Design Prometheus with the original five subships

[sciquest2525]

When the scripts were being developed for the Voyager episode containing the Prometheus, the MVAM was to comprise five sub ships rather then the three shown on screen do to script alterations.
What might have Prometheus looked like with those five modules and would you have had them crewed or relied solely on remote control of the modules from the Bridge w/ computer support or have crews operate each sub ship?

[The Librarian]

I would have made the core ship bigger, and then had four additional drone 'fighters' (although big, larger-than-runabout sized ones) that broke off for it. Sort of like the rider ships from CJ Cherryh's books.

[B.J.]

On this page, if you click on the third pic down (not all of the pic is shown in the thumbnail), you'll see a rough concept of how it would have looked with five sub ships.

[Mark_Nguyen]

Actually, this was done some time ago. Here:



Mark

[Timo]

The thing I like about the three-ship version is that the "drones" are the ones with the big engines, while the "carrier" is just a big load the "drones" haul along on combined flight mode. Makes sense: the drones need big engines to be credible combatants, while the carrier doesn't actually need to maneuver, or carry anything, but just stands back and lets the four people aboard guide the otherwise uncrewed fight.

For a five-component ship, then, I'd keep the four-nacelle layout, but have each engine attached to a single drone... When preparing for a fight, the thing splits in the middle like an arrow that has somehow wronged Robin Hood, and the control section emerges from the middle of the bow bulge, pops out those teeny weeny nacelles of its own, and watches the four identical "arrow splinters" engage the enemy.

Timo Saloniemi

[Dukhat]

B.J. wrote:

---

On this page, if you click on the third pic down (not all of the pic is shown in the thumbnail), you'll see a rough concept of how it would have looked with five sub ships.

I'm glad they went with the three-part design, because two of those five parts are completely unnecessary.

[Timo]

Swarming an opponent in three dimensions would call for four ships at a minimum, so a five-component system would seem prudent if the command unit does not take part in the fight...

Timo Saloniemi

[kv1at3485]

sciquest2525 wrote:

---

When the scripts were being developed for the Voyager episode containing the Prometheus, the MVAM was to comprise five sub ships rather then the three shown on screen do to script alterations.
What might have Prometheus looked like with those five modules and would you have had them crewed or relied solely on remote control of the modules from the Bridge w/ computer support or have crews operate each sub ship?

Hello again, westwords2020.

[sciquest2525]

Yes, I used to be westwords2020 and hope I that as Sciquest2525 I have matured in five years and not become a fanboy again! I forgot the thread from five years ago and was just curious. Maybeye the outriders with a seperating warp saucer and engineering section with external mounted outriders, ala C.J. Cheryth would be better.

[Albertese]

Dude, sciquest2525, did you make your location, your actual address?

brassy.

--Alex

[FalTorPan]

Mark_Nguyen wrote:

---

Actually, this was done some time ago. Here:



Mark

This web site needs a Like button.

[sciquest2525]

Yes, my actual address is as above. So I'll get swamped with mail! Hah! In my dreams

[bryce]

If I was going to re-design the Prometheus, I would makes sure that, if one (or more in the case of the 5-ship version) parts were destroyed, the remaining parts could still recombine. With the version used in the show, the top "command" module looks like it can only combine with the top "drone", and not the bottom "drone"...and if the top component was destroyed in battle (which could very well happen in a fight) the two remaining components couldn't re-combine.

And in my version I'd make each of the 3, 4, or 5 (or whatever) components were the same as the others, and each capable of operating independently...because if you have a "command" module and some slaved "drones", and the command module was destroyed...that would suck. The only complication with that design is, as pointed out with the linked-to article, is that each component would have to have it's own copy of everything...warp core, sickbay, cargo and engines and fuel storage and transporters.

Or you could just have a large Galactica or Andromeda type carrier and multiple smaller drones. Maybe even a medium-sized carrier with 5 or more smaller attacher "rider" type drones, so that if any and even all were lost...the mothership could continue on. (And if the drones were truley un-manned, it wouldn't matter if the mothership carrier was lost, no one would be stranded. Or the drones could be piloted be on-board strong AI's with small warp-cores so that they could return to a base if the mother carrier was lost.

[Saul]

sciquest2525 wrote:

---

Yes, my actual address is as above. So I'll get swamped with mail! Hah! In my dreams

Haha, don't worry about that. Just worry about the nut job who knocks on your door at 4am in the morning.

[Timo]

if you have a "command" module and some slaved "drones", and the command module was destroyed...that would suck.

But having a command module does away with the M-5 problem: you have a local man in the loop, even though you don't risk any lives.

Or you could just have a large Galactica or Andromeda type carrier and multiple smaller drones.

The Prometheus is fun especially for its ditching of the carrier concept and giving the job of "carrying" to the drones - rather sensibly so, as big engines have their rightful place on the drones themselves. A carrier-plus-drones deal would be fun in its own terms, but probably not the same thing as the Prometheus.

Timo Saloniemi