Talk:Saber class
From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference
Contents |
[edit] USS da Vinci ?
Where does this ship come from? References please! --BlueMars 13:56, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
- I think the da Vinci is a ship from the Star Trek: Starfleet Corps of Engineers novels and as such does not deserve an own article. -- Cid Highwind 14:00, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
[edit] HMS Sabre
I wonder why the name Saber is used here. There was no USS Saber in the history of the US Navy yet, but an HMS Sabre in the Royal Navy. The name should be changed to Sabre as the class is obviously named after the British ship much like the USS Endeavour. There is a one time correct name in the Encyclopedia and it is changed to American spelling -- Kobi - (Talk) 07:24, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)
- It's not quite so clean-cut obvious as it should be. It's possible the this named after the "Saber", a sword thing. But there's been back and forth about how this is truly spelled since...a while. A italics note should be added at the bottom for this however, or at least to mention the different spellings. - AJHalliwell 07:29, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)
- There is/was an italics note. --Alan del Beccio 09:29, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Classification
How did we decide that this ship qualifies as a light cruiser? Maybe I'm not fully up to scratch on naval nomenclature (or MA protocol), but just looking at the stats, that looks more like a destroyer to me, i.e. small, fast, heavily armed, with a small crew, and intended more as a support vessel to larger ones. Unless somebody can explain to me why it's a light cruiser and not a destroyer, I say we change it. - Spatula 11:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mistake in DS9 Technical Manual
The DS9 Tech. Manual states that the Saber class has the EXACT same dimensions as the Norway class, which is impossible. I dont know what the policy is in that case, but it is obviously a mistake and it should so be mentioned. I think the wrong dimendions also lead to the rediculous classification as a light cruiser. --Maxwell Fawkes 10:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- This too is really a non-issue. The TM is not canon, so there is no sense in analyzing the content from it. It is merely here for completions sake. --Alan 20:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- Wouldn't that make it Apocrypha? --TribbleFurSuit 21:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- um, no... take a look at what qualifies for each again... --Alan 21:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
