SPEC DEFINITIONS
Page 2 of 2
As is noticeable with several classes in the listing, the registries are all over the place, appearing completely non-sequential. It's possible that there may be a totally unknown factor at work which would explain the properties of Starfleet's registry system. Part of me is from the school of thought which suggests that registries are sequential, and are so assigned to vessels as they are commissioned. This is easily noticeable to the lay person with a Daedalus Class ship from the 22nd century having a registry of NCC 173 for instance, and the latest ships in the 24th century having a code of NCC 80154 as an example. But this would mean that Starfleet have had eighty thousand ships in service in two hundred years, so could this be true? For this to be correct Starfleet would have to churning out around 400 ships per year. That's a lot of ships, so I think there is something else going on here. Like stardates, registries have similarly chaotic chronology, and it would be very difficult to sit down and figure out a logical system which could explain all the inconsistencies and incontinuities. If for instance I submit a theory that Starfleet are able to complete the construction of 100 starships per year, this would included Cruisers, Freighters, transports etc - anything that carries a Starfleet prefix, it would mean that they have had 20,000 ships in service since the Federation began. And the latest ships would be carrying registries in the NCC 20000 region.
So lets examine the possibilities on three separate levels....
#1). Let's say that in about the late 23rd century, a brand new registering system was implemented. The first thing I think happened is this (as is also found on the conjectured Ranger Class page):
Up to mid 23rd century, all registry numbers seemed to work in the sequential sense, as ships were constructed and coded using such a system. But from herein, they became less coherent. For instance, as the Federation began to expand and advance into the 23rd century, one must assume there was a natural increase in Fleet Construction Yards. So, for example, with Ranger Class under a set construction line at perhaps a couple of yards, sequential ordering would've been curtailed due to other vessels of other classes being constructed and launched at other yards. So in this context, perhaps 30, 40, or even more ships of other classes would have been assigned their codes which may disorient the NCC numbering system of any one class. Because, as yards expand, construction technology and techniques improve, ships are launched much more quickly, which in turn creates an overall plethora of mixed, non-sequential codes. In the example portrayed in the Ranger Class listings, 106 ships were commissioned throughout the Federation between the construction of the prototype Ranger and one of its sister ships, the Assurance. This may have occurred over a period of a couple of years. Such a theory as this may begin to explain the complete chaos of Constitution Class registries, that range from NCC 1700 -the prototype, down to NCC 956 (See Here). Also, yards would invariably be involved in the construction of many ships of different classes at any one time.
#2). But this is just part of the story, for, after the commissioning of Excelsior Class, there seems to be a massive and sudden increase in registry increments. For with the prototype Excelsior having a code of NX - 2000, there seemed to be a sudden jump to the NCC 11000 region within a period of just a few decades. This can be explained by possibly two different forces at work. Firstly a radical and new registry technique being implemented at the turn of the century, whereby previously unlisted ships such as Cargo Carriers, Runabouts, Executive Shuttles, Tankers and other Utility ships being suddenly integrated into the Fleet registry makeup. This I think is quite possible. The second possibility is a general increase of Starship construction, mainly in number of ships, but also in generally increased number of new classes for various fleet applications, for this was in essence the Klingon Cold war, and the need for greater defensive and stability was an important issue. So this increased turnaround at the Fleet Yards is another possible answer. Thirdly, one has to take the omni-directional expansion of the Federation into account. With newer, faster starships, and increased numbers of Federation member worlds it takes a larger taskforce of vessels to patrol, defend and provision such a growing territory.
