Miranda vs. Constitution

[086gf]

posted on October 11th, 2010, 6:04 pm

Last edited by 086gf on October 11th, 2010, 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"She can out run us and still out gun us..." - Spock right before the chase into the nebula.

skip to 1:20

[youtube]7w18yZdeRl4[/youtube]

posted on October 11th, 2010, 6:57 pm

Cheers for the video gf, brings back memories.

Myles, if you like Warhammer 40,000, I'd say you're an Imperial Guard fan.  Guardsmen are the meat shield of the Imperium.

I'm with b22 and Silent, cruisers and even battleships still have a role in the modern age.  As stated, missiles can still be stopped using anti-missile systems, a high explosive shell (or a DARPA gauss cannon  ) currently have no counter.

posted on October 11th, 2010, 7:57 pm

My opinion on this is based on what I see on the models and in the scenes.

Miranda-class vessels from the TMP-era have the same amount of phaser-cannons in the saucer and in addition those obviously stronger Phasers on the upper pylons.
Also the Miranda has two more torpedo-launchers. So I guess, with a full attack run firing all weapons while turning around the Constitution, the Miranda would deal way more damage than the Constitution can punch back on it. It may have higher defense due to size and shield grid capacities, but the Miranda has newer technologies and quite a lot more weapons considering its size. This may also be one of the reasons the Constitution was abandoned by Starfleet while the Miranda was in more or less active service until the 2370's (sure, the main reason was the upgrade- and refitting stuff about it due to that fancy upper pylon stuff).

posted on October 12th, 2010, 1:03 am

navies use ships, armies use tanks and cannon fodder.

Thats kind of an insensitive comment and its not reflective of how the United States or any other modern army uses it infantry.

And I disagree with you guys about a few things
1. Cruisers are still in use not just destroyers and frigates.
2. Big naval ships are mostly powered by uranium, not some form of gas.
3. The reason that battleships stopped being used is because their was a shift in naval philosophy. We moved from ships firing on one another with the main guns and shelling islands with them to launching planes and missiles from hundreds of miles away. The big battleships simply couldnt keep up with the aircraft carrier centered task force.

Finally on topic its my opinion that the connie was probably the stronger of the two with the miranda being quicker and better armed but the connie is enough of a tank that it could hold out long enough to dispatch the miranda.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 1:14 am

but the connie is enough of a tank that it could hold out long enough to dispatch the miranda.

I tend to think a Miranda could simply hold a position as behind as possible to the Constitution due to higher manouverability. Thanks to the very cool missing aft torpedo-launchers, the Connie wouldn't get a chance to seriously fight back.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 1:28 am

Well in a fair fight that is i guess it would depend on how fast the connie could turn.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 1:35 am

"not fast enough", I'd say. However the Reliant in STII didn't move THAT much faster in most of the scenes. Dunno if this was intended or just a limit due to filming and model-moving speeds back then.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 2:51 am

@ 086gf

Yeah, but you must remeber, that previously, the reliant had attacked the enterprise, when her sheilds were down as kirk was reluctant to raise  them, not realizing what was going on, and the reliant knew where to hit the enterprise, due to the reliants captains knowledge and such, knocking out alot of crap on the enterprise

[Anonymous]

posted on October 12th, 2010, 3:53 am

Last edited by Anonymous on October 12th, 2010, 4:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Thats kind of an insensitive comment and its not reflective of how the United States or any other modern army uses it infantry.

And I disagree with you guys about a few things
1. Cruisers are still in use not just destroyers and frigates.
2. Big naval ships are mostly powered by uranium, not some form of gas.
3. The reason that battleships stopped being used is because their was a shift in naval philosophy. We moved from ships firing on one another with the main guns and shelling islands with them to launching planes and missiles from hundreds of miles away. The big battleships simply couldn't keep up with the aircraft carrier centered task force.

Finally on topic its my opinion that the connie was probably the stronger of the two with the miranda being quicker and better armed but the connie is enough of a tank that it could hold out long enough to dispatch the miranda.

If the Iowas were retired because the navy moved away from ship vs ship gunfights then why were they un retired in Vietnam and the First Gulf War? 

