Just a snippet about surnames

We all know of long surnames and we all know of double barreled surnames which make them even longer.

I have served with officers with extremely long hyphenated surnames, but have you ever thought about what happens when a man, already with a hyphenated surname meets and marries a lady with her own hyphenated surname? Remember that normally [there are other reasons/causes, for example dynastic/alliances like the surname of our Royal Family, which is Mountbatten-Windsor] there is a perfectly good reason for having a hyphenated surname, which is designed so that the bride can keep her family name alive in the issue[s] of the marriage, and that to me is perfectly reasonable.

Does either the groom or the bride abandon their surname or do they join them together grooms name first followed by his brides name, or perhaps ladies first?

Well, the other day whilst researching the 1920's, I came across a surname with four hyphenated words. Just think what could happen if a child of this officer fell in love with a child from a family also with a four word hyphenated surname!

This, from 1925 times, is the name I found.

Rear-Admiral the Hon. Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax {in 1925}

but later he became Admiral Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax, KCB, DSO, JP, DL.

known throughout the navy as simply 'Drax' took his "extra" names from Estates he inherited from his mother: he was born Plunket. Given human nature, it is easy to see why this man might have been ridiculed because of his name, but quite the reverse was the case! He is recorded as being an officer with a "quick and brilliant brain".  He held important appointments in WW1 being Staff Officer to Beatty at Jutland.  Mid-wars, he was the C-in-C of several stations abroad and a C-in-C of the Nore 1939-1941 when at aged 61 he took his retirement from the Service. He retired to Dorset and immediately joined their "Dad's Army" as a private. Being the man he was, he saw himself back in the navy and took up a post as a Convoy Commander during the period 1943-1945 and never lost a ship. He died on the 16th October 1967 when aged 87.

Do you know of a longer four word hyphenated surname ?

New subject.

Do you know the difference between a RAF [Crabfat] pilot and a Fleet Air Arm pilot ? Well, it is simple really.

In the Royal Air Force, a landing's OK/ if the pilot gets out and can still walk away/ BUT, in the Fleet Air Arm the prospect is grim/ It's BLOODY hard luck if the pilot can't swim

Also this WW2 FAA Canteen Saying...

New subject.

As the Royal Navy's responsibilities/commitments grew ever larger geographically, more and more ships were required to meet the demand.

Originally, our most distant commitment was in China so we called it the China Station and appointed a C-in-C. That lasted until 1941, when the attack on Pearl Harbour brought the Americans into the war.  In 1941 it was up-rated to being called a Fleet, the Eastern Fleet, and that name lasted until 1944. As the war in Europe was nearing its end, this Fleet was renamed to be called the British Pacific Fleet [BPF] and in 1946, approximately six months after VJ day, it was changed yet again to the Far East Fleet, with a corresponding Station name change to Far East Station which lasted until 1971.

Meanwhile, the boys back home were undergoing changes to the same original Fleet in home waters, now with a few more ships added, and after the closure of the Far East Station in 1971, it would take yet another change.

The so called Home Fleet with C-in-C Home Fleet appointed, was, from 1914 until 1919 the Grand Fleet; the Atlantic Fleet from 1919 until 1931; Home Fleet 1931 until 1967; Western Fleet 1967 until 1971 and finally, in 1971, The Fleet commanded by C-in-C Fleet.

It is said, that at the start of the 21st century, its new name was 'The Tiny Fleet' although some say 'The Inadequate Fleet' might be a better and more fitting name. There is no doubt at all that the personnel of today are as good if not better than their forebears [although rarely tested in the same way, thank God], and that too goes for the materiel [meaning equipment] in our vessels, so the problem is simply that of numbers and in this case, size does matter in all areas of our navy.