Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Sci-Fi
»
Designs, Artwork, & Creativity
»
The Niagara
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Timo: [QB] One has to wonder whether [i]any[/i] analogies to current or past naval practices work for Starfleet. Regarding the annoying habit of designating all three-nacellers as dreadnoughts, there is some real-world precedent there: nacelles are very analogous to propellers, and the short and long definition of "frigate" in late WWII and immediate postwar era used to be "single-shaft warship". Add nothing but a shaft and you get a destroyer. Going back farther, nacelles could be likened to the rigging of sailing ships, again a major name-determining factor. So generally, it would be easy to postulate a system where nacelle count [i]is[/i] decisive in naming. All two-nacellers would be cruisers, I guess, while all single-nacellers could be destroyers or somesuch. Yet we know a four-naceller is a ("star") cruiser... Personally, I see the Niagaras being closest to the Ambassadors in design and equipment balance (even including the apparent lack of torpedoes!) - thus, for me a Niagara is a heavy cruiser. Then again, if canon some day tells me otherwise, I'll happily accept. After all, the more designations and "roles" Starfleet ships have, the better. It's pretty silly for them to have sixteen completely dissimilar types of "cruisers"... Timo Saloniemi [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3