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? —This unsigned comment was made by 128.206.178.201 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

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, RelentlessRecusant 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!MMY8806 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.

We can only assume the Longwsords launch from the same place(the lower compartment at the base of the frigate) ground units are deployed from as we,ve also seen pelicans launch from there as well, the airlocks on the side of the forward hull of the frigate may only be used for cargo/personel transfer like in the start of Halo 2. DARKSTORM99 22:41, July 29, 2010 (UTC)

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)

Hello all, just wanted to contribute my two cents, or one cent at least if it doesnt seem valuable to people. I have here a screenshot I took of the action occurring just as the Ark Portal was opening, and one of the Frigate is being pulled in toward it, with several longsword interceptors being pulled alongside it. From the perspective presented, the longswords appear to be just the right size for several of them to be posted aboard a frigate. You may choose to agree or disagree with me if you wish, but I believe that the In Amber Clad's dimensions from halo 2 should not be assumed to be identical to the dimensions of the Frigates in Halo 3. The same should go for the longswords, at least until someone is able to adequately anylize the in game models. Just putting in my 2 cents, heres the picture. Rimnek 015 05:53, March 11, 2010 (UTC) Longswords And Frigate

I'm a bit confused about if the frigate can or cannot hold Longswords. Because in one scene of the campaign they are easily small enough to fit inside(The ending cut scene for the Storm. But other times it's much too large(The crashed longsword on the Ark.) I don't think the crashed one is too scale correctly and may be an oversight by Bungie, while the ones that appear in the cut scenes are to scale. User talk:OniLink 1:32, July 29th, 2010 (UTC)

The longsword is 75m wide, the frigate is 151m wide, therefore 2 longswords are about as wide as a frigate, there is no way they fit INSIDE the frigate, however it is entirely possible that they piggyback on an external hatch. Warman45/HeadachyUpdator 22:08, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Actually they could fit inside considering the length of the Frigate is 478 m its entirely possible that maybe a few could fit inside the Frigate. Col. Snipes450 22:21, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I would imagine a frigate could hold more than a few longswords if it holds them like the Seraphs are held in the Corvette (map). Darb 013 02:53, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

One must note that even the smallest Covenant vessels are far superior in design to anything the UNSC has. I personally highly doubt the presence of Longswords on a Frigate. We've seen their hangar bays, there's barely room for these things to take off. And even if they could fit some on board, the number would be ridiculously small. And I don't think the Frigate ever real was meant to serve the purpose of a cruiser or a carrier, both of which are more appropriate for fighter launches.Fire Eater 04:44, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

You don't need advanced technology to have a few longswords on a winch or cable system hanging from the ceiling, and I'm not saying a Frigate would carry whole squadrons of longswords (thats what a carrier is for), but a few longswords can't hurt. I think it's not a matter of if they can fit but its a matter of how many. Darb 013 05:15, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, also take into consideration how many Frigates are in the UNSC Navy, even if it's only 3-5 Longswords per Frigate, there is more than enough Frigates to bring a significant number of Longswords to an engagement.Col. Snipes450 23:37, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget the Aegis Fate. For all we know, it was the fate that had the Longswords on it.-- Forerunner 23:50, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

With the 3 frigates we have seen during the Covenant war, it is physically impossible for Longswords to fit inside them. I'm all for entertaining an external docking somehow, but they definitely cannot fit inside a frigate. Even a Pelican can't fit inside the hatches on the sides yet I see the article here indicates that is so. (Hell, the Pelicans clip their wings through the hull even dropping from Forward Unto Dawn in the Halo 3 cutscene.) I understand what they books say, but with the models that were used in game, this is an impossibility. Perhaps whatever class the Gettysburg is can accomplish this as it has to be larger than the frigates we've seen. ScaleMaster117 (talk) 09:30, 20 June 2013 (EDT)

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] 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.--ryanngreenday 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.... g^ue_st^y-p_er^so_ny-^th_in^gy^{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)} 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!MMY8806 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)

The picture posted by Ns5x (sorry if I got your name wrong), it says that the silver triangle things near the archer pods are Shivia Nukes. There is 4 triangles per side making 8 total, but the stats say there is only 3 Shivia nukes per ship. So wouldn't that make the picture incorrect? Darb 013 23:31, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I would remove the picture but someone will yell at me. Darb 013 19:32, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Picture of a unsc frigate. Is it worthy of the title picture?

[IMG][/IMG]

yes is good CF⁰⁰¹ 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 frigate. Forward Unto Dawn, Aegis Fate, and the third frigate 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)

<img src="" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting">

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. --CoH|Councillor]] SpecopsUserWiki:Specops306|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)

as we'll the UNSC SAY MY NAME was a cruiser, generally speaking larger ships are the first to be destroyed, so if the UNSC had a cruiser, it would only be logical to assume they had a few more than 4 frigates (1 cruiser 4 destroyers maybey 8 frigates at least.) Warman45/HeadachyUpdator 21:51, August 21, 2010 (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.

it's 30 pods (40 on the dawn) however each pod holds 26 missiles, for a grand total of 780-1040 missiles a frigate.Warman45/HeadachyUpdator 21:47, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

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)

I agree with both arguments here. A few things to make note of here. 1) The MAC gun. Most likely runs the length of the ship up to engineering and the cargo bay. 2) The aforementioned cargo bay. You can't store marines in there. 3) A space ship doesn't waste its space. So you could have 7 foot tall hall ways, while only fitting in 2-3 people wide. This would save much space. So I would have to go with a Marine compliment of 2,000-3,500. Plus a crew of only 300-400 which future technology would be enough through the usage of A.I.--Cookie Dude 16:10, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

i would like to point out that the CVN Nimitz, is 332.8m long, and is 76.8m long, it has a crew of 4800. the frigate is 133% longer, 350% wider, and MUCH taller, so technically speaking it's crew should be much larger, possibly fitting up to 10,000 crew and passengers when overloaded. now, we must consider a few differences, the MAC gun runs through about half the ship's length, and is about half as tall as the ship, as well the engine's protrude drastcally increasing the frigates length, as well as increasing it's hieght, we must account for MAC rounds, a nearly completely automated Fusion reactor, in the end we should end up wth a crew of 1200 MINIMUM, however the frigate should be able to fit many more marines, if fitted for transport duties. Warman45/HeadachyUpdator 21:33, August 21, 2010 (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)

5+ Longswords??

In the ship infobox it syas that Frigates can carry 5+ Longswords. This just contradicts what this picture shows, and it also backs it up by stating that on page 111 of The Fall of Reach. I think that The Fall of Reach simply had a mistake with the ship's class. Someone remove that 5+ Longswords thing? Bottletopman 02:02, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't a mistake. Also, has anyone thought that the wings of a longsword could move to save space? Also, the Ark Longword is to scale with the Longsword from The Maw.-- Forerunner 14:46, July 29, 2010 (UTC)

How does it contradict? i would say that from the scale of the linked picture, you could easily fit a few longswords on a frigate. especialy with the possiblity of folding or sweeping wings suggested by forerunner. Agent Tasmania 07:27, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Length

