Printable View
General sounds better. When I hear generic, my initial thought is medicine.
Probe doesn't sound right for a vessel that is larger than a satellite or one that can fit inside a torpedo launcher. The last time I hear a probe being described for such a gigantic spacefaring object is in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.
I was thinking of probe as in United Space Probe Agency
metioned in TOS.
But I can see your point
maybe we can define NSP as National Scientific Platform.
I was thinking NGL with the G standing for Generic because we don't know what kind of cargo or freight that vessel was carrying
but I like this type of designation for deuterium tankers, anti-matter carriers etc.
NGL:
To explain my thoughts on the specific liquid carrier is motion, dry goods (grains, seeds, ore) once put in place tend to stay in place. People, while normally moving do not take up the high density mass of other cargo types. Liquids, however, have a bad habit of constantly moving around and having high densities. Hence the creation of baffle plates in larger liquid carrying objects, the retard the motion and preventing the slosh effect*.
In my train of thought, liquid carriers would have specially built hulls, and additional IDF generator to prevent such actions from tearing a lightly built (i.e. non-combat design) ship apart.
* = if your unsure what a slosh effect is, take a two liter bottle, half full with a liquid. Lay it on it's side, and move it along the long axis a few inches/centimeters, then stop quickly. You'll notice the liquid suddenly moves to the forward end, then back to the other side, this will repeat a few times. Take note of the tugging sensation when the wave reaches one of the bottles ends.
NSP:
I like the Nantional concept as well. My thoughts are the Science part should be retained as not all missions are ment to survay anything. Probe, I keep thinking unmaned with that term, something with a living crew IMO is not a probe.
How about NSP standing for N.ational S.cience P.atroler?
Platform doesn't work for me because it reminds me of Defense Platform.
(Okay, as I got the section thus far - along with a quick note on 'Class I, II ,and III Starships')
NCC - Naval Construction Contract. This designation is primarily reserved for active Starfleet registries and ships designed and appropriated primarily for active duty. Example: NCC-1701 is the registry of the Constitution class Enterprise cruiser.
NAR - Naval Auxiliary Registry. This designation is reserved for starships which may be called upon for Starfleet duty, but otherwise operates in an independent manner. Many science ships, support ships, and the merchant marines have their vessels follow this registry pattern.
NX - Naval Experimental. This designation is reserved for engineering test-beds or starship prototypes reserved for trial-runs. In almost all cases, the NX designation is replaced with the NCC designation as soon as the vessel enters active service.
NSP—Naval Scientific Platform. These ships are scientific research ships almost exclusively employed by Vulcan. Unlike NAR-designation ships, they may not be called into Starfleet duty without express permission from the Vulcan consulate.
NDT—Naval Diplomatic Transport. Starfleet vessels designed for the shuttling of personnel, diplomats, and passengers over long distances. (This is a recent designation, replacing the NCC designation for personnel transport containers and similar ships.)
NFT—Naval Freight Transport. Starfleet vessels designed for the shuttling of freight and materials over long distances. (This is a recent designation, replacing the NCC designation for freight transport containers and similar ships.)
NGL—Naval General Liquid. This class of ship is reserved for fluid and viscous materials over long distances. (This is a recent designation, replacing the NCC designation for personnel transport containers and similar ships.)
USS—United Starship, formerly United Spaceship. This designation refers to the christened name of all Federation starships.
SS—Spaceship or Starship. This designation refers to Federation vessels not a part of Starfleet. (It is often used by completely independent vessels operating within Federation space as well.)
I just notice something........what would the designation on the SS Santa Maria BDR-????(number escapes me) This vessel was in the DS-9 episode Paradise.
BDR=Basic Diplomatic Registry. This class of ship is reserved for privately owned passenger ships.(This is a recent designation replacing the NCC-ALPHANUMERIC designations.
