Vesuvius refit

They were making test-runs along the Neutral Zone ???? or the Romulans Operatives are Very Good !!!!
I have some Info (i don´t remember where i find it the first time) that says that any section have independent Warp Capabilities.
 
Apperently the Romulans were very good. Your right though, the bottom two sections have two warp naceles each, and the top section has a hidden warp nacele that extends when in Multi vector assault mode.
 
Phasers don't show that they aren't travelling at warp. No matter what sources say, we've seen ships firing phasers at warp.

TC
 
sure it does... how else would a phaser fire from there... what you just said makes no sense at all. If a phaser comes from somewhere, there's obviously a phaser emmitter... but now we should really talk about Wing Commander, since that's what this forum is for.

TC
 
If the Script need to fire phasers in warp.......
In the First episode of STTNG, the phasers are fired from the captain´s yacht (maybe an homage to the first Enterprise)
 
Cause they made a mistake, plain and simple.

Im sure places like the CIC and even that room where the guy sits on the flight deck and watches ships land can be used as an auxilury bridge on Confederation ships. In fact im pretty sure thats what they did on the Tarawa when it was being blown to pieces in End Run.
 
The Intrepid had her bridge blown to the River Kwaii and still had her CIC to make-do as a bridge. Carriers, generally speaking, avoid capital ship combat at all costs. They're a staging point for a seperate element of an attack (fighters). You can't have a carrier trading shots with a destroyer, the carrier is made for deployment of fighters, not face to face confrontation. A good idea for a carrier modification would be to drop mines from some kind of compartment under it's rear bay, to help slow down pursuing enemy capital ships.

I've noticed people on this thread saying how old the Ranger class is. Well, you can't always get a Fleet Carrier or something new and shiny. I'd trust a Ranger far more than a new class carrier since the Ranger has proven it's self time and again. Besides, the age of the carrier has little to do with the type of fighters in her. Would you rather have a Vesuvius-class with nothing but Hornets and Epees or a Ranger with Panthers and Devastators?

The carrier it's self has precious little to do with a stand-up fight, as it relies on it's fighter element for practically everything, not to mention that Rangers are fast little things. Technically, you could jump into a system and drop it's 40 fighters along with a pair of fueling ships and then have the carrier jump back to where it came, have the fighters do their work and then have the carrier jump back in system after the fighting is done.
 
Originally posted by Ghost

Maybe you forget the Enterprise from *All the good things*
and the others truly warships like the Akira Class and the Defiant Class, and IIRC the Galaxy class is the only ship class with 2 bridges (the battle and saucer bridges)
Click to expand...

Ahhh..came here late, please excuse the genre drift....

Just for a bit of trivia, the Akira-class is a carrier. It has two launch bays (fore and aft), and launches the "Federation Tac Fighters". All that info comes from the ships designer.

You may return to your WC discussion now.
 
Does anyone know of any good books that talk about stuff like in this thread? Basic ideas of Fleet Movements and the like?
 
Originally posted by LeHah
I've noticed people on this thread saying how old the Ranger class is. Well, you can't always get a Fleet Carrier or something new and shiny. I'd trust a Ranger far more than a new class carrier since the Ranger has proven it's self time and again. Besides, the age of the carrier has little to do with the type of fighters in her. Would you rather have a Vesuvius-class with nothing but Hornets and Epees or a Ranger with Panthers and Devastators?
Click to expand...

Oh, make no mistake, I think of the Ranger class as being a capable light carrier. The Border Worlds battlegroup I designed and write for HTL has one of those, which I wouldn't have included if I thought it was cannon fodder. Howerver, it is hard to get past the fact that *is* an old design, and has quite a few weakness. It only has a single launch bay, its shields are a generation behind those in WC:p, and it only has a hadfull of laser turrets, much fewer than many modern ship. While the BW would use it (they have a history of revitalising old designs) I really think Confed would have moved on to a more modern light carrier.

Best, Raptor
 
I would disagree with even the assertion that the Ranger is a capable carrier -- aside from weak shields, weaponry and launch capabilities, its fighter complement is pathetically small compared to almost any other class of carrier.
 
Well, I'll agree with it's weakness in turret fire, Raptor, but LOAF, sheilds matter little if you know where to manuver an escort carrier and when. Once again, no capital ship engagements! :D
 
Fine, no capship engagments, but what are you gonna do against those fighters that are always getting through to the carrier?
 
Yes, the Ranger class was even in WC III obsolete but ConFed was running out of combat capable ships so ships that would be second line ships at best end up in front line service.

The Victory had a very experianced and capable crew so it was more to that fact (and the fact that we were stationed aboard it) that it was very sucesseful that of being a capable ship design.

The island on the Ranger, Concordia and Vesuvius class (the one that I can remeber that have a island) its more to the fact that the helm requires a good view point (they dont use screens like the ships on Star trek universe) for navigation and the islands must have independent shield generators for added protection.

The view point of the Vesuvius class is exelent as you can see in WC IV movies.

The Vesuvius class is still a powerful ship, even in WC P time but its too expencive and cost efective for having many of then around, that is why the Midway class was designed.

One of the few design errors of the Vesuvius class is the open flight deck that can be taken out with a few torpedos and make the ship useless, a refit of that class sould take out that flaw.
 
Thats crazy! With the vast distances in interplanetary travel, and even combat. Theres no way anyone can navigate by visual sight. Everything they do from navigation to weapons targeting is done with computers, despite whether or not the bridge has windows or a viewscreen. Most of the time other ships are so far away you couldnt see them with the naked eye. Even with the viewscreen, thats a zoomed in altered image. Thats no way to base your piloting on.
 
I sould have use ruder controls, remenber when the Interpid enter the "dead zone"?

They lose all guidence system but they still have ruder control.

Its not for long range navigation (unless the nav system is down) but for short range navigation, when they are trying to manuver the ship (like when the Vesuvius and Mt. Helen fight each other in Ella) to make better use of weapons, escape manuvers (like when the Interpid dived after St. Helen jump in and engage the Vesuvius) and escape asteroids (they can damage the ship if they are big enough).
 
They were still relying on computer naviagtion to fly the ship. There was no way they can fly a massive ship like that without using computers. They may be able to see the ships thru the windows but they arent using it to fly by.
 
Yes, it would be impossible to "dead stick" a carrier, all carriers have a manual feature in their navigation system. This allows the helmsman to control the carrier's attitude with minor computer aide. This is a backup feature that is built into the system in the event of electical failure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top