RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,614
Posts: 5,426,079
Members: 24,809
Currently online: 434
Newest member: velour

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Takei Has Growth Removed
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 12 2008, 12:20 PM   #16
jongredic
Fleet Captain
 
jongredic's Avatar
 
Location: England
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

I think people have lost sight of a very important issue.

Who wants to be anywhere near a warp core carrying hull with 1500 quantum torpedo warheads when it blows up? They'll have to invent a new word for 'collateral'

And that's before the stardrive section even begins to kerplode.
__________________
Let's bluesify it by, like, twenty percent...
jongredic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2008, 04:45 PM   #17
Dayton3
Admiral
 
Location: Monticello, AR. United States of America
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

jongredic wrote: View Post
I think people have lost sight of a very important issue.

Who wants to be anywhere near a warp core carrying hull with 1500 quantum torpedo warheads when it blows up? They'll have to invent a new word for 'collateral'

And that's before the stardrive section even begins to kerplode.
What makes you think quantum or photon torpedo warheads even have the abilty to "cook off" (prematurely detonate due to external damage).

And if those warheads were vulnerable to cooking off, I doubt it would matter much whether it was 20 torpedos blowing up or 2000. The results would be pretty much the same to the ship in question.
Dayton3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2008, 05:16 PM   #18
Tigger
Fleet Captain
 
Tigger's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle, WA
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

With the original plan for the GCS to be well out in and even beyond the Federation Treaty Zone, if a serious and large threat loomed against the Federation, would the GCS even be able to return in time?
__________________
Chris "Tigger" Wallace
Tigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2008, 05:23 PM   #19
Deks
Rear Admiral
 
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

Dayton3 wrote: View Post
jongredic wrote: View Post
I think people have lost sight of a very important issue.

Who wants to be anywhere near a warp core carrying hull with 1500 quantum torpedo warheads when it blows up? They'll have to invent a new word for 'collateral'

And that's before the stardrive section even begins to kerplode.
What makes you think quantum or photon torpedo warheads even have the abilty to "cook off" (prematurely detonate due to external damage).

And if those warheads were vulnerable to cooking off, I doubt it would matter much whether it was 20 torpedos blowing up or 2000. The results would be pretty much the same to the ship in question.
Agreed.
Besides, there are people living in the stardrive section of the Galaxy class which also contains a warp-core/2 torpedo tubes ready to be filled with 250 photon torpedoes and the main deflector dish.
It doesn't really matter one way or the other.
People are expected to be at their posts in times of battle and would evacuate the vessel if the situation becomes dire.
__________________
We are who we choose to be but also have predefined aspects of our personalities we are born with, and make art that defines us.
Deks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2008, 05:34 PM   #20
Starlock
Rear Admiral
 
Starlock's Avatar
 
Location: Where The Starlock Things Are
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

This sounds like a fun idea.

Of course, if I really wanted to get nasty in a sneaky kind of way, I'd outfit a standard Galaxy class saucer "Q-Ship style". That is with all sorts of concealed weapons which can be extended from the hull as needed.

For example, take into consideration those two enormous elevator shafts which run from the top to the bottom inside the saucer on each side. All that unused open space.

You could fit quite a bit of hardware in there. Think of a giant module or so which is "plugged" into the shaft. Just open up the outer hatches and let the fun begin!
__________________
Osabegta' ghaH...
Olengta' Suto'vo'qor-Daq je' ghaH...
HA'PU'VAMNA'JAY PARROT!!!
You have not experienced Monty Python until you have read him in the original Klingon...
Starlock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2008, 09:07 PM   #21
Dayton3
Admiral
 
Location: Monticello, AR. United States of America
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

Starlock wrote: View Post
This sounds like a fun idea.

Of course, if I really wanted to get nasty in a sneaky kind of way, I'd outfit a standard Galaxy class saucer "Q-Ship style". That is with all sorts of concealed weapons which can be extended from the hull as needed.

For example, take into consideration those two enormous elevator shafts which run from the top to the bottom inside the saucer on each side. All that unused open space.

You could fit quite a bit of hardware in there. Think of a giant module or so which is "plugged" into the shaft. Just open up the outer hatches and let the fun begin!
Interesting idea.

Though the "Q-ship" concept is for a disguised merchant ship to be heavily armed so they can pick off destroyers, frigates, and perhaps even cruisers that operate as commerce raiders.

I doubt that any enemy ship would approach a Galaxy class ship without going in with shields up and weapons armed.
Dayton3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2008, 05:15 AM   #22
Wingsley
Commodore
 
Wingsley's Avatar
 
Location: Wingsley
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

Here's a fun alternative:

One thing that's missing from the TNG/DS9 era is a cruiser-starship like Kirk's original Enterprise. Of course, the term "heavy cruiser" changed its meaning significantly in a hundred years, but I think it would be interesting to take this saucer idea in the opposite direction, and take the secondary hull from a Sovereign-class starship, trim it down a little, give it a smaller saucer, so that the ship has a crew of 400-500. (Call it Sovereign lite, if you like) This ship would be larger than Voyager, but smaller and simpler than Sovereign or Nebula or Galaxy. It would be built for limited deep space exploration (like Kirk's Enterprise) and could also be used for combat.

Now, here's a new possibility: give it the capacity to dock one or two Defiant-class escorts on the outer hull, maybe down where that cavity that's on the aft-keel of the secondary hull. Essentially, most of the design work for the Sovereign-class has already been done for this new class of "lite" cruiser (probably sized between the Enterprise-A and -B) and most of the Sovereign components (nacelles, secondary hull pieces) can be used for economies of scale. I wouldn't be surprised if the manpower, raw materials, and energy needed to build a Sovereign or Galaxy could be just as easily redirected to build a "lite" ship and maybe a Defiant or two. If you're wanting more defensive/offensive capability and still retain non-military flexibility, that would seem to be the ticket.
I'm not sure if the fan-made Posiedon would fit that bill, but from the looks of it, it sure seems to come close.
__________________
"The way that you wander is the way that you choose. / The day that you tarry is the day that you lose. / Sunshine or thunder, a man will always wonder / Where the fair wind blows ..."
-- Lyrics, Jeremiah Johnson's theme.
Wingsley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2008, 10:09 AM   #23
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

I'm a bit wary of the idea of bolting multiple fully functional starships together. I mean, it makes sense in certain circumstances and is a visually cool concept, but Trek so far has not demonstrated those circumstances and Starfleet has not adopted the technique. It's still considered radical in the 2370s, as of "Message in a Bottle", and doesn't seem to be catching on.

Then again, small, crewed fightercraft were similarly anathema to Star Trek originally, but modern Trek has carved a niche for them as soon as portraying them became technologically and budgetarily possible. And we certainly shouldn't argue "this is not logical, therefore it can't be" when Star Trek actually gives us something as an explicit fact. Rather, we should start rubbing our heads together in an attempt to justify what has been shown to exist.

FWIW, we weren't shown modular "warheads" for the Galaxy class in DS9, even though that would have been a natural time and place for them to appear. But we could argue we were shown "warheads" on the Nebulas, with Starfleet moving from a more peaceful stance as with the Phoenix of "The Wounded" to a more warlike one as with the supposedly recently refitted Sutherland of "Redemption"...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2008, 01:52 PM   #24
Sean_McCormick
Captain
 
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

I would think, that the Nebula upper pod is some sort of easily detacheable mission specific module, so probably there a "weapons pod" does exist.

Although not done the way i would envision it, such a module on a Nebula can be seen in this fanfilm trailer:

http://www.hiddenfrontier.com/episodes/HC103.php
Sean_McCormick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2008, 02:08 PM   #25
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

Dayton3 wrote: View Post
Given the ease in which a Galaxy class ship can detach the saucer and given that the engineering hull is a complete starship in its own right, would it be cost effective for Starfleet to maintain a dedicated weapons platform that could replace the regular saucer in time of war?

In just minutes you could have the regular saucer detached and replaced with a platform that could be carried into battle with hundreds, if not thousands of torpedoes, pulse phasers, and all other sorts of weapons.

The platform could even be outfitted with larger impulse engines than the regular saucer to increase sublight manueverabilty.
I've thought of this sort of thing in the past, but not in the sense you discuss it here.

One thing that's clearly established in the "tech manual" is that the Galaxy p-hull is a superstructure with a lot of little modules suspended inside of it (they even talk about how the bits and pieces are attached to the structure). The point of this, from a show-production standpoint, was to allow the interior of the ship to be redesigned and even redefined from time to time without necessarily implying that the ship had to go through major redevelopment. They beam in, and beam out, internal modules as necessary.

SO... as far as the INTERNALS of the galaxy-class p-hull being changed... that's easy and cost-effective. External modifications are quite a bit more challenging.

I mention this because I've thought of alternative internal configurations for this same primary hull. And the three which seemed most plausible were:

1) "Aircraft carrier"... basically convert massive amounts of the interior into additional hangar space. (Yeah, the mostly-unseen main bay was big, but it could be a lot bigger!) The additional firepower would be provided by dedicated gunships... but this would do basically what you describe.

2) "Colonial transport"... massive cargo-bays and short-term-occupancy "bunkrooms" (along with increased life-support capacity).

3) "Mobile Starbase"... in this case, the saucer would have the exploration facilities removed and it would be flown to a specific location and dropped off, providing an easily relocatable base-of-operations, either for an area which was of only temporary interest, or to help secure a location prior to construction of a permanent facility.

