posted
The differences lie in the number of masts and the type of rigging, the depth of the draft, etc.
I believe, but I'm not sure that Corvettes are intended to fight in the line of battle, Sloops aren't.
In Trek you could say that one has one nacelle and the other two...
...but then you'd be heading back to the Starfleet Dynamics system of categorising ships by their shape rather than their function, which has naval precedents but which we both agree (shock!) that we'd rather not do that with Starfleet vessels where configuration has less impact on function than with wet navy vessels.
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
. . . which surely negates the need to have so many specific categories? The ones GRB mentions would do fine, and the more exact size of ship might then be determined by range and mission. . ?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, I always believed in the dual classification system. You have you general navy designations of corvette, dreadnaught, frigate, cruiser, battleship, etc, to describe the SIZE of a vessel. But then you have the 24th century designations, scout, explorer, tanker, runabout for PURPOSE of a vessel. This has been supported some in Trek
Enterprise-D refered to as 'battleship' in "Yesterday's Enterprise". This could be the Naval Designation
Enterprise-C and Horatio referred to as cruisers on two occasions, "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "Conspiracy". In the same ep, the 2 New Orleans class starships are referred to as 'frigates'. Seeing how ever said the Horatio's designation went by size, they also did it for the 2 New Orleans, calling them frigates.
I know there are a couple more out there, I just can't remember them
A ship whose primary mission is the exploration of space. Often found charting systems and phenomena at the edges of Federation space. Some larger classes also used as diplomatic ships. Cheyenne, Constellation, Galaxy, Intrepid (?), Nebula
CRUISER
A ship whose primary mission during peacetime is patrolling borders near potentially hostile space. Also used sometimes for missions that are more "military" in nature. Formerly, these ships were used as explorers are now (e.g. Constitution class of the 2240s-60s). During wartime, these ships make up the bulk of Starfleet's fighting forces. Akira, Ambassador, Constitution, Excelsior, Hokule'a, Miranda*, Prometheus, Wambundu
FRIGATE
A ship whose primary role is defense. These ships are like cruisers, but there are fewer of them, and they tend to be smaller. New Orleans, Miranda*
TRANSPORT
A ship whose primary role is to ferry groups of people (usually SF officers, but not always) from one place to another. These can range from light transports which carry smaller groups to heavy transports which are often used for moving large numbers of troops, especially during wartime. Some transports are converted for specific uses, such as hospital ships. Istanbul, Olympic, Sydney, Whorfin, Yorkshire
SCOUT
Usually smaller vessels, used for scientific missions. They perform more in-depth studies than explorers. Miranda*, Oberth, Soyuz
FREIGHTER
Obviously, a ship that primarily transports cargo from place to place. Deneva, Mediteranean
RUNABOUT
A craft larger than a shuttle, but much smaller than a regular ship, usually assigned as an auxilliary craft for a starbase or space station. Danube
* The Miranda class has been used primarily as a frigate during the Dominion War. In its early days, it was probably considered a cruiser, before Starfleet used the term "frigate". In peacetime, it is used as a scientific scout vessel.
------------------ "Although I'm so tired, I'll have another cigarette. And curse Sir Walter Raleigh; he was such a stupid git." -the Beatles, "I'm So Tired"
posted
(ok, what two buttons did I hit to clear this freaking field! I'll have to give you the shortened version.)
The chart I did for Starfleet Military Reserves website sums up things nicely.
Starship Categorization Tables. opens in new window. I don't use the category Scout, because it is a specific function and any ship can scout. Likewise any ship can survey. I've have planned my chart out according to size, purpose, and abilities. I have also invented the attribute of Mass Class, of which Cruisers hold three, Heavy to Light. I've also broken down every vessel into four types, Starships, Starcraft, Shuttlecraft, and Spacecraft. Explaination on above site.
[This message was edited by Cargile on May 26, 1999.]
posted
Cargile, I think those names are a little too militaristic....they have nothing to do with what the starfleet ships are actually doing......
Has anyone ever considered that there might not be a classification system? What if instead of starfleet desging ships to be exploreres or cruisers or frigates, what if they designed them for what purpose was needed? Let's say.....
The galaxy class was built to serve as a long range starship capable of surveying, research, diplomatic, and defensive missions.
Thus, starlfleet buildds as big ship to accomodate all of these things. The galaxy class might be called an explorer, as might nebulas and ambassadors and akiras. But starfleet wouldn't send ambassador class starship to defend a borg attack just because its an explorer. they would send the galaxy class, because it is more heavily armed.
The defiant class was built to provide a quick response to the borg threat.
thus, starfleet built a small, heavily armed vessel that could be built quickly. The defiant might be classified a frigate, along with the miranda class. but starfleet ins;t going to send a miranda class vessel on a coiuvert mission into enemeny territory. They'll send the defiant because its more hevily armed, and as more advancd sensor systems.
I guess a classifcation system might be used. Afterall, we have haerd the yterms frigate and cruiser on star trek. but I'm just saying that these terms might be lighter than we think they are. We can see from above that all of these definiytions of frigate and corvette or scout and sloop or whatever overlap. The same might be the same in the star trek universe. one person might call the USS New Orleans a frigate, where someone else migth call it a cruiser.
