Isn't it time for a TRUE Federation Carrier
View Single Post
Join Date: Jun 2012
01-28-2013, 11:50 AM
Originally Posted by
The Iowa-class design started in 1938, at that time it was more that known that the Carriers would be replacing battleships as the center of the battle groups.
The Iowa was designed to be fast enough to keep up with carriers and to engage any ships that could come close to the battle group.
I have not been misinformed, those ships were further modified by the realities of the Pacific theater, the first Iowa class to be commissioned was the USS Iowa, it was laid down in 1940, launched in 1941 and commissioned in 1942.
I am quite aware of what battleships were originally meant to do, however anything like the Battle of Jutland never happened in WW II; what DID happened was Pearl Harbor and Prince of Wales, I could add other examples as the Yamato and even the Bismarck.
Realities change the role of ships, the Iowa was a battleship because of its armament and tonnage but its intended role was to escort Carriers and defend then from cruisers and battleships.
Oh dear Lord ...
I do not have the time to go over the entire naval history of World War II, I can only say you are so wrong.
Except the Federation Attack Fighter in DS9:Sacrifice of Angels ...
Ok so ... let me get this.
We "never say any fighter craft in any canon trek" BUT apparently we seen the "Miranda targeting and control system" "toasting multiple wings of fighter craft."
Of course the above is false, we HAVE seen them as I mentioned and yes, we have been told the Cardassian/Dominion Fleet were destroying them ... of course considering how that battle gone it does not tell us much as we seen Mirandas being destroyed as well as the Federation Attack Fighters wings were send alone to lure ships away from the main forces, they simply did not bite the bait.
This tired old comment again.
Also no, the Klingons are NOT suicidal, they are NOT Imperial Japan of the 1944's as they were original based on the Mongols.
I made no attempt at such a analogy, I only said conditions change as we gone from Jutland to Pearl Harbor with the role of the Battleship being altered over the years.
I made my comments in relation to Carriers being " OMG! aggressive warship meant only for war and killing kittens" that a rather ignorant view, a carrier does what it says ... it carries, question is WHAT it carriers.
You people are always with the same crap, on one hand the very mention carrier strikes so much fear into the hearts of the people they faint
at the same time they are utter worthless.
Pick one argument and stick with it but now you mention Battleships is a horrible word YET we have the Typhoon Class Battleship, yet we have the Dreadnought Cruiser.
So carrier is BAD WORD! BAD WORD! yet Dreadnought is perfectly fine.
I have no desire to go back to this tired old argument since THAT ship have sailed (Atrox, Heavy Escort Carrier) and further discussion is POINTLESS, however I do say this.
Right now the Federation True Carrier force is almost exclusive made from the Recluse and now the Jem'hadar Dreadnought ... you DONT have a problem with that? the fact non-Federation ships are taking the place of proper Federation ships because ... well the Heavy Escort Carrier is the 2nd most common escort but still a escort and the Atrox is a rather disappointing ship (even it made so many rage/quit back on its release) since its a Cruiser/Science ship with the worst of both of those ships.
Not quite sure if your sources are fouled or you're just making this stuff up to troll. Here's the deal:
After the battle of Taranto (look it up) and Pearl Harbor (look it up) the U.S. Naval doctrine was that carriers, along with cruiser/submarine screens, were more than capable of defending themselves. The major threat to carriers weren't battleships. It was aircraft, and submarines.
Now that that's established, the U.S.S. Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, and New Jersey were designed from the keel up, as battleships. They were NOT designed as some super destroyer escort, that people then decided to call battleships, as you purport. Their inception, was a direct counter to the new, faster, bigger, super, battleships that Japan was laying down, Yamato, Musashi, and an unnamed third, later to become the Shinano.
Actually, to properly understand the battleship's role, you'd have to go back farther than the entire, naval, history of WWII. Enough said.
The fighters you speak of in DS9 were never, actually, portrayed as carrier, launched, fighters. Nor were any carrier operations ever portrayed in DS9, or otherwise. Those fighters were planetary defense craft, similar to those that got wasted by the Borg cube in TNG. The Federation's "fighter", the Peregrine's actual designation is "courier" vessel, not "fighter".
No, I never said the Miranda was portrayed targeting multiple wings of fighter craft, in any Trek. This is conjecture based on A) The U.S.S. Reliant's phasers tore a gash in the side U.S.S. Enterprise, that was at least 3 decks high. What do you think would happen to a small, unshielded, one man craft? Like I said, toast. And B) The fire control computer in a primitive 21st century tank like the M1 abrams can aquire, and target 3 different targets, simultaneosly. How many can the positronic computers of the 25th aquire, and destroy?
And yes anyone attacking a starship in a small, unshielded, fighter, Klingon, or otherwise, IS suicidal. Notice how, even in STO, few, if any fighters survive an engagement? This is because they're not truly, an offensive weapon. Carriers launch them, to keep the targets busy, while either the carrier, or his friends, whale on the target. This, from the standpoint of someone who would pilot these "fighters", IS a suicide mission. Not sure why you thought I said the Klinks were modelled on the Japanese, either. I never said that.
Lastly, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make concerning battleships, and dreadnaughts, being BAD WORDS. So there will be no rebuttal.