#3). An altogether different theory to submit may surround the actual method of how the registry system is structured and layered. Lets speculate this for a moment: Perhaps Starfleet scrapped the old system and started afresh at NCC 10000 at the very beginning of the 24th century, and rather than continue sequentially, a unique system was employed by assigning a new digit at the beginning of each decade. In the year 2310, NCC 20000 began, in 2320, NCC 30000 began, and so forth. After the first digit, the remaining four may refer to a class's individual coding structure, or perhaps it was related to the particular yard where it was constructed, like an address. Either way, this new registry system would bear little, or no resemblance at all to the previously utilized sequential ordering. Sounds unlikely, but this is the precise system of car registration numbers in the UK. For example, my car registration begins with the characters R784. R stands for the year 1998, for when the car was built and registered. 784, stands for the 784th car off the production line at the plant. After 784 follows three generic letters, this is the code for the city or region where the car was manufactured
At the end of the day I'm not sure of what the final answer is. So for the sake of argument I'm operating in the middle ground. So on the Stats Board I've accounted for a grand total of somewhere in the region of 20,000 ships since the Federation began, and I speculate that Starfleet currently have about 7000-8000 ships in service, as of the year 2378. As for the missing 60,000, let's just assume they are simply 'unlisted' vessels and other auxiliaries....
(For Starship registry problems, and other anomalies, see Conundrums Page)
DATES
For some ship classes we have a general idea for when they were first commissioned. Constitution Class for example was first launched with the prototype in 2244, this we believe after having several clues given to us, (see Here for more comments). We know Excelsior Class was launched in 2285 (but had probably been under trial for several years prior to that) after witnessing the brand new prototype in 'The Search For Spock', and the Galaxy first saw the stars in around 2361-2363. These facts were established from scripted references from the shows/movies, and so forth. But some of the others are more ambiguous, and can only really be guessed at. We thought there'd be a fool proof method of identifying the age of a ship by its registry number, but that just brought up many new problems as they invariably have inconsistent numbering systems. So there is no real way to know for sure unless new canon information is given, so we have to basically 'guess', and place them within sensible time-frames. This I've tried to do. Some people's interpretation may vary from mine by half a century for instance, especially if a particular class has no official design to date it, so if there is little or no existing data for the age of a class, the estimations are my own, and are entirely speculative. See 'Number of Ships Built' further down the page for more.
In the particular class' specs table it is important to explain that my exact definition of a class being 'in service' refers to the very first ship commissioned to the very last ship of the class decommissioned. So if 25 out of 26 ships in a class are lost within 6 months, and the last one goes on for 90 years, then that 90 years is how long the class has been 'in service'.
CREW NUMBERS
The crew count that I quote in a class's stats table is a speculative figure only. We know the Enterprise had 430 crewmen and women, and the Enterprise-D had around 1010-1020, and other ship compliments have occasionally been given for other classes, but this is only academic and not really important as this can usually be taken as a basic, generalised figure. This is because although a ship will have a basic, core compliment, crew rotations would alter the compliment by quite a lot from assignment to assignment, mission to mission and so forth. A figure is inserted for each class though, but is only an estimated ball park figure based on firstly the size of the ship, and the fact that as time goes on, the newer ships are likely to have less crew, as technology will usually eradicate man power in favour of automated operations. In the 23rd century, a Constitution Class ship may need 430 people (via required mission specs and detail) for the ship's smooth running. A century later, a ship the same size would need far less as computers and more complex machinery replace their humanoid operators. The Voyager for example is slightly larger than the first Enterprise, but only has a necessary crew compliment of 125, and in 'The 37's' it was stated in dialogue that the Voyager could possibly operate normally for extended periods after the loss of nearly quarter that figure. I should imagine many ships could man their critical functions with a figure as low as 50 aboard. But usually, a skeleton crew such as this would be a temporary option only....
The second point to consider when calculating crew compliments, is that in at least the 2360's, Starfleet began to accommodate entire families on their starships. It seems to be a foolhardy move, seeing as starship life can be dangerous. Just look at the USS Odyssey for example, before its doomed mission to the Gamma Quadrant, one would have thought Captain Keogh would have evacuated the ship of all non-essential personnel, for this was to be a purely military operation and some level of combat was certainly assured. There was indeed a line where Dax recommends this, and you'd only hope Keogh would already be aware of such a common, crucial protocol as this. As it was, the Odyssey was spectacularly destroyed. If there were families present, more than a thousand people would have been lost. The point is, if a vessel has families aboard, it will greatly increase the overall ship compliment, this is why Galaxy Class, although visibly large has a much larger stated compliment then other vessels, only because the figure of 1000 is canon. But we know little about other class ships, except perhaps Intrepid Class which has a much smaller compliment, and indeed it doesn't have any families onboard (Naomi Wildman being the only child....)
