SHIP PROFILE: CLIO CLASS DDGX

[MikeKozlowski]

DDGX.png

Mike

[Bernard Woolley]

Does make some sense to me that Star Fleet would use US terms like Flight, rather than Batch.

[Johnnie Lyle]

I’m still not a fan of that combination secondary hull and nacelle.

I prefer the two-nacelle AKULAs, or even CONSTELLATION being a Heavy War Destroyer refit.

[jemhouston]

Does make some sense to me that Star Fleet would use US terms like Flight, rather than Batch.

USN uses Flight each production type https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/burke.

[MikeKozlowski]

I’m still not a fan of that combination secondary hull and nacelle.

I prefer the two-nacelle AKULAs, or even CONSTELLATION being a Heavy War Destroyer refit.

...I have a new toolkit that I'm building a proper DSRRV with, we'll see if we can do something with the Clio.

And I think you'll like your ship.

Mike

[Bernard Woolley]

USN uses Flight each production type https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/burke.

I know. Which is why I said it.
I even did research into what was planned for the original Flight III before the end of the Cold War saw plans recast as part of TLW. Never thought I’d be mansplained!

As most Star Trek writers are American, Star Fleet tends to use terms from the US Navy. Therefore, it’s not a surprise to see Flight being used as a term.

[jemhouston]

I lost interest in Star Trek with Enterprise, and nothing really caused me to get back into it. Did Star Fleet ever build a dedicated command ship? It always looked like the admirals were commanding their own flagships.

[Bernard Woolley]

Not that I’ve seen on the latest series. In Picard when Fleet Admiral Shelby appears, she seems to be in the Enterprise-F captain’s chair. You’d think that for ships meant to be flagships, there would be an admiral’s bridge!

[MikeKozlowski]

I lost interest in Star Trek with Enterprise, and nothing really caused me to get back into it. Did Star Fleet ever build a dedicated command ship? It always looked like the admirals were commanding their own flagships.

Jem,

That's not inaccurate.

...SFB started with command cruisers (CC) in both heavy and light flavors with a flag bridge (the DNs always had them) - there would never be enough DNs to go around, and as StarFleet grew, they were going to need a spacegoing C3 ability with the fleets. Up until about the time 1701 got her refit, if there had to be a flag rank on the pointy end, they almost always rode a CA as its CO.

Even once the DNs were upgraded, they were still big, expensive monsters that didn't sail all that often, so the CCs bore the brunt of fleet command work. The fleet carriers were built with flag bridges, so once they started getting into service they eventually took position as flagships. (Some admirals, however, still prefer DN/DX as their flagships.)

Mike

[Poohbah]

Not that I’ve seen on the latest series. In Picard when Fleet Admiral Shelby appears, she seems to be in the Enterprise-F captain’s chair. You’d think that for ships meant to be flagships, there would be an admiral’s bridge!

Hollywood not understanding what Captains and Admirals do, and how they're different.

[Johnnie Lyle]

Not that I’ve seen on the latest series. In Picard when Fleet Admiral Shelby appears, she seems to be in the Enterprise-F captain’s chair. You’d think that for ships meant to be flagships, there would be an admiral’s bridge!

Hollywood not understanding what Captains and Admirals do, and how they're different.

Or how difficult it is to do both at the same time.

[Bernard Woolley]

It would be perfectly possible to do what's depicted in The Lost Fleet series - the fleet commander is on the same bridge as his Flag Captain.

[Poohbah]

It would be perfectly possible to do what's depicted in The Lost Fleet series - the fleet commander is on the same bridge as his Flag Captain.

See Shattered Sword for how that worked out.

[Johnnie Lyle]

It would be perfectly possible to do what's depicted in The Lost Fleet series - the fleet commander is on the same bridge as his Flag Captain.

See Shattered Sword for how that worked out.

It really depends on the situation.

Traditionally, flag captains were extremely junior. A good example is Hardy of VICTORY - he was made master and commander of MUTINE in May 1797, made post after the Nile, and then immediately served as Nelson’s flag captain in VANGUARD, FOUDROYANTE and then VICTORY. It makes sense - the flag captain has the absolute least scope for independent action of any captain, and (ideally) has a vast wealth of experience to learn from (his Admiral) right at hand. So it’s an ideal post for one of the Admiral’s clients who just made post, but whose inexperience will not cause problems.

Senior captains get frigates, not junior ones, because you absolutely have to trust their judgment and discretion when out of sight of the flagship. That makes a lot of sense in the Star Fleet, especially given communication delays, even with subspace. Picard or Kirk as flag captain is a waste of experience. But that judgment and experience is absolutely crucial for an explorer or cruiser (which is the traditional age-of-sail description of a ship on independent operations).

Star Fleet also has lots of what the Royal Navy called Second Class Commodores, men like Matt Decker and Bob Wesley - they commanded their own ships (CONSTELLATION and LEXINGTON), but we also see Bob Wesley commanding a cruiser division.

Star Fleet also likes the Royal Navy practice of making captains in charge of various formations, as with Picard in Redemption II, and Riker in Et in Arcadia Ego Part II.

So it’s not necessarily a net negative. What would be a negative is pairing an admiral with a highly experienced captain, which is implied Star Fleet would do in Chain of Command at Minos Korva.

[Andy L]

Quick question; in the specs, why 'displacement'? Wouldn't it be better to have 'mass/Earth weight'?

[Johnnie Lyle]

Quick question; in the specs, why 'displacement'? Wouldn't it be better to have 'mass/Earth weight'?

Tradition, probably.

[Andy L]

But 'displacement' doesn't make sense for a starship. Mass is constant, all other measurements vary depending on the planet. Even 'weight' will vary.

I would hope the Federation builds its starships to a high degree of tolerence and accuracy in measurement; "We're not Klingons, old boy!!"

[Johnnie Lyle]

But 'displacement' doesn't make sense for a starship. Mass is constant, all other measurements vary depending on the planet. Even 'weight' will vary.

I would hope the Federation builds its starships to a high degree of tolerence and accuracy in measurement; "We're not Klingons, old boy!!"

Displacement is a measure of mass, though. Very indirectly, but still. We humans like our archaic and unusual measures.

Frankly, enclosed volume is probably a more important measure than straight up mass, especially for non-warships.

[Belushi TD]

Displacement is probably a stand in for mass, as the early starships were probably accounted for (for the politicians) in a manner that they were used to, rather than something that made sense, either from a technical or engineering standpoint.

Belushi TD