A quick google gives this:

http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/odd/index2.htm

Most sub-carriers carried one or two aircraft. Nothing like even a CVL-worth.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 10:51 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile;

I still have my doubts about your historical examples. Lincoln didn't make the design decisions concerning the Monitor, that it would be a turreted vessel for example. He didn't specify the type of armament it would use or what sort of speed it should be able to maintain. Those were decisons for naval architects. But you have Buckner choosing the armament for the Razee Dreadnought and making estimates of its movement costs. That he would make armament decisons strikes me as unlikely but possible. That he would believe himself qualified to estimate movement costs seems to me totally implausible unless Buckner were clinically delusional. And I don't think there's anything in SFU history that would support the latter notion.

Just to clarify - I'm not arguing here against the concept of the Razee as an SSJ ship (I haven't made up my mind on that) but I am arguing that the back story needs to be tightened up a lot.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 11:09 pm: Edit

What Buckner could have done was corral some poor naval architect and repeatedly tell him as he saw drafts of the results:

"Cut it back!"

"Cut it back again!"

"Cut it back some more!"

or

"It doesn't need more than this list of systems!"

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:02 am: Edit

Jeff Wile: I wrote what I did based on the impression I got from the original post. It seemed to imply Bukner did the designing so in a rewrite you might clearify that it wasn't.

I would point out that in each of the example people came to the leader with an outline or plan and that leader latched onto it, supported its developement and announced it. JFK most certainly spent a lot of time talking to NASA heads before making his historical speech.

I don't have a problem with Bukner being a big infuence in getting the idea pushed through. He might have even argued the case convincingly and it happened.

But having control over a slight majority is unlikely in the Federation, IMO. These are people with entire worlds behind them. Not much one man can coordinate to sway them in large matters. Not saying its impossible but...well, what did Bukner have to gain by pulling so many favors?

It is much more feasable that he was a brillian campaigner and lobbiest and manage by a narrow margin to push the concept through to a prototype.

Jeff: The reason I take issue with this subject is because what you write in the original post has huge ramifications on the structure and process of how Federation politics work. BY using the above approach you don't make waves for future articles on Federation politics and shorten the backstory. Backstories for rules should be fairly short. Unless you were to go forth with a full fiction piece but you've got to work in some space battles some how.

The Legend of the Tholian Battleship started as a news piece. The idea was grand but it was judged as boring in action. All of the Journalistic style was replaced by a full fictional accounting. I say this so that you might avoid the same mistake should you try to do such a thing.

BTW: If he wanted to reduce the hull size why would he tear out systems from a full saucer. Why would he go with a conversion to a DNL saucer and then lighten up the aft hull a bit.

OTOH, why would they keep the basic frame as is and just replace weapons with support systems and cargo etc.?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:03 am: Edit

Dang, long post! Sorry.

By Ben Moldovan (Shadow1) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:07 am: Edit

It didn't seem like a "bash-a-liberal" thing to me... just kind of like a future FDR-type leader.

By Ken Burnside (Ken_Burnside) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:33 am: Edit

The "bash a liberal" bit was something that I noticed, speaking as a centrist. It's the classic straw man of "cut the military for more social funding!" followed by "Well, now the military is gutted with poor ships!"

Perhaps if the backstory changed to "Buckner, faced with the twin problems of an inadequate defense and a war to recapture provinces that, politically, were more inclined to independance anyway, was lo0king for an excuse to divert military spending into economic stimulus packages in the Federation's core worlds. One of his chief intentions was to provide a heavy cruiser leading frigate squadrons as an economical means of using his budget to patrol a diminished area."

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 08:14 am: Edit

OK, I get the message !

Lets change the back story and shorten it.

I'll try to rewrite it and "tighten it up" going to be a challenge to keep it to 75 words or less!

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 09:07 am: Edit

Mike Raper was kind enough to prepare some SSD's of the DNR design.

The first one is the bare bones version and is seriously undergunned. the second was Mikes recommendation to improve the type.

Many Thanks, Mike!


Federation DNR

Federation
Alternate DNR

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 09:54 am: Edit

Here is an abreviated version of the "backstory"... does anyone have suggestions on how to improve it?

Years after the end of the General War, the personal correspondence and papers of Chairman Buckner (Chairman of the Federation Council, and one of the victims of a peace conference gone bad) were opened to the public.

In his papers was (at the time) a stunning revelation that the opportunity for a peaceful settlement (year 173, the offer by the coaltion to "demilitarize" the Federation outer provinces) was seen by Buckner not as just an end to the war, but also as an opportunity to "rebuild" the remaining Federation by reducing the costs of the military. The Key element of the plan, was to "re-equip" the Starfleet with a new class of more powerful ships at minimal cost, the Razee refit of the venerable DN (the DNR).

Chairman Buckner wanted to convert DN's to the DNR standard and stop construction on all ships larger than frigate class. he estimated that the DN's would cost about the same as a frigate hull to convert.

While the DNR could (in theory) have been produced as early as year 173, it wasnt publicly discussed until after the discovery of the Buckner Papers in year 188. As such it was proposed as an alternative to continued or expanded production of both the BCH and the various X ship designs.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 11:27 am: Edit

Jeff, Mike is right IMO. The Admirals would turn in their resignations if they had to expose such a large ship with less that a DD's worth of weapons to pirates and who knows what.

