posted
Well, if you people knew what it took to design and model a ship in 3ds, especially with god-like detail that alex has put into it (he told me in an email once that hullplates were actually modeled-- not bumpmapped) you would learn to respect his schematics for his ship, as I do.
The modern classifications are known to most. The modern cuiser was orginally called a frigate from 1700-1800's hopwever the French called it a cruiser. Somehom before the First World War, most anvies called their frigates cruisers. Battleship is just a shortened term from "Battleship of the Line" or "Ship of the Line". Destroyers were designed to destroy torpedo boats hence called "Torpedo Boat Destroyers" later shortened to just "Destroyer"
------------------ The whole concept of Survivor is get your average Joe and put him/her on the show and see how they react. Afterwards even though they did not win they make money by appearing on shows. There is no point in having to win a million dollars! They will make that amount in 2 months after appearing on 100 different shows!
posted
Jane's All the World's Fighting Ships uses or used a classification system based on weight alone to clear up clashes between different nations' classification systems. The 1945 edition actually lists what constitutes heavy, medium, and light armament for each nation's navy. It is relatively easy to see what category a ship will fall into if you know the design methodology of the period and have a vast range of ships to look at. (For example, if you page through Jane's, most frigates, cruisers, etc. share a similar sort of gunnery arrangement, superstructure, and hull line within each category.)
However, we don't have that in the Star Trek Universe. Instead, we have a relatively small range of ships with radically different design concepts, which is acceptable given the constraints of the series and the fact that, well, space is vast.
But it doesn't help us one bit in classifying ships. We have no standard for comparison. So we must fall back on armament, defense, which primary systems take precedence (i.e. science vs. tactical), and so on.
But in my opinion, even this doesn't help, because Star Trek vessels have such a wide range of mission compatibility. They are extremely flexible. We have seen Oberths mostly as science vessels and then in major battles. We have seen Mirandas doing everything from research, to battleship-style duty, to cargo hauling.
With this in mind, I just don't see utilizing present-day classification systems as viable in classifying Starfleet vessels.
Who knows? Maybe we'll see an Akira someday as a medical ship, shuttling medicine to a planet in distress?
------------------ "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."
posted
I think that any ship including todays battleships can be converted into whatever the Navy needs, however it all comes down to cost. For instance the hull the Iowa class Kentucky was discussed to be a command ship for the navy but it was too costly. Also several ships over the years have been modified to be crane ships, training ships, or even transports. After World War 2, almost every ship including the carrier and the battleship ferried soliders back to their home, not a big deal but transporting isn't supposed to be part of a battleship's duty.
For us we need to classify things because its easier to. We need to know what Ship A and Ship B are and if Ship C can stand a chance agianst the two. I think that Starfleet uses a new classification system than todays for example the Defiant is a escort but unofficially a warship. Now what warship means we don't know ussually a warship is a ship that is armed for war. That can be anything in todays terms such as a torpedo boat or a carrier.
------------------ The whole concept of Survivor is get your average Joe and put him/her on the show and see how they react. Afterwards even though they did not win they make money by appearing on shows. There is no point in having to win a million dollars! They will make that amount in 2 months after appearing on 100 different shows!
posted
About the multi torpedo ports on the Akira, I think it has these as a result of being an 'older' ship than the Galaxy class, which could - as we have seen done the same or better in terms of amount of torps fired compared to the Akira. If we go by the five rapid fire torps that we saw in FC, have a look at Booby Trap - which I saw again tonight (GREAT EPISODE) the 'prise fires 4 at once from the one port. It's just a matter of the tech being upgraded over time where by the big D and her sisterships didn't need 15 ports to do what one or two ports could do.
Also, did anyone HATE the way that Torpedoes were show/depicted in FC battle scene!?! Those orangey blobs were so - annoying. Fake. Dull!?! I LURRRVED the Torps as seen in Generations/TUC nice.
