looking at Indy's magnificent fleet rosters one again
http://www.bcpl.net/~indy/full-thrust/fleet-rosters.html
i wonder how many ships are on each; i could count them myself, but if Indy
already knows, could he please tell us?
furthermore, for the NAC he notes that battleships aren't listed, as they are
independent units; how many battleships does he see as being in service?
i am planning on using these numbers as a sort of 'gold standard' to figure
out how large the Dutch navy should be. i hope nobody minds.
tom
ps i deleted Indy's most recent announcement about the rosters, which is why
i'm not replying to it. sorry.
Tom: Sorry, don't have the book handy, but doesn't the FB have number in
service, as well as built, lost, scrapped, etc.?
The only place to add numbers would be non-FB ships, of which I think
there are one or two.
Course, that also involves WHEN you are asking for numbers. ;->=
Indy:
Magnificent job; I take back every nasty thought sent your way. ;->=
One suggestion, if time avails: full names on ships. I'm assuming I know most
of the origins of ships names, but one or two have me stymied.
The_Beast
> Tom:
Yes, but only for the specific ship classes we detailed in the book. There may
be 32 Majestics in NACRN service as of 2183, but there are probably half a
dozen other types of older and newer Battlecruisers still in active
service......
Jon (GZG)
> The only place to add numbers would be non-FB ships, of which I think
***
> Tom:
Yes, but only for the specific ship classes we detailed in the book. There may
be 32 Majestics in NACRN service as of 2183, but there are probably half a
dozen other types of older and newer Battlecruisers still in active
service......
Jon (GZG)
***
*ahem* I knew that, really I did. ;->=
I guess in my defense, my impression is that the FB classes are the main bulk
of the fleets. Most of the 'fluff' mentions other classes as remnants and
replacements just coming on board.
However, I must say the numbers of just the designed ships, at least to me,
suggest an industrial production and sheer manpower presence in space that
boggles MY imagination!
The_Beast
> On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 02:30:18PM -0600, devans@uneb.edu wrote:
Think robot mines, refineries and factories. You only need people when you
need flexibility, and I'd imagine by then either the "AI" is good enough to
handle most of the management or there's some
sort of cultural/political/religious reason not to use them.
> ***
There
> may be 32 Majestics in NACRN service as of 2183, but there are probably
Don't forget that the "official" FT ships are actually not that big - no
million-ton-dreadnoughts..... they also have relatively small crews
(compared, say, with Weber's Honor Harrington novels' background - ships
massing multi-million tons with crews of thousands each, and they STILL
lose them by the bucketload in every battle... <grin>)
> Tom writes:
> looking at Indy's magnificent fleet rosters one again
I used to have those numbers readily available, but lost the paper they're on.
I was also planning on generating a table broken up by points to reflect the
relative numbers each power
'has' of cruiser/destroyer/etc squadrons, if only to give a
basic idea that the NAC has X number of ship groups in the
800 - 1000 pts range whereas the FSE has Y number of ship
squadrons in the same point range.
Of course that *was* done on paper, and I lost that, too. :-/ Hafta
regenerate it some time here...
> furthermore, for the NAC he notes that battleships aren't listed, as
[jingle, boing, conk] "Yes"
> then The_Beast writes:
> Indy:
Heh. Tanks.:)
> One suggestion, if time avails: full names on ships. I'm assuming I
Hmmm. Which ones?
and St^3 JT pens:
> Tom:
There
> may be 32 Majestics in NACRN service as of 2183, but there are probably
This is what I love about all this.:) Always keeping flexibility in mind.
Mk