Older planes were used for more risky Wild Weasels, were they not? Whoever flew the Bird Dogs in ‘Nam needed a medal for just stepping into the cockpit
The age of Starships, how old can they get?
- Thread starter valkyrie013
- Start date
Also, plenty of the tech used in WWII was recognized as totally obsolete when the first shots were exchanged already. It still saw years of frontline service, in circumstances where technology simply evolved too fast for the industries to keep up.
The curve would not be that steep in the 24th century (indeed, it's a miracle it isn't totally flat in a galaxy where everything has been invented a million years ago already!) so relics like Constellation would necessarily linger on, and see service in times of crisis. I mean, it's clear that the industries can't cope in Trek, either, or else they would: Starfleet is always fatally short on ships and often measures its response time in years if not decades... Obviously, building more ships is not an option there.
Timo Saloniemi
The curve would not be that steep in the 24th century (indeed, it's a miracle it isn't totally flat in a galaxy where everything has been invented a million years ago already!) so relics like Constellation would necessarily linger on, and see service in times of crisis. I mean, it's clear that the industries can't cope in Trek, either, or else they would: Starfleet is always fatally short on ships and often measures its response time in years if not decades... Obviously, building more ships is not an option there.
Timo Saloniemi
Naval Auxiliary Research?
Would they really use "Naval" for Civilian Registered vessels?
Isn't that more of a government used Acronym?
NAR = National Astro-Transit Resource ?
Naval-Associated Registry?
It's a good question. Could be either way. In my world the explanation would be that it's a Star Fleet ship lent or leased to civilians in sort of a residency program. Scientists put in an application and get the use of a starship maintained by Fleet command for X years.
Than again, could be not :-)
I doubt any of the letters actually stand for any English words, except perhaps through utterly obscure bits of pseudo-etymology (the way the letter V is used for aircraft carriers in USN codes, via aViation).
If anything, N would simply appear to stand for FederatioN, in a coding system that extends to foreign vessels such as Yridian ones. Observably, NCC is Federation active Starfleet, while NAR and NSP and NFT and NBT stand for other Federation organizations, there being no obvious connection between the letters A and R and the organization operating SS Vico just like there is no connection between the letter C and Starfleet.
Registries that lack the initial N would be foreign, then, like YLT or BCR. Or BDR, even if some Feds (or ex-Feds, really) are currently operating that ship.
Timo Saloniemi
If anything, N would simply appear to stand for FederatioN, in a coding system that extends to foreign vessels such as Yridian ones. Observably, NCC is Federation active Starfleet, while NAR and NSP and NFT and NBT stand for other Federation organizations, there being no obvious connection between the letters A and R and the organization operating SS Vico just like there is no connection between the letter C and Starfleet.
Registries that lack the initial N would be foreign, then, like YLT or BCR. Or BDR, even if some Feds (or ex-Feds, really) are currently operating that ship.
Timo Saloniemi
Last edited:
For more versatile designs, there may be a general pattern:
1. Shiny brand new ship. Bleeding edge technology.
2. Been deployed. Design deemed modern, if no longer bleeding edge.
3. Workhorse. Refits keep the design relevant as such.
4, Gopher. Long out of production, but the old rust buckets are still somewhat useful.
By the time you get to number 4, elderly ships are used for unglamorous and/or irregularly scheduled jobs. Spare parts for these ships are probably scavenged from a bone yard.
As for modernization, I suspect that by stage 4 nobody would bother.
5. A few antique ships exist as museum ships.
BTW, I noticed that somebody compared the Miranda to the DC-3 in a Reddit post. According to the Wikipedia article, the oldest DC-3 still flying was built in 1937. That would make that plane about eighty-four years old.
Last edited:
A DC-3 wouldn't be an apt comparison because it's out of service sure there are civilians that re build it and use them but no longer in military service.
The more apt comparison would be a C-130 or B-52 something that has been in service since the 50s but continually upgraded and even with the C-130 continually produced
The more apt comparison would be a C-130 or B-52 something that has been in service since the 50s but continually upgraded and even with the C-130 continually produced
According to Wikipedia, over 300 DC-3s were still in use in 2017. I wouldn't be surprised if at least a handful are still flying 15-16 years from now, somewhere in the world.
