Not exactly bubbling over with posts, are we? This is usually the busiest Forum of the lot.
So, isn't it about time we sorted what new ships we've seen this year, before the, er, 'ships hit the finale,' as it were?
------------------ "Some day this war's gonna end. . ."
- Lt. Col. Kilgore
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
New ships? Or new ship classes? If the latter, then we've seen, well, none, unless I'm forgetting something. If the former... I'd have to go back to the tapes.
------------------ -=Ryan McReynolds=-
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
If it's ship names...the Nebula class T'Kumbra from "Take Me Out..." and the Intrepid class Bellerophon from "Inter Arma..."
Also, the infamous USS Curry, the USS Destiny...the USS Sentinel, I believe. Classes unknown.
I'm sure there are a few others. Was the USS Tombaugh from this season or last?
------------------ "I'll be the sky above the Ganges I'll be the vast and stormy sea. I'll be the lights that guide you inward. I'll be the visions you will see." -- R.E.M.
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
The Tombaugh is from Voyager, actually.
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Alright, here are what I got:
Destiny ("Shadows And Symbols")
T'Kumbra, Nebula class ("Take Me Out To The Holosuite")
Farragut, Excelsior class ("Chrysalis")
Wyoming (already known, destroyed)("The Siege of AR-558")
Veracruz ("The Siege of AR-558")
Grissom (already known, destroyed)("Field of Fire")
Strata ("Field of Fire")
Truman ("Field of Fire")
Hornet (already known)("Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges")
Bellerephon NCC-74705, Intrepid class ("Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges")
------------------ "The one, the only, THE 359!"
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Actually, we never saw the Farragut. We only saw an Excelsior class ship docked at the end of the episode and the mutants had already departed at that time. It makes more sense (to me anyway) that the Farragut should not be an Excelsior class ship seeing as how the last Farragut was a Nebula.
I know there are folks here (at least there used to be) that believe that the Excelsior class is still in production, but I highly doubt this.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I agree with shipbuilder, although I haven't seen the episode yet. An Excelsior class Farragut is not credible, unless a ship has been renamed in honor of the destroyed Nebula class ship.
Why wouldn't they still be building Excelsior-class ships? There are some with registries in the Nebula range anyway...
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
The only Excelsior class ship with a high registry is the Melbourne, but that's because the class was changed (bad enough).
I can't believe that Excelsior ships are still being built because there are around a dozen known classes and possibly some more unknown newer classes of about the same size. Did all of them turn out inferior to the good old Excelsior? This might apply to the Ambassador, which has not been sighted for a long time. However, didn't starships evolve in the last 80 years? The question remains the same if we assume that it is easy to upgrade older ships or build new ones that incorporate the upgrades from the very beginning. Why do the starship engineers put so many efforts in developing new classes?
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
Perhaps the Excelsior-class is old enough that they've perfected the design, while keeping up with technological advances. Hence, they can be easily mass-produced and such.
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I could believe that if production of the Excelsior continued while the successor type is being built. However, there are about two more generations in between.
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Also, the only few known commissioning dates point to a particular lineage of the ships. Constitution-Excelsior-Ambassador-Neb/Galaxy-Intrepid/Defiant-Sovereign. Refitting a ship can only go so far, eventually your structural materials will begin to break down due to radiation exposure, atmospheric exposure (from inside the ship) etc. The one eternal truth in Materials Science is that corrosion WILL happen, regardless of your technological prowess. Whether it will cause a disaster is another question altogether.
The only way it could have been the Farragut is as Bernd noted, that she was renamed in honor of the lost Nebula Farragut, but that seems unlikely due to the ship's crew and CO probably not taking it too kindly. With Starfleet still apparently pumping out new ships, surely they could have bestowed a non-commissioned ship with the Farragut name.
Maybe we'll find out when the updated Encyclopedia hits the stands.
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
I still don't see why Starfleet couldn't be building all-new Excelsiors.
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by Montgomery (Member # 23) on :
It could, but over 100 years it would seem inconsistent with all the new advances. Would YOU build yourself an Excelsor when you could have an Akira for similar amounts of raw materials?
Also the longevity of the excelsior is a curiosity when you consider the Constitution was phased out long ago.
I prefer to tink of the fleet being augmented by new, cooler ships with big glowing blue nacelles, sleek lines and a general sharp look.
------------------ "...And Monty fans may like to know about these special books, available from all good bookshops..."
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
Well, what you'd like or what you'd think would be reasonable is often very different from reality.
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
I don't see why chaning a ship name is a problem. The US Navy does it all the time. Look at the first US Carrier, USS Langley CV-1. She was originally USS Jupiter, but was renamed. I knowthere are countless other ships in the USN that have been renamed.
------------------ "The one, the only, THE 359!"
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
Why would they change a ship name, though? Starfleet probably has more ships than names...
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
It kinda makes you wonder why there are more Excelsior classes then there are Excelsior upgrades....
------------------ "Please state the nature of the medical emergency." -EMH
Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :
And remember we saw The Farragut-Nebula Class in Generationsin case some one was wondering
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Grimlock: "You are creator?" Primacron: "Unfortunately...yes."
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Frank: What about advancements in warp field theory that require different types of hull shapes?? It simply wouldn't be enough to add a new warp engine systems (not just the cores (aka Lakota), we know that geometry plays a part in it as well. Dropping in a new core probably gives them more power and some increase in warp field efficiency, but it reaches a max point of effectiveness.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Actually, the most advanced warp technolgy doesn't need to worry about the physical geometry of the ship at all.
------------------ "I'll turn everything around and confuse you. I'll fix it so you can't remember what was true." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Sol System: I hope hull geometry will continue to play a role. We must not allow kitbashed ships of whatever bizarre structure the modelers can imagine.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, it's just a matter of example. The most advanced warp technology we've seen is in the hands of the Borg, and they obviously have little concern for such...primitive warp theories.
------------------ "I'll turn everything around and confuse you. I'll fix it so you can't remember what was true." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
Shipbuilder: If they really cared about the shape of ships, then why do they build the abominations we saw in the DS9 Tech Manual?
All-new designs would be great, sure. But they aren't cost-effective, for either Starfleet or Paramount.
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Dead End: "If we surrender our energon we're doomed." Breakdown: "And if we don't we're doomed too." Dead End: "Face it. We're doomed."
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Frank: I didn't say that they would have to rely on geometry solely, but to produce a truly efficient warp power system, geometry is a key factor. Based on this, you can see a definate change in geometry as the ship classes advance. I think we've discussed this before in another post and we agreed the hack-jobs would most probably be slower or at least much less efficient than a ship truly designed from the keel-up as a total "package" warp vehicle.
Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :
First One: I was going to make a thread about that today.
Posted by Galen (Member # 72) on :
Also USS Musashi from "Faith Treachery and the Rio Grande"
------------------ How many people does it take Admiral before it becomes wrong?
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
Ha ha ha
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Dead End: "If we surrender our energon we're doomed." Breakdown: "And if we don't we're doomed too." Dead End: "Face it. We're doomed."
