quote:Originally posted by Timo: Or then "long range tactical cruiser" is your typical manufacturer nonsense, and the ship in actual practice will be known as a run-of-the-mill "light cruiser".
It's an old marketing trick to invent flashy new names for things that in practice fall neatly into existing niches. From what we saw of the Prometheus, she could simply be the next Intrepid with one fancy extra feature (for which the user might never figure a good use). "Warship", my ass. She has fewer phaser strips than the Intrepid (or the Nova!), and no visible torpedo launchers. She's probably still half-finished anyway.
Timo Saloniemi
I don't think Starfleet needs to resort to marketing tricks. Who does it need to sell them to?
Multi Vector Assault, Ablative Armour, Regenerative Shielding, (apparently) regenerating weapons systems - it doesn't seem very Voyager-ish to me.
Any ship that can obliterate a Romulan Warbird in a few seconds is no Light Cruiser, in my opinion.
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Starfleet is the sucker that buys these things, not the manufacturer. In most cases nowadays, the ASDB seems to be the seller. And regenerative shields is what Kirk already had - give them a minute's rest and they are good as new. I think Starfleet is being had, big time.
Anyway, if this tech pans out, then it stands to reason that the Prometheii will be among the lighter ships to be built to this standard. Better reserve the more impressive names for the bigger ships that will follow. Ships comparable in size to the Ambassadors at least, since that's the known heavy cruiser yardstick for the 24th century.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Starfleet is the sucker that buys these things, not the manufacturer. In most cases nowadays, the ASDB seems to be the seller. And regenerative shields is what Kirk already had - give them a minute's rest and they are good as new. I think Starfleet is being had, big time.
When did they say the ASDB is selling them? Don't all the dedication plaques have Starfleet personnel as the design teams? Didn't Sisko help to design the Defiant? Aren't they all built in SF shipyards?
And if the Regenerative Shields weren't something new (as in uber-fast regeneration during battle) they wouldn't have bothered mentioning them.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Anyway, if this tech pans out, then it stands to reason that the Prometheii will be among the lighter ships to be built to this standard. Better reserve the more impressive names for the bigger ships that will follow. Ships comparable in size to the Ambassadors at least, since that's the known heavy cruiser yardstick for the 24th century.
I got the impression that the Prometheus Class would be the only one like it (with MVAM anyway). Any smaller, and it would be too fragile, any bigger and it would lose maneuverability and speed, some of its main advantages. There would be no point in an Ambassador Class sized ship trying to separate - it would be too slow.
I really can't reconcile the Prometheus being classified as less powerful than a Nebula (which it pummelled) and an Ambassador (which is already 50-odd years old, and still called a HC).
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
But Starfleet most likely doesn't take firepower as the decisive factor in categorising ships. Sure, the brand new Prometheus class Cruiser could have more firepower than the Nebula class Explorer, but it doesn't remotely have the same amount of labs and sensors. I can't imagine a Prometheus being sent on a "continuing mission to seek out new life", not least because you'd have to maintain everyting in three-fold.
And with regards to that classification, I'd rather believe it's a "long-range tactical Cruiser" than a "Long-Range Tactical Cruiser", if you know what I mean.
Starfleet calling a Klingon ship a Battlecruiser, and Klingons calling a Starfleet ship a Battlecruiser seems, in light of all the other supporting evidence on the two race's/organization's nomenclatures, to be a Klingon thing.
Don't know if I've mentioned my Ambassador conclusions on here yet, but I think we also have Explorer-Ambassadors. The ones in the Enterprise-C configuration are the Explorers, while the ones in the Yamaguchi configuration are the Heavy Cruisers. The differences are minor, but permanent enough I don't think it's something that would be possible in a spacedock layover. Enough plumbing and positioning changes are involved that they have to be intended and built - from the keel up - as one or the other. I apply the same process retroactively to the Excelsior class. The stock Excelsiors, whether with one or two deflection crystals, are the Heavy Cruisers. The later Enterprise-B-style ships are the Explorers. That handily answers why Starfleet would continue ordering ships of the earlier design after the later design was introduced.
By that token, I include "Tactical Cruiser" in my type designation glossary as a Cruiser-sized vessel with more of an emphasis placed on fleet actions, combat capability, and/or border patrols along contested boundaries than your run-of-the-mill multimission Cruiser (Light, Regular, or Heavy).
That's all my rambling at the moment... --Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
It could also be that the E-C was an Explorer, yet would have become a Heavy Cruiser had she survived until the 2360s.
In any case, the Prometheus is neither Long Range Tactical Cruiser nor long range tactical Cruiser. The episode dialogue merely says the was "designed for deep space tactical missions". The size of the vessel suggests a Cruiser designation, although only in the sense that she's between the Constellation and Ambassador canonical 24th century cruisers in size - the size would also match the Frigate designation of the New Orleanses just fine.
quote:Originally posted by Harry: But Starfleet most likely doesn't take firepower as the decisive factor in categorising ships. Sure, the brand new Prometheus class Cruiser could have more firepower than the Nebula class Explorer, but it doesn't remotely have the same amount of labs and sensors. I can't imagine a Prometheus being sent on a "continuing mission to seek out new life", not least because you'd have to maintain everyting in three-fold.