I just noticed that the Halo Encyclopedia (2009 edition) says that the UNSC Frigate is 1,568 ft (478 m) in length but the Convert template says that it is 478 metres (1,570 ft) so I changed it but it got reverted. To add to this Nicmavr why was this changed and did not get reverted? -->My Page Talk Page Contributions Page All Edits Page Email Page Followed Pages (UserWiki:Cally99117|Wiki Page]]) ^{(Favourite Page) (Opinion Page)} 08:06, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Ok so this has nothing to do with anything but I have a modded sandtrap map with the Forward Unto Dawn on it and I put 2 assualt spawn and plants (one at the tip of the mac barrel and one at the rear of the frigate. NOTE: by rear I mean where the large block thing ends, not the exaust thrusters, since those went outside the map) anyway, i went to custom games, got a sniper and looked at how long each assualt point was away from another (since it tells you in meters) and it said 410 meters. Also, if you subtract that off the total length, the exaust thrusters in the rear are 68m. I know this isn't important but it proves that the stated length of the Frigate seems corect. Darb 013 05:50, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Since the lengths in the info box have been changed recently, should we also edit the dimensions space to fit the recent additions to the length?--UNSCSILVERSTREAK 18:19, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

Power Plant

Do we have a source on that deuterium reactor? Because I don't recall it ever being said what type of fusion the UNSC uses for their ships. Could be Deuterium-Tritium, Proton-Boron, Deuterium-Helium-3, Deterium-Deuterium, pure Helium-3, there's no way to tell. Unless we have a specific source for this, it strikes me as fanon. Wannabecriminalman 23:30, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Edit

Actually it seems there is a source for the use of Deterium fusion in TFOR, but it was only one remote sensing station. We cannot extrapolate from that that all UNSC vessels use the same kind of fusion. A stationary sensing station and a mobile warship have very different power requirements.Wannabecriminalman 18:58, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Gallery

Can someone fix this pages gallery? On my screen, atleast, all the picture were going down the left hand side of the page when they should be in multiple colums. Thank you Darb 013 13:32, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Sinoviet Manufacture?

Well, playing Halo: Reach, you can see a hologram of a UNSC Frigate in the central lobby of the Sinoviet tower in New Alexandria. I don't know why it's there; however, could it suggest that Sinoviet is responsible for manufacturing the frigates? Just a thought. -- Sergeant Major Avery Johnson^Chatter 06:08, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Yea they deffinately are built by Sinoviet as why else would they have a hologram of the type. Also thats the company that scraps ships also in this type. VARGR 21:18, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

light frigate?

Anybody think the Halo Reach version could be a light frigate it seems to match some things it does

like the small armor bay for a small amount of troops and it looks to be a smaller version with a little less armor

who else thinks this?Admiralmorris 03:25, September 28, 2010 (UTC)

• Well that is a good theory. The frigates seen in Halo 2 and Reach are deffinately different to those of Halo3 which had far larger hangar for vehicles and dropships. The two different versions Should be pointed out on this page as say version 1 (halo 2/reach) and version 2 (Halo 3) as has been done on the Scarab page. The possiblity of them being light frigates could then be mentioned in the triva section. VARGR 20:48, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

I think that the Halo reach frigates are just more space combat oriented version (Lots of Point defense Guns, no cargobay), and that the frigate like the Forward Unto Down are more planetary action oriented (Less Guns, big cargobay) ... So may be Heavy Frigate/Assault Frigate ? Cyphius 22:19, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Well the reach/H2 versions have been seen in low orbit and near planet surfaces many times so they don't really have any bother fighting on a planet. The thing is canonically there is no Heavy frigates/Assault frigates so it would make more sence to stick to the ones that are considered canon (Frigate + light Frigate). VARGR 11:45, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Side Hangars

If you look at Frigates, there is a row of what looks like closed hangar bays on either side. They seem to small to fit Pelicans(The Pelican is too wide). The only possible explanation I can come up with is that they have escape pods. Anyone else have any ideas? OniLink 22:57, 9 March 2011 (EST)

What look like hangar doors may not be. Remember, in Halo 3 we see Pelicans deployed down - the panels might be reactive armour, meant to protect the internal spaces. The real exit would be underneath, retractable doors. The actual hangars may be much larger than they look. -- Specops306 ^{Autocrat Qur'a 'Morhek} 01:22, 10 March 2011 (EST)

