HOME | DD
Adrasil — Lantree Class
#startrekstarship
Published: 2017-07-10 13:51:01 +0000 UTC; Views: 1399; Favourites: 22; Downloads: 127
Redirect to original
Description
Original design by John Mason, Mike Gray & Paul Lynch.
Made with parts by Captshade, Kaisernathan1701, Icchan85202, Nichodo & myself.
Color palette by UtopiaPlanitia001.
Related content
Comments: 12
It should be the Lantree-subclass. Even without the rollbar, it's still a Miranda-class
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
To be honest, I don't follow the subclass thing (it's like splitting hairs, I guess I'm not THAT into it).
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Certainly you can understand the difference between Frigates, Heavy Frigates (an oxymoron?), Tactical Frigates, and so on?
Different missions, capacties, places in the tree.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hell, what's the difference between a "Destroyer", a "Frigate", a "Scout", and an "Escort"? In my poring-over-ship-designs time, I've seen that Destroyers are the same as Scouts- single-hull, one-nacelle, 0-1 shuttlebay ships; and that Frigates are the same as Escorts- single-hull, two-nacelle, 0 to 2-shuttlebay ships.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Of course there are no ironclad Star Fleet rules about any this. Lots of online designs are simply "frigate" or "destroyer" or "battleship" or "heavy cruiser" or whatever-the-hell else because that's what the person diddling around in Starship Creator thought it should be. I've seen one hull design ID'd as a Destroyer, a Scout and a Corvette by different people.
Here, though, we have variations on the thoroughly canon vessel from WoK. And it's pretty settled that Reliant was a Frigate type, mostly because she just has one hull. Indeed, there was no official word on the class name of this type of vessel (Miranda) until TNG came out, which was, what five years or so after WoK came out. So we look to what the fandom considers "canon" literature from the 80s: Ships Of The Star Fleet and Jackill's Starfleet Reference Manuals. And that's where the general foundation of all this entirely imaginary inventory control comes from.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
EXACTLY! Not only that, seeing how the creators of various Trek ignore canon...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, we call that...Hollywood.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'll help with that: there are many variants of a certain ship model. Take the Constitution-class for example. There's the Endeavor, the Tokapi, the Enterprise and others; all are variants of the same model. The Miranda has three variants: the Lantree, the Saratoga and the Antares.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Endeavour and Enterprise classes represent for evolutions Constitution: sequential refit programs fpr the Heavy Cruiser fleet built onto the original hulls, with some new-built ships as well. Tikopai is %100 new-built, so it qualifies as a less-tactical variant of Constitution. Now, Coronado class through decks? %100 a variant.
For this frigate superclass, go allllllll the way back to the Surya class, companion and contemporary to Constitution.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess what I should have said was I don't think in terms of classes and sub-classes. We could go back and forth on this forever so I'll just say this... There's the Lantree class light frigate. Then there's the Miranda class heavy frigate. The Miranda is more heavily armed, thus it's designation as a heavy frigate (these designations go back over 100 years). Yes, they are based on the same hull design and then given different armament, or sensor packages etc. Each one being designated a different class.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
This is the correct approach to this issue.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is standard naval tradition. For example the 10 Nimitz class aircraft carriers are divided into 3 sub-classes: The original Nimitz, which includes the Nimitz (CVN-68), The Eisenhower (CVN-69) and the Carl Vinson (CVN-70). The Theodore Roosevelt sub-class are the next 5 ships while the Ronald Regan sub-class includes the Regan and the George H.W. Bush. The new Enterprise (CVN-80) will be a Gerald Ford Class carrier (no sub-classes yet). . .
👍: 0 ⏩: 0