And with regards to that classification, I'd rather believe it's a "long-range tactical Cruiser" than a "Long-Range Tactical Cruiser", if you know what I mean.
As Explorer has never been mentioned in dialogue, is the only classification anyone mentions that isn't in use now, and is completely meaningless and silly, I tend to deny its existence.
Also, the classifications are generally used most for battle anyway, to state a ship's tactical ability. I doubt a Vorta commander would be very pleased if his tactical officer told him a Federation Light Cruiser or Frigate was on an intercept course and the Prometheus turned up. And "but it doesn't have many labs or sensors, sir!" wouldn't help the tactical officer much either.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: It could also be that the E-C was an Explorer, yet would have become a Heavy Cruiser had she survived until the 2360s.
In any case, the Prometheus is neither Long Range Tactical Cruiser nor long range tactical Cruiser. The episode dialogue merely says the was "designed for deep space tactical missions". The size of the vessel suggests a Cruiser designation, although only in the sense that she's between the Constellation and Ambassador canonical 24th century cruisers in size - the size would also match the Frigate designation of the New Orleanses just fine.
Timo Saloniemi
Thanks for the clarification. I have watched MIAB too many times, and didn't think that classification was mentioned.
In that case, I am inclined to give it the only other canon classification that fits, Dreadnought. After all, isn't a Dreadnought designed for deep space tactical missions?
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Uhm... "MIAB"? Shouldn't that be "Ship In A Bottle" or "SIAB"? Or am I off my rocker and this isn't referring to the "Star Trek: Voyager" (VOY) episode?
Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Griffworks: Uhm... "MIAB"? Shouldn't that be "Ship In A Bottle" or "SIAB"? Or am I off my rocker and this isn't referring to the "Star Trek: Voyager" (VOY) episode?
It's "Message in a Bottle".
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
SiaB is a TNG episode with Moriarty... MiaB is a VGR episode with Andy Dick
have we found an episode that could be abbreviated MOAB yet?
BTW, most SotSF apologists have reconciled 'Explorer' to be the short form of 'Exploratory Cruiser' or 'Heavy' or 'Large' Exploratory Cruiser.
I question whether the Ambassadors would be retypified from EXs to HCs in the post Galaxy-era (since they still seem to be quite similar in capability to the GCS) but I think the Excelsiors definitely would be (according to Okuda and Sternbach sources, Excelsior was an explorer too.. hey, at least its better than 'space control ship'.. ugggh)..
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: SiaB is a TNG episode with Moriarty... MiaB is a VGR episode with Andy Dick
have we found an episode that could be abbreviated MOAB yet?
BTW, most SotSF apologists have reconciled 'Explorer' to be the short form of 'Exploratory Cruiser' or 'Heavy' or 'Large' Exploratory Cruiser.
I question whether the Ambassadors would be retypified from EXs to HCs in the post Galaxy-era (since they still seem to be quite similar in capability to the GCS) but I think the Excelsiors definitely would be (according to Okuda and Sternbach sources, Excelsior was an explorer too.. hey, at least its better than 'space control ship'.. ugggh)..
I still think it's silly. The vast majority of SF ships "explore". Granted, a few will sit around Earth waiting for transwarp conduits to open (some of which are supposedly "Explorers"), a few more will be ferrying Admirals around, and some will be patrolling, but most of them seem to be designed with exploration in mind. And exploration has nothing to do with size, tactical ability or durability, which is what all the other classifications signify, but with specific missions.
And I just checked, and there aren't any MOAB episodes. Measure of a Man (MOAM) comes close though...
Perhaps an ENT episode called Mother of all Bolians?
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Betazoids, man... Betazoids. They could even get Majel to play the part! Yes.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Timo: And regenerative shields is what Kirk already had - give them a minute's rest and they are good as new. I think Starfleet is being had, big time.
I think you're confusing two different functions. The regenerative qualities of Kirk's shields was simply a rest. When a shield system is hit it causes the generator to heat up as it exerts effort to defend the ship. Coolant systems take care of this to a point, but as the coolant system loses effectiveness so does the shields-- thus as the shield loses effectiveness it goes down in percentage. If you let the system cool off, it will "regenerate" but it isn't the defination of the term Regenerative Shields.
Regenerative Shields have the ability to take a piece of the incoming fire and use it against future attacks. Think of it as an imperfect borg shield. As the shield is attacked it takes a part of the power of the incoming fire and uses it to reinforce the shields. So hitting the shields helps to regenerate them, although it's probably a one step forward two steps back thing.
Don't ask for proof, I don't have it, I just see it that way...
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
