Talk:UNSC frigate

Longswords?
It is assumed that Keyes' Longswords would have been destroyed outside of Earth. KillerCRS 02:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Does the frigate really include a squadron of Longswords? Seems far too small for those and at least 4 or 5 pelicans and an albatross. Plus wouldn't Keyes have used the longswords in the battles on Delta Halo?

Of coarse they have them, and she did use them in the battle of the ark. Remember the one that gets shot down? Also if you go near the crashed pelican it says "Flash two coming about" that is most likley a longsword. -Knife 26 February 17

Sure they are small but not that small any UNSC ship would look small compared to a Covenant ship.--Ryanngreenday 21:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm simply taking its compliment facts from Halo: The Fall of Reach and Halo 2. Its credulity hasn't registered yet in my mind. cheers,  Relentless Recusant  16:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

In Halo: Fall of Reach the Frigate UNSC Commonwealth has at least one squadron of Longswords. Since most frigates/destroyers/cruisers etc are built to standard designs and specifications then it is reasonable to assume that at that point most frigates held longswords. If frigates are built to fufill specifications then the new frigates would also have the capacity to hold longswords. Also the fact that it specifically mentions that Destroyers have No single ships-that suggests to me that destroyers dont have single ships UNLIKE frigates. 81.76.51.222 23:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

There's a quote in the Halo 2 announcement trailer, "my frigates are Combat ineffective." should someone include that, or is it not enough?

The pelicans are stored behind those blue doors on the sides.--Malak

I was looking at this for reference for the Halo Wars game going on and I found this very helpful, I don't know who made this but thank you.--Omrifere 20:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

those airlocks on the side seem to small when you look at the size comparison showing a marine and a spartan for evan a pelican, and the frigate does not carry longswords not only becaus eit is to small but it is not listed on its equipment list from HBO. J!MMY8806 20:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

aswell as this the frigates used before had rotating sections the new ones that we have seen on the game use artifical gravity plating indicating that they are upgraded ships and not the same.  J!MMY '' 8806  20:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't these have two MAC guns? Look at the picture... the two MAC guns are in the front.

hey uhh that puts the fact up that that may be a destroyer "What those critics forgot that a UNSC Destoyer sported 2 MAC guns, 26 oversized Archer missile pods and 3 nuclear warheads. Only seven meters longer than a frigate. (note the) No single ship fighters. Almost as heavy than 2 frigates combined mass"

I think it's logical to assume that there are multiple Frigate classes, as the term Frigate is used to describe ships of a certain tonnage and role. For instance, the UNSC Commonwealth might have been built with larger but fewer bays dedicated to storing Longswords whilst the UNSC In Amber Clad was built with more hanger bays dedicated to Pelicans, though smaller in size.

The only time in game that gives reason to believe frigates have longwords is in Halo 3 when a longsword crashed on The Ark (Level). Halo 2 frigates gave no evidence of carrying Longswords. What if instead of frigates, the sanghelian ships were reinforced with UNSC Longswords to add as much strength as possible for the obviously uneven naval combat that would commence once the humans/elites emerge from the portal. As for the Commonwealth, perhaps the Longswords were carried externally, or it was retrofitted for extra firepower for its obviously important mission and is not standard pattern.

That is possible, I recall Contact Harvest mentioning that ships not carrying SF drives of their own would hitch a ride on larger shipsDarkfire27983 02:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Given that the more capable UNSC Destroyers don't carry Longswords at all, it seems reasonable to think that Frigates don't either.

I posted a picture on the main Frigate page, comparing the size of a Longsword to The Foward Unto Dawn. They are too big, they is no place on a frigate for them. I hope this can end that debate.

The UNSC frigate Gettysburg is stated on pg 275 of Halo: First Strike to have three Longsword fighters in its hanger bay. This means that a Frigate is in fact large enough to contain multiple Longswords. Molotovsniper 08:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The refrence said its repairing them in the launch bay, with exoskeletons on the ground. It doesnt specify that it can house them, or launch them for that matter. The simple matter is they are too large, if destroyers cant house them neither can frigates, which are smaller. [sniper T53] june 26th 2009

The point is that they can house them, the main launch bay is large enough to hold at least three of them and a 50m long chiroptera class vessel, with exoskeletons, people etc.

