Spaceship naming conventions

So I've been thinking about a military sci-fi setting lately. The action is confined to the solar system : no FTL drive exist, though the propulsion methods are much more efficient than today.

The primary weapons are missiles, which can take several forms : long-range (10,000 - 1,000 km) kinetic impactors, mid-range (1,000 - 100 km) conventional payloads and EMPs, smaller swarming short-range (100 - 10 km) missile interceptors, and orbit-to-ground missiles. No nukes (that part of the Outer Space Treaty is still in effect) but ships carry nuclear power generators. Directed energy weapons exist, but they are limited in power (because of the waste heat), so they are used only for missile interception and close range fights.

The ship types are as follow :

• Type A : mid- to small-sized ships, armed almost exclusively with long- and mid-range offensive missiles. In a typical fleet, they are the Glass Cannons : hard-hitting but defenseless.
• Type B : mid- to small-sized ships, armed almost exclusively with point defense (small missiles and lasers). In a typical fleet, they are the Stone Walls screening the Type A.
• Type C : very rare, very expensive large-sized ships, armed with both offensive missiles and point defense. In a typical fleet, they are the Master of All flagship.
• Type D : mid-sized version of Type C. They are often employed alone, on Gunboat Diplomacy missions that do not warrant the intervention of a type C flagship. As such, they often carry more orbit-to-ground weapons than usual.
• Type E : small-sized versions of Type D. In a typical fleet, they can be used as Jack of All Stats filling the role of either Type A or Type B, or in small groups for hit-and-run attacks.

My questions are : does this typology make sense ? And more to the point, what name give them ? Most of the names will be borrowed from early 20th-century wet navies because of Life Imitates Art, but I'm a bit uncertain on the specifics.

• Type C will probably be called "Dreadnoughts", because it's always the name given to the biggest ships in a space navy.
• Type B could be called "Destroyers", since they fulfill the same mission of defense against smaller attackers (here, missiles) while not being able to take on larger ships.
• Type D could be called "Cruisers", given their status as sub-capital ships used for independent action.
• Type E could be called "Frigates", they are the smallest type of ship and can be used for a wide variety of missions.
• Type A is the one that gives me more trouble. I initially thought about calling them "Cruisers", but it fits Type D better. "Gunship" is a cool name and closer to their role as smallish heavy hitters, but they don't use guns. "Missile Ships" is a better descriptor, and close to the "Torpedo Boats" they emulate, but it is too descriptive and modern-sounding for my tastes. "Battleships" is a half-fit, they are powerful but don't have much defenses.

So, any thoughts ? Am I completely mistaken on what these ship names actually mean ? Do you have a cool name for these pesky Type A ? I'm open to suggestions.

And a last questions : I think it would be more interesting if different factions have different doctrines, like "USA = aircraft carriers / URSS = missile ships" during the cold war. Any idea what other space combat doctrines could exist ? (Space fighters is right out though)

edited 23rd Apr '15 2:53:18 AM by Aetol

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore

How about calling type D Battlecruisers instead? If they're downscaled versions of type C "battleships", that'd fit pretty well.

That leaves the Cruiser designation for A and B (call them "Missile Cruisers" and "Aegis Cruisers", respectively?).

In my understanding (and according to Types of Naval Ships), cruisers were "used for independent action, of a long-range nature" while battlecruisers were bigger cruisers used in battle. So it doesn't really fit, unless I switch the names around. But calling Type A "battlecruisers" implies they are larger than type D "cruisers", while actually they would be smaller. On the other hand, Type A are Glass Cannons just like cruisers.

Maybe I could call Type A "frigate" and type E "corvette", which respects the relative sizes, but I'm not sure it makes much sense otherwise.

edited 23rd Apr '15 2:52:18 AM by Aetol

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore

Hrm.

Traditionally, naval ships tended to do as follows;

Frigates were the jack of all trades small ships. Could take on aircraft, ships, submersibles, and shore targets to a degree. Master multi-taskers, as it were.

Destroyers were often similarly sized to frigates, but were almost unarmoured and carries heavy loads of anticorvette and antiaircraft weapons. Fleet defense, mainly against torpedo boats.

Cruisers were the larger cousins of frigates. Little bit of everything.

