Flare Sci-fi Forums
Flare Sci-Fi Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » 32nd Century Ships (Page 2)

  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: 32nd Century Ships
Spike
Pathetic Vampire
Member # 322

 - posted      Profile for Spike     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So Starfleet ist still pretty much a 20th century Homo sapiens club with a touch of BLM.

Intrepid is the only class with a remotely Starfleet look. The rest are just weird shapes, more befitting for one of these cheap Syfy TV shows.

I'm impressed by the huge amount of creativity spent on the registry numbers.

[ January 07, 2021, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: Spike ]

--------------------
"Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon

Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged
Lee
I'm a spy now. Spies are cool.
Member # 393

 - posted      Profile for Lee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There could be a good reason for a lot of the ships we’ve seen having 325xxx or even 3250xx registries - perhaps they were newly-built or about to be commissioned ships which weren’t powered up or even fuelled, and so escaped being destroyed in the Burn.

--------------------
Never mind the Phlox - Here's the Phase Pistols

Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged
Spike
Pathetic Vampire
Member # 322

 - posted      Profile for Spike     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So this is what we have so far. Did I forget something?

USS Annan* NCC-325051* Saturn class*
USS Armstrong NCC-317659 Constitution class
USS Cuyahoga
USS Giacconi NCC-316608
USS Hiraga Gennai
USS Jubayr* NCC-325068* Courage class*
USS Le Guin NCC-325060* Mars class*
USS Maathai* NCC-325023* Angelou class*
USS Noble NCC-325002 Constitution class
USS Nog NCC-325070 Eisenberg class*
USS Reliant NCC-1864-M Constitution class
USS Song NCC-325084 Courage class*
USS Tikhov NCC-1067-M
USS Voyager NCC-74656-J Intrepid class
USS Yelchin NCC-4774-E
NCC-325019
NCC-325072

*Behind the scenes sources

--------------------
"Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon

Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged
Lee
I'm a spy now. Spies are cool.
Member # 393

 - posted      Profile for Lee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don’t have my list handy, but that looks about right.

NCC-325072 is the USS Hansando - the name is legible onscreen but it’s so close up you can’t tell which class it is.

https://twitter.com/gaghyogi49/status/1329853611564789764

There are still three classes unnamed: the flattened-capital-J-shaped ship (with four or eight nacelles if Jorg’s analysts is right) which has the 325019 reg; the four-nacelled ship; and the dual-long-nacelled one.

https://twitter.com/gaghyogi49/status/1349412689676742658

--------------------
Never mind the Phlox - Here's the Phase Pistols

Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dukhat
Hater of Stock Footage
Member # 341

 - posted      Profile for Dukhat     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think the Hansando is the four-nacelled ship (the one that looks similar to the Section 31 four nacelled ship.)

--------------------
"A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425

 - posted      Profile for WizArtist II     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There has to come a point where there is a reset of the numbers. It has happened before in real world and realistically should happen in the fantasy/sci-fi realm too.

For example the "Century Series" aircraft were all labled F-101, F-104 etc. then it was reset where numbers designations became F-14, F-15, F-16 etc. I realize this is a different format as it should be compared with Carrier hull numbers i.e. CVN-65, CVN-80 etc. but the number of hulls created in real life vs. the sci-fi realm is staggeringly different. There should either be a type classification such as "BB" for Battleship "CVN" for carrier etc. or a more organized numbering system.

IIRC, in TOS, there were only a DOZEN Constitution class starships. Now it seems like there are hundreds if not thousands of ships of the same class all needing absurdly long hull numbers. While this looks really cool on screen, the reality is that this actually dilutes the value of ANY individual ship. It's just another brick in the wall.

--------------------
There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.

Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Shik
There's a million things I haven't done, but just you wait
Member # 343

 - posted      Profile for Shik     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by WizArtist II:
There has to come a point where there is a reset of the numbers. It has happened before in real world and realistically should happen in the fantasy/sci-fi realm too.

For example the "Century Series" aircraft were all labled F-101, F-104 etc. then it was reset where numbers designations became F-14, F-15, F-16 etc. I realize this is a different format as it should be compared with Carrier hull numbers i.e. CVN-65, CVN-80 etc. but the number of hulls created in real life vs. the sci-fi realm is staggeringly different. There should either be a type classification such as "BB" for Battleship "CVN" for carrier etc. or a more organized numbering system.

IIRC, in TOS, there were only a DOZEN Constitution class starships. Now it seems like there are hundreds if not thousands of ships of the same class all needing absurdly long hull numbers. While this looks really cool on screen, the reality is that this actually dilutes the value of ANY individual ship. It's just another brick in the wall.

