Guide:Baker - Revision history

Dan at 01:48, 23 September 2025

2025-09-23T01:48:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:48, 22 September 2025
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\|years= [[2268]] - [[2328]]		\|years= [[2268]] - [[2328]]
	* Flight I light exploratory cruiser: ([[2268]] - [[2276]])		* Flight I light exploratory cruiser: ([[2268]] - [[2276]])
	* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[~~2314~~]])		* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[2319]])
	* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[2328]])		* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[2328]])
	\|constructed= 27 total:		\|constructed= 27 total:

Dan at 01:47, 23 September 2025

2025-09-23T01:47:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:47, 22 September 2025
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\|years= [[2268]] - [[2328]]		\|years= [[2268]] - [[2328]]
	* Flight I light exploratory cruiser: ([[2268]] - [[2276]])		* Flight I light exploratory cruiser: ([[2268]] - [[2276]])
	* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[~~xxxx~~]])		* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[2314]])
	* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[~~xxxx~~]])		* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[2328]])
	\|constructed= 27 total:		\|constructed= 27 total:
	* Flt I: 10 (built [[2268]] - [[2269]])		* Flt I: 10 (built [[2268]] - [[2269]])

Dan at 01:45, 23 September 2025

2025-09-23T01:45:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 22 September 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:
	\|category= light exploratory cruiser / destroyer		\|category= light exploratory cruiser / destroyer
	\|years= [[2268]] - [[2328]]		\|years= [[2268]] - [[2328]]
	* Flight I light exploratory cruiser: ([[2268]] - [[~~xxxx~~]])		* Flight I light exploratory cruiser: ([[2268]] - [[2276]])
	* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])		* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])
	* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])		* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])

Dan at 01:21, 23 September 2025

2025-09-23T01:21:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:21, 22 September 2025
Line 106:		Line 106:
	In frontline use, the ''Bakers'' initially added to the confusing multitude of single-nacelle destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the ''Chargers'' and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-squadrons of ''Bakers'', led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated squadron leader design was created out of ''Baker''; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing squadron command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the ''Baker'' eventually became the only late [[23rd century]] destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat squadrons.		In frontline use, the ''Bakers'' initially added to the confusing multitude of single-nacelle destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the ''Chargers'' and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-squadrons of ''Bakers'', led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated squadron leader design was created out of ''Baker''; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing squadron command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the ''Baker'' eventually became the only late [[23rd century]] destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat squadrons.

	At the turn of the century, the class was still at full fighting strength, despite the alarmingly dwindling supply of LN-40 ~~spares - the~~ Khitomer-imposed retirement of Makin and Kolm-An assault transports had alleviated that problem somewhat, even though their LN-40A wasn’t completely compatible with the earlier model. In contrast, the single-nacelled destroyers of the Klingon conflict were disappearing from around the Bakers, class by class. Moreover, their replacements represented obvious Baker thinking, only now through a priori deliberation: the Polaris heavy destroyers were twin-engined light cruisers by design, and destroyers only by relative performance, while the humbler spaceframes of the Hardin destroyers packed firepower hitherto ~~undreamed~~ of. With such a splendid heritage, the Baker class could well be declared the winner of the messy and confused destroyer race, despite the lack of decisive combat engagements or stories of outstanding heroism.		At the turn of the century, the class was still at full fighting strength, despite the alarmingly dwindling supply of [[LN-40]] spares—the [[Khitomer]]-imposed retirement of ''[[Guide:Makin\|Makin]]'' and ''[[Guide:Kolm-An\|Kolm-An]]'' assault transports had alleviated that problem somewhat, even though their [[LN-40A]] wasn’t completely compatible with the earlier model. In contrast, the single-nacelled destroyers of the [[Klingon]] conflict were disappearing from around the ''Bakers'', class by class. Moreover, their replacements represented obvious ''Baker'' thinking, only now through ''a priori'' deliberation: the ''[[Guide:Polaris\|Polaris]]'' heavy destroyers were twin-engined light cruisers by design and destroyers only by relative performance, while the humbler spaceframes of the ''[[Guide:Hardin\|Hardin]]'' destroyers packed firepower hitherto undreamt of. With such a splendid heritage, the ''Baker'' class could well be declared the winner of the messy and confused destroyer race, despite the lack of decisive combat engagements or stories of outstanding heroism.

	==Gallery==		==Gallery==

Dan at 22:12, 22 September 2025

2025-09-22T22:12:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:12, 22 September 2025
Line 104:		Line 104:
	The ''Knutson'' experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 "[[Common Claw]]" torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the ''Chargers''. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the ''Bakers'' rode largely on inertia now. Two production contracts were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first was was completed by [[2276]], the second by [[2282]]. Setchuen sized its casting of [[LN-40]] coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.		The ''Knutson'' experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 "[[Common Claw]]" torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the ''Chargers''. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the ''Bakers'' rode largely on inertia now. Two production contracts were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first was was completed by [[2276]], the second by [[2282]]. Setchuen sized its casting of [[LN-40]] coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.

