posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Harry:
What's that silhouette to the left of the Connie-refit on the first chart?

---

quote:

---

It's labeled - Class VII(?) Assault Ship, whatever that means.

---

quote:

---

And what's the name of the class to the right of the Decatur and Belknap on the second chart? Something with a B. Is it similar to the Belknap?

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:
Also, what was the original number of the Surya?

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Harry:
I've not included the Larson and Loknar, basically because they're really ugly, and also because the Saladin invalidates the Larson (both Destroyers), and the Surya invalidates the Loknar (both Frigates).

---

Is there some rule that Starfleet only uses one type of Frigate at a time? IMO the Loknar looks cool and being smaller than the Surya with the focus on forward firepower it makes an excellent fast strike ship to the more patrol orientated Suryas.

The Loknar is also important because it shows a continuation of the NX-01 configuration into the 23rd century, this is further continued by the Akyazi in the 2290s and the some unseen ships until the rear end gets flipped upside down to make the Akira.

The Larson is more problematic. It's larger than the Saladin, and has major design problems if it has TNG/ENT style warp core rather than TAS/Fandom style M/AM reactions in the nacelles. As a Heavy Destroyer it would appear less capable than the two nacelled Detroyat class, however it could be a specialised vessel (the long, low extension at the rear looks ideal for minelyaing equipment).

But each to their own. I think that even in teh 2260s Starfleet has room for a main design of Destroyers or Frigates and a number of less numerous, more specialised designs as well.

--------------------
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
What's with the wierd registries on the other FJ ships?

---

He's probably trying to give the ships a halfway-reasonable registry number so they can fit in the "modern" Trek universe, considering that the FJ numbers make absolutely NO sense, even if they stand on their own and the movie and TNG ships aren't taken into account!

It's implicit that FJ believed in some sort of chronological assignment of registry numbers, given that each class had its own block. But... given the nearly identical design elements in all five classes (well, four actually ) I find it very illogical that the Saladin/Hermes would be that much older than the Constitution -- or for that matter, that the Ptolemy would be that much newer.

Identity Crisis, no matter how much I like some of the fandom ships, I will never treat the Larson as a "real" starship -- that thing is just plain ugly. It even gives those horrendous DS9 kitbashes a run for their money! (But again, to each their own. )

--------------------
“Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov
Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha