Constitution and Miranda Classes / A Hi-Lo Mix?

[CuttingEdge100]

I was wondering about the Constitution and Miranda Classes and wondering if there could have been some kind of parallel between them and the concept of the Hi-Low Mix used by the USAF during the 1970's due to the fact that the F-15 was too expensive to build in sufficient numbers desired, so the F-16 was developed as a lighter, cheaper alternative.

The F-15 had a (superior) radar, carried the AIM-7 (As well as the AIM-9, and an M-61 cannon), and possessed a superior top-speed. Originally the design was to possess air to ground capability and would have had even a greater air-to-ground load than the F-4 or F-16 (This was later removed to save money and to a small degree, to reduce weight).

The F-16 on the other hand originally did not possess a radar (the YF-16 -- the F-16 does), however by the time the aircraft entered service it was fitted with the APG-66 which while effective, was not as capable as the F-15's APG-63 in terms of range, the aircraft also only had AIM-9's and a gun. Originally the F-16 was to have a lower bomb capacity than it ultimately ended up with, though this was increased (This was done to increase versatility, and also for political reasons: The USAF preferred the F-15 over the F-16 and by adding more air to ground capacity to the aircraft, and the strengthening required to carry the extra loads, idea was to basically weigh it down, reducing it's thrust-to-weight ratio and increasing it's wing-loading, at least when fully loaded so the F-15 would be the better performer -- the F-16 still turned out more maneuverable in a number of respects. It's kind of ironic that by doing this they were technically shooting themselves in the foot) for a number of reasons. While the F-16 was not as fast as the F-15, it had greater range, and was far more maneuverable. It also was substantially cheaper than an F-15.

It would be interesting if the Constitution and Miranda Classes were examples of such a Hi/Lo Mix.

The Constitution being the more capable design in that it had greater scientific equipment onboard, more labs, a greater crew complement to operate all this stuff, as well as a twin-hull design allowing the primary hull to detach from the secondary (as a lifeboat originally -- that was Jeffries' idea) hull, though almost undoubtedly being more expensive or resource intensive.
In Star Trek, there was conflicting information on money, at least in one episode Kirk said something suggesting that of "earning their pay". From Star Trek IV and after it was stated that they did not use money in the 23rd (and later 24th) century. Regardless, resources are limited and the amount of resources available to build ships would be an issue.

Opinions?


CuttingEdge

 

[blssdwlf]

Not necessarily. The Constitutions and Mirandas appear to be more modeled on naval ships than on fighter aircraft.

It's more like they are two very similar class ships that use the same technology parts but have different roles. The Connies appear to have a better long-range sensor system with its large sensor dish and up to ST3, held some speed records that had not been broken. We don't know enough about the Mirandas other than they have the same number of phasers and 2 extra aft torpedo tubes. But given the size of the torpedo pod, I'm not so sure how many torpedoes it carries ready to fire.

The Mirandas might be easier to build though, or at least more modular since we've seen them with and without the torpedo pod and rollbar.

They're pretty close to each other though, unlike the F-15/F-16 so I don't really see the Hi/Lo model working very well. (Also, the F-15 outranges the F-16 last time I checked.)

 

[SpyOne]

I am not doubting the story above, just presenting an alternate take I had heard in an effort to shed some light on the core question.
As I had heard it, the F-15 was designed to engage enemy aircraft at long ranges (dozens of miles) and at supersonic speeds. It's primary roles were clearing paths for bombers, and intercepting aircraft getting too close to something.
The F-16 however was designed for dogfighting: engaging enemy aircraft at close range and subsonic speeds (although capable of supersonic flight, not as fast as the F-15). It was designed to establish dominance over a large area of airspace.

I think the Constitution and the Miranda were designed similarly: similar roles, and to a certain extent each can substitute for the other, but ultimately excelling in different aspects of the job.
Constitutions seem to have been faster, have better long range sensors, and may have been better armed (same number of phasers doesn't mean their phasers were equal, for example). This points to the Constitution being tasked with long range missions to unexplored space, and expected to survive alone.
Mirandas seem slower, with shorter sensor range, but more space for things like science labs. This points to their being sent mainly to areas that have been mostly explored, perhaps to get a better look at something interesting, where help is not far away should they call for it.

IMO, YMMV.

 

[caisson2delta]

^Very good points and I agree. I would like to add, as well, that they probably had very similar components and construction other than the exterior differences. For all we know, the Mirandas were designed right along with the refit Constitution as a sort of little brother. It filled the roles that were too mundane or routine for a capital ship, probably had a lesser crew compliment, and could be built in much greater numbers. It may have served the role as more of a support type ship.

 

[Unicron]

Depending on how one views the cruiser/frigate type roles as well, there might be a difference in the flexibility of both designs. Some fan sources like Ships of the Star Fleet and Jackill's work seem to suggest that there are considerable parallels between the two design branches, and that the Mirandas (frigates) are more capable of acting as tactical or military vessels than the cruisers are, as those tend to be geared more for exploration purposes. The frigates have better design options for weapons and equipment should those be needed in a conflict, and in peacetime can complement the cruisers as support and exploratory units.