	In frontline use, the Bakers initially added to the confusing multitude of single-~~flotilla~~ destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the Chargers, and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-~~flotillas~~ of Bakers, led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated ~~flotilla~~ leader design was created out of Baker; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing ~~flotilla~~ command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the Baker eventually became the only late 23 century destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat ~~flotillas~~.		In frontline use, the ''Bakers'' initially added to the confusing multitude of single-nacelle destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the ''Chargers'' and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-squadrons of ''Bakers'', led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated squadron leader design was created out of ''Baker''; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing squadron command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the ''Baker'' eventually became the only late [[23rd century]] destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat squadrons.

	At the turn of the century, the class was still at full fighting strength, despite the alarmingly dwindling supply of LN-40 spares - the Khitomer-imposed retirement of Makin and Kolm-An assault transports had alleviated that problem somewhat, even though their LN-40A wasn’t completely compatible with the earlier model. In contrast, the single-nacelled destroyers of the Klingon conflict were disappearing from around the Bakers, class by class. Moreover, their replacements represented obvious Baker thinking, only now through a priori deliberation: the Polaris heavy destroyers were twin-engined light cruisers by design, and destroyers only by relative performance, while the humbler spaceframes of the Hardin destroyers packed firepower hitherto undreamed of. With such a splendid heritage, the Baker class could well be declared the winner of the messy and confused destroyer race, despite the lack of decisive combat engagements or stories of outstanding heroism.		At the turn of the century, the class was still at full fighting strength, despite the alarmingly dwindling supply of LN-40 spares - the Khitomer-imposed retirement of Makin and Kolm-An assault transports had alleviated that problem somewhat, even though their LN-40A wasn’t completely compatible with the earlier model. In contrast, the single-nacelled destroyers of the Klingon conflict were disappearing from around the Bakers, class by class. Moreover, their replacements represented obvious Baker thinking, only now through a priori deliberation: the Polaris heavy destroyers were twin-engined light cruisers by design, and destroyers only by relative performance, while the humbler spaceframes of the Hardin destroyers packed firepower hitherto undreamed of. With such a splendid heritage, the Baker class could well be declared the winner of the messy and confused destroyer race, despite the lack of decisive combat engagements or stories of outstanding heroism.

Dan at 22:08, 22 September 2025

2025-09-22T22:08:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:08, 22 September 2025
Line 7:		Line 7:
	* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])		* Flight II destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])
	* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])		* Flight III destroyer: ([[2273]] - [[xxxx]])
	\|constructed= 40 total:		\|constructed= 27 total:
	* Flt I: 10 (built [[2268]] - [[2269]])		* Flt I: 10 (built [[2268]] - [[2269]])
	* Flt II: 1 (converted from Flt I [[2273]])		* Flt II: 1 (converted from Flt I [[2273]])
	* Flt III: <br>		* Flt III: <br>
	** 8 (converted from Flt I [[2273]] - [[~~xxxx~~]])		** 8 (converted from Flt I [[2273]] - [[2276]])
	** 17 (built [[2273]] - [[~~2286]])~~		** 17 (built [[2273]] - [[2282]])
	** 13 (built [[2291]] - [[2297]])
	\|length= <br>		\|length= <br>
	* Flt I: 171.9 m		* Flt I: 171.9 m
Line 140:		Line 139:

	* The text differs significantly from the sidebar regarding the construction of the Flight III newbuilds: [[2276]] vs [[2286]]; [[2282]] vs [[2297]]. I'm deferring to the text (after changing the use of "flotilla" to something a bit more industrial).		* The text differs significantly from the sidebar regarding the construction of the Flight III newbuilds: [[2276]] vs [[2286]]; [[2282]] vs [[2297]]. I'm deferring to the text (after changing the use of "flotilla" to something a bit more industrial).

			* I've decided [[Setchuen]] produced the [[LN-40]] for a year (''i.e.'', [[2283]]) following the completion of the final Flight III, before discontinuing it.

	==Alt Sources==		==Alt Sources==

Dan: /* Background: Hobbyist's Guide */

2025-09-22T21:59:04Z

Background: Hobbyist's Guide

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:59, 22 September 2025
Line 103:		Line 103:
	[[Image:No Photo Available.jpg\|left\|300px\|thumb\|The major changes in ''Baker'' appearance—the new warp engines on their aft-slanted pylons, the lengthwise extension of the aft hull, the cosmetic modifications on the saucer—actually mattered less to her mission capabilities than the internal gutting performed to accommodate the twin torpedo launchers. The bulging, duonetically-transparent berths on the aft hull upper flanks at least were retained for possible (but never realized) remounting of scientific sensors.]]		[[Image:No Photo Available.jpg\|left\|300px\|thumb\|The major changes in ''Baker'' appearance—the new warp engines on their aft-slanted pylons, the lengthwise extension of the aft hull, the cosmetic modifications on the saucer—actually mattered less to her mission capabilities than the internal gutting performed to accommodate the twin torpedo launchers. The bulging, duonetically-transparent berths on the aft hull upper flanks at least were retained for possible (but never realized) remounting of scientific sensors.]]