Battlecruisers were slightly larger cruiser hulls with battleship-grade armament; fragile, but could dish out the hurt.

Battleships were the proverbial tanks. Slower than most, but could lay on the pain and take it at the same time.

Dreadnoughts were the pre-battleships, but in sci-fi are generally the bigger, meaner brother of the battleship.

Carriers... well, are carriers.

While this may not apply in sci-fi of all kinds, it serves as a decent basis for starship terminology. Your current setup looks good, if a little backwards (destroyers as tanks, frigates as glass cannons, etc.).

edited 23rd Apr '15 10:33:42 AM by Error404

So "Frigate" type E, "Cruiser" type D and "Dreadnought" type C all fit, with the latter following the sci-fi convention.

My type B have point defense not for themselves, but for the rest of the fleet ("point" being relative there, they cover a range of up to 100 km around them). So I think calling them "Destroyers" fits, even though they destroy incoming missiles and not enemy ships (unless a frigate is stupid enough to come this close).

Type A really fit the Glass Cannon role of battlecruisers... but I'm still bothered by the larger size it implies. Frigate-sized "light battlecruisers" sounds odd.

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore

Maybe Strike Cruisers? Fast-attack ships with more speed and maneuverability than defenses?

Or possibly Attack Destroyers?

edited 23rd Apr '15 5:43:22 PM by Error404

Missile Corvette?

"Strike Cruisers" or "Attack Cruisers" could work for type A. Type D could be called "Orbit Cruisers" or "Bomber Cruisers" (or just "Bombers" ?) to differentiate it better. And its definition could be skewed a bit to make it closer to type A : a cruiser armed almost exclusively with orbit-to-ground weaponry, additional point defense for solitary operations, and overall better fitted for orbital operations.

edited 24th Apr '15 8:15:53 AM by Aetol

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore

Keep in mind that in Real Life, many designers and planning committees care not one flying frack about categories.

To whit: the 'USS America is an amphibious assault ship without a well deck. That is, she has to use V-22's to put Marines ashore. The rest of the ships in the class with have a well deck.

Many US Navy Cruisers and Destroyers have firepower far outside their weight class.

All night at the computer, cuz people ain't that great. I keep to myself so I won't be on The First 48

Let's see.... first time here but here's my thoughts...

Destroyers might fit Type A lot lot better if their purpose is to simply hit stuff with missiles.

As for type C wanna just simply call them Flagships? Since they are rare and expensive, they are all works of art like a Motar Headd? A display of that nation's wealth, craftsmanship and technology. All of them are christened a unique name fitting for a hero's ship.

Gah~ Writer's Block!

I'm going with the old definition of destroyers as defensive ships. Screening a fleet or providing escort for a convoy. The old-school destroyers were "torpedo boat destroyers", these are "missile destroyers" (i.e. they destroy missiles).

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore

I'd call the Type-A the "Deterrence"-class, as they carry (Preemptive?) Strategic Multiple-Target Armaments and are designed primarily around successfully launching them. That, or the "Party Police"-class, because anytime they show up somewhere, you sit down and shut the hell up.

In general, what you have to keep in mind is, they're being put into service by politicians. I would just name their classes rather than their purposes, as it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have one government field 8 completely different ship types that would qualify as a Type-C.

Types is not the same thing as Classes. IRL navies can have different classes of destroyers/cruisers/submarines with slight variations.

No, you lob a few missiles at them and watch them blow up. Not that they would show up anywhere without some Type B...

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore

Violence perceived is violence achieved. If you can accomplish a task for the cost of fuel without having to resupply/replenish your weapons, why waste money and time opening fire at all? (This is why the Cold War lasted as long as it did, and why Googling "bellicose nation" will get you daily results.)

IRL navies have different classes for reasons that wouldn't make sense in a space-faring context. Space travel is expensive, and solving the logistics issues therein would involve a cult of perfectionism - getting the right design out the first time, and not having to call a ship back for a refit ever.

(On that note, you need a Type F: supply freighters. Even with Easy Logistics, there's more money in shipping cargo than there ever is in fighting battles.)

Oh of course there would be tankers, tenders, freighters and whatnot. I'm just interested in naming the actual warships here.

Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore