Proposal for R12/R13:

In Y172 the Kzinti were desperately looking for ways to improve the combat power of their ships.

One of the concepts was the "saddle bag" designs, (a alternative to the "ridge back" designs) however, it was not known if the concept would work (computer studies were inclusive) so to test the idea the Kzintis decided to convert a frigate.

It was thought that if the concept proved successful that other frigates (since the FFK & FH were not entirely successful) would be converted to the new design. Accordingly FF+ #182 was converted into the Light Destroyer DL #01.

However the tests on this ship also proved to be inclusive (some thought a larger hull would be needed to prove the concept once and for all).

Changes to the FF:

P-1 FA Replace with Disruptor 22-FA

Left "saddle bag":

1 C Hull
1 ADD-12
1 P-1 LS
1 APR

Right "saddle bag":

1 C Hull
1 ADD-12
1 P-1 RS
1 Btty

Warp 4x4 in a X configuration

Total ship (w/out warp): 43
Total power: 20+4
Shields: +4 ea
BPV: ~90
MC: 1/2

Other data unchanged

Anyone who wishes to post a SSD may do so.

Comments?

JBP

By Jeremy Gray (Gray) on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 08:44 am: Edit

James, I like this idea. I banged together an SSD for you. The only thing I changed from your proposal was increasing the turn mode to B (like other Kzinti destroyers - seemed reasonable with the added mass) and a slight increase in crew units and BPs.

Quite comparible to the DW. Slightly better drone defense, but weaker shields. Phaser arcs are a bit different, giving the ship some unique flavor. I like it. Comparisons to the Fed FFB would be easy to draw.

By Jeff Laikind (J_Laikind) on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 01:23 pm: Edit

There is a Kzinti Battle Frigate (4 engines ) in CL31 (BFF). At 88 BPV, it includes the Y175 refit and slightly better shields.
It does have an A turn mode, which could be attributed to "ridgeback" vs "saddlebags" for wieldiness.

By James B. Pennington (Cutlass401) on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 06:34 pm: Edit

Jeremy:

That turned out nice, You're right I should have increased the TM, I just forgot about it. Crew units and BPs are something I usually don't concern myself with--I let others better than myself worry about that.J

I originally intended for this design to have the Y175 refit a couple years early (hence the ADD-12s), but it is fine that you showed it as a separate refit.

I thought about calling it a "Battle Destroyer", but I thought that a ship designated as such would be larger than the Destroyer. This design is built off of a smaller hull.

JBP

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, May 03, 2010 - 03:47 pm: Edit

SVC ANALYSIS: Something worth considering. I will point it out to Petrick.