[Solatar]

The Orff looks kickass in my opinion...

[Nico]

Originally posted by EagleCAP
Setekh - What I'm trying to go for is a bit of realism atmosphere within the FS universe.  Don't even get me started about making a corvette(!) bigger than a cruiser.  Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.    

Actually, if you look at the words themselves, from the start, it makes no sense that a cruiser is bigger than a destroyer, but I suppose that's just me

[Janos]

Why would you designate Herc II as AF-19? I know USN designated the Super Hornet as F/A-18E/F even though it's not that similar to real Hornet, but Herc II seems so different from Herc I (AF-19 in your designation system), that a similar affix is not really justified in my opinion.

[Ghostavo]

cruiser - 7 letters
corvette - 8 letters
destroyer - 9 letters
juggernaut - 10 letters

They seem to be in the correct order of size

[TrashMan]

For my campaing I'm actualyl putting nameplates on every ship I can...with regitry numbers.. I feel it adds a bit of flavour to the game..

However, so far, I ony have nameplates for 4 capship classes.
The need ot re-convert all ships in order to give nameplates kinda slows the process down a bit..

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Janos
Why would you designate Herc II as AF-19? I know USN designated the Super Hornet as F/A-18E/F even though it's not that similar to real Hornet, but Herc II seems so different from Herc I (AF-19 in your designation system), that a similar affix is not really justified in my opinion.

AF = Assault Fighter
SSF = Space Superiority Fighter
IF = Interceptor Fighter
RF = Recon Fighter
 ...etc...

[EagleCAP]

The reason I made the squadron logos 2 letters instead of three was mainly because that the current US Navy uses 2 letters for their tailcodes.  And, since there are 676 combinations for the letters, I think there are enough.

WWII Baltimore-class cruiser: 673 feet, 17,031 tons
WWII Fletcher-class destroyer: 376 feet, 2,924 tons
'Nuff said.

With the thing that the Herc II is the AF-19D, the F/A-18 was the main precedent I was going at.  The Super Hornet is actually a tremendously different plane than the original - the outside looks generally the same, but the inside is totally revamped with new 21st century technology that is light-years ahead of the original F/A-18.  The F/A-18E/F is a massive upgrade of a plane designed decades ago.  The Herc II is a massive upgrade of a fighter made over 30 years before it.

TrashMan - if you're going to be putting reg #s on your ships in the campaign, let me know what the numbers are.  The "Great Registry Number List" is well on its way to completion, with ships from FS1, FS2, FS1:ST, Derelict, Fall of EP, Cas of War, Inferno, and others.

[Janos]

Originally posted by TrashMan


AF = Assault Fighter
SSF = Space Superiority Fighter
IF = Interceptor Fighter
RF = Recon Fighter
 ...etc...

Damn I'm stupid and missed my mark. I meant the
Herc I = AF-19
Herc II = AF-19D
seems a bit off, since they quite different.

[EagleCAP]

Another update - The registry that I displayed in the screenie for the Bastion (DDB-104) has been changed.  Since the last Orion was 109, 104 would be "too new" for the Bastion to have been decommissioned before FS2.  Since when ships are put in mothballs its generally the first few ships of the class, I changed it so that Bastion is DDB-79 and Nereid is DDB-77.

[pyro-manic]

Originally posted by EagleCAP
With the thing that the Herc II is the AF-19D, the F/A-18 was the main precedent I was going at.  The Super Hornet is actually a tremendously different plane than the original - the outside looks generally the same, but the inside is totally revamped with new 21st century technology that is light-years ahead of the original F/A-18.  The F/A-18E/F is a massive upgrade of a plane designed decades ago.  The Herc II is a massive upgrade of a fighter made over 30 years before it.

I considered the Herc 2 to be an entirely new fighter. Based on the original architecture (because it was so successful), but with a new chassis, new engines, new systems, new everything...

And your implementation of the ID codes is actually nicer than I thought. The Orff is pretty cool - nice and subtle, but it does ad something. The Orion is ugly, though - stick with the original namplate size, and add it on the end of the same line (in a smaller type size).

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Goober5000

 or the GTVA TX23-01 on the Vesuvius in Inferno R1?

Um... if that's the same Vesuvius I'm thinking of, that was completely meaningless and applied as arbitrary fluff for the texture detail.....

