Federation CVO

marcus_aurelius · Post by **marcus_aurelius** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:22 pm

I had a question on the Federation CVO just out of curiosity.

I remember first seeing this ship in Supplement #1 years ago and when I got back into FC / SFB I found out the ship no longer "officially" exists.

I was curious about the reason.

Was the ship unbalanced/broken in some way?
Was such a large ship with only 2 very large warp engines incongruous?
I think I remeber that it only had a move cost of 1. Perhaps that was part of the reason since it was such a large ship?
etc.

Thanks!

OGOPTIMUS · Post by **OGOPTIMUS** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:26 pm

It was removed because in F&E all other races could convert a CVA from a DN, except for the Feds. So a new DN-based CVA was created to make the Fed fleet design like all the others.

You can still find it in Stellar Shadows Journal #1.

marcus_aurelius · Post by **marcus_aurelius** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:30 pm

Thanks for the quick response!

That makes sense.

I had a miniature of it back in the 80s and I was thinking of getting another in my next miniature purchase just because it is such a pretty ship. So that sparked the question.

Davdob · Post by **Davdob** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:39 am

In what edition of Module J was this changed? I have the copyright 1991 version and rule R2.13 still references the "flatbed" design. I didn't go into my attic to grab the SSD, but maybe this just means the DN hull modification but with the 3 engine design?

I started early with SFB so the supplement rules tend to bleed in my memory sometimes.

djdood · Post by **djdood** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:17 am

To the best of my knowledge, the Federation CVA has been a DN-variant ever since the "Doomsday" Captain's Edition was first printed. The old, two-big-engine CVA ended when Commander's Edition did.

One of the major things that was changed with the Captain's Edition Fed CVA (besides its configuration) was the elimination of the "photon freezers" for the A-10s. That made for a pretty big shift.

The current CVA (which is indeed a DN variant) is much modified from the base DN. The fluff text mentions that the engines are on struts that place them below the level of the balconies and that she has a large shuttlebay door on the rear edge. This would involve a fairly major reconfiguration of the struts and rear hull; The DNG has its "flat" engine struts right at the mid-line and shuttlebay on the front face.

The existing Starline 2400 CVA minis uses a smaller saucer (from the old "cruiser like" M/C 1 "flatbed" CVA mini). This is artistic license at work and ADB is fine with it.

When I rebuilt mine after a major accident, I chose to bring it more in-line with the ship's description in Module J, using a DN saucer and highly modified DN rear hull (bashed together with the balconies portion of the CVA mini).

Davdob · Post by **Davdob** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:46 pm

A rear hull like this would still mesh up with the "flatbed" description in R2.13 I guess.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:26 pm

The change was made in the transition to Captain's Edition.

Quite frankly, there were really only two changes made to the ship in the transition:
- It went from a movement rate of 1 with two 18 box engines to a movement rate of 1.5 with three 15 box engines.
- The photon freezers where removed from the SSD. (The freezers are still there, but are a boxless system that is an assumed component of the fighter's shuttle box.)

That's basically it. It still retains its "flatbed" rear hull with all of its balcony positions and track system. The systems that were contained in the saucer are unchanged. Aside from those changes above, the ship is virtually identical.

The idea that it is a "DN variant" really just a non-sequitor. In "reality", the rear hull is totally different and the saucer is virtually gutted and completely rebuilt between a DN and CVA. Apparently the reason it is a "DN variant" is because of the engine arrangement alone.

Post by **Steve Cole** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 3:29 pm

Actually, it's so you can do a DN to CVA conversion in F&E.

mdauben · Post by **mdauben** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:02 pm

I totally understand the in-game reasoning for the change. I do have to say I really like the old "flat bed" design better than the current DN based mini, but that's just aestetics.

Nerroth · Post by **Nerroth** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:01 pm

If it helps, Stellar Shadows Journal #1 (which, as noted above, includes the "current" SSD for the original flatbed ship) is available for download on e23.

Davdob · Post by **Davdob** » Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:32 pm

I guess my question is really was the R2.13 ship description ever revised? The 1991 version of module J still talks about the "flatbed" design and doesn't state the CVA is a DN variant. Why this is on my mind is a bit of a mystery.

Thanks for all of the great input here. And I was inspired to buy SS #1 off of e23. So a sale made also!

Sneaky Scot · Post by **Sneaky Scot** » Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:52 pm

I guess you could say that "flatbed" comes from the look of the main hull section - it is somewhat flatter than your typical Federation design, plus it keeps the reference to the WW2 carriers (which is nice).

David · Post by **David** » Mon Aug 04, 2014 9:32 pm

mdauben wrote:I totally understand the in-game reasoning for the change. I do have to say I really like the old "flat bed" design better than the current DN based mini, but that's just aestetics.

Have to agree. There's just something about the original that sings so-to-speak. We still use the original as well as the DN version. Best of both worlds.