	The ''Knutson'' experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 "[[Common Claw]]" torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the ''Chargers''. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the ''Bakers'' rode largely on inertia now. Two ~~full flotillas~~ were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first ~~flotilla~~ was completed by [[2276]], the second by [[2282]]. Setchuen sized its casting of [[LN-40]] coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.		The ''Knutson'' experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 "[[Common Claw]]" torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the ''Chargers''. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the ''Bakers'' rode largely on inertia now. Two production contracts were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first was was completed by [[2276]], the second by [[2282]]. Setchuen sized its casting of [[LN-40]] coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.

	In frontline use, the Bakers initially added to the confusing multitude of single-flotilla destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the Chargers, and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-flotillas of Bakers, led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated flotilla leader design was created out of Baker; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing flotilla command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the Baker eventually became the only late 23 century destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat flotillas.		In frontline use, the Bakers initially added to the confusing multitude of single-flotilla destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the Chargers, and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-flotillas of Bakers, led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated flotilla leader design was created out of Baker; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing flotilla command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the Baker eventually became the only late 23 century destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat flotillas.

Dan: /* Notes */

2025-09-22T21:58:00Z

Notes

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:58, 22 September 2025
Line 138:		Line 138:
	==Notes==		==Notes==
	* Timo had no "Mk II". As there is no logical reason to skip flights, I've adapted the article so that all "Mk III'' ''Bakers'' are now Flight IIs and "Mk IVs" are Flight IIIs.		* Timo had no "Mk II". As there is no logical reason to skip flights, I've adapted the article so that all "Mk III'' ''Bakers'' are now Flight IIs and "Mk IVs" are Flight IIIs.

			* The text differs significantly from the sidebar regarding the construction of the Flight III newbuilds: [[2276]] vs [[2286]]; [[2282]] vs [[2297]]. I'm deferring to the text (after changing the use of "flotilla" to something a bit more industrial).

	==Alt Sources==		==Alt Sources==

Dan at 21:44, 22 September 2025

2025-09-22T21:44:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:44, 22 September 2025
Line 103:		Line 103:
	[[Image:No Photo Available.jpg\|left\|300px\|thumb\|The major changes in ''Baker'' appearance—the new warp engines on their aft-slanted pylons, the lengthwise extension of the aft hull, the cosmetic modifications on the saucer—actually mattered less to her mission capabilities than the internal gutting performed to accommodate the twin torpedo launchers. The bulging, duonetically-transparent berths on the aft hull upper flanks at least were retained for possible (but never realized) remounting of scientific sensors.]]		[[Image:No Photo Available.jpg\|left\|300px\|thumb\|The major changes in ''Baker'' appearance—the new warp engines on their aft-slanted pylons, the lengthwise extension of the aft hull, the cosmetic modifications on the saucer—actually mattered less to her mission capabilities than the internal gutting performed to accommodate the twin torpedo launchers. The bulging, duonetically-transparent berths on the aft hull upper flanks at least were retained for possible (but never realized) remounting of scientific sensors.]]

	The Knutson experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 ~~‘Common Claw’~~ torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the Chargers. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the Bakers rode largely on inertia now. Two full flotillas were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first flotilla was completed by 2276, the second by 2282. Setchuen sized its casting of LN-40 coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.		The ''Knutson'' experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 "[[Common Claw]]" torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the ''Chargers''. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the ''Bakers'' rode largely on inertia now. Two full flotillas were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first flotilla was completed by [[2276]], the second by [[2282]]. Setchuen sized its casting of [[LN-40]] coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.

	In frontline use, the Bakers initially added to the confusing multitude of single-flotilla destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the Chargers, and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-flotillas of Bakers, led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated flotilla leader design was created out of Baker; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing flotilla command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the Baker eventually became the only late 23 century destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat flotillas.		In frontline use, the Bakers initially added to the confusing multitude of single-flotilla destroyer designs. Their range of applicability was greater than that of the Chargers, and few were tasked with escort duty. Instead, border starbases enjoyed the rotation of offensive half-flotillas of Bakers, led by modern scouts of appropriate warp performance when available. No dedicated flotilla leader design was created out of Baker; and indeed the type would have been somewhat undersized for housing flotilla command gear. Rather, the manageable dimensions encouraged mass production, and the Baker eventually became the only late 23 century destroyer type to be procured to the strength of three full combat flotillas.