SHIP TYPE REGISTRATION NUMBER
ROBOT TRANSPORT
SMALL NCC-Axxxxxx
MEDIUM NCC-Bxxxxxx
LARGE NCC-Cxxxxxx
MANNED TRANSPORT
SMALL NCC-Fxxxxxx
MEDIUM NCC-Gxxxxxx
LARGE NCC-Hxxxxxx
PASSENGER
SMALL NCC-Lxxxxxx
MEDIUM NCC-Mxxxxxx
LARGE NCC-Nxxxxxx
MISCELLANEOUS
NCC-Rxxxxxx
NCC-Sxxxxxx
Some thoughts of my own
Sometimes the 'SS' designation is dropped in favor of a vessle's name only. EXAMPLE: The Apollo-class Light Cruiser T'PAU
NSP-17938.
Isn't that taken from FASA sources?Quote:
Originally posted by skree
SHIP TYPE REGISTRATION NUMBER
ROBOT TRANSPORT
SMALL NCC-Axxxxxx
MEDIUM NCC-Bxxxxxx
LARGE NCC-Cxxxxxx
MANNED TRANSPORT
SMALL NCC-Fxxxxxx
MEDIUM NCC-Gxxxxxx
LARGE NCC-Hxxxxxx
PASSENGER
SMALL NCC-Lxxxxxx
MEDIUM NCC-Mxxxxxx
LARGE NCC-Nxxxxxx
MISCELLANEOUS
NCC-Rxxxxxx
NCC-Sxxxxxx
The 'BDR' is a pretty blatant in-joke, though, since the registry is the license plate of the Bluesmobile from 'The Blues Brothers' movie. This is one of those instances where the 'canon' itself should probably be dismissed in favor of something more sensible.Quote:
Originally posted by skree
I just notice something........what would the designation on the SS Santa Maria BDR-????(number escapes me) This vessel was in the DS-9 episode Paradise.
I would throw this in as an NDT, though the '529' registry would make a really old Federation diplomatic transport. This too may not be too problematic, if you assume the Santa Maria is a contemporary of the later 'movie' period, around the time of the USS Oberth.
Actually, that still works. The T'Pau is not a member of Starfleet (hence the NSP designation). The SS refers only to Federation ships, though, and the NSP-17938 may be a strictly Vulcan-only vessel.Quote:
Originally posted by skree
Some thoughts of my own
Sometimes the 'SS' designation is dropped in favor of a vessle's name only. EXAMPLE: The Apollo-class Light Cruiser T'PAU
NSP-17938.
The T'Pau is also mentioned by name and not by display in TNG. The ship may officially have an 'SS' or 'VS' or 'PDQ' designator before the christened name, but there's just not a way to be sure.
(For instance, in ST:TWOK, the 'Reliant' is never called 'USS Reliant' in dialog, only on the model and in the 'tactical' display on the Enterprise... it's just not natural to, in dialog, prefeix 'SS' or 'USS' to a ship's name. Even when done in TOS it sounds more forced than if they had just said the ship's name alone.)
Yes it is from FASA's ST:RPG
I Looked at the ST:Encyclopedia and It just gives the NAME T'PAU
No SS,VSS,RSVP,etc. Just T'PAU. another EXAMPLE is the NX-class ENTERPRISE...NO UES,UNSS,SS etc.
Well, NX-01 isn't really part of a 'fleet' per-se. (There are huge problems with the 'fleets' and ships in Enterprise that we'll gloss over for this discussion)...Quote:
Originally posted by skree
Yes it is from FASA's ST:RPG
...
I Looked at the ST:Encyclopedia and It just gives the NAME T'PAU
No SS,VSS,RSVP,etc. Just T'PAU. another EXAMPLE is the NX-class ENTERPRISE...NO UES,UNSS,SS etc.
I would say that USS is a standard for Federation Starfleet ships, and SS is just a common designation for non-starfleet ships, but not required on ships entering into registry.
(With NX-01 being arguably a 'fleet' vessel, though, it really should have either UESS or USS behind it... though that may conflict it with the Dauntless even more...)
FASA also has huge problems with registries, which often make no sense in any way, shape, or form. (They actually use two different schemes on their own first, and then eventually adopt the TNG 'chrono-batch' approach.)
I like a lot of the FASA game's ideas, but I can also feel quite comfortable saying, "eeeh.. they got it wrong here."
:)