Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 191
06-08-2012, 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
We have tractor beam Doffs though... even if the BO has inexplicably not trained in the use of them (despite no canon instances of a BO saying 'you do this, I've never used a tractor beam before), why wouldn't they be able to order the underling to run it?

Sulu didn't manually load the photon tubes by hand, either...
Good point. There's also no canon reference to TBs being used as an offensive weapon by anyone, save the Borg, either. And they only used it to try and drag the Enterprise into the cube so they could assimilate it. Not to hold it still, while they pounded it with beam weapons, and torpedos. After all, it's a tractor (meaning pull) beam, not a freeze ray.

An enemy ship is just a big crate, So is a friendly one. Extrapolating on that analogy, some people move crates with more care than others. And while it's probably not a big deal if the contents of that enemy "crate" arrive at their destination, pulverized. The last thing any StarFleet captain wants to see, is an angry Admiral, with Earl Grey on his uniform, glaring at them, because their TB guy has a heavy hand. So preciscion is a plus.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 192
06-08-2012, 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
A random thought on the "battleship" classification.

I seem to remember that in some TOS episodes, the Enterprise was referred to as "Starship", as if this was some kind of class or classification. Maybe Gene (or the writer in question, if not Gene) actually intended to allude to the idea of "Battleship" there, and not just "space ship"?

Could be an interesting twist in ship classification. All the ships we name "Cruisers" should/could be Battleships (Starships in Starfleet parlance since it's not all about war).

It's not as if Gene wasn'T aware of the importance of Aircraft Carriers, but he seemed to decidedly not make the Enterprise some kind of space carrier, but more a ship of the line.

The classification of Battleships with their heavy weapons and heavy armor seems to fit to the Enterprise(s).

[/random thought]
Starships are warp capable. They travel between star systems. Early Romulan vessels weren't warp capable. It was only through an Alliance with the Klingons and some old D7 cruisers, that the Star Empire became true spacefarers. Basically, because in TOS, it was just easier to paint birds on the D7 models, than come up with original designs, although this contradicts the Romulan/Vulcan schism, and why Vulcans were seemingly the big know it alls, with warp capability, while the Romulans couldn't go around the galactic, block.

Actually, it's 3D space, and the evolution of weaponry that spelled the end for the small 1/2 man ship. Gene recognized rightly so, that an aircraft's advantage over a terrestrial ship, is it's ability to move in 3D space, if only for 180 degrees. Battles that takeplace in space negate that advantage. Now as clearly evidenced in STO, fighters simply don't have the shields, or weapons, (especially against point defense or aceton assimilators) to combat a weapons platform the size of a starship. While simply an ability in game, keep in mind in RL these pilots would be punching one way tickets. Who'd want that job? Klingons don't care on account of they all have a deathwish. No one in StarFleet, I suspect. In STO your crew replenishes, and when your cool down clears, you just launch more fighters. but how many of them make it back to the ship? That's why Trek is more about capital ships slugging it out, and less about carrier ops in space.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 193
06-08-2012, 01:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feydman View Post
On the other hand, they have eliminated the need for toilets as starship bathrooms do not have them.

I'm not sure if being able to hold your poop for years at a time is an ability that makes since, but it is useful... :p
Upon graduation, all cadets have micro transporters inserted in their bums that beam the excrement to the reclaimators, where it's converted to useful items like containers and bottles.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 194
06-08-2012, 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad_Max_Rockatanski
Good point. There's also no canon reference to TBs being used as an offensive weapon by anyone, save the Borg, either. And they only used it to try and drag the Enterprise into the cube so they could assimilate it. Not to hold it still, while they pounded it with beam weapons, and torpedos. After all, it's a tractor (meaning pull) beam, not a freeze ray.

An enemy ship is just a big crate, So is a friendly one. Extrapolating on that analogy, some people move crates with more care than others. And while it's probably not a big deal if the contents of that enemy "crate" arrive at their destination, pulverized. The last thing any StarFleet captain wants to see, is an angry Admiral, with Earl Grey on his uniform, glaring at them, because their TB guy has a heavy hand. So preciscion is a plus.
In combat though, you'd pretty much always prefer the enemy to be ripped up by agressive tractor use, so not sure that really applies either.

In SFB, there was an extra 'new' race the Andromedans which used Tractor Repulsor based weaponry though..... Even though it isn't canon, it is a concept that has been thought of.