I would have thought the endorsement of having families aboard a starship to be a pretty controversial matter in the Federation. The Romulans and Klingons for example certainly would not have their families onboard ship. The Romulan officer, R'Mor, in Voyager's 'Eye of The Needle' hadn't seen his family in a couple of years because of his deep space assignment. It can be a highly dangerous environment, and I can see no logic as to why such a policy was implemented. I mean, did Starfleet suddenly think its ships were super-safe from enemy attack? The Alpha Quadrant has never been a stable region, and during the time of Galaxy's first commissioning the Cardassian war had only recently been concluded. So why suddenly risk an increase of casualty figures by loading vessels with hundreds of civilians? And such losses would not simply be a combat statistic, but a great human (and non-human) tragedy, for many innocent people, and children could lose their lives. For this reason, I submit that if Starfleet must insist on this, that only the biggest and most powerful ships, such as Galaxy Class should have families. But certainly not in wartime, such as in the recent Dominion conflict. I for one certainly empathized with Picard for having to 'deal' with the fact that families were onboard his ship. It greatly increases individual responsibility. Look how much danger the Enterprise encountered week in week out -what sort of environment is that for a kid? I think the only plausible reason was that when the Next Generation began, it was possibly Gene Roddenberry's decision to have families onboard so they could increase plot potential and explore more human and relationship issues.
This is another estimated figure as we have no idea exactly how many ships any one class has, nor indeed the size of the fleet. Though during the Dominion war (portrayed on DS9) we were given a fair clue on just how big the fleet is, for many hundreds if not a few thousand ships contributed towards the offensive effort of the aligned forces, a great many being Federation ships -about 600 in the 'Sacrifice of Angels' battle. It's a far cry from the dumb line by Shelby in 'Best of Both Worlds', when on the loss of 39 (out of 40) ships during the battle of Wolf 359 she said the fleet would be back up in year. With a fleet as large as it is, 39 is barely scratching the surface. Little did the creators know at that time how much the overall picture of this great Federation would expand and evolve over the years since The Next Generation began. For my theory on how this line can be justified, see Talking Points Page 2.
All in all, we really have to surmise a ball park figure to arrive at a sensible conclusion for the size of the fleet. If one includes all active starships in the field, from Galaxy and Sovereign Classes all the way down to the diminutive Danube; no matter how they're deployed or where they're assigned. One could speculate that it might be a figure anywhere in the region of 7000 - 8000 ships. For a Federation that's as big as it boasts, this can really be seen as a very conservative estimate.
For any one class, (in its specifications table) a speculative and estimated number is given, but these are by no means certain, because the question also has to be asked: for how long exactly are ships constructed in any one class? Galaxy Class ships were first launched in the early 2360's, so at the current given date of 2377, are they still being built??? On this class' page I gave the rough estimate of a 139 Galaxy Class ships having been built at various intervals and at various ship yards during this period, with a further 31 under construction, or planned to be constructed and completed by the year 2381. I believe this to be a fair and realistic supposition. This is still highly conjectural though, for we know little in as far as how many ships Starfleet has, or deploys throughout its space and beyond, nor the number of ship yards it operates, or industrial logistics details, construction turnarounds, etc. But if a line of dialogue was given that stated there were more than 200 Galaxy Class ships I wouldn't fall off my chair. Because, as stated on the Galaxy Class page, Sisko alludes to 'Galaxy Wings 91 and 93' in the episode 'Sacrifice of Angels', which throws the debate up into the air regarding what constitutes a 'wing'?. 200 plus Galaxy Class ships isn't beyond all realms of possibility, in fact it sounds infinitely more sensible than the total of eight Galaxy Class ships speculated by Roddenberry at the birth of The Next Generation. But in fairness this was in the era of the early 2360's, it seems okay to think that at that time only eight had been built. But now Trek-time has reached the late 2370's, and with Galaxy Class being the fleet spearhead I speculate a significant number have been constructed. When you think of the huge size of the Federation that Starfleet has to control and patrol they're going to want to have a wide variety of ships numbered in the region of several thousands.