The Sabre is by far the most compact UNSC craft, and it would not have fitted into the Frigate on the Boneyard. But beware of scaling-down issues. Also, concept art for Halo 3 depicts a frigate inside the Assault Carrier with lit up hangar openings at the back of these hangar sections a la Battlestar Galactica.--46.138.185.74 12:37, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

The bridge

Is the bridge really that thing perched on top? For starters, it's a stupid place for such a vital part of the ship: It would be shot off by an opportunistic rebel or Covenant Seraph pilot. Secondly, the cutscene at the end of Halo shows Thel taking control of the Dawn on its bridge, and later we can see that the pod on top of the ship is still attached to John's half of the frigate. Furthermore, when Thel crashes to Earth in his own half, no similar pod can be seen. This suggests that the frigate's bridge is in fact buried within the ship and further forward. This is a militarily sensible design aspect that seems to be supported by canon. As for the pod atop the ship? Well, my guess is that it's a sensor pod of some kind.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 13:51, 30 June 2011 (EDT)

Hm. According to Stephen Loftus' analysis of the in-game model of the In Amber Clad, the bridge is indeed located in the pod on top of the ship. Concept art places it there as well. This does, obviously, create an inconsistency with the Halo 3 ending and the Dawn, unless the bridge is located elsewhere in the frigate class seen in Halo 3, or the room Thel goes in is a secondary control center of some kind. But you're right it doesn't really make any sense to place a bridge on top - or close to the exterior hull at all for that matter - but neither does the Pillar of Autumn's bridge placement. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 14:06, 30 June 2011 (EDT)

Does concept art count, though? Do we treat Mr. Loftus' observations as canon? You're right, though. It could indeed be a secondary control centre, probably in use because the primary bridge had had a pulse laser shot through it. :-) --The All-knowing Sith'ari 14:13, 30 June 2011 (EDT)

I wouldn't say concept art is canon in itself, but it does give an idea what the designers intended. As for Loftus' observations, we've treated his ship and vehicle sizes as canon for a long time and so does 343i, if the Encyclopedia is to be believed. Besides, it's not like he's making it up - it's all from the game files. About the bridge of the Dawn, the issue is complicated by the fact the bridge Thel enters appears to be laid out identically to that of the IAC, including the windows, control panels and the command chair. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 14:43, 30 June 2011 (EDT)

I would say that in general, the bridge placement on human vessels in Halo is absurd. Why, when you have advanced holographic technology (see the A.I. pedestals, and the hologram GySgt. Buck's team were viewing in "Prepare To Drop") would you place the bridge where a missile or even a collision with a chunk of space debris could blow it or tear it off. Imagine the first CE cutscene like this: Cortana: "A single Halcyon-class cruiser against a dozen Covenant Superior Battleship. With those odds I'm content with *BAAAMMMM* and a damaged Seraph plows right through the forward viewport. See you on the other side Master Chief. So long Captain Keyes. Good luck stopping the Flood's galactic joyride on the Truth And Reconcilliation with out them. Seriously, the Sangheili place their bridge in a much more sensible and secure location, with the mass of the ship and their onboard infantry between the command crew and enemy fire and boarders. --Sierra 109 21:23, 14 November 2011 (EST)

A frigate is pretty much the cheapest offensive starship the UNSC can produce, so it's true there would be a lot of design flaws corrected in larger designs. For example, notice how most frigates destroyed tend to break in half or be sliced along the middle, where their thinnest point is. A flaw like this gets corrected in ships such as the Halcyon, or the Marathon, which are significantly thicker alongside there. With that cheapness in return for fast production, I'm not surprised a frigate has such huge flaws. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 22:44, 14 November 2011 (EST)

Harpoon nuclear missiles??

I don't Believe those Hatches on the port and starboard are missile launchers at all with their presence of over 90 identical hatches found on Anchor Nine.

The only reference to theses is the concept art which contains other 'misleading' labels. --Otterboy 00:20, 7 January 2012 (EST)