Page 1 of 2

Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:25 pm
by Meste17
Why is the Nebula class considered a heavy cruiser? She looks more to me like the Reliant of that century, being to the Galaxy class what the Miranda was to the Constitution class of the 23rd century. True she has a secondary hull, but she looks AT MOST a medium cruiser to me. :)

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:50 pm
by Tinadrin Chelnor
Meste17 wrote:Why is the Nebula class considered a heavy cruiser? She looks more to me like the Reliant of that century, being to the Galaxy class what the Miranda was to the Constitution class of the 23rd century. True she has a secondary hull, but she looks AT MOST a medium cruiser to me. :)
Bare in mind the other ships that are in service around the time. The Excelsior is still around and likely considered a medium cruiser, they still have numerous smaller classes to fit the light-medium cruiser ranges. The Nebula seems to be more of a scaled down counterpart to the Galaxy, but with the added benefit of being extremely modular. I think it would definitely rate as a heavy cruiser, when compared to other starships in service at the time, both Federation and other polities alike.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:37 pm
by Meste17
Tinadrin Chelnor wrote:
Meste17 wrote:Why is the Nebula class considered a heavy cruiser? She looks more to me like the Reliant of that century, being to the Galaxy class what the Miranda was to the Constitution class of the 23rd century. True she has a secondary hull, but she looks AT MOST a medium cruiser to me. :)
Bare in mind the other ships that are in service around the time. The Excelsior is still around and likely considered a medium cruiser, they still have numerous smaller classes to fit the light-medium cruiser ranges. The Nebula seems to be more of a scaled down counterpart to the Galaxy, but with the added benefit of being extremely modular. I think it would definitely rate as a heavy cruiser, when compared to other starships in service at the time, both Federation and other polities alike.
True, but bear in mind that that also applies to the Miranda class, itself being a scaled down version of the USS Enterprise and other Constitution-class ships like her. For all we know the Nebula IS supposed to be a descendant of the Miranda class, much as how the Galaxy is a descendant of the Constitution class.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:07 pm
by Tinadrin Chelnor
The Nebula in my view, still, is much more than a medium cruiser when compared to it's modern counterparts.

It's not merely a matter of what it may of or may not have been based on, look at the Klingon bird of prey for example. They were everything from small fighter-type craft, to battlecruisers.

Also, the Contitution I'm certain was referred to as a battlecruiser at some point, and in its day probably did serve in that role.

But to my mind, the Nebula would rate at least as a heavy cruiser, due to its versatility and durability when compared to other active classes.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:19 pm
by Teaos
I'd agree, although from the looks of things I think they could go anywhere from light to heavy cruiser.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:20 pm
by Tinadrin Chelnor
Teaos wrote:I'd agree, although from the looks of things I think they could go anywhere from light to heavy cruiser.
Aye, it would probably depend on their configuration, etc.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:33 pm
by Teaos
Its not the sexiest ship out there, but I think the Nebual is by far Starfleets best design in early TNG era.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 9:08 pm
by McAvoy
Since people like to use naval terms especially older ones like light and heavy cruisers, it should be pointed out there technically shouldn't be a medium cruiser.

Though it seems to be too much of a similarity between the three terms anyway.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:51 am
by Tholian_Avenger
McAvoy wrote:Since people like to use naval terms especially older ones like . . .
Where are the armored cruisers, sloops, and galleons dammit?

I'm pretty sure that I can make a convincing case for the Antares being a collier, if it matters to anyone.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:56 am
by McAvoy
Armored cruiser would be hard to describe without basically describing a heavy cruiser or battleship. Though maybe you could argue a Trek armored cruiser would be a heavily armored ship with little shields and moderate firepower.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:26 am
by Teaos
The one type of ship that would have been nice to see in latter trek would be a pocket battle ship, like a Defiant but a bit larger and more self sufficient.

Given the threat of the Dominion and Borg, it is the perfect response to them. Hell an Akira would come close if you welded on some armor an powered up the phasers.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:52 am
by McAvoy
Technically the pocket battleship was nothing more than a slow, more heavily armed version of a heavy cruiser. You could make the case that certain heavy cruisers are a match one on one.

But I guess you could make a ship as powerful as a Galaxy but without the niceness and science crap and give it a range issue. Maybe a 420 meter long ship.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:26 am
by katefan
I would say the Nebula classified as a heavy cruiser fits. True, it is to the Galaxy what the Miranda is to the Constitution, but when you talk about sheer mass it was at the time the second largest ship serving in Starfleet. Even with the advent of new vessels like the Sovereign it is still a beast regardless of which pod it is sporting.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:24 am
by McAvoy
You could make the argument the Nebula is a better ship. But there is an unwritten rule that all Enterprises should be the best.

Re: Nebula class questions

Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:51 am
by Teaos
"Best" doesnt have to mean strongest.