posted
FWIW, I'm now definitely doing Iceland class, including the good ship Finland, as part of the Guide. I doubt the aerodynamic hull form really signifies true atmospheric flight capabilities - but it could tell of the lineage. OTOH, "Regeneration" proves that warp-capable vessels can also be landing-capable in this era. Or perhaps the Icelands are Mars-based, benefiting from aerodynamics but not having to fight all that gravity?
Since I'm doing the Guide with the assumption that Spaceflight Chronology still largely holds true, I imagine that Earth in the late 21st century had dozens upon dozens of clumsy conical sublight warships (and fought the Kzinti in those) in addition to hundreds of nonmilitary ships jury-rigged with warp engines. UE Starfleet (founded when SFC says, in 2089 or so, writers' guides be damned) just protected the Sol system initially, lacking the infrastructure to go farther out. Civilians of course went off the deep end, there being no stopping them. Ships as such probably aren't expensive - the support infrastructure is.
A true interstellar-capable warfleet would only emerge in the 22nd century, and the Icelands would be a relatively late addition - for one, their warp engines look more modern than those of the Intrepid type... These ships might not go into deep space, but they'd certainly have some extrasolar duties. If they were built to meet a specific military need, say, convoy escort for major trade routes, then there'd be none to spare for trips to the likes of Terra Nova.
Expect an update early next week. I'm all for that four-deck scaling, fusion powerplant, and externally mounted warp stabilizer stuff. In fact, the self-made Michigan class already fits the Iceland description save for minor details. IMHO, NX-01 should be the first antimatter-propelled manned starship in Earth service, but the other two known Starfleet workhorses could already benefit from the advanced drives, Iceland more than Intrepid. Warp 3 sounds good for both, but the smaller and newer [i]Icelands[/] do it with less power and more style.
quote:GAHH!!! I hate it when these unofficial names stick. I always felt the same way about people calling the Curry-type/Raging Queen the "Shelley-class" too...damn you MARRRRRRRRK!!!!!
Since the actual designers of the ships & the writers of the scripts didn't even care enough to give them class names, individual names, or registry numbers (and probably never will), then I suppose it's up to us to do that. At least until the next Encyclopedia says otherwise (and who's counting on that to happen...)
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
And on top of that, it's really kind of ludicrous that we keep seeing the prototypes mentioned of all these ships -- variety is better! We've already got the Centaur class (which is boring, IMO), we don't need the Curry class and the Elkins class and the ENT-Intrepid class...
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I always thought the Centaur should be a Chimera-class, personally. The name sure fits. . . But every time I start thinking about other chimeric names for members of the class - Griffin, Manticore, Medusa etc. - I remember how much I hate all those ship lists that have Cheyenne-class ships named solely after Native American tribes!
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:GAHH!!! I hate it when these unofficial names stick. I always felt the same way about people calling the Curry-type/Raging Queen the "Shelley-class" too...damn you MARRRRRRRRK!!!!!
Since the actual designers of the ships & the writers of the scripts didn't even care enough to give them class names, individual names, or registry numbers (and probably never will), then I suppose it's up to us to do that. At least until the next Encyclopedia says otherwise (and who's counting on that to happen...)
It's only a matter of time before we see the "Abbadon Class". Always online, and able to make copies of itself.
-------------------- I am the Anti-Abaddon. I build models at a scale of 2500/1
Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I doubt the aerodynamic hull form really signifies true atmospheric flight capabilities - but it could tell of the lineage. OTOH, "Regeneration" proves that warp-capable vessels can also be landing-capable in this era. Or perhaps the Icelands are Mars-based, benefiting from aerodynamics but not having to fight all that gravity?![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