------------------ "How many people does it take before it becomes wrong?"- Jean-Luc Picard
"Fortune Favors the Bold."- Benjamin Sisko
"And so, the warriors, the peacemakers, the helpers, the saviors, the forgotten, and the remembered, they all signed on that data padd and peace was made."- Shannon London-Karkarsku, leader of the Unisist Movement
Captain Alex Herenwhiner, Transwarp inter-dimension timeship explorer U.S.S. Liberty
posted
Recently, Voyager was listed as a short-term explorer. I'm not going to tell the episode because I forget the name and I don't want to get the anti-spoilers mad
posted
The DS9 TM gives the class designation of the Excelsior as Explorer.
In the episode "Datalore", the USS Tripoli is identified as a heavy cruiser.
In the same technical manual mentioned above, the Norway Class is identified as a medium cruiser.
In the episode "The Arsenal of Freedom", the USS Drake is identified as light cruiser. The top speed of the USS Drake is very odd. However, since there is a lack of information on this class, I believe the issue of the USS Drake's speed is not important.
In the episode "Reunion", the USS Arcos is identified as a freighter. This class has to be one of the smallest for there is only a two man crew-pilot and engineer.
*chains 359 and Frank together and drops them into the dual-classification bucket of molasses*
I dug up an old thread I posted to the Enterforum-F, that for some weird reason I had saved.
*ahem*
quote: OK. I think Explorer just means "big ship", the equivalent of battleship but not so violent-sounding. Because they're so big and comfortable, they Explore, but like all of Starfleet's ships they have a very multipurpose role. They are generally the most powerful starships out there, so from now on replace "Battleship" with Explorer.
Cruisers are smaller ships than Explorers that stick to the inner Federation. Remember DeSoto's line about the Hood in Tin Man... going back and forth between starbase all day long. In terms of size, there tends to be a bit of overlap with the smaller Explorers, so Heavy Cruisers are generally bigger than Light Explorers. Mirandas are Cruisers as they are primarily a multipurpose ship.
There is no Destroyer classification in the 24th century. It sounds far too nasty and as Baloo points out, it's become nearly synonymous with Frigate even today.
Frigates tend to have a more military nature (though these are still multipurpose vessels). I expect the bulk of heavy Federation escorts are Frigates, and most are out there patrolling the Tzenkethi border while everyone else messes about with the Dominion. They basically overlap with all Light Cruisers, but ships like Mirandas don't qualify as one as they are more scientifically oriented.
Scouts are wee problem. Voyager is a scout, yet so are the little weeny Romulan Scouts ships and the Insurrection one.
Escort was probably just a job description until the Defiant project came about . Then a name was needed to cover-up a warship with something less toothy-sounding.
As for the Prometheus.. um.. well... how about dragging 'tactical cruiser" or "strike cruiser" out of somewhere for just this once? :-)
One last thing. I believe a class is assigned into one of the five at design go-ahead and rarely is reclassified from one to another. However, inside that classification, the terms "heavy" "medium" and "light" can be floated about, as they are relative. For example, the Constitution was originally a "heavy cruiser". Upon the arrival of the Excelsior, it probably got kicked down to "medium cruiser". (After the Akira et. al hit the scene, it might have been given the title "light cruiser" post mortem.) The Excelsior also got kicked from heavy to medium upon the Akira's arrival.
And, then, recovered from the wreckage of the Enterforum-G,
quote:OK.. may I outline my case...
As pointed out by pretty much everyone except Frank, a dual classification system is unneccessary.
As pointed out by pretty much everyone except Frank, Starfleet's vessels probably do not have very un-pc names like "Battleship" and "Gunboat"
As pointed out by pretty much everyone except Frank, words change over time and it is not at all unlikely that different meanings for current designations as well as entirely new designations exist in the 24th century that do not exist today.
My personal opinions on classification of Starfleet ships were used to create a table of the various classification's size and mission profiles. Not including Oberths, Olympics and various service ships, I classify vessels into six-odd classifications (Surveyor, Tanker etc. are classifications as well, but they don't appear on my chart.) It's sorta confusing, but hopefully the brighter ones of you should work it out quickly enough . Classification of the FC ships is somewhat arbitrary, as are the mission objectives of scouts due to a lack of info. I have followed IDCrisis' lead by having no Explorers before the Ambassador, which itself was reclassified to a cruiser following the arrival of the Nebula, Galaxy, Cheyenne etc.) http://www.geocities.com:80/Area51/Zone/6151/classifications2.htm
My definitions follow.
Explorer Starfleet's biggest and arguably best. The ships that most exemplify Starfleet's founding principles. Comfortable and spacious, they do much more than explore, but also serve as a diplomatic vessels and serve a variety of miscellaneous roles on the Federation's outer edges. Thanks to their massive powerplants, they are the closest thing Starfleet has to a battleship, and during wartime are the most potent parts of Starfleets arsenal (Defiant and Prometheus excluded).
Cruiser The term "Cruiser" has evolved from the twenty-fourth century from a purely military role to that of a mid-sized, multipurpose ship that is generally similar to Explorers, but minus some of the plushness, though like Explorers families are aboard during times of peace. They differ from Explorers primarily by their tendency to stick the relatively tame interior of the Federation as per DeSoto's line at the opening of "Tin Man". Ships like the Miranda, though smaller than most frigates, are cruisers as they serve roles from science ships to cargo haulers to warships.
Frigates Recipe for Frigate: Take one cruiser. Remove much of plushness. Remove much of scientific facilites. Remove families. Orient towards Federation defence (though not to the point of the Defiant). Serve, at much less the fat content of a cruiser. Suggested Serving: Damn Andorian Smugglers being pesky near starbase 211? Can't spare a big@ss ship to do the job? Or how about a really big shipment of antimatter coming in for use on Deep Space 5? Escorts not up to the job? New Orleans will fit the bill nicely.
Escorts Recipe for Escort: Take one Frigate. Remove anything comfortable, remotely related to science or diplomacy, or any crew not useful 100% of the time. Shrink to fit. In case of top-secret Borg busting warship, add really big guns. Cover up details from Federation civilians.
Scout Smallish and not too plush ship that is designed to do stuff the big ones can't do (in the words of Rick S. about Voyager). Not particularly concerned about cruising about the Federation stopping errant moons form falling out of orbit, they can range from Data's little overblown runabout to Voyager.
Raider Created primarily because they really don't fit into any category. While not serving as attack fighters we're not too sure what they do. Probably a little bit of escorting, a little bit of serving as a "Coast Guard Cutter" type deally busting gunrunners etc.
I do like the sloop argument, though.. the entire thing about Voyager and Data's wee li'l scoutship being in the same classification has bothered me. Sloop does sound a little weird though...
Oh, and I just redid that classification chart in the link above...
------------------ "But compared with Star Wars, Star Trek, for all its obnoxious spin-off "make it so" durability, is Hamlet and Lear alongside Saved by the Bell."
"Good old Liam as Qui-Gon Jinn, the hero in this film, is represented as fighting against the forces of greed. A Star Wars picture that preaches against greed is a little like Bill Clinton in the pulpit for a chastity-begins-at-home campaign."
-Rex Murphy on Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace
[This message was edited by The_Tom on May 26, 1999.]
posted
Frank: I knew you'd find flaws w/ my system, but surely it can't be that bad?! It includes all the classifications that are canon (that I know of), and it has frigates smaller than cruisers. Surely you aren't going to attest that Starfleet must use terms such as "battleship", "destroyer", etc....?
------------------ "I make fun of senior citizens, but obviously I aspire to be one of them, the alternative being what it is." -Scott Adams, The Dilbert Future
posted
Cargile sums it all up: the people who use terms like Battleship etc. aren't describing the Starfleet that we see on Star Trek. They're describing the militaristic Starfleet that exists in their own minds.
posted
The point everyone is missing is that these classifications aren't arbitrary; they're used in specific situations. Terms like cruiser and destroyer and unnecessary in peacetime, and classifications like scout and explorer are useless in battle.
And the idea that Starfleet wouldn't use designations like "destroyer" is pacifist propogranda.
"Send a destroyer to take care of those attack ships, quickly!" "Sorry sir, but here in the politically-correct, touchy-feely, cater-to-the-nutty-population Starfleet, we don't use terms like "destroyer." "Fine, send something! Now!" "How about an explorer?" "Sure, do it, do it! Augh! They just took out engineering!" "Yes sir, I'll send the Hubcap." "What?! That's an Apollo! Send an Akira! Send an--" *gets impaled by shrapnel and dies*
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ "CORUSCANT...DOES NOT COMPUTE...I mean, uh, you're under arrest." - Anonymous battle droid
posted
>The point everyone is missing is that these >classifications aren't arbitrary;
Yes they are. They are the accidental end product of centuries of changing ships, changing navies and changing languages. No one sat down and worked them out for any logical reason.
The Navy could call things Tom, Dick and Harry instead of Cruiser, Frigate and Destroyer and things would still work just as well.
>they're used in specific situations.
Everyday naval practice is a specific situation?
>Terms like cruiser and destroyer and unnecessary >in peacetime,
So the USN or any other navy doesn't use those terms in peacetime? What do they call their ships in peacetime then?
>and classifications like scout and explorer are >useless in battle.
They are labels for types of ship and function exactly the same in battle as in any other situation.
The idea that every ship needs two labels, one for use in wartime and one for use in peacetime is simply nonsense. One label is all you need and the labels used by Starfleet are Explorer, Cruiser, Frigate, Scout, Escort, Surveyor, etc. Destroyer is possible (lots of non-canon mentions and one reference to Destroyer wings in DS9) but Battleship and Battlecruiser are highly unlikely.
You keep on putting in these cute pieces of dialogue, but you always miss an important point. For instance with your latest effort: a commander wouldn't say send a destroyer if destroyer wasn't a starfleet term. So your example falls apart at the first line.
------------------ -->Identity Crisis<--
[This message was edited by Identity Crisis on May 27, 1999.]
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic