ins_apmj@jhunix.UUCP (Patrick M Juola) (02/01/86)
In article <11633@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> harry@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu.UUCP writes: >How could "heavy cruisers" be the "biggest" catagory of ships? Wouldn't >the largest ships be called "battleships" or "dreadnoughts" or something? In one of the printed supplements (the Technical Manual?) they list all the Class I starships (i.e. the ships of the line.) There are scouts, destroyers, tugs, various tug pods, heavy cruisers *and* dreadnoughts, but the dreadnoughts are still (at the time of publication of the TM) under construction. When you think about it, even an Constitution-class heavy cruiser packs a hell of a lot of firepower -- more than is typically needed for any sort of peacetime mission. A dreadnought would just be that much more expensive to construct and maintain, and the extra firepower wouldn't be needed/used. Besides, would *you* send your umpteen quadrillion credit dreadnought on an exploration mission to get trashed by the berserker/doomsday machine/flying carrot? Another point. The Federation is, as a whole, a peaceful group. Battleship is an awfully military term, and perhaps calling the Enterprise a heavy cruiser gives the Federation a few diplomatic points. I belive this point was brought up in one of the unofficial novels. After all, if the Enterprise can trash any given Klingon ship in battle, and they know it, what does it matter if it's called a heavy cruiser, a PT boat, or _GOD'S_WRATH_PERSONIFIED_? Patrick Juola Hopkins Maths