TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

[SuperSaiyaMan12]

From the TOS to Movie Era, how big do you think the Federation Fleet got? Like how literal should we take Kirk's quote about the Constitution-class being only 12 in the fleet?

[Deepcrush]

I would take it that there are only 12 of that class in the fleet. Don't see that as being a tough call.

[SuperSaiyaMan12]

I would take it that there are only 12 of that class in the fleet. Don't see that as being a tough call.

Seems a little...minimalist. I mean, the Federation had how many worlds in it then? 12 ships of the heavy cruiser class wouldn't be enough to protect a single world, much less the Federation.

[Captain Seafort]

Seems a little...minimalist. I mean, the Federation had how many worlds in it then? 12 ships of the heavy cruiser class wouldn't be enough to protect a single world, much less the Federation.

Not on their own, but supported by an unknown number of lesser cruisers, destroyers, frigates, etc, it should be sufficient. The Connie is, after all, the most powerful ship in the fleet - it makes sense that there should only be a small number of them.

[Mark]

I would take it that there are only 12 of that class in the fleet. Don't see that as being a tough call.

Seems a little...minimalist. I mean, the Federation had how many worlds in it then? 12 ships of the heavy cruiser class wouldn't be enough to protect a single world, much less the Federation.

After all, how many aircraft carriers does the US Navy have? 12 isn't an unrealistic number for the time. Especially since one assumes it was supported by the Miranda class, as well as the non cannon frigate and destroyer classes.

[Teaos]

Hell if the TOS tech manual is to be believed (its non canon) there were dozens of other types of ships. A rather large fleet in total.

[Graham Kennedy]

12 "like her" regarding the Enterprise doesn't mean only 12 ships in the fleet. It doesn't even mean only 12 large Starships in the fleet. It simply means 12 Constitution class ships in the fleet. I see no reason why there couldn't be at least one or two other similar classes in service which number many, many more. Just as at the end of WWII the US only had four Iowa class battleships, but had a total Battleship fleet of some twenty or so along with thousands of cruisers, destroyers, frigates, submarines, etc.

Assuming the NCC system came in with the founding of the Federation in 2163, 1,700 ships or so had been put into service by the 2260s. Assuming a constant building rate that's 17 ships a year. The hull life of Federation ships runs to a century plus, but even assuming a 30 year average hull life you could maintain a fleet of 510 ships at that build rate.

We know Kirk told Zefram Cochrane ""We're on a thousand planets and spreading out." The "we" could even be Humans rather than the Federation as a whole, which would make the Federation potentially huge - tens of thousands of planets perhaps. But taking a low end case of 1,000 Federation planets, and even assuming a lot of them were the sort of "five person outpost" places that we so often saw in TOS, we're surely still talking about some hundreds of developed worlds. The fleet needed for that would be in the hundreds, at least.

So yeah, I'd put the TOS fleet at about 500 ships, minimum.

[Teaos]

And thats not unbelieveable at all. Just think of the industrial capability they have. At a minimum they have a half dozen highly built up home worlds along with dozens of other very well established panets. Pooling that amount of industry you would easily be able to support a lot of ships.

[Graham Kennedy]

Absolutely.

It's also worth noting that a rise from 500 or so ships in TOS to 5,000+ in TNG also represents a hell of a jump. The advent of replicators seems to have produced a truly massive leap in production capacity for the Federation - a new industrial revolution, effectively.

[Sionnach Glic]

To assume Kirk's quote means there were only 12 ships in all of Starfleet is incredibly foolish. It's far more likely he meant just 12 Connies, which wouldn't be surprising given that they were probably a new class and some of the most powerful and large at the time.

[SuperSaiyaMan12]

To assume Kirk's quote means there were only 12 ships in all of Starfleet is incredibly foolish. It's far more likely he meant just 12 Connies, which wouldn't be surprising given that they were probably a new class and some of the most powerful and large at the time.

Let me clarify, I mean 12 CONNIES is ridiculous, given that they are supposed to be frontline vessels as well as explorers and warships. Given that the Federation had about 30 member planets and nearly a 1000 colonies. Since the class launched in 2245, there should have been at least 20 Connies in the Fleet by 2265. Just 12 of them seems rather minimalist.

[Sionnach Glic]

Given that TOS quite often jumps all over the place in terms of stardates, it's hard to say just how long the class had been in service as of that quote.
If we take each one as being the flagship of a specific fleet with, say, four or five hundred ships in each, it becomes reasonable enough.

[Mikey]

Again, I'd use the analogy of Connies to nuclear carriers. The connie would only be needed in a sector or system under attack, and would be used for external exploration; there is no reason to think that any other missions couldn't be handled by a myriad of lesser ships.

[Captain Seafort]

Let me clarify, I mean 12 CONNIES is ridiculous, given that they are supposed to be frontline vessels as well as explorers and warships. Given that the Federation had about 30 member planets and nearly a 1000 colonies. Since the class launched in 2245, there should have been at least 20 Connies in the Fleet by 2265. Just 12 of them seems rather minimalist.

As has been pointed out, saying that a dozen of the most powerful ship in the fleet isn't a problem. During the age of sail, the Royal Navy at it's height typically had few than a dozen 1st rates in commission. During the 1st World War, it had only five of it's most powerful design. At the end of the 2nd World War the US Navy had, as mentioned, four. Currently, the US Navy has 10, 7 or 3 (depending on what you're counting) of it's most powerful design.

Giving Starfleet the same number is not at all unreasonable, despite having to cover hundreds or thousands of light years - the E-nil is, after all, far faster than anything we have. As with the British Empire in the late 19th century, most of the Federation could be covered by local gunboats and other light forces, and the bulk of the battlefleet comprised of older designs, leaving the Connies to deal with the most potent threats.

[Toadnuke]

Considering the Constitution Class was the most advanced ship of that time, 12 isn't an unreasonable number. I'm sure this number eventually grew to at least 25 by the time they were retired from service.

However, I'm aware of several other smaller friggates and cruisers (Including the Miranda Class) that probably made up the bulk of the fleet for a long while.