Another statistic I want to outline here is the dates I give for when a class has been in service, a point that should perhaps be further explored in the 'Dates' section, which is further up the page, but I think it's pertinent here. On the Stats Board, a year is given for when a ship was first commissioned. For example, let's quote Constitution Class. Here I state the launch of the prototype USS Constitution to be 2244, which is about canon, and correct. The year stated represents the date from which a class is first considered 'in service'. For Constitution Class, I then speculate that the last ship of this class was decommissioned in 2308. Another plausible time-frame, because although the Enterprise was such a famous ship, it was not the be all and end all of Constitution Class vessels, there were many more that perhaps went on after the Enterprise-A for another decade or two in limited respects. This makes a final figure of 64 years that the Constitution Class was in service. A fair amount for the number of ships, and the technology of the time. This factor of 'number of ships built' is important in the final analysis. With Constitution I speculate a final figure of 47 (Trek's favourite number!). This is due to the fact that there seemed to be so many darned ships of this class in Trek canon, so they must have been prolific throughout Federation space in comparison to other classes. Because of it's success and legendary status, it's fair to say that Constitution Class ships were constructed for quite some time, perhaps stepping up in construction during the refit and upgrade phase of the 2270's. I believe 47, although perhaps a bit small in some people's minds is a fair assessment.
But the point I want to consider, is that because there were 47 meant that the class endured for a long period, whereas a class with only 10 ships would last perhaps only 30 years at most. This is basic logic, for a large number of vessels for a class, it will take a significant amount of time before the numbers dwindle, and one with a small number of ships, such as the conjectural Nevada Class, which had only 8 vessels constructed lasted 38 years, for its fewer numbers results in inferior longevity. So my basic point is, the more the ships in a class, the longer that class will survive in service. But no matter how sound its construction, or how good a job is done at the Yards, there are many factors which can arise to stop a ship short of it's intended life-span, most notably war. One should also consider that it is a canon fact that the Galaxy Class has an intended life-span of 100 years. This is only what the technology intends, and the designers and engineers guarantee. There can be no accounting for the myriad mitigating circumstances which can curtail a starship's life. Space is a dangerous place....
WEAPONS
For the statistics given in this column, I've centred the whole thing around the canon stats listed for Galaxy Class. These ships have a total of 12 Type X (Roman numeral ten) Phaser Arrays, and 3 Photon Torpedo Launchers, carrying 275 individual casings as standard. For the other classes, I've basically formatted a logical method of conjecture around Galaxy to determine other class armaments.
All other ship weaponry dating back to the 23rd century to the present follows an imagined, and set progression of arms development and improvement over time. For we have little information of actual weaponry on other, earlier starships, ie how many arrays, Torpedo types, damage 'hit points' inflicted etc. So, the weapons statistics, although following a path of reason as technology develops, are only conjectured. Shield strength is just a basic value that has no actual 'treknological' basis, but is simply a guide to demonstrate the defensive capabilities from class to class, decade to decade. (see below for more)...
POWER
Power is an approximate calculation of shield strength times offensive capability, ie, for Constitution Class the final value of 7.8 is reached.
Constitution's Shield strength is 1.3, times it conjectured Phaser arrays (4) and Photon launchers (2), - or 1.3 x (4 + 2), totalling 7.8
|
S x (P+P) =Power |
This system, although based on hypothetical figures does give a basic, but realistic overall idea of how offensively powerful that particular class vessel is. For older ships (Daedalus Class) who posses the older style Laser Cannon and Fusion Missiles, a 50% power reduction calculation is considered. For middle aged classes of ship which have since been refitted, their original prototype values are noted -not their upgrades. The new Quantum Torpedo and Phaser Cannon systems have values which are speculated as being twice that of Photon torpedoes and the older style 'long beam' Phaser Arrays respectively. Older ships since upgraded to Quantums aren't considered, only new original prototypes fitted with them are acknowledged. More information can be found on the Class Stats Board.
