Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Federation CA Hull Numbers
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Star Fleet Battles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Scott36
Ensign


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 2:29 am    Post subject: Federation CA Hull Numbers Reply with quote

First of all, I'll apologize in advance if this is the wrong forum for this question (or if this seems silly). I'm just getting back into SFB after a long hiatus and I'm still feeling my way around.

I'm compiling a list of ship names that more or less matches up with the Order of Battle listed in Federation & Empire (for use in a future campaign, maybe). One thing that I noticed is that there are multiple series' of hull numbers for Federation CA's. Aside from the 1700's, there are some older hull numbers from old CA's that have been refitted (1017 Constellation, for example).

My question is regarding the 1600's... are these older cruisers that have been refitted, newer cruisers produced after the 1700's, or what? I've found descriptions for 1601, 1602, 1603 and I know that 1651 and onwards appear to be for NCA's. The others have me stumped, though - particularly since 1601 - 1603 seem to be fairly late production models, compared the 1700 hulls.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dal Downing
Commander


Joined: 06 May 2008
Posts: 552
Location: Western Wisconsin

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 3:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Scott,

Welcome back I have my Opinions of what those ships are but I will wait and see if someone more in the know knows something before i muddy the water. BUT... I have a few links you may want to scan through for Fed Fleets during Day of the Eagle or Day One. The Day One is a Wild A$$ Guess in places but figured you could use the research and change it up the way you want to see it look.

Romulian Border - "Day of the Eagle" (6th fleet)

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1224&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

And for Klingon Border - Roughly on "Day One" (3rd and 7th Fleet)

Scroll down to Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:55 am

http://www.starfleetgames.com/federation/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1543
_________________
-Dal

"Which one of you is the Biggest, Baddest, Bootlicker of the bunch?"
"I am."
"ARCHERS!!! THAT ONE!!!!"

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the plug of my miniatures post! Very Happy

This might not be much help, but there is a line in the fiction story from CL39 about the 1600 series of cruisers being upgraded to the same specifications of the 1700 series.

So, that might imply that the 1600s were produced before the 1700s, but it might also just mean that the 1700s got their upgrades first, and then Star Fleet went back to upgrade the 1600s.
_________________
O.G. OPTIMUS


NEW Page | OLD Page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2925
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That was the impression I had always gotten too. That being the 13xx and 16xx series were all brought up to be functionally identical to the 17xx Constitution-class ships (at least identical in the things that SFB and FC model).

Perhaps one or both of the older series were "Middle Years" ships or even earlier.

If and when Leanna's Fighting Starships is published, maybe it will answer some of these kinds of questions. Or, maybe not.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to quickly follow up on my earlier note, I went back and read the relevant section of the fiction story and here's the line:

"...a heavy cruiser of the sixteen hundred series...one of the oldest heavy cruisers..."

And then the reply: "...but even the sixteen hundreds were upgraded to the seventeen hundred standard before the war..."

Quote taken from Captain's Log #39, published and copyright ADB Inc., 2009.
_________________
O.G. OPTIMUS


NEW Page | OLD Page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2925
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Makes perfect sense to me.

Look at the modern-day U.S.S. Enterprise CVN-65. She's still in service and will have been in service for well over 50 years by the time she retires (when U.S.S. Ford replaces her). Enterprise has been extensively refitted several times during her career, including full-swaps of her defensive armament and radar/electronics suites as well as numerous complete replacements of her air group.

Considering how durably Starfleet builds its peacetime ships, I can easily see them being valid for upgrade for well over 100 years (like the oCL's). The CA hulls I'm sure would follow suit.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Scott36
Ensign


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks! I was thinking roughly along the same lines.

The description in Fast Warships for the Federation fast cruiser seems to contradict this, indicating that the fast cruisers were built in Y167, 168 & 169, 'replacing the normal CA's in the production schedule for those years'. Two of the three fast cruisers had 1600 hull numbers (1602 Wolverine, 1603 Stingray). Agincourt (1601) is listed in the same product as being rebuilt as a drone cruiser and re-entering service in 172, but there's no mention of when the cruiser was originally launched.

That being said, I'm still leaning towards the explaination that many of the 1600 series ships listed were older cruisers that were refitted up to 1700 standards.

Thanks again. And thanks for the 'Day One' links for the 3rd and 6th fleets - those were very helpful!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2925
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Issuing of the NCC-numbers may not be consecutive. It may very well skip blocks of numbers, for reasons only bureaucrats would understand.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
OGOPTIMUS
Captain


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 981

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Different shipyards contracting for a limited production run several times?

And not all shipyards are upgraded or switch over at the same time. IIRC, there was one Klingon shipyard that never stopped making D6s when all the others made D7s long before the General War.
_________________
O.G. OPTIMUS


NEW Page | OLD Page
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
djdood
Fleet Captain


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 2925
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's always cancellations and then later reassignment to other hulls too.

CV's 50 through 58 for the U.S. Navy were all canceled. One of those could get reactivated and used for a new construction (stranger things have happened).
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Scott36
Ensign


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That works for me!

Thanks for the input.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bolo_MK_XL
Commander


Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 787
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Remember that CA/CL and CV/CVLs used the same number list ----
Wasn't a separate list of numbers for the hull types --

Most numbers were used, just the construction was canceled --
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
terryoc
Captain


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 1379

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, the older CAs were the R-class, including Republic and Reshadije, among others. I think they were either Middle Years era ships or even Early Years ships, updated to modern standards. The original hull design had "growth room" which allowed the hulls to be upgraded to other ships like the GW CA, CC and even CB.

The Klingons continued to produce D6s through the GW for similar reasons: the D6 is an extremely adaptable hull, they built carriers, scouts, drone cruisers, penal ships, commando ships, and I don't know what else from that hull.
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3489
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

terryoc wrote:
Yeah, the older CAs were the R-class, including Republic and Reshadije, among others. I think they were either Middle Years era ships or even Early Years ships, updated to modern standards. The original hull design had "growth room" which allowed the hulls to be upgraded to other ships like the GW CA, CC and even CB.

The R-class CAs are all Middle Years designs (yes, this is a retcon). That does mean there are two separate "Republic" classes: The EY ships, and the R-class MY ships.

Also, don't forget the 10xx series ships represented by the Constellation.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bolo_MK_XL
Commander


Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 787
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the US, ship Numbers/Names were handed out with the contract --- Names were sometimes changed during construction ---

Thinking that possibly in the Federation, Contractors had certain numbers they would use when they got a contract -- A used 10XXs, B had 16XXs so fore and etc ----

That would put things in a simpler light when trying to explain things ---
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Star Fleet Battles All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group