Various WCSO/WCP Continuity/Source Questions

Kyle Maverick

Rear Admiral
I am goint to say one thing here:

We're using current designations for future classifications. It doesn't work like that.

To use an RPG that I helped create, CV is used for standard fleet carriers, CVS is used for strike carrier CVE is used for escort carrier,. But we also use CVA (Assault), CVD (Defencve, carried light fighters only) and CVM (Mothership, those were huge and hard to take out, larger than even teh Kilrathi Dreadnaught of WC3), and to my knowledge, CVD and CVM have never been used in either real life and in WC. Trying to apply real life designations doesn't always work, as we often make designations in fiction as we need. Trying to use real carrier designations for the WC Universe is silly. Think about the Tiger's Claw, it was a Strike carrier but when you landed you saw CV07. An standard carrier if you use todays standards
 

Dragon1

Rear Admiral
I am goint to say one thing here:

We're using current designations for future classifications. It doesn't work like that.

To use an RPG that I helped create, CV is used for standard fleet carriers, CVS is used for strike carrier CVE is used for escort carrier,. But we also use CVA (Assault), CVD (Defencve, carried light fighters only) and CVM (Mothership, those were huge and hard to take out, larger than even teh Kilrathi Dreadnaught of WC3), and to my knowledge, CVD and CVM have never been used in either real life and in WC. Trying to apply real life designations doesn't always work, as we often make designations in fiction as we need. Trying to use real carrier designations for the WC Universe is silly. Think about the Tiger's Claw, it was a Strike carrier but when you landed you saw CV07. An standard carrier if you use todays standards

Wing Commander- observed:

CV = Carrier (light, fleet, utility, possibly heavy)
CVA = Possible designation for heavy or attack carrier
CVX = Midway-class Carrier
CVE = Escort Carrier (converted heavy transport Wake-class, and presumably built from the keel up Harrier-class)
CVS = Battleship (TCS Concordia)
LCA = Light Cruiser

Unless I left something off, that is all we know.

The Wing Commander community does not make up designations, these are the designations provided for us in the games and novels.

The TCS Concordia (WC2) uses the hull designator CVS-65, we know that the Concordia (from the manual provided with the game) is a Confederation-class Dreadnought. Therefore, it is logical to deduce that in the Wing Commander universe, the CVS designator is applied to Dreadnoughts. It may seem counter-intuitive, but we don't really know what the "S" stands for, while the Concordia's fighter complement clearly qualifies the ship for the "CV" portion of the designation.

One thought that I have is that the pre-war battleships, which carried no fighters at all, had the hull designation "S." Thus, a Texas-class Battleship's hull number may have been something like S-40, again though, this is just conjecture on my part.
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
LCA = Light Cruiser

2 part nitpick:

1) None of the fighter-equipped human cruisers are light cruisers. 2 are heavy cruisers (Waterloo and Tallahassee), and one is a "quick strike cruiser", a designation unique to WC (Hades).*

2) Again using modern designations, light cruisers are "CL".

(* I don't think the Plunkett has a fighter complement, but not sure on that. If anything, though, it'd probably qualify as a battlecruiser, for its firepower, if not an all-up battleship.)
 

Jason_Ryock

Vice Admiral
2 part nitpick:
I don't think the Plunkett has a fighter complement, but not sure on that. If anything, though, it'd probably qualify as a battlecruiser, for its firepower, if not an all-up battleship.

This is something I have asked LOAF about and apparently it DOES have a fighter complement. The Plunkett Doc file says it has a max of 15 fighters and 5 shuttles, in one hanger bay.
 

Bar-None

Rear Admiral
One has to wonder: with the coming of the mace missile, flash pack and leech class weapontry, why Confed would move more in the massive-carrier direction. A Vesuvius or Poseidon(Midway) class vessel would undoubtedly take far longer and be more costly to build than a Yorktown, Ranger or Confederation. Additionally you're comparing hundreds of fighters and pilots with dozens.

Given the risk, wouldn't it be safer (and easier) to cover that vast an amount of space with smaller ships in far greater numbers, built at greater intervals?
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
The answer to most "why would they..." questions, in its short form, consists of just one word: money.

Such is the case with the Midway class carriers.

IIRC, the Midways were to form the core of Confed's heavy strike capability, backed up by more numerous (and much smaller) escort carriers. Of course, the bugs kinda put a kink in that particular plan... :D
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
More importantly, the Midways were to act as mobile naval bases - which presumably means that instead of building additional starbases (like Ella, Perry, or the huge starbases from WC2), they would have Midways patrolling the frontier. I suppose, if the Midways were designed properly to live up to this requirement, they would be able to endure much, much longer deployments without having to head back to base for fresh supplies - and in fact, smaller ships would pick up supplies from them. But, this is just speculation - we don't really know if the "mobile naval base" thing is to be taken literally, or if it was just a fancy buzzword.

(...though we do of course see a Midway-class carrier serving as a static naval base in Arena)
 
Top