Dan at 21:07, 22 September 2025

2025-09-22T21:07:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:07, 22 September 2025
Line 99:		Line 99:
	Forces driving for re-escalation existed independently of such events. A refitting craze gripped Star Fleet at the introduction of linear excitation warp propulsion technology and suddenly every existing platform was seen as a potential basis for a superfast, multipurpose combatant. The remaining flock of light exploratory cruisers was in [[2270]] deemed to be behind the times on all three aspects of the designation: more substantial armament, protection, and propulsion was called for; exploration had to give way to defensive duties; and the proper moniker for a vessel of this size would from now on be destroyer. ''USS Knutson'' (NCC-1298) got the misfortune of trailblazing the conversion. She received the [[Setchuen]] [[LN-40]] warp engine, one of the less successful attempts at a [[PB-45]] successor, and had her aft hull stretched to accommodate the associated powerplant. An accordingly increased number of lateral sensor berths was to compensate for all the survey assets lost with cutting off the ventral mission pod.		Forces driving for re-escalation existed independently of such events. A refitting craze gripped Star Fleet at the introduction of linear excitation warp propulsion technology and suddenly every existing platform was seen as a potential basis for a superfast, multipurpose combatant. The remaining flock of light exploratory cruisers was in [[2270]] deemed to be behind the times on all three aspects of the designation: more substantial armament, protection, and propulsion was called for; exploration had to give way to defensive duties; and the proper moniker for a vessel of this size would from now on be destroyer. ''USS Knutson'' (NCC-1298) got the misfortune of trailblazing the conversion. She received the [[Setchuen]] [[LN-40]] warp engine, one of the less successful attempts at a [[PB-45]] successor, and had her aft hull stretched to accommodate the associated powerplant. An accordingly increased number of lateral sensor berths was to compensate for all the survey assets lost with cutting off the ventral mission pod.

	The actual mission gear ~~Starfleet~~ hoped to fit aboard was unrelated to survey duty. Paired torpedo launchers were to turn the Knutson into the twin-engined counterpart to the projected Charger single-nacelle light destroyers. The better endurance and accommodations of the Knutson were lost in the conversion process, as the torpedo system took up a lot of room at the lower bow, and the outer hull equipment cavities and consumables tanks were reappropriated for extra shield conduitry and a double-wall structure of somewhat dubious protective worth.		The actual mission gear Star Fleet hoped to fit aboard was unrelated to survey duty. Paired torpedo launchers were to turn the ''Knutson'' into the twin-engined counterpart to the projected ''[[Guide:Charger\|Charger]]'' single-nacelle light destroyers. The better endurance and accommodations of the ''Knutson'' were lost in the conversion process, as the torpedo system took up a lot of room at the lower bow, and the outer hull equipment cavities and consumables tanks were reappropriated for extra shield conduitry and a double-wall structure of somewhat dubious protective worth.

	[[Image:No Photo Available.jpg\|left\|300px\|thumb\|The major changes in Baker ~~appearance – the~~ new warp engines on their aft-slanted pylons, the lengthwise extension of the aft hull, the cosmetic modifications on the ~~saucer – actually~~ mattered less to her mission capabilities than the internal gutting performed to accommodate the twin torpedo launchers. The bulging, duonetically transparent berths on the aft hull upper flanks at least were retained for possible (but never realized) remounting of scientific sensors.]]		[[Image:No Photo Available.jpg\|left\|300px\|thumb\|The major changes in ''Baker'' appearance—the new warp engines on their aft-slanted pylons, the lengthwise extension of the aft hull, the cosmetic modifications on the saucer—actually mattered less to her mission capabilities than the internal gutting performed to accommodate the twin torpedo launchers. The bulging, duonetically-transparent berths on the aft hull upper flanks at least were retained for possible (but never realized) remounting of scientific sensors.]]

	The Knutson experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 ‘Common Claw’ torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the Chargers. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the Bakers rode largely on inertia now. Two full flotillas were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first flotilla was completed by 2276, the second by 2282. Setchuen sized its casting of LN-40 coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.		The Knutson experiment was followed with series production of a slightly different model, with a more potent Mk 9 ‘Common Claw’ torpedo launcher rather than the Mk 14 of the Chargers. The class ship spearheaded the modification, a telltale sign of the unhurried schedule of the refitting project: there were more capable destroyer types under consideration already, and the Bakers rode largely on inertia now. Two full flotillas were completed by first refitting the eight remaining survey designs and then adding seventeen newbuilds; the first flotilla was completed by 2276, the second by 2282. Setchuen sized its casting of LN-40 coils to fit this procurement program, and then discontinued the type.