StarFleet CVA Classes...

[MikeKozlowski]

...Just a quick list, all photos from http://www.shipschematics.net/ . Please disregard NCC numbers in the Pershing and Ranger pics.

MacArthur Class CVA

USS MacArthur NCC- 2554
USS Napoleon NCC-2555
USS Zhukhov NCC-2556

Carefully planned and tested, the Big Macs were StarFleet's first CVAs. Though powerful and well-liked, by the time they got into service they were actually somewhat behind the curve, and had issues when they got into combat. Two more, George Washington and Julius Caesar were finished as Space Control Ships.

macarthur.PNG

NOTE: SFB retconned the Big Macs into DN conversions, but I think we're going to alternate timeline that.

Pershing Class CVA

USS Pershing NCC-2617
USS Foch NCC-2618
USS Eisenhower NCC-2619
USS Alanbrooke NCC-2620
USS Sun Tzu NCC-2621
USS Simon Bolivar NCC-2622
USS Blucher NCC-2623
USS Montgomery NCC-2624

StarFleet engineers were working on improving the Big Macs before the last one was even laid down, and they came up with a superb follow-on design. The Pershings were fast, powerful, and carried enough shuttles to deal with any possible threat.

pershings.PNG

Ranger Class CVAX

As with just about every ship design StarFleet had, the CVAs got the X treatment, and they were stunning. They were also the last large CVAs laid down by StarFleet.

USS Ranger NCC-2700
USS Invincible NCC-2701
USS Bearn NCC-2702
USS Graf Zeppelin NCC-2703
USS Vikrant NCC-2704
USS Shokaku NCC-2705
USS Bonaventure NCC-2706

rangerCVAX.PNG

Mike

[Johnnie Lyle]

Interesting that they went back to the Big Mac for RANGER.

[MikeKozlowski]

Interesting that they went back to the Big Mac for RANGER.

John,

The only real flaw in the Pershings was that they went to the pylon/saucer configuration - which is great for just about anything else, but causes warp field distortion when you attach it to the unique CVA secondary hull. (The CA-based CVLs didn't have this issue, as their secondary hulls were just deeper versions of the standard design.) The distortions caused actual directional control issues at high warp; Pershing had an uncommanded pitch-up at Warp 8 that left her dead in space for nearly a full day until she could be towed back in, while Foch, Eisenhower, and Alanbrooke all had dangerous DCF (Depart Control Flight) incidents until BuShips could get things sorted out. The first four Pershings have gotten field adjustments and inertia dampeners that essentially eliminated the problem, but under routine operations they are limited to Warp 6.5. The following ships were built with fixes installed.

The flatbed design guaranteed no such issues, and Ranger's designers went back to basics using the Mk XII CVA design as their baseline.

Mike

[Johnnie Lyle]

Interesting that they went back to the Big Mac for RANGER.

John,

The only real flaw in the Pershings was that they went to the pylon/saucer configuration - which is great for just about anything else, but causes warp field distortion when you attach it to the unique CVA secondary hull. (The CA-based CVLs didn't have this issue, as their secondary hulls were just deeper versions of the standard design.) The distortions caused actual directional control issues at high warp; Pershing had an uncommanded pitch-up at Warp 8 that left her dead in space for nearly a full day until she could be towed back in, while Foch, Eisenhower, and Alanbrooke all had dangerous DCF (Depart Control Flight) incidents until BuShips could get things sorted out. The first four Pershings have gotten field adjustments and inertia dampeners that essentially eliminated the problem, but under routine operations they are limited to Warp 6.5. The following ships were built with fixes installed.

The flatbed design guaranteed no such issues, and Ranger's designers went back to basics using the Mk XII CVA design as their baseline.

Mike

How does the secondary hull differ from the DSSRV? In plan view, they look similar.

[MikeKozlowski]

Interesting that they went back to the Big Mac for RANGER.

John,

The only real flaw in the Pershings was that they went to the pylon/saucer configuration - which is great for just about anything else, but causes warp field distortion when you attach it to the unique CVA secondary hull. (The CA-based CVLs didn't have this issue, as their secondary hulls were just deeper versions of the standard design.) The distortions caused actual directional control issues at high warp; Pershing had an uncommanded pitch-up at Warp 8 that left her dead in space for nearly a full day until she could be towed back in, while Foch, Eisenhower, and Alanbrooke all had dangerous DCF (Depart Control Flight) incidents until BuShips could get things sorted out. The first four Pershings have gotten field adjustments and inertia dampeners that essentially eliminated the problem, but under routine operations they are limited to Warp 6.5. The following ships were built with fixes installed.

The flatbed design guaranteed no such issues, and Ranger's designers went back to basics using the Mk XII CVA design as their baseline.

Mike

How does the secondary hull differ from the DSSRV? In plan view, they look similar.

John,

The DSRRV/MSRRV secondary hulls are cylindrical in cross-section, while the CVA hulls are a flattened oval.

Mike