Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Did Starfleet use a different classification chart in the 22nd and 23rd centuries?

my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

»	Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » Did Starfleet use a different classification chart in the 22nd and 23rd centuries? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Did Starfleet use a different classification chart in the 22nd and 23rd centuries?

Ryan McReynolds
Minor Deity
Member # 28

posted

I don't really think there is too big of a deal with having two designations for the same ship, one technical and one descriptive. For instance, "K't'inga" might be the class name, but "D-8" could be the design code number or something. There's no reason for Klingons to follow any naming scheme similar to those of humanity, so I for one have no problem with having more than one name for the same ship.

Oh, and as an off-and-on student of tlhIngan Hol, I can confirm that yes Klingons do indeed use a ten-digit number system.

------------------
-=Ryan McReynolds=-

Registered: Mar 1999 | IP: Logged

Bernd
Guy from Old Europe
Member # 6

posted

I'm trying to avoid a definite statement about what the Klingons and what the Feds do call Klingon ships, and if there is an official and a short designation. Maybe it is a bit like the NATO designations for former Soviet aircraft, there was a NATO B**** or F**** designation, a Soviet manufacturer designation and maybe a design number and maybe a nickname for each aircraft, and it didn't really result in confusion.

Ryan: I'm looking for some possible Klingon ship names and their translations ("Bloody Dagger" or something like that). It should be official tlhIngan Hol.

Registered: Mar 1999 | IP: Logged

Federation Shipmaster
Kai Tak Pilot
Member # 15

posted

Or Soviet submarines. What's the deal with calling one of them the Akula, anways? It ruins the whole pattern.

------------------
What bloke invented signatures?

Registered: Mar 1999 | IP: Logged

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic