Fed DN class name

Darkwing · Post by **Darkwing** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:14 pm

I see on the Mongoose site that the Fed DN is listed as the Federation class. However, the model is of the straight nacelled DNG or DNH. That would be a different class than the Franz Joseph ship with the upward slanted nacelles, would it not?

I ask for a couple of reasons, the big one being that I read in another thread that the FJ ships will be added to the game later and that might be confusing. I also ask because I have several of these on the way and I want to decorate them properly. If there is going to be an update to the original Fed DN I do not want to put the name "Federation" on what is more properly a later ship.

Scoutdad · Post by **Scoutdad** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:18 pm

The USS Federation is indeed the class name for the Federation DN (ala' Franz Joseph Designs)

The Mongoose DN mini is more properly clasified as a DNG. According to the Starship name registery, the DNGs usedthe following names and hull numbers:
2120 Entente, 2121 Trusteeship, 2122 Unification, 2123 Solidarity

Darkwing · Post by **Darkwing** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:52 pm

Thanks for that! I will use names from that list and hold off on Federation and Alliance until a later time, you know if/when the other design becomes available.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:59 pm

Do realize that nearly all of the FJ DNs were eventually converted to the DNG design. (The rest were converted to one of the various other variants, e.g. DNF.)

Darkwing · Post by **Darkwing** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:25 pm

That is a good point, too. That leaves the option of having an original ship name in both her original form and her later years.

djdood · Post by **djdood** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:44 pm

[cross-posted with Mike West]

I think it's safe to assume that the class-name was carried over to the DNG as any surviving examples were refitted into that version.

"Class names" or model names are a variable and funny thing in any Navy or military.

An example from the real world U.S. Navy; the WW2-era Midway-class aircraft carriers were heavily refitted from straight to angled flight decks, removal of all 5" guns armament and replacement with CWIS and missiles, etc. to reflect the radical changes in technology during their service lives. They looked (and performed) nothing like how they started out. However they are still referred to as "Midway-class" ships.

Many consider the USS John F. Kennedy a different class of ship than her near sisters in the Kitty Hawk class, some do not.

An example where the military didn't change the model/class name (when it seems like they really should have) is the F-16C/D. Those models have been in USAF service since 1984. However, they've had numerous "block" changes and upgrades since then. The basic structural airframe is similar but a modern block 60 F-16C (like those built for the UAE) is not remotely a "1980's airplane". Later, they were renamed F-16E, but that was more of a political/salesmanship decision.

A-10 Warthogs flew as A-10A models from 1977 until just now, when they are being modernized heavily and renamed A-10C models (but, no new A-10s have been built in over 30 years). Even before the C model upgrade, a post-Gulf War A-10 was very different than a 1970's airplane.

In the SFU, there is also the example of the enigmatically-named old light cruiser. It's been referred to as variously the "Province"-class, the "Carolina"-class, and the "Texas"-class. If I recall correctly (and I could be wrong) it has been said that all of those are true. Texas-class seems to be the name that has been settled on for history and that is often the case.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:01 pm

djdood wrote:In the SFU, there is also the example of the enigmatically-named old light cruiser. It's been referred to as variously the "Province"-class, the "Carolina"-class, and the "Texas"-class. If I recall correctly (and I could be wrong) it has been said that all of those are true. Texas-class seems to be the name that has been settled on for history and that is often the case.

Well, the Texas class refers to the "modern", or MY/GW era ship. The Province class is one or both of the EY era ships. Don't know about the Carolina class. Perhaps one is the "16-warp", and the other is the "24-warp" versions (I mean speed, not box count).

For a truly screwed up example, look no farther than the Federation CA. The Republic class title was used for the YCA, but also for a separate CA class. In addition, there is the Constellation class and the Constitution class. The funny thing about this is that the three different CA classes are all different, yet are represented by the exact same ship card. Go figure.

Which is, of course, all good. Such confusing and inconsistent nomenclature can be annoying, but is also (unfortunately) highly realistic.

djdood · Post by **djdood** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:09 pm

It's so confusing, even self-proclaimed obsessives like me get confused. I thought the older 137x series Fed CAs (Republic, Reshadije, Ramilles) were called the "R" class, much as the British did with with some of their warship classes?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:54 pm

I pretty sure they are in the (second) Republic class. I believe the "R" class designation was just an informal reference.

Nerroth · Post by **Nerroth** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:33 am

Pehaps the "R" ships are a (production) series, rather than a separate class in and of itself.

Sneaky Scot · Post by **Sneaky Scot** » Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:39 am

We Brits are not immune to illogical naming conventions either! For example, in the Royal Air Force our current standard of Typhoon fighter is the FGR Mk 4, which actually covers a number of differing aircraft standards. When we used Tornado interceptors, we had F Mk2, F Mk 2a, and F Mk 3 to cover the differing standards.