BTW, the F-15 fighter first flew in 1972, but the USAF is receiving an upgraded version, the F-15 EX.
BTW, the F-15 fighter first flew in 1972, but the USAF is receiving an upgraded version, the F-15 EX.
F-15 would be apt.
Try to make a replacement but didn't work out so the make more planes to fill the bill.
But again F-15ex is an upgrade with the latest and greatest and a new build. A miranda say built in 2310 wouldn't have the Connie refit nacelles. Would be more in line with excelsior.
Try to make a replacement but didn't work out so the make more planes to fill the bill.
But again F-15ex is an upgrade with the latest and greatest and a new build. A miranda say built in 2310 wouldn't have the Connie refit nacelles. Would be more in line with excelsior.
NX-01 being decommissioned after only 10 years was likely due to a number of factors. it's possible other NX class ships were in service longer
Possibilities:
it's crew and the ship itself were famous for uniting the founding members of the federation, so it was decided to put it in a museum before it could get destroyed or heavily damaged in service
All the new tech or advancements of current tech, both human between its launch and the founding, as well as brought in from the other members by the forming of the federation was too much to retrofit into the existing ship
Possibilities:
it's crew and the ship itself were famous for uniting the founding members of the federation, so it was decided to put it in a museum before it could get destroyed or heavily damaged in service
All the new tech or advancements of current tech, both human between its launch and the founding, as well as brought in from the other members by the forming of the federation was too much to retrofit into the existing ship
In a practical view I think a ship should last about 50 years unless there is some historic value to it.
That being said, the use of the movie models in TNG and DS9 blows that out of the water. We have ships that are 80+ years old and classes that were designed more than a century before. So I think that one of the improvements in Starship technology involves longevity and as of the movie era, ships were capable of lasting until they were very obsolete or too damaged to put back into service. I'm sure these older ships have had many upgrades to their systems, but their space frames are robust and capable of lasting a long time. So I don't really think there is an upper limit as long as the ship serves a purpose and is still useful.
That being said, the use of the movie models in TNG and DS9 blows that out of the water. We have ships that are 80+ years old and classes that were designed more than a century before. So I think that one of the improvements in Starship technology involves longevity and as of the movie era, ships were capable of lasting until they were very obsolete or too damaged to put back into service. I'm sure these older ships have had many upgrades to their systems, but their space frames are robust and capable of lasting a long time. So I don't really think there is an upper limit as long as the ship serves a purpose and is still useful.
I mean, They find old ships from advanced alien civilizations that still work after hundreds or thousands of years...
.
There are a lot older military ships in use now than commercial. The same is true of aircraft. so a fifty year old air craft carrier, USS Nimitz still has some life left in it, not to mention the age of those B-52 bombers. The French Navy has been using the Charles De Gaulle since the late 80's and I think intend to use it until the 2030's. Conversely you'd be hard pressed to find a container ship that dates back to the early 90's, and apart from a few ex soviet haulers, very little commercial freighters from before then. The rules of sea war haven't changed enough to require massive revisions in most navies, but the demands of commerce change year by year.
The ISS is old enough to vote and drink and it will be in it's thirties by the time it probably is abandoned. I tend to think Federation ships last a very long time, or else, like commercial ships, get melted down and recycled once their role changes too much for them to be worth upgrading.
The ISS is old enough to vote and drink and it will be in it's thirties by the time it probably is abandoned. I tend to think Federation ships last a very long time, or else, like commercial ships, get melted down and recycled once their role changes too much for them to be worth upgrading.
Older ships still in is use may never have seen combat, or be in an environment or situation to overstrain the ship?
Well, you might say the Enterprise NCC-1701 went through so many odd situations and took such beatings in battle that it could explain why Starfleet retired her early. But if Voyager can be kicked back and forth like a football and be back at 100% capacity next week without a Starbase around, that argument only goes so far...
