Miranda Class in the Dominion War.

[137th Gebirg]

There was also a 'D12' designation for Lursa & B'etor's BoP in Star Trek: Generations, but there's also no indication of scale for it, unless it's the same ship they were using in DS9 when they rendezvoused with a runabout, in which case it was about the same size as Kruge's BoP in TSFS

To add to the confusion about the timeframe of BOP designations, MA also says this:

The menu screen on the Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (Special Edition) DVD describes Klaa's ship as a "Bird-of-Prey D12-class."

... a full 5 years (and around 80-some years in-universe, before the 24th century segment) of Generations!

And then they also mention that the BOP has been given a "Class 5" designation in Prodigy, with additional weapons systems that previous models didn't have (extra wing-mounted disruptors & aft-facing torp launcher).

Sadly, I've never heard of either of these other designations (or, I should say, don't recall them, as they were both mentioned on-screen) until I read this thread this morning...

 

[Dukhat]

I don't think that's the case at all. Miranda's were perfectly serviceable ships. They weren't a Sovereign or a Defiant, but they're far from useless death traps.

They seem to be, at the very least, roughly on par with Jem Hadar bug ships.

Yeah, the two instances we saw of them in TNG, they were crewed by about 30 people, which despite their capacity for 430 crew, doesn't quite make them 'drones.'

We don't know what Sisko's Saratoga's crew complement was, but we saw at least 10-15 people on the bridge, in the hallways and during the evacuation. Only three escape pods were jettisoned; if there were about 15 people per pod, the total surviving crew would be under 50. Still far short of the 430 capacity.

To add to the confusion about the timeframe of BOP designations, MA also says this:... a full 5 years (and around 80-some years in-universe, before the 24th century segment) of Generations!

Well, at least that would confirm that the scale of the Duras sisters' BoP we saw in Generations was the same as Kruge's ship (and, apparently the same age as his ship too.) It's just annoying that a tiny BoP took out an entire Galaxy class starship...

My question is, was the 'D12' designation originally meant to have been for a larger, more powerful ship (with a corresponding new filming model built) which the producers nixed in favor of the BoP so that they could reuse the explosion stock footage from TUC?

 

[evilchumlee]

Well, at least that would confirm that the scale of the Duras sisters' BoP we saw in Generations was the same as Kruge's ship (and, apparently the same age as his ship too.) It's just annoying that a tiny BoP took out an entire Galaxy class starship...

I've been told that size doesn't matter...

But for real though, Trek ships rely HEAVILY on their shields for protection. Once shields are down, that's that. The BoP could ignore shields, so...

Yeah, the two instances we saw of them in TNG, they were crewed by about 30 people, which despite their capacity for 430 crew, doesn't quite make them 'drones.

I think many ships could potentially operate with far less crew, just depends on their mission profile.

Miranda's may have once been up with there with Constitution's doing all sorts of frontier exploration and all that. By the 24th century, they're likely more freighters, patrol vessels, etc. that just don't require all of those positions. Less crew means less medical staff. If there's not really a science profile, you can knock out an entire division of the ship. No (or minimal) labs and what not.

The ships seem to be incredibly well engineered, so maintenance is likely incredibly low, meaning less engineering personnel required.

They have a capacity for 400 some odd crew, but it's not a requirement.

 

[Tim Walker]

Located my biplane post. Post dated July 1st, 2021, to the thread The age of starships, how old can they get?. The biplane was a Soviet design, the Polikarpov Po-2. First flew in 1927. So when I made my post, a design that had been flying for about 94 years.

 

[evilchumlee]

Located my biplane post. Post dated July 1st, 2021, to the thread The age of starships, how old can they get?. The biplane was a Soviet design, the Polikarpov Po-2. First flew in 1927. So when I made my post, a design that had been flying for about 94 years.

We also don't know how long the Miranda's were in production for.

If it was a proven, rugged, damn near unbreakable design we might be seeing Miranda's in the Dominion War that aren't necessarily that old. It's entirely possible they kept the production lines going on them for an extended period, making some tweaks here and there that didn't necessitate an entire redesign.

It's not a direct perfect comparison, but I think of Miranda's like a Jeep Wrangler. They've been being built for close to 40 years now, just getting upgraded versions from time to time.

I have a headcanon that a huge strength of the Miranda as compared to something like say, a Galaxy-Class is that it's warp core/nacelles/warp drive system is a whole is essentially bulletproof. It's so incredibly well designed that it needs a ridiculously low amount of maintenance, it can be operated by an absolute skeleton crew, and it will work through any amount of punishment and can be held together by duct tape. The Galaxy-Class' warp core seems to made of paper and explodium, and if it's sneezed on has a propensity to go into a breach.

SO... given that, Miranda's just... kept rolling off the assembly line. Things were updated... weapons system, computer cores, etc. but they just left the warp drive system alone.

 

[Dukhat]

We also don't know how long the Miranda's were in production for.