The Actual real reason they are now permanently retired is because they are so dang expensive to run as they use geared turbines and boilers  not a nuclear reactor.  plus keeping them upgraded to modern standards was cost prohibitive as they were not designed for modern military equipment were talking about ships designed in 1938  with the first one launched in 1942 with the last one launching in 1944.  they had a crew of 2,700  after the 80s modernization 1,800 still a hell of a lot of men compared to the 33 Officers, 27 Chief Petty Officers, approx. 340 enlisted of a Ticonderoga class CG

what the Navy needs is a modern designed BGN  (Nuclear powered Guided Missile Battleship)

maybe something like this    [url=http://books.google.com/books?id=iQyaw_xlM_UC&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=Leviathan+trimaran&source=bl&ots=iRQW9Rqi7c&sig=ObZxsen4JrQHyXv5p3t2UIwM3WE&hl=en&ei=3X06TO-5FsbgnAe7pq3kAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Leviathan%20trimaran&f=false]Popular Science - Google Books     

scroll down to the one called Leviathan

posted on October 12th, 2010, 4:00 am

If the Iowas were retired because the navy moved away from ship vs ship gunfights then why were they un retired in Vietnam and the First Gulf War? 

The Actual real reason they are now permantly retired is because they are so dang expensive to run as they use geared turbines and boilers  not a nuclear reactor.  plus keeping them upgraded to modern standards was cost prohibitive as they were not designed for modern military equipment were talking about ships designed in 1938  with the first one launched in 1942 with the last one launching in 1943.  they had a crew of 2,700  after the 80s modernization 1,800 still a hell of a lot of men compared to the 33 Officers, 27 Chief Petty Officers, approx. 340 enlisted of a Ticonderoga class CG

what the Navy needs is a modern designed BGN  (Nuclear powered Guided Missile Battleship)

maybe something like this    [url=http://books.google.com/books?id=iQyaw_xlM_UC&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=Leviathan+trimaran&source=bl&ots=iRQW9Rqi7c&sig=ObZxsen4JrQHyXv5p3t2UIwM3WE&hl=en&ei=3X06TO-5FsbgnAe7pq3kAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Leviathan%20trimaran&f=false]Popular Science - Google Books     

scroll down to the one called Leviathan

100% true, even though im not sure about the missle battleship.
Actually gunfights may become popular again with the further railgun development, who knows. But at this moment, battleships are to expensive to run and to keep upgraded.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 5:22 am

Prior to the development of the Electric Drive currently in use for DD21, the official statement was that it's not possible to achieve the kind of acceleration that a BB needs with a nuclear system.  Thus, it continued to use gigantic Caterpilar marine diesels.  With the Electric Drive, that could most likely be changed.

The results of a live-fire excersize upon a BB hull highlighted just how tough those things are.  Not manuvering, not fighting back, being hammered viciously, she remained afloat until a Los Angeles Class SSN nailed her not once, but at least twice with ADCAP II torpedoes.  The first one should have broken her back, but the ridiculous armor plate, reinforced with highly impact-resistant Haze Gray held her together and afloat.

Those ships are not to be underestimated.  Especially since they can mount 8 Seawhiz, 4 torpedo tubes, and 6 missile tubes as a baseline, in addition to their famous deck cannons, with a 40 nautical mile range...throwing HEAP rounds that are commonly likened to volkswagons.

Newest and shiniest is not always the automatic winner.  The biggest problem with the BBs really is the grotesque amount of fuel those marine diesels consume.  The number I was quoted was $1,000,000 per day that a battleship wasn't docked with the engines off.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 8:33 am

A million dollars a day when in use?  That's simply obscene.

posted on October 12th, 2010, 10:02 am

if you have played Starfleet Academy you will know that the constitution is the stronger of the 2

posted on October 12th, 2010, 10:55 am

if you have played Starfleet Academy you will know that the constitution is the stronger of the 2

Games are not canon.
I agree that the connie should definitely be stronger than the miranda. And that a fair battle with equal crews and no luck would result in the connie winning with shields nearly depleted.

[Dircome]

posted on October 12th, 2010, 2:29 pm

Last edited by Dircome on October 12th, 2010, 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I believe that battleships were unretired so they could be used as an offshore artillery platform. Sure they may be tough ships but they are just not as useful as a missile destroyer. And like silent said they are prohibitively expensive to run, update, and replace/build. O yeah who needs the old fashioned main guns when this is on the horizon.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1q_rRicAwI&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]