The thing about those is that it's not a matter of STRUCTURAL CHANGES to the existing Galaxy primary hull.

Now, if you went for a totally different primary hull, you'd probably need to redefine elements of the design of the secondary hull as well... since I'm sure it's designed to be most efficient, strongest, etc, with the intended structural configuration.

I like it much more (in a combat-related role) as a carrier anyway...
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2008, 04:59 PM   #26
Wingsley
Commodore
 
Wingsley's Avatar
 
Location: Wingsley
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

Timo wrote: View Post
I'm a bit wary of the idea of bolting multiple fully functional starships together. I mean, it makes sense in certain circumstances and is a visually cool concept, but Trek so far has not demonstrated those circumstances and Starfleet has not adopted the technique. It's still considered radical in the 2370s, as of "Message in a Bottle", and doesn't seem to be catching on.
In a vague sense, that's what a Galaxy-class saucer section is to begin with: a fully functional ship bolted onto the stardrive section.
__________________
"The way that you wander is the way that you choose. / The day that you tarry is the day that you lose. / Sunshine or thunder, a man will always wonder / Where the fair wind blows ..."
-- Lyrics, Jeremiah Johnson's theme.
Wingsley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2008, 09:54 AM   #27
jolau
Captain
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

I once theorized that if the Q's timeline in "All Good Things" were to come true in some way shape or form, and include the events of "Generations" and the movies afterwards, that the saucer from the Enterprise-D was recovered from Veridian 3, and that a new stardrive section would be built to replace the stardrive that was destroyed in "Generations". After all, the most interior modifications would be to the stardrive section (especially the structures for the third nacelle and new impulse deck), with only exterior modifications to the saucer (phaser cannons and torpedo pod).
The new stardrive and the modifications to the Enterprise-D saucer could be finished just in time for Admiral Riker to take command.
__________________
"Your gone and I'm lost inside this tangled web in which I'm lain entwined
Oh Why?"

-Sarah Mclachlan
jolau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2008, 10:37 AM   #28
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

By no means impossible. In "AGT", the future timeline makes no references to the past that would contradict the events of ST:GEN, and we can assume that the past timelines of "AGT" are not relevant to the discussion. Things could indeed proceed in a sequence that involves both ST:GEN and the future part of "AGT".

In a vague sense, that's what a Galaxy-class saucer section is to begin with: a fully functional ship bolted onto the stardrive section.
The jury is still at each other's throats over whether the saucer had proper warp drive aboard. That would IMHO be the deciding point: bolting together two ships of roughly similar size (that is, not merely a mothership and a warpshuttle) that both are independently capable of interstellar travel sounds wasteful and nonproductive.

The combination of a powerful tug and an assortment of mission spacecraft towed by her is sensible enough, assuming that it is not easy to pack the gear for multiple missions in a single hull. A Galaxy-like ship with two or three saucers could well be a logical construct, too: all three could be combat saucers in wartime, but only one in peacetime, the other two then catering for exploration and colony logistics or whatever. Once this setup is modified so that the tug actually drops off a mission spacecraft somewhere and later comes to pick her up, though, things get a bit overcomplicated and inflexible again: the mission spacecraft might then be better off having her very own warp engines.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2008, 01:22 PM   #29
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

I had a vaguely similar notion once - a "tug" to recovery galaxy class saucers whose star drive sections have been destroyed after ejecting. It would be a simplified star drive, just two nacelles and a docking "neck" on a minimal hull.

I quickly realized that it would be infinitely more practical, in that situation, to have another Galaxy class ship drop its own saucer off at a starbase and go get the orphaned saucer. No point in building a whole new class of ship that might only be needed once or twice in a century.
Forbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2008, 01:43 PM   #30
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: How About Replacing the Galaxy saucer with dedicated weapons platf

...Also, Starfleet probably needs tugs that can tow starship wrecks that are not nice and intact Galaxy saucers but are at least as massive. Say, a badly damaged whole starship of that class.

A Galaxy can no doubt tow another Galaxy, and perhaps dozens if need be. But we have already seen that a relatively small tug can pull a load ten times its size at least (DS9 "Time to Stand"). Starfleet's easiest choice for recovering a Galaxy saucer would then be the same as with every other towing job: to use these already existing small tugs in sufficient quantity.

No doubt there are advantages to a single large tug in some circumstances, and no doubt Galaxies can swap saucers in emergencies (even though no two halves might be perfectly compatible unless they had already spent months together getting properly acquainted). However, battlefield and post-battlefield logistics might best rely on the flexible use of smallish tugs.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
galaxy-class, technobabble

Thread Tools

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 On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.