The only 'evidence' we have for how long that was, was from the USS Brattain's dedication plaque, which gives a commissioning stardate analogous to the year 2345. The only problem with that date is that the Brattain's 2XXXX registry number would be too low chronologically for a ship produced in 2345 (hence the word 'evidence' in quotes, since it's possible the stardate system changed after this plaque was made.) But for now, that's the best evidence we have for Miranda class construction dates. So at the very least, Starfleet was producing Miranda class ships up to the year 2345.

 

[evilchumlee]

The only 'evidence' we have for how long that was, was from the USS Brattain's dedication plaque, which gives a commissioning stardate analogous to the year 2345. The only problem with that date is that the Brattain's 2XXXX registry number would be too low chronologically for a ship produced in 2345 (hence the word 'evidence' in quotes, since it's possible the stardate system changed after this plaque was made.) But for now, that's the best evidence we have for Miranda class construction dates. So at the very least, Starfleet was producing Miranda class ships up to the year 2345.

Registry numbers have been shown to not necessarily be sequential. They... often skew towards being generally sequential, but they are unreliable at best.

Starfleet is all over the place with that and it's not out of the question that USS Brattain was named after an older ship and reused the registry, sans letter suffix (that prior to Discovery, was very scarcely used). Or that particular number was unused, and had some sort of meaning to someone involved with its build, 21166.

At the very least, we know from Brattain that at the very least, the Miranda's got upgrades... its computer systems were LCARS-based, not the older Movie-era type which remained consistent through TNG's run.

But yeah, Brattain may have been... 20ish years old in TNG. I don't really see any issue with that at all. They found a design that worked and stuck with it. The Miranda's are the Federation's version of the Klingon Bird of Prey. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[Dukhat]

Registry numbers have been shown to not necessarily be sequential. They... often skew towards being generally sequential, but they are unreliable at best.

Registries are more reliable than you're giving them credit for, but that's another topic.

Starfleet is all over the place with that and it's not out of the question that USS Brattain was named after an older ship and reused the registry, sans letter suffix (that prior to Discovery, was very scarcely used). Or that particular number was unused, and had some sort of meaning to someone involved with its build, 21166.

I'm not sure why the Brattain wouldn't have had a suffix after the registry if it was using the same registry as an older Brattain. Besides, most of the time newer ships with the same names as older ships have completely different registry numbers. Plus, the dedication plaque does not say 'second starship to bear the name' or similar info. So for all we know, this Brattain was the first one.

At the very least, we know from Brattain that at the very least, the Miranda's got upgrades... its computer systems were LCARS-based, not the older Movie-era type which remained consistent through TNG's run.

Every Miranda class ship in TNG and DS9 (granted there were only three) had been upgraded internally from the TMP movie era. Even the oldest ship (based on its NCC-1837 registry) which had been relegated to supply ship duty with minimal crew had its bridge updated (they used the Ent-D battle bridge.) Maybe you're thinking of the Constellation class Stargazer, which used the TMP Enterprise bridge.

But yeah, Brattain may have been... 20ish years old in TNG. I don't really see any issue with that at all. They found a design that worked and stuck with it. The Miranda's are the Federation's version of the Klingon Bird of Prey. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I don't really see them continuing production of Mirandas past the 2340's though. By the 2350's we started seeing the Galaxy class predecessors like the New Orleans class, and by the 2360's we have the larger Galaxy and Nebula classes (the latter being analogous to the Miranda class in layout.)

 

[evilchumlee]

Registries are more reliable than you're giving them credit for, but that's another topic.

They're usually a good indicator, but there are all sorts of outliers that are never treated as if it's anything out of the ordinary.

I'm not sure why the Brattain wouldn't have had a suffix after the registry if it was using the same registry as an older Brattain. Besides, most of the time newer ships with the same names as older ships have completely different registry numbers. Plus, the dedication plaque does not say 'second starship to bear the name' or similar info. So for all we know, this Brattain was the first one.

Prior to DSC, we only rarely ever saw a reused ship name/registry get a suffix other than Enterprise. Usually yes, the name is reused with a different registry. You have the Defiant, which... is destroyed and then they just relabel Sao Paolo as if nothing happened.

Starfleet doesn't seem to have a completely standardized way of doing this.

Every Miranda class ship in TNG and DS9 (granted there were only three) had been upgraded internally from the TMP movie era. Even the oldest ship (based on its NCC-1837 registry) which had been relegated to supply ship duty with minimal crew had its bridge updated (they used the Ent-D battle bridge.) Maybe you're thinking of the Constellation class Stargazer, which used the TMP Enterprise bridge.

I didn't have a specific instance in mind, just a general idea. Yeah the Stargazer has the Movie-era "Blue and green" computers, Chakotay's Val Jean has them, etc. I meant more that they never retconned that out, and there were the occasional ship we see with them in an era appropriate context.

