I wonder if no one ever gets tired about this discussion.

The Sovereign entered service after the Galaxy so it can't possibly be a predecessor. Nor is it a successor, the two ships appear to be very different in nature. They're merely different designs in use by Starfleet at the same time. The Galaxy class has not yet been made obsolete, so there's no need for a successor deisgn.

And the idea that a successor would be an Explorer II is nonsense. Starfleet has been around for over 200 years, how many 'generations' of, say, cruisers has she got through in that time? Six maybe? So are current cruisers classified as Cruisers VI?

A newer class may be given a designation such as Advanced Cruiser until it's been produced to enough nukbers to largely replace the older cruisers at which point the Advanced would be dropped. But that's mere speculation.

And, yeah, the peacetime/wartime thing is crap.

------------------
-->Identity Crisis<--

While there are oddities, like a tiny Constellation and a huge Ambassador both being explicitly called "cruisers" in episodes, there don't seem to be actual contradictions. Thus, I see little need for multiple parallel designation systems. If we can get a single designation system, even a crooked one with frigates larger than cruisers and with tiny and gigantic explorers, I think it will still be inherently superior to multiple parallel systems (even if those systems are well thought out like Frank's).

The only contradictions I can think of at the moment would be the Enterprise-nil being both "heavy cruiser" (computer screens) and "battlecruiser" "(Klingon dialogue) in ST3, and the Grissom being interpretable as "scout class" but Oberths being called "science" and "supply" vessels in TNG. But those aren't very severe problems - Klingons can have a differing opinion, and the Grissom thing is vague.

Isn't the Venture class starship from Star Trek: Insurrection considered a scout? (Venture is a highly conjunctural name for the scout ship from ST:I)

------------------
"If I knew you were coming I would have baked a cake...learned to sing....stop me Gage!"
--Aurther
The Journeyman Project 3

[This message has been edited by Cammodude (edited July 20, 2000).]

If you just beamed down to a planet and the locals were interest in what type of ship you drove I don't think you would call it a scout. Oh yeah she's ah...ah an explorer.... ah yeah.

I believe all ships that can travel substantial distances without refueling or resupply are cruisers, and word cruiser doesn't lends itself to a military designation in this case. They may be formitable fighting vessel in their own right but that is hardly all they are or ever will be. Frigate , scouts an escorts I think are suppose to be purely military type vessels with little or limited practical peace time use. I honestly think if you were going into battle you would probably want more frigates ,escorts ,and scouts than cruisers.

------------------
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/9268/index.html

• ...necessary to distinguish ships in combat situations from one another because the standard set of classifications (explorers-cruisers-frigates etc.) most likely reflects tactical ability and power output as well as the nature of the ship's equipment, operations range and common mission types.

  nor

• ...in keeping with the Roddenberrian vision of Starfleet as only a vaguely military organization that shuns violence whenever possible. How peaceful in character is a starfleet that talks about deploying "battleships" and "gunboats."

  nor

• ...even vaguely alluded as the system that Starfleet, be it onscreen evidence or in technical manuals or by Sternbach et al online.

------------------
"Truth about Santa Claus debunks Santa God. God evolves from Santa."
-Gene Ray, http://www.timecube.com

------------------
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/9268/index.html

The peacetime/wartime differentiation is necessary because what a ship does when looking at a planet is very different from what it does in battle. I would hope people could understand it. It's like classifying an orange as being a fruit and being round. Nobody is going to say that all fruits are round or anything.

3 ships
13 ships
34 more ships
2,000 fighters
4,000 more fighters
100,000 troops on 100 ships

Now tell me how confusing that is?

On screen evidence of the peacetime/wartime classfication is in The Searth Part1.

"Officially it is a escort, unofficially it a warship."
This was Sisko when referring to the Defiant. Now are we going to call that ship too in stead of it's real classficiation?

*can't*

I won't even bother arguing w/Frank on this topic, since we've all come to identify arguing with him about this (and the Defiant's length, too) is about as useful as trying to tell Omega that guns are bad and that the Earth is populated with life that arose billions of years ago.

Instead, I'll direct my comments to the other poor souls who may yet be saved, unlike Mr. Gerratana here. [Shades of Milton's Paradise Lost, anyone?]

..."unofficially" is the keyword, everybody. That literally means that Starfleet doesn't have an official classification called "warship". (I'd go so far as to say Frank would agree with me here). To go further, I have to point out that in that scene from The Search, you will note that Sisko places special emphasis on the fact that Starfleet is squeemish about having "warships." That line plays, or at least IMHO, as "Starfleet has tried to slot this ship into a category that it hardly qualifies to be in, so just between us, let's think of it as a warship."

------------------
"Truth about Santa Claus debunks Santa God. God evolves from Santa."
-Gene Ray, http://www.timecube.com