[Nuke]

i like the nameplates. it would help whow which ship is who without targeting it. instead of every ship of one class looking alike. i wonder if the coders could implement a text  to texture rendering system, you could have a box in fred for a ships nameplate and put in html/xml code , which would them be rendered onto the texture on load. of course that sounds like a hassel too me.

[FireCrack]

Yeah, it would be nice to have Nameplates generated from text.

[Goober5000]

Waaay too much work.  You already have texture replacement... use that.

[EagleCAP]

All but 2 of the squadron insignias are done.  Expect a release sometime later today.  And they are definitely a LOT more meaningful than the thing on the Vesuvius - which I can find no proof that it actually means anything.

Pyro-maniac: Calling the Herc II the AF-19D means that there were 3 versions before it - the AF-19A, AF-19B, and AF-19C.  These were probably prototypes that brought the features of the Herc II gradually into the ship.  Plus, all that the FS2 tech database says is that the Herc II's additions improve  "speed and maneuverability without sacrificing loadout capacity."  Another thing:

F/A-18E/F improvements:
- Completely revamped cockpit
- State of the art ECM and avionics
- Almost 200mi more range
- 2'10" fuselage extension
- Two more weapon pylons
- 25% larger wing
- Brand-new engines with 35% more thrust
- 33% more fuel

Need I say more?

[TrashMan]

WEll, I'm currently trying ot decide eactly how the numeration would look...Basicly I got these 2 systems:

1:
BASTION
NRN-1203203-BD3-V1


Explanation:
Naval Registy Number, followed by a series of numbers - could be the date it entered servie or the x'th ship that entered the serivce or something else.
After that we have the ship type (Battle Destroyer - aka Orion) and the the ships number (in this case 3 - the third Orion produced)
And then the version of the ship. V1 is the basic, great war orion, v2 would be a slihtly upgraded one, v3 another version with different weapon setup



2:
BASTION
NRN-D48-BD3-V1

Same as above, but the second section details the ship main type (Destroyer) followed by hte number of hte produced ship.
After theat the destroyer sub-type (BD3 - battle destroyer) and version.


I'm kinda enclined towards the second one...
but the problem is vasudans..how to make nameplates for them??? On vasudan???

[EagleCAP]

Interesting.  My system was more or less based on the current USN system, but that looks more like Babylon 5 or Star Trek.  The "battle destroyer" is only a type designation, not the specific Orion class itself.  The way to refer to a class is to use the number of the first ship produced, in my system DDB-75.  I've actually already used my system to create most of the Great Registry Database, which now has all of the ships from FS1 and FS2.  The current system actually is not "just" a random series of letters and numbers on the side of a ship.  If one wanted to really formally refer to the Bastion DDB-79 (ie in a change of command, a funeral, something), they would call it "Galactic Terran Destroyer Bastion, Battle Destroyer Seven-Nine."  Or, take the Orff: "Galactic Terran Cruiser Orff, Strike Light Cruiser Two-Nine-Five."  Maybe the "final" system could be a combination of the two systems:

BASTION
GTN65324.DDB-79

GTN-Galactic Terran Navy.  The never actually mentioned name of the whole Terran fleet in FS1 and FS2.

65324 - 653rd ship ever made for the GTN, and the the last 2 numbers of the year it was delivered: 2324.

DDB-79 - The designation of class and hull number as already defined before.

For refits, it would be something like

GTN67826.DDB-101/2

with the /2 meaning the 2nd version of the ship.

[TrashMan]

An easy change

NRN-10586 = first indentifier (unique for each ship)
DB3 = Orion class (indentifies ship class and function)

V1 = verison ???? Maby I should ditch this???

[Boomer]

I haven't even read the whole thing, and here's my biggest gripe:

You give guidlines on the numbers that entail a class.

This eliminates a great amount of freedom in ship creation, (unless you use CLS-186.5 or some other ungodly number).

That said, it would however, be a good way to denote prototypes and possibly civilian craft with a little tinkering.  Although civilians shouldn't be able to get their hands on destroyer class vessels (legally anyway).....

*Now I have read the whole thing*

As far as the FS ship arrangement goes,  Perhaps on the conception of a Space fleet, they just said "What the hell, I want a destroyer to be larger than a cruiser."

We are talking about Command here, who aren't exactly known for their brilliant mental capacities.

*cough, cough, "Sir, we have hull breaches on 12 decks!  Half our crew is dead!"
  "Phoenecia, remain on station", cough, cough*

[TrashMan]

Well yes, Command has reached unseen levels of stupidity...