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
The AKIRA is older than the Galaxy class? Maybe...but I wouldn't count on it. Also, Rapid fire torpedo technology is nothing new. The refit-Enterprise was supposed to have that, witness the four rapid, consecutive shots fired at the Genesis planet.
------------------ "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."
posted
When did they fire at Genesis four times??? Or do you mean at that location, firing on Kruge? That was just two torpedoes. But it was indeed a fast volley, and the firing sound is my favourite to date. The Ent-D aft torpedoes of "Encounter at Farpoint" being the worst.
The TNG red torpedoes are also my least favourite torp FX, but I quite liked the ones from FC, especially the first two that hit the bottom of the cube, they had a nice buzz and good detonation. The "new" quantums shine too brightly, I like the Defiant's ones from, um, "Defiant" better. They weren't so goddamn slow, either.
------------------ "Babies haven't any hair; old men's heads are just as bare; between the cradle and the grave lies a haircut and a shave."
posted
The Akira class is supposed to older than the Galaxy Class - as per their registries...
We've all the way through TNG had designs and registries increasing - even into DS9 and Voyager - look at the Runabouts each new runabout has a higher number than the other. Then Along comes the REDICULOUS Seens from FC with fucked up registries... and everyone takes this a 'canon'! I mean the Sabre was 8xxxx!!!!
1. I originally insisted that the Akira's are new ships - as per their designs and nacelles and phasers and lifeboats - E-E vintage - I think they still are
2. I was trying to explain the torps away as a consequence of everyone wanting these Akira's to be like 20 years old.
I feel that the four ships seen in FC were new and prototype ships that wouldn't be very far out. They were probably all closer in towards the core worlds undergoing test runs etc. No Excelsiors, Mirandas, Galaxies, Intrepids - out protecting the outer planets from the Dominion incursions.
So until this is all cleared up - I think i'll retract my pre-galaxy launcer theory and just say this.
The theory that the Akira, Steamrunner, Sabre and Norway are new ships is more likely
1. Not seeing them before FC. 2. The look of their Tech 3. They being the majority close in by Earth
They being old ships
1. That they ALL had COMPLETE overhauls/brought out of mothballs...
very unlikely
They are Defiant/E-E vintage.
Reguarding registry numbers - which cause this whole debate. They are wrong. They were not done by Okuda they - like the Prommie are wrong in the effects but I'm sure their plaques would have the correct numbering. 7xxxx...
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
It's simply common sense. The staff decides that they'll have new ships in "First Contact". Why? To reflect that Starfleet has been doing more than taking soil samples on Theta-Eta-Crapsilon Prime the past six years. They have been growing to meet the mettle of the other superpowers in the quadrant, and prepared themselves against the Borg. It's much more credible and much more EASIER than trying to convince us that these streamlined, advanced designs already existed long, long ago.
------------------ "Babies haven't any hair; old men's heads are just as bare; between the cradle and the grave lies a haircut and a shave."
posted
Gah! I never noticed the registries in FC. *sigh* I've grown lax in my High School years. But that's a SCARY continuity error. Per everyone elses' posts, I too would like to believe that the Akira, Steamrunner, etc, are new classes.
------------------ "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."
posted
Good point Andrew about hardly any top-of-the-line ships being there except for that Nebula and the E-E. I don't think that the 15 torpedo tubes probably not standard because look at the space is needed to give all those torpedo tubes a good enough torp. complement.
------------------ The whole concept of Survivor is get your average Joe and put him/her on the show and see how they react. Afterwards even though they did not win they make money by appearing on shows. There is no point in having to win a million dollars! They will make that amount in 2 months after appearing on 100 different shows!
posted
Well said Joshua. Also, I happen to like all those "ugly" ships from FC. In fact, they were a breathe of fresh air from all the Galaxy-bash ships.
-------------------- TheTrekker's Officer's Bible: A Concise Review of the Starfleet http://www.thetrekker.org
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
