Miranda vs. Constitution

posted on October 10th, 2010, 6:48 pm

Hmm, a fair point b22, but I don't think we can apply naval warfare here as the weapons and maneuvering work on a different basis.

It's an interesting conundrum for the TMP era, the Connie will having better phasers and phaser coverage and the Miranda having the greater torpedo coverage, making her more dangerous to heavier ship types.

For the DS9 era I think the (now fragile) Miranda would make a good hit-and-run flanker.  While the opponent is distracted by a 'tank' ship the Mirandas in a squad could cause critical damage while both approaching and moving away from the target.

posted on October 10th, 2010, 10:34 pm

Indeed, Fraz .

  by DS9 times the Miranda was clearly used as a destroyer or at most a light cruiser.  Certainly nothing on the heavy side of things.

 
  The Constitution was referred to in the movies as a "Federation Battlecruiser" by the Klingons in ST3.  Then at some point I believe there was mention that the Ent-A had a 10:1 firepower advantage over the B'rel.  I think that may have been a bit of an overstatement, but nonetheless the Constitution seemed to be regarded by the Klingons throughout the TMP movies as a formidable and dangerous challenge.

  The Miranda was likely regarded as more of a baseline cruiser in the TMP era.  Already getting a bit old, but clearly able to hold it's own .

 
  Regarding the difference between the Excel and the Con - in STVI the Enterprise withstood a huge amount of punishment relatively well.  The Excel's first hit comparatively seemed to do a lot more damage overall.  The reaction of the Enterprise's crew also led me to believe that the Excelsior was not mean to be in heavy combat.  It was "The Great Experiment" afterall .

posted on October 10th, 2010, 10:45 pm

The Constitution was only a Battlecruiser to the Klingons, to Starfleet it was a Heavy Cruiser during that period.

posted on October 10th, 2010, 10:52 pm

Might have to re-watch the end of VI but my impression was that the Excel was a much stronger ship than the constitution.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 3:41 am

the Excelsior took at straight on torp shot to the flat part of its saucer and it didnt do as much exterior visable damage as the Ent was taking. 

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjKH7o2Bo ]YouTube
- Star Trek 6 (Battle set to music from Requiem for a Dream)[/url] shows the torp hits on both ships pretty decently

posted on October 11th, 2010, 3:56 am

Don't think you understood me clearly Franz.  I'm simply saying the Miranda is not in the same weight class as the Constitution. Just as in naval warfare a destroyer is not in the same weight class as a cruiser.  Hence my money would be on the Constitution.

I believe starfleet mothballed the connie, just because the excelsior simply did the same job a little bit better.  Modernized a connie could definately handle a bug.

In ST VI the Enterprise took well over 6 torpedoes before the sheilds collapsed. But when the excelsior got hit by 1 torp even the Enterprise crew got worried about it.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 9:57 am

if u look at the visual evidence from that battle you can only consider the first hits. as the excel only took 1 hit in the battle so we can compare that to the ents first hit.

the ent took the hit and there was a little blackening on the hull and the shields started buzzing around that area.

the excel took a hit and there didnt appear to be any blackening on the hull. so i would guess the excel was stronger defensively.

both ships had consoles exploding as per usual in star trek

also from the voyager flashback episode, the excel took a couple direct shield impacts from ktingas (much bigger than what chang was packing in st 6) and no hull damage. just the usual console damage.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 3:04 pm

Just found something very interesting in the Starfleet Command 2: Orion Pirates Vessel Library.  I know it's not canon but still a good source of ship info for TMP era.

The Miranda class is listed under the Light Cruiser tab, but is actually marked as the NCM - New Heavy Cruiser.  If the original Enterprise Refit was classed as a CA - Heavy Cruiser, then the Miranda carried more firepower and stronger shields.  The poor old Connie would now be the underdog, good thing that Mutara Nebula was nearby then, eh Kirk?

Attachments

posted on October 11th, 2010, 3:08 pm

That's the problem with online ST ship databases they all contradict one another. About the only thing that matches up is the picture of the ship.

@ Myles

True the Enterprise had a big black splotch on her hull after the first torpedo and as far as we know the excelsior didn't.  But, again with just the first torpedo the Enterprise takes the hit, gets her paint smudged, violently shakes but that's about all, it wasn't until the 3rd torp hit that the consules began to short out and the ship looked like it was taking a pounding.  Were as the excelsior was having to seal off some of its damaged areas after their first hit.  Anyway, I don't deny that the Excel is a bigger badder beast than the connie, but in her time the connie was no pushover either.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 3:27 pm

The Constitution being a Heavy Cruiser is canon, so that part is accurate. Was that the only Miranda in the game or was is a refit?

[FrazUK]

posted on October 11th, 2010, 3:40 pm

Last edited by FrazUK on October 11th, 2010, 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The first ship to use the Miranda's ship design in the library is the NCL - New Light Cruiser, which comes in at lower stats than the Miranda.

I'm assuming the Enterprise would have been CA as, I think, it was one of the first Connies to be refitted.  Wrath of Khan doesn't indicate if the Enterprise was further refitted from the CA's specs, or if the USS Reliant was a Miranda class.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 5:39 pm

In WW2 if you pitted any destroyer against a cruiser it would be pretty much a one sided affair the victory would undoubtedly go to the cruiser.  I would expect that this military docterine wouldn't change that much in the future.

funny thing about your comment is: It has alr changed. Battleships were taken out of service due the fact that a simple destroyer could deal heavy damage to em with a few missles. Ofc the battleships were able to fire same ... but then again, why use battleships for it? So at this time the most armys use destroyer, frigates and light cruiser and also ofc carrier. But nothing real big for direct fights.

back to the topic: i think it doesnt need to be discussed that the excel was stronger. Its the same with the ambassador and the galaxy. A successor wouldnt make sense, if its weaker.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 5:43 pm

That's not what they told me when I asked why.  (I had been wanting stationed on the Missouri or New Jersey).  What they told me was that the damned things cost so much in fuel that it just wasn't worth using them.

These days, the odds of a missile hitting a Carrier or Battleship are low as hell.  Phalanx/Seawhiz system, plus the interceptor micromissiles create a pretty nasty screen.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 5:49 pm

Crap silent93 beat me to it.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 6:01 pm

navies use ships, armies use tanks and cannon fodder.

maintaining a large navy now isnt really helpful. there arent any huge wars any more. and its doubtful there will be any with conventional weapons. most likely nukes. the big stick isnt as necessary.

aircraft carriers and their planes are usually more cost effective.