned in time for the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Yorktown.

Advocates want old name for
new ship
Wittman joins pair as they push for a 6th USS Yorktown
The final USS Yorktown was a guided missile cruiser in service from 1984 to 2004. JOHN GAY/U.S. NAVY
By Ben Swenson
Correspondent
YORK — Five ships named the USS Yorktown have served the U.S. military, and a devoted group of York
County residents believe it’s high time there was a sixth.
Frances Goodwin Holt and Sheila Noll are leading an effort to have the Navy commit to another USS Yorktown
as the nation celebrates its semiquincentennial this year, leaving ample time for a ship’s formal commissioning
by 2031 — the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Yorktown.
Holt was a civilian engineer and executive director of the Navy Munitions Command for the Navy for 48 years.
Noll has represented District 2 on the York County Board of Supervisors for 30 years.
The local effort is also benefiting from the interest and advocacy of U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, a Republican
whose 1st Congressional District includes Yorktown.
Wittman sent a letter Monday to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth urging that the next Navy nuclear-
powered aircraft carrier be named the USS Yorktown.
There are a few compelling reasons that another USS Yorktown would be appropriate, Holt said.
Among them: there have been five vessels in three different centuries that have served honorably in the Navy,
and naming a sixth would continue that remarkable legacy.
The first USS Yorktown was a 16-gun sloop that served from 1840 to 1850. That was followed by a gunboat
that was in service from 1889 to 1919.
Two aircraft carriers that bore the name took part in World War II — the first of which was sunk at the Battle of
Midway in 1942. Its successor entered naval service in 1943 and served until 1970, then became the
cornerstone of the Patriots Point Naval & Maritime Museum in Charleston, South Carolina, where the vessel
resides today.
The final USS Yorktown was a guided missile cruiser in service from 1984 to 2004.
Many people remember the different ships bearing the name Yorktown — even some with relatives who
served aboard the World War II vessels, Noll said.
According to Holt, another USS Yorktown would also serve as a tribute to the soldiers and sailors who fought
for independence at the last major battle of the American Revolution.
In October 1781, Gen. Charles Cornwallis surrendered his forces to George Washington’s Continental Army at
Yorktown, which had laid siege to the bustling port town.
“It would be a fitting way of honoring patriots who so valiantly fought,” she said.
Timing is another reason, according to Holt. Events surrounding semiquincentennial celebrations would offer
an appropriate backdrop for such an announcement.
“This is a perfect time to name a new ship USS Yorktown,” she said. “The optics for the Navy and our nation
would be ideal.”
Wittman also is working the levers of power in Washington.
The name Yorktown continues to be synonymous with American resolve, resilience and sacrifice, according to
Wittman.
For that reason and for the battle’s pivotal role in American victory and independence, he is aiming high.
Wittman wants the Navy to assign the name to CVN-84, a planned Gerald R. Ford-class nuclear powered
aircraft carrier.
“Over the last several months, I have been communicating with the administration and the Pentagon about
honoring that legacy by naming CVN-84 the USS Yorktown,” Wittman said in a statement.
“Doing so would appropriately commemorate the nation’s triumphant founding, celebrate naval sacrifice and
strength and project American resolve as the United States enters its next 250 years.”
Holt and Noll also have embarked on a letter-writing campaign to get the attention of national officials. Among
the policymakers Noll reached was Secretary of the Navy John Phelan. In February, Phelan responded to Noll
in personal correspondence.
“The process is a thoughtful and solemn one, weighing many worthy recommendations for a limited number
of vessels,” Phelan wrote. “Please be assured that your suggestion has been formally received. It will be given
full and earnest consideration as we select the names for the next generation of naval ships.”
Noll said she was heartened by the response.
“The Navy is taking it under consideration. That’s a big move,” she said.
Holt knows from decades of experience working for the Navy that nothing will happen overnight, but is
hopeful that growing local support will help convince policymakers this is the right thing to do.
“Most things of this nature take a long time, but I also know from experience if you push the right buttons, you
can make things happen,” she said.

[jemhouston]

I like the idea. I'm not sure I like the of CVN USS Enterprise and CVN USS Yorktown sailing together or just because you were president means anything other than your library should be named for you.

[Belushi TD]

Agreed.

I don't think there's been a president since Regan that deserved a carrier named after him.