They are not much smaller. Frigates are only seven metres shorter.

Since destroyers have more than double the armour thickness and probably more cross-bracing then that means that frigates have more internal space. A 2525 frigate has a squadron of longswords and a 2552 frigate can hold them Molotovsniper 06:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

A serious look at the two ships will reveal that the hanger bay is too small for longswords, not too mention that they are not in the bay of the Gettysburg on page 275 of first strike, they are in the hanger bay of the Assualt carrier/capital ship ascendant justice. Halo 3 shows that a assualt carrier/capital is capable of housing an entire friage, that is the bay that is being described not the bay of the Gettysburg. Its in the chapter title.

The bay is that of the Gettysburg.

"Locklear wheeled the table into the Gettysburg's launch bay....three Longsword fighter craft were being repaired." Molotovsniper 16:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

2552?
How were Frigates introduced in 2552, but used in 2525 during the Battle of Chi Ceti?  Guesty - Persony - Thingy  04:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It's the first time it was seen in action.


 * Cheers,


 * 49 Proximal Secant[ oracle ][[Image:H3 Monitor.PNG|25px]] 05:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * TFoR, Chapter Twelve. The Commonwealth and a small Covenant ship engaged in battle while the Spartans and Dr. Halsey descended to the UNSC Damascus Materials Testing Facility on Chi Cheti 4 to test project MJOLNIR. If that's not action, I don't know what is.  Guesty - Persony - Thingy  06:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes they've been around longer then we're being lead to belive.-- ryan  n  green '' day 06:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Humanity did not have artificial gravity technology at the time of the Chi Ceti incident (they used centrifugal motion/spinning bits). The frigates seen in the games obviously do. Therefore, it is likely that the current class of frigate was introduced in 2552, and an older model was in use in 2525.

Known Frigates Template
Firstly, this article should either have a listing of known frigates, or the template. It shouldn't have both. Also, the template should have ships names in italics (not the UNSC part), as the list does. Manticore 11:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with that. I'd rather have the bulleted list, but it's up to whoever changes it. ODST27 1:29, 13, February 2007 (UTC)


 * I think this article should have the list, and any actual frigate pages should have the template. Also, ODST27, you can sign your edits by just putting ~, and it'll automatically put the UTC time for you, since you were using CST....  guesty - persony - thingy  I too am an AI... my owner's name is Supreme Honcho. 01:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

This article's layout....
...Is somewhat screwed. would anyone have the knowledge on how to fix it? Because it looks horrid.
 * What's wrong? Cheers, My Name is Helen (Talk) (Contribs) (Helen) [[Image:CortanaRR.jpg|15px]] 02:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The Spacing, the template are all overlapped and not at the bottom, it's all weird.KillerCRS 03:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Destroyer pic
there the mac gun pic has 2 MAC guns in it can i remove it because of the fact that destroyers have 2 mac guns

MAC
this can not be the placeof the MAC as there is a hatch door located thier so unless you can think of a good reason to take a strole into a MAC barrel then this isnt the MAC  J!MMY  8806  16:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

internal maintenence.--Maiar 06:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

halcyon
it look nothing like the halcyon class cruise and definatly not a smaller version of the ship Ralok 13:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a different class of Frigate was being talked about? Honour Light Your Way -   Kora ‘Morhek   The Battle-Net  My Conquests.  01:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Defences
On the Halo 3 level "The Ark," I can count three 50mm CIWS turrets - one on the Bridge, and two underneath. Does anyone have a different number? Honour Light Your Way -   Kora ‘Morhek   The Battle-Net  My Conquests.  01:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

If you do the 'camera outside of Sandtrap' glitch, the you can count four 50mm guns in total; two on each side. I may have missed one or so, but I'm pretty certain that there are only four turrets. I'll add the information later when I've double checked. Diaboy 01:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

How does a ship hover in an atmosphere?-- Joshua 029 14:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It is possible that UNSC ships have some form of anti-gravity device which facilitates this (The human ships in Stargate are an obvious example). A more humble explanation would be that they use some form of thrust vectoring; essentially vertical engines. Isidis 128 19:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Picture of a unsc frigate. Is it worthy of the title picture?
[IMG]http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l148/megatron6543/8511127-Full.jpg[/IMG]

yes is good C F 00 1 12:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Just add it to the gallery. --Ajax 013 15:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Can it be scaled down a little? It looks like it's taking over the page. Isidis 128 19:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Freight Classes
If you look at a picture of the back of In Amber Clad and Forward Unto Dawn you can tell that they are of different classes. The cargo bay on the back of Forward Unto Dawn that you jump into at the end of Halo 3 is missing on In Amber Clad. Just wanted to point this out, perhaps In Amber Clad was an older freight. Forward Unto Dawn, Aegis Fate, and the third freight that fired on the Forerunner Dreadnought all appear to be of the same class. Adao1207 01:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)Adao1207

That is possible, as Forward Unto Dawn is Miranda's new ship.

~Delta-718

MAC
Do we know which of the bow "prongs" is the MAC? Top or bottom? I'm sure in a Destroyer both would be, but for a Frigate, just the one.  Specops306 ,  Kora 'Morhek  20:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

 This is from Halo 3 when the 3 frigates are firing at the forerunner dreadnought ~Adao1207

Then supposse that neither is a MAC, because the flash of fire does not come from either prong. ~Delta-178

its comming from the top prong(the only one with a nozel-like spot on it). but iether prong looks to short to sport a MAC of any real power.Maiar 06:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

After taking a fly around the Forward Unto Dawn in theater i found a barrel in the top prong. along with 4 of those turrets and 8 of what i guess are archer missile pods.

Spartan Lasor?
I Read On the frigate page that if you betray merienes then a few spartan lasors will shoot at you is that true?Shipmaster117 07:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Spell "Laser" right. ppl who say lazer, lasor or lazor are wrong


 * In addition, the lasers are actually emitted by the towers that ring the map, not the frigate. There's no indication that the ship has laser weaponry at all. -- Councillor   Specops 306  -  Qur'a  'Morhek  08:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Number of frigates left in the fleet
On the frigate page in says that there are 4 frigates left in the UNSC fleet. How can that be true if I only see 3 UNSC frigates in halo 3. Is there another one or did someone screw up on that.

For that matter, how do we know there are ONLY 4 left? Where is this stated? Just because we only saw 3 attack the dreadnaught doesn't mean that's all there are. In many cases, when a smaller force takes heavy losses, they carefully shepard the forces they do have left by moving them to a safe location and only using them when absolutely necessary. So again, where does it say there are only 4 left??? SpartHawg948 01:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

There were only 3 frigates attacking the Forerunner Dreadnaught, yes, but that doesn't mean those were the only frigates left in existence. Other frigates could have still been elsewhere around earth and the entire solar system. Truth never completely secured either the planet or the system, so there could be a sizeable portion of earth's home fleet remaining.


 * One would think that since Fleeet Admiral Harper had 67 Frigates in one fleet.--Sgt.T.N.Biscuits 16:24, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

number of Archer missile pods
Someone put that there are 30 Archer missile pods on a UNSC frigate but a UNSC frigate only holds 26. So that should be change back unless the UNSC made new frigates that hold 30 Archer missile pods or bungie put more Archer missile pods on it than it should have.

Weight
Do we seriously want to be batting around the frankly impossible weight of 4,000 tons?

The cited dimensions give a volume of around 8,083,936 cubic meters, but obviously the frigate isn’t a big box so let’s chop that by 75% to say 2,020,984 cubic meters. We’ll use basic titanium for density which is 4,500 kilograms per cubic meter. That gives us a mass of 10 MILLION tons, but the ship isn’t just a huge block of titanium obviously so let’s generously say 90% of it is hollow.

Final weight? 1,002,489 million tons.

This estimate is probably rather low as noted since it assumes 90% of the vessel is hollow which is rather unlikely. Just for fun let’s say the ship DOES weigh 4,000 tons well the above noted figures tell us the ship has a volume of about 2,020,984 cubic meters while 4,000 tons equals roughly 3,628,738 kilograms. Thus we have a volume of about 1.79 kilograms per cubic meter. AIR has a mass of 1.204 Kilograms per cubic meter at about room temperature… it wouldn’t QUITE float in an Earth Like Atmosphere, but it would be close.

I vote we Axe this nonsense on the grounds of being bloody impossible. TK3997 02:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Where did we actually get the original figure of 4000 originally? Did we ever have a source, or was it just fanon someone just posted and we didn't notice? And on a related note, I found this - a calculator for starship weight. I don't think we know all of the neccessary factors yet, but I'd be interested in its initial results... --  Administrator  Specops306  -  Qur'a 'Morhek   Honour Light Your Way!  05:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea either. Vastly understating starship weight is a long proud tradition among sci-fi authors most of whom are, ironically, really bad at math. Still this is just outrageous as this number makes it less then half the weight of a modern destroyer it’s over three times the length of and probably dozens of times the volume.

Volume is what determines mass, but how it works is somewhat counter intuitive. Namely volume (which as noted is what determines mass) goes up much faster you might expect with increased size. Still this lacks even that excuse as the number given isn't "heavy, but not heavy enough" it's wildly too light to begin with.--TK3997 22:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Nylund has a bachelors degree in chemical physics, though, which requires intimate knowledge of mathematics, so I'd assume he'd know how to calculate a ships mass. -- ' Administrator  Specops306  -  Qur'a 'Morhek ''  Honour Light Your Way! ''' 22:51, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Apparently not given that I just proved above (with a few minor and logical assumptions) how absurd his number was with high school level math and about half an hour on Google. I didn't know he had a degree in a real science, in chemistry no less! In that case his insane number is even more illogical he MUST have some clue there is no godly way something that large made of metal could be that light. It then smacks not of lack of knowledge, but profound laziness. If he had such a degree and still published that number he can't have considered it for more then 30 seconds or run even the most basic of calculation on it. --TK3997 01:22, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

If these vessels were truly so light, then any MAC round delivered over 10-40Km/s would be capable of tossing the ship about with ease due to the limited acceleration of UNSC vessels. The sheer recoil of a delivery mechanism punching out a 600 ton round at 0.4c (as some have postulated) would be sufficient as to apply an impulse of 71,950,189,800,000 kilogram-meter/second, which to a tiny 4000 ton vessel would be the equivalent of an 18,000km/s push in the opposite direction. I sincerely doubt the UNSC have the thrusters to compensate for a thousandfold increase in velocity. "Limited acceleration"? You must have a rather odd notion of what "limited" means since calculations of some scenes in the novels show UNSC ships can use their engines to accelerate to noticeable fractions of C quite rapidly. Indeed they're so fast they more or less require some kind of inertial dampening system to perform like they do, which calls into doubt if this line of debate can be used. Any sort of damper that can keep the crew alive in a ship performing hard maneuvers at thousands of kilometers a second (at least) could also easily be used to counter the recoil of the main gun firing. (Though the high speeds of UNSC ships does call into question why Archers are so weak, fired from a ship moving at the speeds we know UNSC ships can there kinetic energy should be enormous, easily nuclear level) --TK3997 01:55, September 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm curious as to where you derived these "C-fractional acceleration" from, since during the FOR it was stated that it would take an hour for a UNSC Frigate to make the 80,000,000Km distance to the target.