I'll read that back story in a bit. I'm still sipping my first cup of java.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 11:51 am: Edit

Loren?

Are we looking at the same thing here?

I see 4 Photons and 8 phaser 1's, and 45 points or warp power ...my first thought isnt a destroyer...compare it to a CA or a CC...which is the role the DNR is supposed to fill, at a price of 1/3 rd that of the BCH which is the competitor to the DNR.

Also, note the YIS would be post 188.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:08 pm: Edit

Alan Trevor:

Concerning Abraham Lincoln and ship design...Did you know that Lincoln is the only american president to have a Patent on file with the US patent office for a ship?

it dates back to 1840 or so, when Lincoln was living in Illinois, he submited a river boat design for a rapid load and unloading system. There is a model of the ship and a copy of the patent on display in the Abraham Historic site in Springfield Illinois.

Furthmore, Lincoln test fired and evaluated something called the "Sharps Carbine" and ordered the War department to procure it, The Illinois Militia Museum in Springfield has the target that Lincon put 7 shots into when he discharged the weapon. (its right across the asile from Santa Anna's wooden leg that the federalized Illinois Militia "liberated" during the Mexican American War (1848?!?).

Anyway, while Lincoln may not have designed the Monitor, he did prevail upon the Navy to work with John Erickson, the designer of the Monitor, inspite of the navy's reluctance to work with erickson after the "Peacemaker" episode.

Like Winston Churchill and FDR, Lincoln did have an interest in technology and various weapons applications...not bad for a self taught country lawyer!

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:19 pm: Edit

The DNs sit at the SB and cost little to nothing during Peacetime. The CCs and CCHs command the fleets.

But the Fleet will keep the big boys for when war breaks out again.

No one in his right mind would strip down a DN to make another crusier.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:46 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I think Loren was referring to the first version, and that he agrees that the second one is more viable.

Chris,

I think that was the point...

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:47 pm: Edit

Jeff: Mike put it right.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 01:06 pm: Edit

Nobody would let this happen, and if you want to fly a ship that has this MC and these weapons, fly a DNL.

By John Sickels (Johnsickels) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 01:07 pm: Edit

Jeff: I think you and I have finally found something to agree on: admiration of Abraham Lincoln. His photograph adorns my office wall along with one of FDR and a postcard of Churchill.

Note that we share this with Gene Roddenberry and James T. Kirk....

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 01:33 pm: Edit

John, IMO there is such a thing as "the Great Man" (and I suppose Great Woman, too!)

Lincoln, Churchill, Roosevelt and others all managed to triumph inspite of adversity.

Now, for the back story, how can we improve upon it? What added sections need to be cut? Does anything need to be added?

Does the Year in service 188+ work for the concept?

by that point, X ships are coming into wider service and (iirc) there will not be a Size Class 2 X ship, so the DN will be obsolete and no longer needed for the mission they have had for years, namely waiting for war to start.

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 01:42 pm: Edit

1. Don't type it so small J.
2. Add a blurb about what the heck a "Razee" is.
3. The idea that it came from the notes of a dead Chairman make no difference; I would just note that it was a proposal made by politicians to cut military spending.
4. Y188 doesn't work. The SSD posted above is based on the Fed DN+. There would be no ships of this class available for conversion. Maybe as an alternative to the DNL?
5. Note that no Military planner would actually consider the idea.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 02:00 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile;

I was aware of some of that, though not all of it. Are you from Illinois? I was born in Iowa but lived in Illinois pretty much my whole life until I joined the Air Force.

I've been mulling over an idea about tying the "Razee" concept to the recently discussed "Super Heavy Cruisers". I'll post it if I can convince myself it makes enough sense to be worth posting.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 02:05 pm: Edit

Robert:

1. OK!
2. Razee \'ra-ze\ noun [French, (vaisseau) rase', lit., cut-off ship)] 1794 : a wooden ship with the upper deck cut away. (Webster's ninth new Collegiate Dictionary).
3. Drop the first pargraph, modify the 2nd substantially to read "an ammendment to the Federation Star Fleet Defense Budget to reduce new ship construction funding by substituting refitted DN class hulls to a DNR standard.
4. retain year 188 and specify DN variants still in fleet service. (includes DNG, DNH types) (good idea Robert! I much prefer 6 photons to 4 any day!)
5. add a paragraph noting that such a program is unpopular with military planners.

Any other changes? Suggestions?

Comments?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Actually, Baranov was even less capable than the incompetent Bucker and it was the next election that brought the other political party and found the Churchill guy.

By Richard Sherman (Rich) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 02:10 pm: Edit

SVC,

Hunh? Previous published "historical" fiction refers (paraphrasing now) to Baranov as a 'human dynamo' that energized the Federation and Star Fleet after the Y174 Disaster at Olsen's Reach.

I'm confused...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 02:23 pm: Edit

Alan Trevor:
We vacationed in Springfield early this summer, the Military museum is generally open only in the afternoon, but the tourist guide book we had stated the museum was open daily from 9:00 am...so it was closed when we got there...but the director of the museum was there, and when I pointed out the error, agreed to open the museum for us...and then he ushered us on a private guided tour.

a wonderful time was had by all, and the museum covers illinois military history from 1712 to present (thats confirmed, 1712, when parts of illinois were part of the colony of Virginia!)...I particular enjoyed the F-16 cockpit simulator from the Illinois Air National Guard!