Klingon-Federation War of 2372-3

[Captain Clark Terrell]

Different timeline, but the same resources. Both Starfleet and the KDF were fielding the same ships in battle. Three of the big BOPs were a match for a Galaxy.

The problem with this thinking is that it assumes the resources are being utilized in the same way. That the Federation was getting its butt kicked by the Klingons in an alternate timeline has no bearing on the events of the primary timeline. Even change of the smallest degree could have broad implications in the creation of a new temporal events sequence.

The trouble is that we know little or nothing of the sequence in question. We're shown only the events of "Yesterday's Enterprise." Picard indicates that Starfleet is on the verge of surrendering, but we know little of how things got to that point. One cannot assume that every individual who played a key role in shaping the Federation in the primary timeline would have the same role in the alternate timeline. The Enterprise-D is but a single vessel. We have no way of knowing what the Federation as a whole looks like beyond the fact that it's losing the war.

--Sran

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

^Having given further thought to this matter, there's a line from "Yesterday's Enterprise" that's always puzzled me. I'm referring to Tasha Yar's statement that the Enterprise-D "was the first Galaxy-class ship built by the Federation." That can't be, can it?

I'm assuming that the line was included by mistake, but suppose it wasn't. Does this mean that the naming schemes for vessels are different in this timeline? Does it mean that the USS Galaxy was partially constructed but abandoned in favor of Enterprise?

In any case, there's no way to know exactly when the Galaxy-class ships were first put into service: assuming that they would have been space-ready at the same point that they were in the primary universe isn't something that can be proven one way or the other. My point in saying this is reiterate that we must consider the events of the alternate timeline independently of those happening in the primary timeline when trying to determine who would prevail in a military conflict, especially when we don't have enough information about one of the timelines.

--Sran

 

[Pavonis]

My point is that the YE episode doesn't depict a radically different timeline. Perhaps it should have, but the producers couldn't afford to build all new sets and models and cast all new people in the episode. So we see a Picard commanding an Enterprise despite the alternate events of the timeline. If the events of the YE timeline lead to Picard et al. aboard the Big-E, how can we expect that everything else is radically different?

Sometimes small changes might generate wildly different results, but sometimes those small changes actually damp out. Given the rest of the episode depicts almost no differences between the timelines, I think it makes sense to think the Klingons of YE are not much different than the ones in the prime timeline. Therefore YE suggests the KDF could whip Starfleet in a prolonged war.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

My point is that the YE episode doesn't depict a radically different timeline.

Doesn't it? That the Federation finds itself embroiled in a two-decade-old conflict that it would not have been otherwise is a big deal. In any case, I stand by my original point that we have so little information about the "Yesterday's Enterprise" timeline that it's impossible to draw any conclusions about the timeline or about how those events relate to anything that happened in the primary universe.

--Sran

 

[Pavonis]

So the timeline is radically different, but somehow the Enterprise is exactly the same. How does that work?

As for drawing conclusions, there's plenty of data from which to do so. There's no reason not to do so. If new data were somehow to be found, different conclusions could be drawn. But saying it's "impossible" is ridiculous.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

So the timeline is radically different, but somehow the Enterprise is exactly the same. How does that work?

The Enterprise is not exactly the same. Where are Worf and Troi? Tasha Yar is alive. The point is that if even one vessel has incurred significant changes, it's likely that the rest of the universe has, as well. It's a scientific fact that the amount of entropy in the universe is increasing, not the reverse. Applying this rule to an alternate reality, the degree of deviation from the status quo (the primary universe) would have increased over a period of twenty years, not decreased or remained largely unchanged.

--Sran

 

[Pavonis]

Where's Worf? Presumably either dead at Khitomer, or serving in the KDF. Troi? Who knows? There were other episodes where Troi wasn't present either, but that doesn't mean she wasn't aboard.

