RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,437
Posts: 5,507,316
Members: 25,132
Currently online: 508
Newest member: Fluidman

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 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 8 2013, 02:34 PM   #76
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Forbin wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
And take the rollbar off and you lose alot of that war-capability.
...which excuse doesn't mitigate the war capability with the rollbar ON.
Which disappeared after "The Undiscovered Country" and didn't appear again until the Dominion War. Since we are told in "The Undiscovered Country" that the military program would be mothballed it works out that anything looks like a warship would be not seen until a big war broke out again.

Forbin wrote: View Post
Although the phasers on the rollbar are exactly like the phaser ball emitters on the rest of the ship
Are they exactly the same? The special effects on TWOK made them seem the same, but they sure looked like they were meant to be different and more piowerful.
As far as physically shown, yes. Effects-wise we never see either ship fire at full power. The Reliant's opening phaser volley on the Enterprise were at 1/4 or low power and we see the surgical damage inflicted as the energizers blew out. But when reduced to impulse-powered phasers, they were not any more powerful than at the beginning of the movie. Enterprise's battery-powered phasers barely scratched the surface as she never is repaired to a power state that is on par with the relatively undamaged Reliant. (Thus the "out-gun" part.)

Forbin wrote: View Post
so I don't think it gave it more firepower but just better phaser coverage.
...which a warship would need.
Not debating that. However, the Enterprise, "out-of-the-box" already has that phaser coverage making her more warship than the Reliant without the rollbar.

Forbin wrote: View Post
The 2 tubes facing aft might be more indicative of the necessity to flee a battle and discourage pursuers. I would've put more forward tubes on the Reliant to really indicate a firepower advantage over the Enterprise, IMHO. (Heck, the TOS Enterprise had 6 tubes facing forward...)
So the USS Iowa's aft 16-inch gun turret was there so it could run away?
I equate phasers to 16" guns as their power is dependent on how much energy the ship can put into the volley. Aft torpedo tubes are more like aft tubes on a submarine to discourage pursuers when it needed to escape, IMHO.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 02:43 PM   #77
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

TheSubCommander wrote: View Post
Hmmm...and to think that old Doug Trumbull wanted to build it even bigger to give the audience a massive impression of scale. The ILM folks should count their lucky stars that he didn't wind up getting budget approval for such an up-scaling of the TMP filming "miniature".
Are you saying there was plans to bring a refit connie to the small screen?
Well, yes, in Phase II, but that was not what I was referring to.

Many years ago I read something that claimed that Douglas Trumbull wanted to build the refit MUCH bigger than what he wound up getting for TMP. They wanted to be able to roll around this thing with a camera and really see some massive detail (mostly for the drydock sequence), but the budget wouldn't allow it. For some reason, 17ft comes to mind.

Just one of those things that stuck in my brain - have no clue where it came from.
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 04:11 PM   #78
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
You ignored the rest of my quote in which I indeed said they could.
No I didn't; on the contrary, you ignored the rest of MY quote...
Um, no. You forgot that you began by responding to my post. How can I ignore something that you hadn't said yet?
You ignored the relevant part of my response: the Constitution class was likely a over the hill by the time Pike visited Talos-IV.

Which is why we didn't see them much after the 23rd century. It's probably a progressive upgrade of what was essentially a late 22nd century design.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 04:24 PM   #79
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Forbin wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
And take the rollbar off and you lose alot of that war-capability.
...which excuse doesn't mitigate the war capability with the rollbar ON.
Which disappeared after "The Undiscovered Country" and didn't appear again until the Dominion War.
Didn't appear until WHEN, now?

Since we are told in "The Undiscovered Country" that the military program would be mothballed
No, we are ASKED if the military program would be mothballed; one of the people who asked the question is a treasonous dog personally responsible for the deaths of not less than a dozen officers, the other is a pencil pusher we've never seen before and never see again.

Not debating that. However, the Enterprise, "out-of-the-box" already has that phaser coverage making her more warship than the Reliant without the rollbar.
Phaser COVERAGE is irrelevant unless you're planning to use those phasers as point defense weapons. Coverage zone is not as important as trek fans like to believe in ship-to-ship scenarios; mainly due to the way these ships move in space, there are very few combat situations where the aft phasers would even come into play. Starships, in most cases, prefer to use torpedoes in those situations.

I equate phasers to 16" guns as their power is dependent on how much energy the ship can put into the volley.
Which makes them very much UNLIKE 16" guns which fire at the same strength no matter how much power the ship has.

Aft torpedo tubes are more like aft tubes on a submarine to discourage pursuers when it needed to escape, IMHO.
AFAIK, the aft tubes on submarines were simply a clever way of increasing the submarine's torpedo capacity; convoy raiders used the aft tubes to attack shipping just as often as the bow tubes.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 07:56 PM   #80
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Ferguson, Missouri, USA
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
No I didn't; on the contrary, you ignored the rest of MY quote...
Um, no. You forgot that you began by responding to my post. How can I ignore something that you hadn't said yet?
You ignored the relevant part of my response: the Constitution class was likely a over the hill by the time Pike visited Talos-IV.
Um, where did this come from? How can I ignore something that you're just now saying?


But I guess it doesn't matter, since I disagree with your assessment. I think the Constitution-class had been around for awhile by the time Pike was at Talos IV--maybe a little over a decade, 15 years tops--but was by no means over the hill in Pike's day. The design was probably just hitting its stride in the years before Kirk's 5-year mission.
__________________
"Don't sweat the small stuff--it makes you small-minded..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 09:42 PM   #81
Nightfall to-Ennien
Lieutenant Commander
 
Nightfall to-Ennien's Avatar
 
Location: The Everfree Forest
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

It may seem a bit boring, but I always attributed the relative abundance of Miranda class ships to simple upkeep and logistics reasons. The closest we saw to the Miranda in her prime was the Reliant, doing surveys of planets within Federation territory, within reasonable proximity of Regula 1, while the Constitution was an all-singing all-dancing long-duration explorer with a crew of more than four hundred, more than a dozen science labs onboard, AND all the speed records. I surmised that as time marched on, and that generation of technology was withdrawn from front-line service, they found the less elaborate Miranda was more economical in resources to send on generally uneventful milk runs. And this is all without mentioning the two enormous shuttle/cargo bay doors on her aft that seem ideally suited for if you wanted to, say, gut one and turn her into a freighter, or even do a flexible new-build variant leveraging a proven spaceframe and propulsion systems.
__________________
On the Starship Enterprise, no one is alone. No one.
Nightfall to-Ennien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 09:55 PM   #82
YJAGG
Lieutenant Commander
 
YJAGG's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

I would guess that next gen wanted to distance themselves from TOS, but ther budgets screamed reuse what we have so they looked around and saw four good studio models Refit Enterprise, The great experiment, the Reliant and BOP- so not wanting to show the old Refit jobbies they went with the other three. I am surprised they did not just do some scratch building a Reliant with excelsior nacelles or somthing, but when budgets are tight they are tight
YJAGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 12:11 AM   #83
Unwrapped
Continuity Spackle
 
Unwrapped's Avatar
 
Location: The mockingjay soars (Unicron)
Send a message via ICQ to Unwrapped
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post

But then again, we never saw a "standard" Miranda after "The Voyage Home" until the Dominion War came along. All of these subclasses could've been Starfleet experimenting with a "de-fanged" version of the ship and then re-mounting the rollbars whenever a war broke out for a quick conversion from exploration ship to warship, IMHO.
Sure we did. The USS Brattain in "Night Terrors" was a straight reuse of the Miranda model with no visible modifications. The USS Trial also appeared in "Way of the Warrior" and was recycled as stock footage for other Mirandas docked at DS9, although it had the rollbar flipped around. Whether that was a goof or an intentional variation isn't entirely clear to me.
__________________

"If you think you're brave enough to walk the path of honor, then follow me into the dragon's den."


Knight Exemplar
Unwrapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 01:01 AM   #84
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Forbin wrote: View Post

...which excuse doesn't mitigate the war capability with the rollbar ON.
Which disappeared after "The Undiscovered Country" and didn't appear again until the Dominion War.
Didn't appear until WHEN, now?
@Crazy Eddie and Unicron - Ah I forgot about the Brattain and Trial. Hmm, nevermind about the rollbar theory then

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
No, we are ASKED if the military program would be mothballed; one of the people who asked the question is a treasonous dog personally responsible for the deaths of not less than a dozen officers, the other is a pencil pusher we've never seen before and never see again.
The bad character who asked the question doesn't invalidate the question or answer given the answer came from a higher-up. As far as we know the military program got cut while the science and exploration programs lived on in Starfleet.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Phaser COVERAGE is irrelevant unless you're planning to use those phasers as point defense weapons. Coverage zone is not as important as trek fans like to believe in ship-to-ship scenarios; mainly due to the way these ships move in space, there are very few combat situations where the aft phasers would even come into play. Starships, in most cases, prefer to use torpedoes in those situations.
Perhaps or perhaps not, but without the rollbar phasers the Reliant's initial broadsides attack would've required the port-side ventral saucer phaser beams to come awefully close to their own nacelle.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
I equate phasers to 16" guns as their power is dependent on how much energy the ship can put into the volley.
Which makes them very much UNLIKE 16" guns which fire at the same strength no matter how much power the ship has.
Literally, no. I was just trying to keep within Forbin's metaphor. Phasers are the primary variable-power energy gun used in TOS. There isn't a good equivalent to WW2 terminology other than it was their "big guns".

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Aft torpedo tubes are more like aft tubes on a submarine to discourage pursuers when it needed to escape, IMHO.
AFAIK, the aft tubes on submarines were simply a clever way of increasing the submarine's torpedo capacity; convoy raiders used the aft tubes to attack shipping just as often as the bow tubes.
Yes for those times when the bow tubes couldn't be turned in time for an attack run and it makes a handy weapon to discourage pursuers. Still, in terms of offensive firepower, the 2 aft tubes on the Reliant would've made more sense mounted facing forward, IMHO.

Unicron wrote: View Post
Sure we did. The USS Brattain in "Night Terrors" was a straight reuse of the Miranda model with no visible modifications. The USS Trial also appeared in "Way of the Warrior" and was recycled as stock footage for other Mirandas docked at DS9, although it had the rollbar flipped around. Whether that was a goof or an intentional variation isn't entirely clear to me.
Correction noted above
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 03:51 AM   #85
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Um, no. You forgot that you began by responding to my post. How can I ignore something that you hadn't said yet?
You ignored the relevant part of my response: the Constitution class was likely a over the hill by the time Pike visited Talos-IV.
Um, where did this come from? How can I ignore something that you're just now saying?
I'm not "just now" saying it. I said it two posts ago in response to you.

Try to keep up.

I think the Constitution-class had been around for awhile by the time Pike was at Talos IV--maybe a little over a decade, 15 years tops--but was by no means over the hill in Pike's day. The design was probably just hitting its stride in the years before Kirk's 5-year mission.
Possibly true for the relatively new build NCC-1701. Not so much for the (probably much older) NCC-1017.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 04:26 AM   #86
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
The bad character who asked the question doesn't invalidate the question
When a complete asshole asks a loaded question like that, it's probably not a legitimate question.

or answer given the answer came from a higher-up...
Who was interrupted mid-sentence by the aforementioned asshole before he could actually give it.

As far as we know the military program got cut while the science and exploration programs lived on in Starfleet.
As far as we know "the outposts along the neutral zone" WAS the military program in its entirety.

Perhaps or perhaps not, but without the rollbar phasers the Reliant's initial broadsides attack would've required the port-side ventral saucer phaser beams to come awefully close to their own nacelle.
Or they could have just rolled ten degrees to port so their ventral phasers had a shot. They only had, what, two and a half minutes to reorient themselves for that?

There's no rule that starships have to be perpendicular to each other's deck level at all times; realistically, they usually WON'T be.

Literally, no. I was just trying to keep within Forbin's metaphor. Phasers are the primary variable-power energy gun used in TOS. There isn't a good equivalent to WW2 terminology other than it was their "big guns".
I don't know that the World War-II analogy is or was ever all that appropriate since large warships rarely if ever engaged with torpedoes. And for good reason, too; if you could get close enough to a heavy cruiser to shoot a torpedo at it, you were either close enough to get eaten alive by its main guns, or you were in something too small for its guns to actually aim at without overshooting.

Here's something to consider, actually: at the time that Star Trek actually went on the air, the most prominent cruiser-type vessels of the day were Guided missile cruisers converted from WW-II vessels. USS Galveston and similar types would have been examples of the "standard" type of warship at the time. Moreover, the nuclear-powered USS Long Beach, armed mostly with missiles with only a token gun arament (like modern ship types) had been in service for over ten years when Star Trek came out.

We should consider that "Enemy Below" ripoffs aside, Star Trek may have been less about emulating WW-II era warships and more about emulating MODERN ones contemporary with the actual show. Phasers would be a good "dual purpose" weapon good for close quarters combat, light shore bombardment and plinking at enemy fighters, but the ship's OFFENSIVE weapon remains the photon torpedo launcher. By the time the Navy started getting more interesting launcher designs like the VLS tubes and the Armored Box Launches for the Tomahawks the "Torpedoes fire from a single launcher in location X" meme had been grandfathered in and Starfleet stopped emulating the navy altogether.

That is, until STID when we suddenly discover the Enterprise has over a dozen lateral torpedo tubes in addition to the big neck launcher.