I'm not sure there's a president before him going back to FDR that deserved a carrier named after him. Eisenhower, perhaps, but he was an Army guy. Seems sacrilegious to name a Navy ship after a president who was an Army general.

I am also VERY against naming things (no matter what) after people who are still alive. If you're so certain that someone deserves a ship/airport/whatever named after them, make sure they're safely dead first!

Belushi TD

[jemhouston]

I would be happy if you had to be dead ten years before anything could be named for you. I would exempt people killed in the line of duty.


It will never pass, politicians loved spending our money to have things named after themselves.


I wonder what they'll name after Clinton and Trump.


No, I don't think the Trump Battleship will get built.

[MikeKozlowski]

....Hmmmm.

They seem to have misspelled 'Ranger'.

Then Yorktown.

Mike

[Davion Highlander]

Ranger, Yorktown and Lexington would all be great names for future American carriers! I'm a sucker for the old names.


Never thought the USS John C Stennis or USS Carl Vinson were well named frankly. I mean I get naming for presidents but senators? Particularly one with Stennis's record on civil rights and support for segregation. At least Vinson was a massive advocate of the navy so I can see why he was so honoured even if a more traditional name would have been better.


Plus I think at this stage naming them for Presidents just seems to be "defacto" now rather than actually for massive service. I mean the Clinton is an obvious example of that. Surely there are more historical presidents who would be better choices?

[Calder]

Agreed.

I don't think there's been a president since Regan that deserved a carrier named after him.

I'm not sure there's a president before him going back to FDR that deserved a carrier named after him. Eisenhower, perhaps, but he was an Army guy. Seems sacrilegious to name a Navy ship after a president who was an Army general.

I am also VERY against naming things (no matter what) after people who are still alive. If you're so certain that someone deserves a ship/airport/whatever named after them, make sure they're safely dead first!

Belushi TD

George H.W. Bush is more deserving of a Carrier than Regan. He flew 50+ combat missions as a Avenger torpedo bomber pilot in WWII.

But, I would argue that we shouldn't name navy ships for ANY politicians. I would rather continue to use the old names. Throwing away our ship history of names for people who already have too many things names after them is stupid. If we are going to name a ship after a person they should
1. Should have been in the Navy
2. Won the Navy Cross or higher
3. Already be dead.

[FLW]

I would be happy if you had to be dead ten years before anything could be named for you. I would exempt people killed in the line of duty.


It will never pass, politicians loved spending our money to have things named after themselves.


I wonder what they'll name after Clinton and Trump.


No, I don't think the Trump Battleship will get built.

CVN 82 had been named USS Clinton, and CVN 83 Dubya Bush. Neither of them should have anything besides a garbage scow named for them. GHW Bush flew combat off a carrier and Gerry Ford served on the carrier USS Monterey in WWII. I can see naming carriers after them. Both Roosevelts were Asst SecNav, so they could get a ship, but not a carrier. The old naming conventions should be restored. . . . destroyers for heroic individuals, cruisers for cities, amphibs for Marine battles, carriers for battles and famous ships, etc.

[Sukhoiman]

Eisenhower, perhaps, but he was an Army guy. Seems sacrilegious to name a Navy ship after a president who was an Army general.

Ahem....George Washington would like a word....

[Nik_SpeakerToCats]

Um, given a 'New Yorktown' sounds so much like a 'New York Town', against which current POTUS carries yet-another petulant grudge, not gonna happen.
Snark:
Of course, could just lay keel as 'Item 2026'.
And, by the time some-one gets to swing the bottle of bubble, DJT will be dead, buried and safely staked...
/

[Johnnie Lyle]

Eisenhower, perhaps, but he was an Army guy. Seems sacrilegious to name a Navy ship after a president who was an Army general.

Ahem....George Washington would like a word....

We have had major warships named GEORGE WASHINGTON or WASHINGTON since the founding of the US Navy, so he’s moved from Army guy to famous ship.

[kdahm]

Um, given a 'New Yorktown' sounds so much like a 'New York Town', against which current POTUS carries yet-another petulant grudge, not gonna happen.
Snark:
Of course, could just lay keel as 'Item 2026'.
And, by the time some-one gets to swing the bottle of bubble, DJT will be dead, buried and safely staked...
/

To really get the rumor theories going, refer to this one in all of the documentation as "Project 952". Then the next one as "Project 938".

