View Single Post
Old September 10 2013, 03:24 PM   #43
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
If we total only Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates the count is still 1991: 187, 2001: 115, 2005: 99, 2011: 109.

No matter how you try to spin which class or type is what, the simple fact is that from 1991 to 2005 there are HALF as many Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates (combined total).
I see the point once again went right over your head.

Because 40 Perry-class frigates were decommissioned long with 25 or so hopelessly obsolete 1960s/70s era guided missile cruisers, you manage to completely gloss over the fact that almost all of the 109 currently existing ships are equipped with the Aegis combat system, the Mk-41 VLS system and are compatible with the ESSM quad pack that allows a single vessel so equipped to do the work of FIVE ships with the old Terrior radar systems.

Basically, you're touting the "warship gap." Made all the more hilarious by the fact that the next largest navy in the world has only 76 destroyers/frigates in is entire registry (guess which one? Go ahead, guess!)
Your point is that these FEWER ships are better than the ones they replaced.

My point is that we have FEWER ships and thus not be able to absorb losses as well and it would be preferable to have MORE ships with the same better capabilities.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
And if you read my argument, its to maintain the same number of ships while keeping pace with technology.
Which is equivalent to a military BUILDUP, not maintaining the same level of capability.
How is that a buildup when maintaining the same number of ships?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
An AEGIS destroyer that can simultaneously engage 60 targets at a time can do the work of a 5 Tartar ships that only engage 12. For a naval force that has no serious military rivals, there's no coherent reason to build 5 Aegis ships to replace the 5 tartars,
That single destroyer can only patrol 1/5th the number of locations in a given year and mean a reduction in global commitments that the US can take on. And if that single destroyer goes down for maintenance you'll need another one to fill the gap.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
unless you can think of a scenario where an aircraft carrier is going to be attacked by upwards of 200 enemy missiles in a single volley.
Aren't there certain countries taking their time to build up a stockpile of missiles that is forcing the US Navy to reconsider how close they can conduct wartime operations to their shores?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Which is exactly what she is meant to ask in the script. The response is exactly the same: "Our scientific and exploration programs will not be affected, but the facts speak for themselves."
The "facts speak for themselves" was never said in the film.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
What are the FACTS of this case?
1) Starfleet no longer needs space installations along the neutral zone
2) The Federation has bigger fish to fry than the Klingons
3) The Klingons can't afford to keep jousting with the Federation even if they wanted to.
The only FACTS of this case are 1) and 3).

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The installations along the neutral zone are being negotiated because under the circumstances they are no longer needed, and Starfleet can and will get back to whatever it was doing before the Organian Peace Treaty CREATED that neutral zone in the first place (assuming they ever STOPPED doing it, and by all accounts they did not).
In the same vein, Starfleet's military program that dealt with 70 years of unremitting Klingon hostility was no longer needed as well.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The facts speak for themselves; everything else is just meaningless speculation.
Why then are you speculating on dialogue that wasn't spoken or cut from the filmed movie?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post

Or at that point only 40% of the fleet is for exploration and science because the other 60% of the military has been keeping the Klingons in check.
There is not a shred of evidence that even a SINGLE starship was decommissioned as a result of the Khitomer accords; there is even less evidence that the Klingon threat itself was anything more than a minor blip on Starfleet's necessarily large radar.
What shred of evidence do you have 95% of Starfleet is composed of science and exploration? (I already pointed out we're both guessing on the composition.)

As to the Klingons being a minor blip - going to war with them in "Errand of Mercy" looked like a major blip.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
But you are making the assumption that some portion of the fleet was "purely" military in nature and its only reason to exist was to keep the Klingons in check. This is demonstrably counter-factual: we have an account of a starship on a mission of peaceful exploration (one of which would be unaffected by Spock's negotiations) that REPEATEDLY engages in combat with Klingon warships during its 5-year mission.
If you're talking about the Enterprise and her crew, they were also identified specifically by the Organians as Military forces. The Enterprise also patrolled the Romulan Neutral Zone and enforced laws.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
There is not, in other words, any reason whatsoever to assume that the "scientific and exploration program" of the fleet is physically distinct or separable from its defense role.
There's lotsa ways to reduce the military in Starfleet. Stop training crew to think they're soldiers because they identified themselves as such in TOS. *During the war in DS9 they had to train them a soldiers. Switch to only using ships with minimal self-defenses for science and exploration and retire the heavily armed ones.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Of course we're both guessing since there are no stats about the percentages.
There's the fact that the USS Enterprise -- a vessel whose stated purpose is peaceful exploration of the galaxy -- engages in armed conflict with the Klingons on multiple occasions and even directly participates in a short-lived war with said Klingons. It's doubtful that any part of the fleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration, and yet they are still perfectly capable of keeping the Klingons in check between survey missions.
Yes the fact that a 3rd party, the Organians, identified the same "peaceful explorer of the galaxy" as part of the Military forces of the Federation indicates a military ship that also happens to have science and exploration facilities.

Now, the question is would the "Science Probe Vessel Antares" in "Charlie X" or the USS Grissom be also identified as military or just science?
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote