Topic: OT Battlecruisers,Dreadnaughts and Battleships.

[dogfighter]

one word about the d7 or ktinga batlecruiser being equal to the fed constitution heavy cruiser.
sure - the klings constructed their ships for war.fed ships are multirole. and it seems klingon ships arent as strong as fed ships. the ktinga is somewhat smaler then a constitution. and they have less weapons.2 torpedo tubes and 6 disruptors(or disruptorbanks) while the conni refit has 9 phaserbanks(doubleemitters) and 2 torpedo tubes. we saw the ktinga firing 3 torpedoes from the forward launcher in TMP and we saw the conny firnin 2 torps from one launcher in TSFS. so klinks have the faster torplaunchers. in the trek shows the klink disruptors seem to be more powerfull or at leas as powerfull as fed phasers. so in weapon terms the ships could be equal.fed heavy cruiser equal to klink battlecruiser. maybe a klingon ship designated as a heavy cruiser would be weaker than a conni.
when it comes to fed ships im somewhat uncomfortable speaking of a battleship. i use the excelsior for that role since it is very well armed , big and sports advanced technology.constellation may fill the role as a battlecruiser: cruiser size with more torpedo tubes - and maybe some megaphasercannons (not sureabout the cannons ).

my 2 cents.

[zerosnark]

Zerosnark you really know your navy history, but the as far as the Hood is concerned Im pretty sure it was always classed as a battlecruiser, and certainly used as such when sortied against bismarck. I agree that it was basically a fast battleship, I think this is really half of the defination of a battlecruiser, the other half being its role as to how its deployed. So I guess my point is that a battlecruiser is defined by two chacteristics: battleship firepower with cruiser speed (inferring lighter armor), AND a scouting and/or cruiser support role. So did the battlecruisers of WW1 have lighter armor or where they just built longer (greater fineness ratio ) with the same armor as a battleship?

Anyway too bad for Hood, its last refit they armored the front deck but not aft : of course thats were it gets hit.

LS: You make several good points. I may very well stand corrected, and the Hood may have been considered a Battlecruiser at the time of her sinking. . . .but the design was definately reworked after Jutland, with armour intended to withstand battleship gunfire

And yeah, I am a naval history buff. I can't build these cool SFC models like the rest of this crowd, but I can contribute to this forum by sharing what I know.

As for WWI Battlecruisers: Between 1905 and 1918 both dreadnaughts and battlecruisers steadily grew in size and lethality. In general, the battlecruisers had significantly lighter armour and one less heavy gun turret. Overall size and weight was of battlecruisers were bigger because of the engines. Scouting was a key role, as both aircraft and radio technology was very, very new.

Side note: When the Bismark sailed with the heavy cruiser Prince Eugen, Britain basically deployed their entire fleet. Unlike Jutland, the fleet was not all in harbor at the time. The Hood was actually sailing with the new Battleship "Prince of Wales" at the time, which had comparable speed. The Prince of Wales was so new, the ship was experiencing major teething problems during the battle, ("C" turret, mounting 4 of the 10 heavy 14" guns, became jammed) and wisely withdrew after the Hood blew up.

The Queen Elizabeth class battleships stood out at Jutland, because with oil fired boilers, these new and fully armoured battleships featured the new 15" guns AND at 25 knots were almost as fast as battlecruisers. In the 1940's, the Iowa class battleships stood out because these ships were capable of 35 knots, while the other new American battleships could only do 27 knots. Iowa class armour was comparable to the contempory North Carolina class battleships. To do this, the Iowas weighed in at 45,000 tons (nominal) vs the North Carolinas (nominal) 35,000 tons.


* * * * * *

[Lord Schtupp]

Zerosnark - very interesting - now you have me thinking that Hood remained classed as a Battlecruiser (if true) because of tradition more than anything else, since Hood was The Royal Navy's most famous ship (before she was sunk) and the Royal Navy being kinda heavy into the tradition thing. Its final role was really that of a battlecruiser role, but if she hadnt been so famous then the RN probably would have reclassed her as a BB, just as the Japanese reclassed the Kongo BCs to BBs during thier refits. I think the Japanese where really the only other navy to have the BC classification, they borrowed tactics heavily from the RN.

So really SFB/SFC is most like WW1 combat, and would have to be.

There is no way that fighters would have evolved in the universe of SFB/SFC, as they did in WW1-WW2. As had been pointed out, the ships are relativly much stronger to their seagoing counterparts where one hit could sink them. In SFB there was an optional critical hit rule, and also rules for fighters to make them more survivable(also pointed out above), but I just dont seeit happening.

Now lets say fighters truely do evolve in SFB, consider thier carrier: It would have to be much stronger relative to its seagoing counterpart. The vast distances in Star Trek space are many times greater relative to the WW1-WW2 distances, which would mean a more self-supporting carrier than the historical sea carrier. It would therefore have heavy armament like the cruiser. So interestingly the carriers depicted in SFB/SFC would have to be armed as presented in SFB/SFC and are the likely occuring design, rather than a huge carrier that was only defensively armed. The current carrier designs in the game are more "Accurate" (for lack of a better word).

The Fast patrol ship or "psuedo-fighter"(stupidest name ever given to anything) with it's associated tender, is a much more viable weapons system than the CV/fighter. much bigger than a shuttle, they can maintain standing patrols and scout effectivly at the same speeds that starships can.

[Lord Schtupp]

one word about the d7 or ktinga batlecruiser being equal to the fed constitution heavy cruiser.
sure - the klings constructed their ships for war.fed ships are multirole. and it seems klingon ships arent as strong as fed ships. the ktinga is somewhat smaler then a constitution. and they have less weapons.2 torpedo tubes and 6 disruptors(or disruptorbanks) while the conni refit has 9 phaserbanks(doubleemitters) and 2 torpedo tubes. we saw the ktinga firing 3 torpedoes from the forward launcher in TMP and we saw the conny firnin 2 torps from one launcher in TSFS. so klinks have the faster torplaunchers. in the trek shows the klink disruptors seem to be more powerfull or at leas as powerfull as fed phasers. so in weapon terms the ships could be equal.fed heavy cruiser equal to klink battlecruiser. maybe a klingon ship designated as a heavy cruiser would be weaker than a conni.
when it comes to fed ships im somewhat uncomfortable speaking of a battleship. i use the excelsior for that role since it is very well armed , big and sports advanced technology.constellation may fill the role as a battlecruiser: cruiser size with more torpedo tubes - and maybe some megaphasercannons (not sureabout the cannons ).

my 2 cents.

From what I have read about the D7 is that the concensus is that its considered an older design than the connie. If the Klinks had designed the D7 after engaging in combat with the Feddies, then rest assured that the D7 would have been a much more formidable ship than it stand now.

[Rod ONeal]

"Critical Hits" and "Leaky Shields" were added to SFB to emulate what's seen on screen when, for example, a ship takes a large volley and the "warp power goes offline" or when you see sparks fly after a hit and the tactical officer reports that "shields are down to x%", but the ship obviously took some damage.

I really like these rules and would like to see them implemented in SFC. Admittedly, they'd have to be optional, just like they are in SFB.

[zerosnark]

Critical hits could be fun. . . The Hood blew up because of a "critical hit".

I could see a well placed phaser shot seperating a Klingon Boom from the aft hull.  A well placed disruptor shot could probably blow both nacelles off a fed heavy cruiser in a moment. . .I think this could be neat!

*****
From my reading, I always thought of the D6's as the Constitution class contemporaries. The D7's would have been the next model, probably a contemporary to the Bon Homme Richard class cruisers. hmmmm. Remember, these ships don't fight every day. An entire class or two could be built and in service for 10 years before a critical weakness would be revealed.

*****

As for SFB carriers: Yeah, it all depends on what you assume regarding technology. In SFB, the presumption is that to move at speed 20 for any distance you need HUMONGOUS engines. A major role for the Fed Scout is actually VIP transport. Why? Because to go from star system to star system, their are no "airliners". A shuttle won't make it! You actually need a LARGE starship! With that thinking, it is easy to see a carrier being fully gunned so that it could operate independently.

BTW: The US Lexington and Saratoga, as well as the Japanese Kaga and Akagi (all circa 1925) originally sported a full heavy cruiser gun battery, for all the reasons we have been talking about. Until people figured out in the '30s that having a carrier in a gun battle was REALLY bad idea.

* * * *

Vulnerability of surface ships vs starships: I dunno how much tougher they are. Remember, we are talking about a GAME!
If star trek was "real", the ships  have shields, but you shoot nukes at them. A fed CA can take a Plasma R hit that can vaporize an asteroid. . .I think without shields no ship could withstand a single drone hit. I mean, the warhead is a matter-antimatter bomb right? What, a few megatons? Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!

Toughness of surface ships? Depends on design and damage control. The Japanese Yamato's withstood literally DOZENS of bomb and torpedo hits. The Bismark had the entire topworks shot to pieces by two battleships and a few cruisers, but the ship was not in danger of sinking before being simultaneously scuttled and torpedoed.  But most WWI vintage battleships were mutalated by single torpedo hits. . .

*****

So consider this: The Japanese Long Lance torpedo was a huge surprise to the Americans. The speed, range, and damage of these weapons was inconceivable to the Americans.

This is exactly like the klingons going to war against the Mirak armed with D6's and slow drones. But due to an intelligence error, you don't realize that the Mirak have nothing but Fast, Large drones with quad reloads. What if suddenly the Romulans developed a Plasma torpedo that struck THROUGH shields?