 

[SpyOne]

For what it is worth, the Vanguard novels featured a Miranda Class ship, and had Kirk visiting the station on his way home from the incident at the Galactic Barrier (season one).
Further, the ship was described as .... not new. Never called old, but noticeably older than the other two ships assigned to the station (an Archer Class scout and a Constitution Class that was almost brand new, IIRC).

I know the books aren't canon, but it might be an idea folks want to see.
On the one hand, the Enterprise was 19 or 20 at that point, so there is plenty of room for the Miranda to be a newer design and still have some years of hard service under her belt. On the other, it is going to be 6 to 10 years before the Enterprise refit, so perhaps this Miranda has TOS style nacelles and will undergo a refit itself in a few years.

And as long as I'm mentioning non-canon stuff, FASA had the "Reliant Class Cruiser" introduced two years before the Enterprise refit.

 

[blssdwlf]

Check out "Fighter Mafia" and the reasons why the F-15 and F-16 were developed. Interesting read

 

[Timo]

...And they base it on a preceding, TOS-era design, originally the fugly Anton class of Light Cruisers. Was it SFB that had the Benning class as the similar predecessor?

Todd Guenther's Ships of the Star Fleet draws together many fan works and suggests that the TOS counterpart and predecessor to Reliant was the Surya class from the 2240s, with a few parallel designs such as Coventryand Noshiro. The Reliant herself would represent a refit/newbuild mix dubbed the Avenger class, again with a few parallel or successor "batches" or "subclasses".

It would be simple to throw in a few more names to complete the mix: Miranda could be the oldest variant there, just preceding those Suryas in construction timetable and in registry numbers, and one of those might have been refitted into the Lantree we see in TNG, with that very low registry number. At some point, Starfleet would stop using separate names for the minor variations of the design, so USS Reliant would come to be considered a generic Miranda class refit, rather than an Avenger specifically...

In Guenther's work, the TOS era counterparts to the Reliant were not really sidekicks to the Constitution class - because the work postulated that the Constitution had already been created in the 2220s. However, there was a very obvious pairing between the 2240s Constitution variant (the one Kirk was flying in TOS) with the Surya, and the even later variant (the one Kirk was flying in TMP) with the Avenger. For all we know, Guenther assumed a similar counterpart to the original 2220s Constitution had existed, too, but didn't include that in the work for some reason or another.

Interestingly, the ship mentioned in the Vanguard novel, USS Bombay, had the ability to fire aft torpedoes - something not provided for in the classic fan creations. Were the writers perhaps imagining a "roll bar" launcher for the Bombay?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Herbert1]

Perhaps CuttingEdge100 is attempting to find a reason why there are so many appearances of the Miranda-class and her variants in filmed Star Trek since Star Trek: The Next Generation onwards, especially the number shown in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine?

 

[WendellM]

The Constitution being the more capable design in that it had greater scientific equipment onboard, more labs, a greater crew complement to operate all this stuff, as well as a twin-hull design

That's sort of how the two are in the Star Fleet Battles board game. The "Miranda" (it wasn't exactly, but close enough) appeared in 1982 as a New Light Cruiser with a crew of 360, while the Constitution has more labs and general capability with a crew of 430:

In the Starfleet Command computer version of SFB, the Miranda's 3D model is used:

The NCL is rated a bit lower than the CA in combat effectiveness: 116 vs. 125 in SFB; 120 vs. 129 in SFC.

 

[Herbert1]

^But this is fandom or licensee speculation that has not been confirmed in any filmed depection. We have only seen the bridge of a Miranda-class starship.

Since the USS Reliant is surveying planets as test subjects for Project Genesis, we can presume that she has science capability and she seems to be able to hold her own against Enterprise. So the evidence in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is that she isn't a Lo ship to the Enterprise Hi. I don't see any evidence of an Admiral Elmo Zumwalt Hi-Lo ship procurement philosopy within Starfleet comparing these two designs. Reliant isn't a Sea Control Ship compared to an Enterprise Nimitz-class supercarrier.

 

[WendellM]

^But this is fandom or licensee speculation.

Yes. CuttingEdge asked for opinions on his idea, so I mentioned that it matched what had been done in some games (which I happen to like; I should have added that).

 

[Herbert1]

^I apologize. After reading about the United States Navy in the 1970s and Admiral Elmo Zumwalt's procurement philosophy, Hi-Lo has a specific meaning to me. Nimitz-class supercarrer versus Sea Control Ship or Aegis nuclear-powered strike cruiser (CSGN) versus austere Aegis conventional-powered destroyer. So the Hi-Lo analogy doesn't work for me.

Has fandom or the role playing games done anything with the Constitution-class variant model shown in the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Booby Trap" with the turned nacelle arrangement? A Constellation-class test bed? Or could these be later new Constitution-class starships? Could this possibly be the configuration of the USS Challenger NCC-2032 or USS Ahwahnee NCC-2048? Or a post Ahwahnee batch of Constitution-class starships?

 

[Gagarin]

^But this is fandom or licensee speculation that has not been confirmed in any filmed depection. We have only seen the bridge of a Miranda-class starship.

Exactly. But what else is there but theories?

Since the USS Reliant is surveying planets as test subjects for Project Genesis, we can presume that she has science capability and she seems to be able to hold her own against Enterprise. So the evidence in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is that she isn't a Lo ship to the Enterprise Hi. I don't see any evidence of an Admiral Elmo Zumwalt Hi-Lo ship procurement philosopy within Starfleet comparing these two designs. Reliant isn't a Sea Control Ship compared to an Enterprise Nimitz-class supercarrier.

The Reliant was surveying planets in a mundane fashion. Specifically, looking for lifeless planets. She's not going where no man has gone before, she's looking for something in the backyard. She's not exploring strange new worlds or make contact, she's on a go-fetch surveying mission. The comparison doesn't work as for as "science capability".

The Enterprise was also without the full force of its primary power for the entire enagement, so we have no way of really judging its shield generating capacity or phaser rate of fire compared to the Reliant --- what would really matter, not number of phaser banks.

As speculation, she might not even have a huge library computer or the compliment of biologists, bontanists, physicists, anthropologists, or what-ever-ists a Constitution lugged about.

Another interesting part of the comparison is, like the F-15, the Constitution didn't seem to outlast the cheaper Miranda program (F-16).

 

[Unicron]

Herbert, AFAIK there's been no conjecture about the distinctive "sideways" model that appeared in TNG (it also appeared in "The Neutral Zone"), but SotSF does include a Constitution II subclass based on the early designs for the TMP Enterprise, with variations in the nacelles and pylons as well as a few other areas.

 

[Timo]

My personal speculation on the odd TNG Constitution models is that most of them are simply in-universe mistakes - models poorly assembled by Starfleet personnel or their kids. Or perhaps poorly reassembled, after said kids had their way with them.

However, the sideways nacelles could easily be considered an experiment that paved way for the Constellation. Even the lack of some of the pieces on the saucer could be accepted as a feature of this testbed ship: the original fully operational cruiser might have been gutted of parts before being used for verifying the sideways engines. Or then one might argue that the missing saucer rim pieces are in fact dark sensor recesses for early testing of the TNG style lateral sensor arrangement, performed on an already mutilated Constitution for expediency.

Similarly, we have the USS Trial (NCC-1948), a crude build of the Reliant model kit supposedly for certain DS9 shots in "Way of the Warrior". Her saucer rim features what looks like TNG style lateral sensors, too, thanks to the shortcuts taken in throwing together this model.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[kkozoriz1]

The Constitutions could have a wider variety of labs that would allow them to function better as explorers. Reliant could have lab space that is refit depending on it's mission. It wouldn't have to be a major refit. A couple of weeks at a Starbase would suffice. After it's mission is over, the lab could be refit for a different area of study, turned into cargo space for colony resupply, etc. Perhaps the Mirandas can do almost everything the Constituions can, just not at the same time.

 

[JTK1]

I remember a TNG ep. that had a TOS refit model with its nacelles are on backward.
God I wish I could remember the name of the ep.

 

[SpyOne]

Folks here have said several times that the Miranda would have less space for labs than the Constitution. I grant that the two are both of irregular shapes, and the shapes are dissimilar, so it is hard to judge how they compare by eye.
This page http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWvolumetrics.html was done by a guy who used 3-D software and some good models of the ships in question to work out the volume of a bunch of Star Trek ships (and Star Wars ships, which isn't relevant here).
He has the Miranda being 6500 cubic meters larger than the Constitution, or about 3%. Surely not all of that is extra photon torpedo launchers.
Add to that the idea that the Miranda had less range (less space devoted to supplies) and less speed (less space for it's Warp Core?), and you get a ship with a lot MORE space for things like labs.
Just not as much as a dedicated science vessel.

 

[Timo]

Surely not all of that is extra photon torpedo launchers.

It might well be almost completely there, to be sure. But that wouldn't mean the Miranda would rank behind the Constitution in useful internal volume; she'd simply be on par.

Perhaps starships in the TOS era had much bigger machinery in their engineering sections, and in the Constitution refit this was turned into additional cargo space as the machinery was miniaturized? The Miranda might have had smaller machinery from the start (confined between those big shuttlebays that probably aren't refit additions), so she would have had inferior engines originally - but after the miniaturized technology was introduced, she may have reached the same level of propulsive prowess as the Constitution. And that may have removed Starfleet's last excuse to keep the Constitutions in service alongside the more practical Mirandas.

Timo Saloniemi