[Sukhoiman]

Eisenhower, perhaps, but he was an Army guy. Seems sacrilegious to name a Navy ship after a president who was an Army general.

Ahem....George Washington would like a word....

We have had major warships named GEORGE WASHINGTON or WASHINGTON since the founding of the US Navy, so he’s moved from Army guy to famous ship.

Fair enough. There was also a SSBN named after Andrew Jackson. Grant too it seems.

Navy likes prominent enough US Generals

[Nightwatch2]

Ahem....George Washington would like a word....

We have had major warships named GEORGE WASHINGTON or WASHINGTON since the founding of the US Navy, so he’s moved from Army guy to famous ship.

Fair enough. There was also a SSBN named after Andrew Jackson. Grant too it seems.

Navy likes prominent enough US Generals

And Patrick Henry

[Rocket J Squrriel]

Ahem....George Washington would like a word....

We have had major warships named GEORGE WASHINGTON or WASHINGTON since the founding of the US Navy, so he’s moved from Army guy to famous ship.

Fair enough. There was also a SSBN named after Andrew Jackson. Grant too it seems.

Navy likes prominent enough US Generals

And Bobby Lee. George Marshall, and Henry Stimson.

The 41 for Freedom!

[M.Becker]

Let's hope this ends the tradition of naming ships after presidents.

[Belushi TD]

Oh, I'm in favor of naming SSBNs after presidents. They possess the most destructive capability of any ship, and it does my heart good knowing that the only time they make the news is if someone f&cked up.

However, don't name anything after anyone until they're safely dead. Use appropriate measure to ensure they're dead.

Bush 1 wouldn't bother me if they named a destroyer after him. He did serve in WWII as noted above. A carrier is NOT appropriate. Vinson was a huge navy advocate, and I seem to recall they named it after him rather than someone else who was even more objectionable. However, that may be my brain confabulating stories. Does anyone have any knowledge of that?

Stennis always confused me, unless they named it after him to keep from naming it after someone else as well.

Washington was the father of our country. The ships have not been named after Washington, the general. The first one was named after Washington, the father of the country. If I understand the naming conventions properly, the succeeding ships have been named to honor the preceding ships, rather than the person.

Belushi TD

[MikeKozlowski]

Oh, I'm in favor of naming SSBNs after presidents. They possess the most destructive capability of any ship, and it does my heart good knowing that the only time they make the news is if someone f&cked up.

However, don't name anything after anyone until they're safely dead. Use appropriate measure to ensure they're dead.

Bush 1 wouldn't bother me if they named a destroyer after him. He did serve in WWII as noted above. A carrier is NOT appropriate. Vinson was a huge navy advocate, and I seem to recall they named it after him rather than someone else who was even more objectionable. However, that may be my brain confabulating stories. Does anyone have any knowledge of that?

Stennis always confused me, unless they named it after him to keep from naming it after someone else as well.

Washington was the father of our country. The ships have not been named after Washington, the general. The first one was named after Washington, the father of the country. If I understand the naming conventions properly, the succeeding ships have been named to honor the preceding ships, rather than the person.

Belushi TD

....Here's the issue with Stennis - the Senator was a huge backer of the USN. He was also a vicious, brutal, die-hard segregationist, and if any ship should have been renamed during The Great Confederate Purge, it should have been the ship her crew calls Johnny Reb.

But - and this is the important part - Stennis was a Democratic senator, and there were/are LOTS of Congresscritters who knew him. Change the name on the CVN, and there's no telling where things could go (sarc/off). Was never going to happen. And worse still, several African American USN officers have written public commentary on how they feel having to serve aboard a ship named for that man.

Mike

[M.Becker]

....Here's the issue with Stennis - the Senator was a huge backer of the USN. He was also a vicious, brutal, die-hard segregationist, and if any ship should have been renamed during The Great Confederate Purge, it should have been the ship her crew calls Johnny Reb.

Mike

Maybe Karma will get to it after the Midterms and the USN gets a Hornet?

[Bob Dedmon]

Um, given a 'New Yorktown' sounds so much like a 'New York Town', against which current POTUS carries yet-another petulant grudge, not gonna happen.
Snark:
Of course, could just lay keel as 'Item 2026'.
And, by the time some-one gets to swing the bottle of bubble, DJT will be dead, buried and safely staked...
/

If approved the ship will just be named Yorktown.