Yes for those times when the bow tubes couldn't be turned in time for an attack run and it makes a handy weapon to discourage pursuers.
I'm not the almost-expert I used to be when I was younger, but I am about 100% sure that the only thing a WW-II submarine could do about pursuers was to dive like hell and PRAY FOR A FUCKING MIRACLE. There's almost no record of a submarine shooting its aft torpedoes at pursuing destroyer escorts mainly because 1) since you have to stay at periscope depth long enough to get a firing solution, you practically guarantee the enemy will kill you and 2) since your pursuer is heading DIRECTLY AT YOU, your torpedoes are equally guaranteed to miss.

Those submarines did not use those torpedoes against pursuers. What they did was, they fired the bow tubes in spread at their first target(s) then while those tubes were reloading, turned away and aimed the rear tubes at a second set of targets; by the time the rear tubes were empty, either the bow tubes were reloaded or the escort ships were zeroing in. If the latter, your attack run is over: dive as deep as you can, shove a cork in your ass and hope they run out of depth charges (or mortars, or both) before they hit you.

It wasn't until the invention (and actually, perfection) of wake-homing torpedoes that shooting at a pursuing escort ship even BEGAN to make sense. Nowadays, submarines don't even bother with torpedoes; if you're unlucky enough to figure out where they are, they pop six harpoons in your general direction and then slink away laughing (silently) at your panic.

Still, in terms of offensive firepower, the 2 aft tubes on the Reliant would've made more sense mounted facing forward, IMHO.
I don't see how, considering starships in the TMP era only ever launch torpedoes one at a time.

OTOH, if Trek had kept pace with the times as well as it did in the 60s, Reliant's Terrier-inspired torpedo pod would eventually have been replaced by a more versatile multi-tube launcher like the one we later see in Into Darkness, something with a dozen less complicated tubes that each be loaded with a single weapon. The nature of scifi space battles means that if your ship launches a Macross Missile Massacre, it doesn't really matter what direction you're facing: your missiles/torpedoes are going to home in like a swarm of bees and your target is either going to doge/shootdown all of them, or he's going to be annihilated.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!

Last edited by Crazy Eddie; August 9 2013 at 04:36 AM.
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 04:48 AM   #87
YJAGG
Lieutenant Commander
 
YJAGG's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

but think about it and I am rolling my eyes as I write this they did nto want to refit Enterprise in SFS "Jim...she's 20 years old..." ok closer to 30 I would think with the April Pike back stories
YJAGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 04:50 AM   #88
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Ferguson, Missouri, USA
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
You ignored the relevant part of my response: the Constitution class was likely a over the hill by the time Pike visited Talos-IV.
Um, where did this come from? How can I ignore something that you're just now saying?
I'm not "just now" saying it. I said it two posts ago in response to you.
No, this came after what I originally said. You accused me of ignoring something you hadn't said yet.
Try to keep up.
Try to stay on track.
I think the Constitution-class had been around for awhile by the time Pike was at Talos IV--maybe a little over a decade, 15 years tops--but was by no means over the hill in Pike's day. The design was probably just hitting its stride in the years before Kirk's 5-year mission.
Possibly true for the relatively new build NCC-1701. Not so much for the (probably much older) NCC-1017.
For all intents and purposes, the Constellation was a either a ship from an earlier design that was later upgraded to Constitution-class specifications or was simply a vessel that was assigned a lower hull registry than the Constitution if hull registries aren't always consecutive.
__________________
"Don't sweat the small stuff--it makes you small-minded..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 04:50 AM   #89
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

YJAGG wrote: View Post
but think about it and I am rolling my eyes as I write this they did nto want to refit Enterprise in SFS "Jim...she's 20 years old..." ok closer to 30 I would think with the April Pike back stories
Actually, Morrow is slightly breaking the forth wall there: he really means to say that STAR TREK is 20 years old and is echoing the view of the studio that says "We fell her day is over."

Otherwise, backstage sources indicate Enterprise was 20 years old when Kirk first got his grubby little hands on her. By this time, she's pushing 40 to 50.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 04:58 AM   #90
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Um, where did this come from? How can I ignore something that you're just now saying?
I'm not "just now" saying it. I said it two posts ago in response to you.
No, this came after what I originally said. You accused me of ignoring something you hadn't said yet.
You have me confused with cooleddie; I DO NOT possess a time machine.

For all intents and purposes, the Constellation was a either a ship from an earlier design that was later upgraded to Constitution-class specifications or was simply a vessel that was assigned a lower hull registry than the Constitution if hull registries aren't always consecutive.
Except we don't canonically know the registry of USS Constitution; for all we know they gave it "NCC-911" and concurrent with a dozen other starship classes who shared the 900 and 1000 series for the next twenty five years.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 01:44 AM.

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