On the list of other ideas that are never used, since photon torpedoes are actual physical torpedoes why not beam them directly inside the hull of an opposing ship? I am sure there are all sorts of Geneva-like conventions against doing so, but not every race or captain out there plays nice, and there are times when ships are close enough with both shields down....
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 195
06-08-2012, 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad_Max_Rockatanski
Upon graduation, all cadets have micro transporters inserted in their bums that beam the excrement to the reclaimators, where it's converted to useful items like containers and bottles.
Toilets are on the blueprints of the Connie.... not sure about the later ships....
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 196
06-08-2012, 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
The classification of "battleship", derived from "line of battle-ship"(to describe the ship's role of sitting in a long line with other similarly armed ships to unleash their broadsides all at once on designated targets), is obsolete. In the final days of sail, "line of battle-ships" were composed of large ships with many guns whose only purpose was to be hauled out to fight in a sea battle. Much of the time they were kept in port due to the monumental cost of maintaining them at sea. Steam and oil powered warships of the largest size leading to WW2 were still called battleships due to tradition, and due to the fact that they still operated in the then-obsolete line of battle with one ship following another to combine firepower. Also battleships of the 20th century were never intended to go out on long duration operations independently of fleet escorts. Nuclear submarines do that now, to the point where they're the cruisers of the modern age.

The term "cruiser" or "cruizer" was first commonly used in the 17th century to refer to an independent ship. "Cruiser" meant the purpose or mission of a ship, rather than a category of vessel - just as "battleship" means the purpose of the ship(to sit in a line of battle and fight), not category. This makes much more sense in trek, no matter how heavily armed the ship is. Cruisers are built to go out and cruise around space for long durations. They also project military power to where it is needed. They don't stand in a line of battle, hence there is no longer a need for the term "battleship". You might as well call them warships and be done with it. And the Federation doesn't build warships.
Line of Battleship? You're thinking of "Line Ahead" formation. The only fact I can discern from anything you just said is that, for the most part, ships of the line did remain in port, partly because of operational costs, but mostly because of their ponderous size and weight, they could not maneuver in heavy seas, and would be lost, not only diminishing a nation's prestige, and fighting prowess, but costing a considerable expense to replace. They would only embark as a fleet, when both sides determined a time, and place for the engagement. Sometimes they would be escorted by a frigate line, but more often than not, the frigates would stay behind, as they were deemed to small, and insignificant to make a difference in battle, and would only be lost.

Cruiser is, in fact, a classification of naval warship. The U.S. navy designation CLGN means Light Cruiser, Guided Missile, Nuclear Powered, for instance. The "Battleships" of most modern navies have been replaced by guided missle cruisers. You may be thinking of the term "Cutter" as in "Excise Cutter" or Coast Guard cutter. A cutter's primary mission is commerce interdiction, seizing contraband, and taxing "duty free" cargo.

Not clear who, or what your source of information is, but this is mostly rubbish. A nuclear missle sub's (Boomer) primary mission is the threat of "Mutually Assured Destruction" or MAD, in the event of a pre-emptive nuclear strike. The mission of non-nuclear missle sub's (Hunter Killers) or HKs is to keep tabs on, shadow, and if the need arise, destroy enemy boomers. There's no "projection of power" here as theoretically, no one knows where they are.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 197
06-08-2012, 01:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
Well, of course, that's why they call them starships.

But if you say that a fleet would send its Cruisers around the world to do whatever needs to be done for "non-violent power projection" and only sends battleship for direct engagements, then I can see that battleship is not the right term and Cruiser is more fitting.
StarFleet doesn't like to think of it as "projecting power" across distance. They prefer words like "First Contact" and "Ambassadorial endeavors".
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 198
06-08-2012, 01:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad_Max_Rockatanski
Starships are warp capable. They travel between star systems. Early Romulan vessels weren't warp capable. .
Ultimately, while this is alluded in TOS, it's nonsense. If the Romulans didn't have warp drives, they couldn't build a space empire in any sensible amount of time nor lead any kind of war against a race that has warp capable ships.

It's a canon inconsistency. Basically, people tried to circumvent Balance of Terror's no-FTL implications for the Romulans with TNG's introduction of Quantum Singularity as energy source for Romulan ships - basically Scotty was looking for signs of a Matter/Antimatter Reactor on a ship that used a different technology as energy source.



Startrek doesn't really make since often.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 199
06-08-2012, 01:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
Toilets are on the blueprints of the Connie.... not sure about the later ships....
None on the Klink BPs though.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 200
06-08-2012, 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
Ultimately, while this is alluded in TOS, it's nonsense. If the Romulans didn't have warp drives, they couldn't build a space empire in any sensible amount of time nor lead any kind of war against a race that has warp capable ships.

It's a canon inconsistency. Basically, people tried to circumvent Balance of Terror's no-FTL implications for the Romulans with TNG's introduction of Quantum Singularity as energy source for Romulan ships - basically Scotty was looking for signs of a Matter/Antimatter Reactor on a ship that used a different technology as energy source.



Startrek doesn't really make since often.

One of many.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:34 AM.