Naval Terminology
- Thread starter Murph
- Start date
Spacehand Arioch
SOC-8
I always found it odd how ship names were thrown around. Eg. the Sydai Class Detached Cruiser, a 2000 dton, J3? M3 vessel, 16 missle turrents and 4 laser turrents with a 32 man marine detachment.
BTW, I love this starship.
BTW, I love this starship.
Murph,
I'll throw in with Uncle Bob's descriptions on this one. They really need a "purpose based description".
The US Navy had asked (in the late 80s I believe) for additional destroyers to augment the fleets. Congress said no. So, the Navy renamed the designs to frigates and pushed it through congress. Its all perspective.
Also, A TL8 world will have a completely different conceptual of a battleship than a TL15 world. Size is fine for the TL15 description but may not work in more primitive star navies.
Savage
I'll throw in with Uncle Bob's descriptions on this one. They really need a "purpose based description".
The US Navy had asked (in the late 80s I believe) for additional destroyers to augment the fleets. Congress said no. So, the Navy renamed the designs to frigates and pushed it through congress. Its all perspective.
Also, A TL8 world will have a completely different conceptual of a battleship than a TL15 world. Size is fine for the TL15 description but may not work in more primitive star navies.
Savage
I may have to quible with you, Savage. In the 1960s the Navy proposed a class of missle-armed ships bigger than destroyers, as big as light cruisers. They wee numbered "DLG" for "Destroyer Leader Guided missile", but called "Frigates". In the 1980s the Califonia and Virginia classes of frigate were reclassified as cruisers.
At the same time Destroyer Escorts were renamed as frigates to bring us into line with NATO.
http://www.warships1.com/US_frigates.htm
At the same time Destroyer Escorts were renamed as frigates to bring us into line with NATO.
http://www.warships1.com/US_frigates.htm
Drakon
SOC-14 1K
There is another aspect that I don't see touched on. What about missions other than warfare?
Imagine an exploration/first contact mission. Arriving at a brand new sophont species. They ask you what kind of ship you are on. Your reply:
"Destroyer"
Diplomatic hijinx ensue.
I would have one set of vessels for the regular "fighting fleet" such as destroyer, cruisers, battleships, and carriers. And a second expeditionary fleet set with names such as frigates, (cruisers and carriers can be interchanged) and some other names for battleships. They may be just as heavily armed and as capable as their fighting fleet counterparts, just with a more diplomatic name.
Imagine an exploration/first contact mission. Arriving at a brand new sophont species. They ask you what kind of ship you are on. Your reply:
"Destroyer"
Diplomatic hijinx ensue.
I would have one set of vessels for the regular "fighting fleet" such as destroyer, cruisers, battleships, and carriers. And a second expeditionary fleet set with names such as frigates, (cruisers and carriers can be interchanged) and some other names for battleships. They may be just as heavily armed and as capable as their fighting fleet counterparts, just with a more diplomatic name.
Yes the Death Stars,both the 120km and the partially built 900km one,were Starships not stations they did move under there own power .
The Imperator class Star Destroyer may have been that a Destroyer albeit it was 1.6KM long.Which means the 17.6km long Executor class (( do not call the ship a super star destroyer here is no such thing since the first ship was Executor)) would be considered either a fleet carrier of a battleship.
T
The Imperator class Star Destroyer may have been that a Destroyer albeit it was 1.6KM long.Which means the 17.6km long Executor class (( do not call the ship a super star destroyer here is no such thing since the first ship was Executor)) would be considered either a fleet carrier of a battleship.
T
Drakon,
Any leader that sends a military "destroyer" on a diplomatic mission needs to be slapped silly. Such
vessels rarely have quarters and resources for diplomatic missions.
Uncle Bob,
Sorry my response is so overdue. I'd forgotten about this thread.
I don't see the relationship between my comment and yours. The US Navy was developing new tougher destroyers and re-classifying them. Congress at several points capped the number of ships with particular designations.
Fact is that a Naval Command designates what a fleet is comprised of and how its defined. I suppose I'm actually suggesting that politics often has something to do with it.
Savage
Any leader that sends a military "destroyer" on a diplomatic mission needs to be slapped silly. Such
vessels rarely have quarters and resources for diplomatic missions.
Uncle Bob,
Sorry my response is so overdue. I'd forgotten about this thread.
I don't see the relationship between my comment and yours. The US Navy was developing new tougher destroyers and re-classifying them. Congress at several points capped the number of ships with particular designations.
Fact is that a Naval Command designates what a fleet is comprised of and how its defined. I suppose I'm actually suggesting that politics often has something to do with it.
Savage
Drakon
SOC-14 1K
Savage, I disagree.
It really depends on how the navy is set up to begin with. Does it have war ships patrolling independently, or does it operate tied to a fleet.
If individual ships operates independently, then any ship will of necessity have the minimum necessities to complete a first contact, or diplomatic mission. Which when you think about really amounts to a few extra staterooms, and perhaps a nicer wardroom area.
Think of the naval vessels during the Age of Sail. There was really no telling what a Captain would have to deal with, and sometimes a few placed cannon shots were an effective diplomatic tool.
It really depends on how the navy is set up to begin with. Does it have war ships patrolling independently, or does it operate tied to a fleet.
If individual ships operates independently, then any ship will of necessity have the minimum necessities to complete a first contact, or diplomatic mission. Which when you think about really amounts to a few extra staterooms, and perhaps a nicer wardroom area.
Think of the naval vessels during the Age of Sail. There was really no telling what a Captain would have to deal with, and sometimes a few placed cannon shots were an effective diplomatic tool.
CliffBates
SOC-12
This was a very interesting thread... thanks for bringing it to our attention again.
esampson
SOC-13
Historically it is only very recent that captains have been able to 'phone home' and even then some captains, such as the one's captaining nuclear missile subs, may have to operate for prolonged periods without communication (they are able to receive messages but transmitting can be very problematic).
CliffBates
SOC-12
I think Adventure Class Ships are simply ships that are suited for adventures, or the standard adventures where PCs are not in official roles, but acting as private individuals or outsiders.... vs active service personal.
I hope there will be some sort of High Guard/TCS supplement for T5, one that will give a broader scope of how T5 will bridge CT-MT-TNE-T4/T0-T20....
I hope there will be some sort of High Guard/TCS supplement for T5, one that will give a broader scope of how T5 will bridge CT-MT-TNE-T4/T0-T20....
CliffBates
SOC-12
I have always thought the Kininur was a premature birth before the implications of HG Book 5 designs were fully thought through. In many ways a Kininur would make a good Merc Ship, but it is hardly a Battle Cruiser.