The LCARS system is a fairly recent thing as of TNG... Stargazer still had the older style operating system, a scant decade prior to the start of TNG. Granted, Stargazer entered service in 2326, so there's a few decades there when the transition could have occurred, but still very much tracks with the 2345ish date for Mirandas still potentially rolling off the assembly line.

I don't really see them continuing production of Mirandas past the 2340's though. By the 2350's we started seeing the Galaxy class predecessors like the New Orleans class, and by the 2360's we have the larger Galaxy and Nebula classes (the latter being analogous to the Miranda class in layout.)

I think that's reasonable. I really think the "Lost Era" saw Starfleet sort of coasting on the past... they didn't seem to go hard to producing new designs. Once the mid-24th century hits, Starfleet really starts ramping up again.

The ultimate point of this being... tl;dr, all the Miranda's we see might not actually be all that old.

 

[Dukhat]

The 2326 commissioning date for the Stargazer is an obvious error on Dave Blass’s part. It is a contemporary to the Hathaway, which was commissioned in the 2280’s.

 

[evilchumlee]

The 2326 commissioning date for the Stargazer is an obvious error on Dave Blass’s part. It is a contemporary to the Hathaway, which was commissioned in the 2280’s.

Said while we are in a discussion about how, potentially, the same class of ship could be built over a long period of time.

There's not really anything wrong with the same type of ship being produced in both the 2280's and the 2320's... Stargazer was just a newer build than the Hathaway.

 

[Dukhat]

Said while we are in a discussion about how, potentially, the same class of ship could be built over a long period of time.

There's not really anything wrong with the same type of ship being produced in both the 2280's and the 2320's... Stargazer was just a newer build than the Hathaway.

It didn’t look newer. It actually looked older on the inside than the Hathaway did. And the registry numbers are so close together that I find it hard to believe that there is a 40-year span of time between the Hathaway’s commissioning and the Stargazer’s.

 

[evilchumlee]

It didn’t look newer. It actually looked older on the inside than the Hathaway did. And the registry numbers are so close together that I find it hard to believe that there is a 40-year span of time between the Hathaway’s commissioning and the Stargazer’s.

And yet, that's what it is. That really isn't up for debate.

Registry numbers are unreliable. Visuals are too. "Looking old" can be subjective, and visuals just... kinda don't matter anymore. The Walker-Class looks newer than everything in TNG.

Honestly I thought the Stargazer looked fairly contemporary to TNG.

 

[Dukhat]

And yet, that's what it is. That really isn't up for debate.

Registry numbers are unreliable. Visuals are too. "Looking old" can be subjective, and visuals just... kinda don't matter anymore. The Walker-Class looks newer than everything in TNG.

Honestly I thought the Stargazer looked fairly contemporary to TNG.

It is up for debate. That's what we’re doing, debating the viability of something that was quite obviously a mistake. Much of the info on those ship plaques can be debated. Like how Uhura’s ship from 2288 looks like a design from the 2370’s (because that’s what it was) or how that ship could have been on a five year mission to the Lesser Magellanic Cloud that it could not have possibly undertaken with the distances involved.

That plaque info should rightly be taken with a grain of salt.

And the Stargazer looked fairly contemporary to TNG? Seriously? It looks exactly like what it is: a TMP era ship.

 

[Tuskin38]

and there wasn’t time to make a CGI model for it.

They made a CG model, the issue was the producers wanted them to change something windows but there wasn’t time to do it.

 

[Dukhat]

They made a CG model, the issue was the producers wanted them to change something windows but there wasn’t time to do it.

From what I understand, Eaves made concept art of the ship only, which wasn’t approved. The CGI model was made after the show ended by Robert Bonchune.

Edit: Ok, apparently there was a different CGI model made for the episode that wasn’t the same one as Bonchune made later.

 

[Tuskin38]

The Walker-Class looks newer than everything in TNG.

I have to disagree. The hull panelling, pop up phase cannons and ball turrets. It’s like some weird hybrid of mid 22nd and late 23rd century aesthetics. Theres nothing about it that looks post-TNG. Where’s the smooth curves?

 

[Dukhat]

I have to disagree. The hull panelling, pop up phase cannons and ball turrets. It’s like some weird hybrid of mid 22nd and late 23rd century aesthetics. Theres nothing about it that looks post-TNG

Yeah, it probably would have worked fine as a post-TUC design, but not remotely a TNG design.

 

[Tuskin38]

The 2326 commissioning date for the Stargazer is an obvious error on Dave Blass’s part. It is a contemporary to the Hathaway, which was commissioned in the 2280’s.

Yeah it doesn’t make sense based off the Hathaway.

My head canon has been it was retired at one point and recommissioned later

 

[Ithekro]

It is also possible that a starship gets its registry number when the ship is ordered by Starfleet. But the starship might have its building delayed or even postponed indefinitely. Until one day Starfleet decides they need to replace a ship and pull one of their already ordered (and I suppose "paid for") starships through production. Maybe decades after ordering the ship. This might also be the reason for some of the Legacy starships having non-traditional numbers due to them being inserted into the existing system by the Federation Council.