But face it, the E-D is exactly the same. Same design, same command crew, even the same bartender! Both versions of the E-D end up in the same area of space at the same time. There are far more similarities than differences. Apparently the disappearance of the E-C at Narendra had no effect on Picard et al.'s careers, or in ship design. I find it hard to believe that a prolonged war with the Klingons wouldn't lead to significant changes in ship design and personnel. Clearly the war isn't significant enough to change these things, so perhaps the war hasn't been going on for as long as it seems, or not at the same intensity anyway.

Perhaps this is a case of "for want of a nail". Perhaps the E-C saved a Klingon at Narendra III that influenced the Empire to be friendlier with the Federation. Or that one key politician or Starfleet admiral was killed early in the war that would have handled the conflict with the Klingons better. But the point remains that the Klingons, fielding the same ships against the same Starfleet ships, managed to kick Starfleet's ass in at least one scenario. More data would always be welcome, but for now it looks like the Klingons could defeat the Federation.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

^My point about Worf and Troi was rhetorical. You weren't supposed to respond to it. In any case, you're continuing to miss an extremely important point that should be obvious: the Enterprise is only one ship. We're shown nothing of the rest of the Federation, so your argument that Starfleet is utilizing the same ship designs is baseless. You cannot draw a conclusion from nothing. More information would certainly help in drawing said conclusion, but that information isn't available. Therefore, no conclusion can be drawn.

There's a reason why standardized tests often include the option "not enough information to answer." Not everything may be determined using only a limited amount of information, and it's both foolish and irresponsible to believe otherwise.

--Sran

 

[Pavonis]

Don't be afraid of drawing conclusions, Sran, based on little or no data! That's what this board is all about! This isn't a standardized test or a scientific article - this is just for fun. What else is there to do? We only have what was depicted in the episodes, and we extrapolate to all kinds of weird and wonderful conclusions from what little we have. If you don't want to draw a conclusion, what's the point of discussing it? If you're only going to contribute by saying we can't conclude x, y or z, why stick around? That's only going to end the discussion. Where's the fun in that?

Anyway, we normally only have the Enterprise to show us what's going on in the galaxy, and that's pretty much always the case, but that's no reason to limit what we can conclude. "Yesterday's Enterprise" says that, despite a prolonged war with the Klingons, Starfleet designed and built the Galaxy-class ships. That's a fact, we saw it on screen. I conclude then, that, the Galaxy-class is a robust design that Starfleet thought would stand up well to the Klingon ships. In one timeline, it's an exploration vessel. In another timeline, it's a battleship. In both timelines, it's laid out the same, with identical weapons and defensive systems. So, during the short war with the Klingons in the 24th century, I imagine the Galaxy-class ships fared exactly as well in battle as they were seen to do so in "YE" - i.e., not great if they're outnumbered by 3-to-1 or worse. In the wider war, apparently Starfleet just didn't distinguish itself well enough to hold the Klingons off. Maybe they didn't have inspired leadership, maybe they had a string of bad luck, or maybe the Klingons really are badasses, despite their regular depiction as loud-mouth wusses who can get their asses handed to them by skinny Bajoran women and middle-aged Irishmen. Maybe the Klingons just outnumber the Federation 1000-to-1. Who knows? Only the writers, and they're not saying.

We do have what the alternate Picard told Captain Garrett - that Starfleet Command saw defeat as unavoidable within 6 months. Whatever else we know about the YE timeline, the fact is the Klingons effectively won that war (unless an alternate Ben Sisko had a plan to draw the alternate Romulans into the war within the next 6 months).

Anyway, lighten up - it's a discussion board, not a scientific conference. I'm not holding my posting here to the same high standards I hold my work.

 

[MacLeod]

Whilst it's a non-canon source did the TNG Technical Manual state the Galaxy-Class began it's design life circa 2343. i.e before The Narendra III incident.

External the alternate Ent-D seen in Universe might be the say as the one we know. But that could be where the similiarties end.

 

[Anwar]

Yar probably meant that the USS Galaxy was a prototype, a test model, whereas the Enterprise-D was the first normal model type of that ship class. The first "true" completed version of the design whereas the prototype was still a prototype.

 

[Mage]

Different timeline, but the same resources. Both Starfleet and the KDF were fielding the same ships in battle. Three of the big BOPs were a match for a Galaxy.