Phaser types are passingly acknowledged, for Excelsior Class phasers are obviously going to be considerably less powerful than Sovereign for instance. Final power values given are a fair indication of that class' actual armour and hit points capability, and a ship whose power is 100, is there or thereabouts 10 tens as powerful as a ship that is rated at 10. The inserted Shield Strengths (listed for each class on its page) is considered to be increased and enhanced as time moves on and technology improves, and the system works on an exponential curve basis like the warp scale, meaning that a ship with a calculated shield grid strength of 6, is not necessarily twice as robust as a ship with a shield value of 3.
MAXIMUM CRUISING SPEED
Like the other speculated statistics, the same applies to the inserted cruising speed value for each class. Galaxy Class is the only class ship we really know a lot about (and Intrepid to a lesser extent), this is thanks to the shows, and great books like The Next Generation Technical Manual. Galaxy's cruising speed is noted at Warp 9.2, and 9.6 for 12 hours until the engines must be powered down. So taking this into account it's possible to assume related values at adjusted ratios for older/newer vessels. When the Intrepids were launched, they had a greatly improved cruising speed of 9.975, so warp propulsion took a great leap in subspace mechanics and engine efficiency over the period of a decade.
LENGTH
Length is reasonably self-explanatory, and we have a fair number of canon lengths for established classes, though there are still many canon design classes which have ambiguous lengths, such as Defiant and Akira Classes, to name but two. Some of the figures I've quoted come from other literal sources, such as Manuals and the Encyclopedia, others are sepeculated as there is conflicting information on several of the class lengths. Classes which have no official design obviously have a completely speculative length inserted in this column. For example, my design of Hokule'a Class, and its designation as a Medium Cruiser, I've said it's a pedestrian 388 Meters. But that's my vision only, as is my conjectural design.
MASS
This has been the most tricky figure to calculate. It is noted in the Technical Manual that the total mass of the Galaxy Class was estimated at 4.96 million metric tonnes. Based on this figure and the ship's relativistic specs and measurements I logically figured out an approximate mass for the next class down (canon Heavy Cruiser) which was Ambassador Class. I arrived at 3.80 million tonnes as a ball park figure. Soon afterwards, whilst thumbing through the Technical Manual searching for more relevant facts regarding the Galaxy Class, I stumbled across a passage that actually states that the Ambassador prototype NX-10521 had a mass of 3.71 million metric tonnes. So my guess was pretty close, and went a long way to convincing me that other class masses could be similarly calculated. Two other points should be noted regarding tonnage though. We know Galaxy Class is just short of 5 million MT, whilst Intrepid Class is around 700,000 MT, so Galaxy's mass is roughly 7 times that of Intrepid's, which doesn't quite mirror the difference in size, because analysing it, Galaxy is nearly twice as long, and it's breadth (beam) can be imagined to be at least twice as great due to the wide saucer. Intrepid's Deck number is 15, Galaxy's is 42, a higher figure by a factor of 2.8. So we can assume an average increase in all departments of 2 - 3, so a projected Galaxy mass next to Intrepid's can be assumed to be in the region of 1.75 million MT, yet it's 4.96 million MT. There may be other factors as to why Intrepid is so much lighter that is not known, or taken into account, such as the lack of certain bulky equipment, lower number of shuttles (not likely, as anyone one who watched the show will know!) newer and lighter construction components and so forth. But you'd have to wonder how much bearing this would have on what appears to be such a significant and radical contrast in tonnage.
Anyway, Galaxy Class is well tagged as a Heavy Cruiser! The overall general trend in the stats will be that older ships will be heavier than newer ships of similar size, because as technology advances, lighter and more durable materials become available. More efficient and less cluttered internal arrangements may be employed, and more computer operated systems will require less manpower. So, Lighter, emptier ships will equal less overall mass.
A metric tonne by the way, for those of you who don't follow the metric system (like most of us in England), is equal to 1000kg, or roughly 2,200 lbs. In imperial measurements, one metric tonne equals 0.98 (long) tons.
DECKS
Decks are calculated visually by examining a picture of the established class and making ones best guess at reaching a suitable figure if none is known. Again, like with mass and length etc. a completely conjectural design equals completely conjectural specs for those classes that simply have a name only with no details, like Hokule'a Class again. This and certain other such classes (at time of writing) have no canon specifications.
