Stargate Information Archive

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Search     Help     Rules     Members V     Calendar V     Live Chat V  

> Stargate Atlantis: General Discussion

This area is for general discussion of Stargate Atlantis only. Atlantis spoilers belong in the Spoilers & Speculation section. There are separate categories for Stargate SG-1 Discussion and Stargate Universe Discussion. Complete forum rules are available here.

Atlantis Index: General Discussion | Spoilers & Speculation | Specific Episode Discussion

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> F-304 Missile Launchers
jhdesynz
post Feb 28th 2008, 9:52 PM
Post #1


Airman Basic
*

Group: Donating Members
Posts: 23
Joined: February 13th 2006
From: maryland, usa
Member No.: 11,184
Gender: Male



I apologize if this has already been discussed, the search widget doesn't seem to be working at the moment.

Why are the Daedalus/Odyssey/Apollo/etc.. (and the Prometheus for that matter) missile launchers on the top of the ship? That makes absolutely no sense for a space-based ship. In a 3D battlefield, wouldn't it be logical that the ship is going to face the opponent? Why then are the missile batteries not on the front of the ship and/or sides and rear, ala Wing Commander (B-Movie, I know)?

Missile batteries being on the top of the ship screams surface/submerged-to-air launch. Which would only truly be useful if the ship had landed.

This would also eliminate the problem of the missiles having to correct coarse after they are fired.

Again, I apologize if this has already been discussed add nauseam.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave312
post Feb 28th 2008, 10:09 PM
Post #2


Senior Master Sergeant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 367
Joined: September 23rd 2007
From: Australia
Member No.: 15,343
Gender: Male



Of all 6 directions that a ship would fire in during a space battle, below the ship I would say is the most uncommon. Your correct in saying that most commonly the ship would be facing its target, however in situations where there are multiple targets, this is not always the case. The aim I would say would be to try and reduce the angle in which the missile needs to re-direct itself. If we take below the ship as being the most uncommon direction to fire in, then the missiles placement is correct.

It might also be a case of just where there is room on the ship.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jhdesynz
post Feb 28th 2008, 10:17 PM
Post #3


Airman Basic
*

Group: Donating Members
Posts: 23
Joined: February 13th 2006
From: maryland, usa
Member No.: 11,184
Gender: Male



I see your point, it could be a on-board space issue. It just seems so out of place for a fairly well thought out design.

Oh and I, of course, mispelled the ship registration, it should be BC-304 not F-304.

This post has been edited by jhdesynz: Feb 28th 2008, 10:18 PM
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave312
post Feb 28th 2008, 10:22 PM
Post #4


Senior Master Sergeant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 367
Joined: September 23rd 2007
From: Australia
Member No.: 15,343
Gender: Male



QUOTE(jhdesynz @ Feb 29th 2008, 2:17 PM) *

Oh and I, of course, mispelled the ship registration, it should be BC-304 not F-304.

Thats one thing I've never known the answer to, where has it been said that the ship is a BC-304? Most of the time it gets called just a 304. And Prometheus was called the X-303 so I've always assumed it was a X-304.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jhdesynz
post Feb 28th 2008, 10:48 PM
Post #5


Airman Basic
*

Group: Donating Members
Posts: 23
Joined: February 13th 2006
From: maryland, usa
Member No.: 11,184
Gender: Male



When the ship is in prototype, its designation is X, once its commissioned, its changed to the type of ship. As I understand it: F = Fighter, BC = Battle Cruiser. Those are the only ones we've seen so far. Technically they should follow Navy tradition and use USS, but I think they wanted to set the ships apart from the ST universe.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JC1
post Feb 28th 2008, 11:00 PM
Post #6


Captain
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: January 13th 2003
From: Dublin, Ireland
Member No.: 342
Gender: Male



QUOTE(Dave312 @ Feb 29th 2008, 3:22 AM) *

Thats one thing I've never known the answer to, where has it been said that the ship is a BC-304? Most of the time it gets called just a 304. And Prometheus was called the X-303 so I've always assumed it was a X-304.

They referred to BC-303's in "Enemy Mine" when they were trying to mine enough Naquada to build more of them.

As jhdesynz said the X designation is used when the ship is a prototype.

However, as far as I know, the 304's are referred to as DSC-304's. DSC meaning Deep Space Carrier. I think the DSC designation is on uniform patches the Odyssey crew wear. Or it could be on the Apollo patch, I'm not sure.

And both the Odyssey and the Apollo have use the USS prefix before the name.

This post has been edited by JC1: Feb 28th 2008, 11:03 PM
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jhdesynz
post Feb 28th 2008, 11:17 PM
Post #7


Airman Basic
*

Group: Donating Members
Posts: 23
Joined: February 13th 2006
From: maryland, usa
Member No.: 11,184
Gender: Male



JC1 nailed it. I think the best way to think of it would be (and JC1, please correct me if I get it wrong):


The code and number are the ship's registration/class designation. The USS goes before the actual ship name regardless.

IE:

USS Daedalus, DSC-304; USS Apollo, still DSC-304; USS Prometheus, BC-303; etc.


But back to the topic. I still think its odd the missile batteries are only on top the ships.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JC1
post Feb 28th 2008, 11:38 PM
Post #8


Captain
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: January 13th 2003
From: Dublin, Ireland
Member No.: 342
Gender: Male



QUOTE(jhdesynz @ Feb 29th 2008, 4:17 AM) *

JC1 nailed it. I think the best way to think of it would be (and JC1, please correct me if I get it wrong):
The code and number are the ship's registration/class designation. The USS goes before the actual ship name regardless.

IE:

USS Daedalus, DSC-304; USS Apollo, still DSC-304; USS Prometheus, BC-303; etc.


Thats my understanding of how it works.

QUOTE

But back to the topic. I still think its odd the missile batteries are only on top the ships.

In “Grace” when the Prometheus fired missiles aft, I don’t think they came from the top of the ship. So it’s possible the ships have more than one missile battery.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Revan
post Feb 29th 2008, 7:15 AM
Post #9


Dark Lord of The Sith
Group Icon

Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,455
Joined: February 1st 2006
From: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., Terra Firma
Member No.: 11,056
Gender: Male



They are Daedalus class DSC 304's. It says so on a plaque inside the Apollo.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: July 23rd 2014 - 11:21 PM
Stargate Information Archive

Stargate SG-1 © 1997-2013 MGM Worldwide Television, Inc.
Stargate Atlantis © 2004-2013 MGM Worldwide Television, Inc.
Text and images from this site may not be used without permission.

All comments on these pages belong to the author of those comments, and
do not necessarily reflect the views of the Stargate Information Archive.