Not the same resources. The conflict started in 2346, or there abouts. Up to that point, Starfleet hadn't seen a lot of ongoing combat for a while, AFAWK. They weren't set up for a big conflict at all. While Klingons are basicly always prepared for a big conflict, it's part of their culture.

In 2372, things are different for Starfleet. They encountered the Borg, and the Dominion, and realized just how seriously underpowered they were. Thing started to change, ships like the Defiant and Prometheus were designed, they came up with pulse phasers and quantum torpedoes. So yeah, they stand a much better change against the Klingons then they would in 2346.

 

[The Librarian]

There's no particular reason that the Enterprise couldn't have been completed first if the Galaxy was delayed during construction. For that matter, there's no reason there would have to be a USS Galaxy at all - there' a long history of classes that aren't named after the first ship.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

There's no particular reason that the Enterprise couldn't have been completed first if the Galaxy was delayed during construction. For that matter, there's no reason there would have to be a USS Galaxy at all - there' a long history of classes that aren't named after the first ship.

That seems to have been the case in the twenty third century, but by the time Picard was commanding the Enterprise, most ship classes were named for the first vessel of their kind.

--Sran

 

[TheRoyalFamily]

We don't know enough about the war in YE to say anything about the significance of Starfleet's coming surrender. They might have been doing pretty well militarily, but the folks back home were getting tired of it. Maybe it started over some border systems, and the Tellarites were getting fed up with supporting a long conflict over them, and were making noise to leave the Federation. We don't know that a surrender would be unconditional, or just the feds handing over a few "criminals."

 

[Crazyewok]

Plus the federation has had years to beef up its military power in response to the Borg and Dominion kicking their asses.

The Klingon knew about the dominion, plus seeing as there are plenty of kllingon borg drones it seems they have meet the borg two.

 

[Anwar]

The Klingons in the DS9 war had more advanced tech and ships too, like the Negh'Var.

 

[Timo]

Also, in "The Way of the Warrior," a task force of nine starships seemed to pose a serious threat to several dozen Klingon warships.

I don't think the military threat of the ships was a factor as such. Rather, these ships would be the official entry of Starfleet into the fray, transforming the whole situation politically.

DS9 was in Gowron's propaganda harboring Changelings and no doubt itself already co-opted by the Dominion. It's status was vague to begin with: formally, the Klingons were dealing with Bajorans there, and had nothing to fear from them in terms of retribution. Starfleet was not yet involved, not according to Gowron. Indeed, if he could kill Sisko, he could say that Starfleet had never betrayed the Empire by leaking secrets to Cardassia - only a now-dead Dominion lackey had done so. And the beneficial alliance could continue.

However, fresh ships coming from Federation space could not be claimed to be Dominion assets, not without claiming that the UFP had already been corrupted by the Dominion. And that claim would be much more difficult to support than the one that the secretive Cardassian Union had become Dominion property.

Six ships would simply be too many to be made to just disappear, even if far too few to actually offer resistance to the Klingon forces. And for this reason Gowron could not fight them. He would very much have preferred to have DS9 destroyed before such a political intervention, and so would "Martok", but alas, no such luck.

As for a Klingon-Federation war taken to its conclusion, I'd think Klingons would actually be disinterested in winning. I mean, they love local victories, the total humiliation of the enemy, glorious looting, and so forth. But they have never shown a tendency towards the total annihilation of the enemy (save for Tribbles). For a warrior culture, total war is probably unthinkable...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[jmampilly]

I simply don't understand how a warrior culture could develop advanced technology. Yes, the Klingons would probably dump lots of resources into weapons development, but given that most Klingons are obsessed with being warriors, why would any be willing to sit behind a desk and research? The Federation's culture promotes research, and as such, would have far more advanced ships.

 

[Timo]

but given that most Klingons are obsessed with being warriors

It's probably more like "given that most obsessed Klingons are warriors"...

The warrior part of the population is simply the most visible and obnoxious one, to outsiders at least.

Timo Saloniemi