Where's Jonah to once again tell us about what Matt Jeffries REALLY planned with hull numbers?

--------------------
"I never agreed with Jefferson once—we have fought on like seventy-five different fronts. But when all is said & all is done...Jefferson HAS beliefs; Burr has none."

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Shik
There's a million things I haven't done, but just you wait
Member # 343

 - posted      Profile for Shik     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Jokes aside, though, the amount of ships in 32Fleet generally depends on 1) what missions they're handling & where, & 2) what tech level they're at.

For late 24th/early 25th century, I postulated in my work a Starfleet of ~65,000 ships because the mission needs & the level of drive tech required that. But if by 3189 they can hit the Ocampan homeworld in the span of 2 years, then that dramaticlly reduces the needed number of ships; at those speeds, a fleet of, say, 600 could cover the entire galaxy. If the assurances of "not another Burn" are accepted, that means shipbuilding can renew, exploration can return, & the existing fleet doesn't need to stay so close to home all the time. Once that level of operation goes extragalactic, then there would probably be a needed return to tens of thousands of ships.

Also, who's going to crew them? If the Federation is that drastically reduced, then manpower issues require a reduced fleet, unless there are mostly or fully holo-crewed ships out there.

--------------------
"I never agreed with Jefferson once—we have fought on like seventy-five different fronts. But when all is said & all is done...Jefferson HAS beliefs; Burr has none."

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dukhat
Hater of Stock Footage
Member # 341

 - posted      Profile for Dukhat     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree with Wizartist. In my opinion, by 2499 PIC should have had starship registries with a different prefix, say NCV instead of NCC (which VOY even had precedence for with the Relativity’s registry), and start the numbering over. So those Inquiry class ships could have been NCV-01 to NCV-200 or whatever. And definitely by the 31st century, Starfleet should have switched over to a different numbering system, yet 700 years after the TNG era they’re still using NCC numbers.

--------------------
"A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Krenim
Unholy Triangle Fella
Member # 22

 - posted      Profile for Krenim     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Star Trek Online is about to add the Intrepid II class to the game, renamed the much more reasonable Janeway class.

--------------------
"Kirito? I killed a thing and now it says I have XPs! Is that bad? Am I dying?"

-Asuna, Episode 2, Sword Art Online Abridged

Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Shik
There's a million things I haven't done, but just you wait
Member # 343

 - posted      Profile for Shik     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Still ugly tho

--------------------
"I never agreed with Jefferson once—we have fought on like seventy-five different fronts. But when all is said & all is done...Jefferson HAS beliefs; Burr has none."

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Lee
I'm a spy now. Spies are cool.
Member # 393

 - posted      Profile for Lee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Is this going to be another one of those not-really-canon-but-might-as-well-be-as-it’ll-never-be-contradicted-by-proper-canon facts?

And, ugh. WTF is it with all the VOY veneration? Why does Janeway get a class named after her? Is what the ship did really all that special? Some obviously think so (you should have seen the outrage when I asked this on Twitter. “But she destroyed the Borg,” they sobbed furiously.* Really looking forward to rubbing it in their faces when the Borg are inevitably brought back in DSC - which they’re bound to do).

*There being Borg obviously live & assimilatin’ in the LDS titles seems to escape their notice

--------------------
Never mind the Phlox - Here's the Phase Pistols

Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged
137th Gebirg
Member
Member # 2692

 - posted      Profile for 137th Gebirg     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Cross-marketing for the new Prodigy show. [Big Grin]
Registered: Sep 2013  |  IP: Logged
Shik
There's a million things I haven't done, but just you wait
Member # 343

 - posted      Profile for Shik     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lee:
And, ugh. WTF is it with all the VOY veneration? Why does Janeway get a class named after her? Is what the ship did really all that special?

Kristen Beyer is part of the writing staff.

--------------------
"I never agreed with Jefferson once—we have fought on like seventy-five different fronts. But when all is said & all is done...Jefferson HAS beliefs; Burr has none."

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Krenim
Unholy Triangle Fella
Member # 22

 - posted      Profile for Krenim     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So... the Courage-class is coming to STO next week.

Why do I bring this up? Because the ship's "gimmick" is that the player decides which end of the ship is "front" and which end is "back", with different abilities in each mode.

The cynic in me is wondering if anybody thought out which end is which when designing it.

--------------------
"Kirito? I killed a thing and now it says I have XPs! Is that bad? Am I dying?"

-Asuna, Episode 2, Sword Art Online Abridged

Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


© 1999-2008 Solareclipse Network.

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3