80,000,000km in an hour from a stop equals: 12km/s^2 or 1259G's of acceleration

Now for the energy output W=F*d, F=ma so W= ma*d in this case 4000000kg*12345m/s^2*80,000,000,000m = 3.95e21J

P=w/t so 3.95e21J/3600s = 1.097e18W

KE=.5mv^2 so .5*600,000*30000^2= 2.7e14J

A crew can survive several thousand G's of acceleration with a compensation mechanism (although an inertial dampeners is pure conjecture at this point) since the acceleration of the vessel is capable of equaling the force of the current 30km/s MAC velocity coupled with our knowledge on UNSC propulsion. But given the weight of the vessel, how do you propose the thrusters square off against a magnitude increase of order presented by a 0.1c or even a 0.4c MAC round? You're applying an impulse energy that the ship isn't designed to resist, and any handwavium technobabble response will simply not suffice for now.


 * how would a Magnetic Acceleration system produce recoil? i keep hearing people say it would but i have yet to hear an english explenation. untill i get one i believe the recoil would be insubstantial if at all existant.


 * All guns produce recoil regardless of the mechanism used to propel the projectile. This is dictated by the law of conservation of momentum, one of the principles of modern physics. With projectile mass, acceleration, and speed being equal, coilguns and railguns do produce less recoil than your normal chemically propelled projectile simply because they don't have to worry about additional recoil being generated by the exhausting propellant gasses. But make no mistake: a MAC round will produce recoil regardless; and a 600 ton slug moving at c-fractional velocities will not negate the fundamental laws of physics, regardless of the delivery mechanism. Which means that the 30km/s figure makes the most sense, since the engines CAN compensate for the recoil of the round and still remain in relative orbit with a target or continue to charge with only a minor deceleration as a result, whereas a round fired at 0.4c will be the equivalent of splattering the crew against the decks of the vessel and crumpling it like a tin can under the sheer stress. I believe that was a suitably "English" explanation for you.

Similarity To "Aliens"
I was watching "Aliens" and the UNSC Frigate looks breathtakingly simalair to the marines ship on aliens. Also the female marine from the halo series is the same nationality as the one in aliens and the sargeant in aliens is a wisecracking african-american with a cigar always in his mouth Just like seargeant johnson. The marines armour and weapons are also simaliar. Additionally there are posters on the Pillar of Autumn on Halo CE which read "Missing cat, answers to Jonsey", the cat in aliens was named jonesy. I LOVE Halo and would not want bungie to get in trouble, but i felt the need to voice my concerns. Index3769 00:35, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I just saw a picture of the ship, I'm assuming that it is the "U.S.S. Sulaco" that you're talking about. They actually look nothing alike, other than the location of the bridge and that they're both longer than they are wide. 24.0.184.14 18:58, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Crew and marines
I was reading the frigate crew and marine complement and was wondering how the hell can a ship this small carry so many people, 1200+ marines minimum and a few hundred crew members? I know its fiction but come on. Sfw88 03:46, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * 1200 IS a large number. It seems more likely that their would be a Battalion at most. Someone needs to source that. Oh and sign your comments, it's the button with the cursive writing on it, third from the left on the bar thingie--Arabsbananas 03:38, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

"This small" You do know that this ship is significant larger then a modern supercarrier yes? You know the ones with a crew of a bit less then 6,000 people? Acutally such a crew is arguably rather too small, for only a few hundred crewmen to run a ship that large implies rather heavy automation. If it's crew is that size though then carrying a thousand odd marines on the side wouldn't be an issue of space though. --TK3997 22:30, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Archer missiles
I found a picture that seems to show that there are 10 more archer missile pods on the underside of the Forward Unto Dawn. I think this means that a frigate actually has 40 archer missile pods, instead of 30. Please tell me what you think.
 * Umm, who says that the 30 missiles mentioned in the page don't include these 10? :| I shrunk the image, in case you were wondering. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 19:42, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * If you look at the side view of the Aegis Fate in the article, you will see 10 pods near the front and 5 near the back. It follows that there are 15 more on the other side of the frigate, making 30. But but that picture is only a side view, so these 10 weren't counted.--Jamminben 07:57, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, nice find. I'm going to mention them as well. - JEA13  [ iTalk  ] 08:21, December 29, 2009 (UTC)