RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,182
Posts: 5,435,813
Members: 24,947
Currently online: 593
Newest member: CaptainJaymez

TrekToday headlines

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


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 September 26 2013, 05:47 AM   #76
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
We don't HAVE to make the comparison since many of the destroyers built during the cold war are STILL IN SERVICE with foreign navies. Thus, the comparison remains fully valid.
Then you shouldn't have needed to object to the comparison in the first place.
What I'm saying is it's not really a "comparison" since that is actually the state of global naval power anyway. The foreign equivalents of the AEGIS ships are all owned by people who are nominally ALLIES of the United States. Those same destroyers are far more likely to engage in combat against warships from the previous generation where they already have the overwhelming advantage.
If you're moving the tech of the "cold war destroyers" forward to modern day then you change the conditions of the comparison. In this case, the overwhelming advantage will be less since the older destroyers now have access to upgraded tech.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Because I agree with Akimoto's actual point: the whole reason we needed large fleets in the past was because the navy's mission REQUIRED a large fleet to carry it out. The capabilities of these newer ships means the same mission can be accomplished with a much smaller number of ships with much smaller crews.
Did you ever stop to wonder why the navy's mission REQUIRED a LARGE fleet to carry it out? Back in the 70's the navy underwent a 300 ship drop and had difficulty maintaining its commitments. Even today they want more ships.

Nob Akimoto said, "A modern DDG could wipe the floor with a squadron of Cuban Missile Crisis era frigates and destroyers, or cruisers for that matter." I agreed in general and added that "ten modern DDGs WILL wipe the floor with a squadron of those ships." The reason is that a single modern DDG can have a bad day - mechanical or software failure and get mission killed from the comparison when she can't fully defend herself. Ten guarantees a victory whereas a single ship doesn't give you any ability to absorb losses.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
I've watched every episode of TOS ever filmed and I have never seen an episode that begins with the narration "These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise. Its five year mission: to change missions as the needs dictate..."
Watched every episode?

Kirk's words:
KIRK: Mission, routine investigation and report as per ship surgeon's medical log.
KIRK: My mission is to establish diplomatic relations between your people and mine.
KIRK: Mister Spock, our mission is to protect this colony, to get the pergium moving again. This is not a zoological expedition.
KIRK: Gentlemen, my government has informed me that the Klingons are expected to move against your planet with the objective of making it a base of operation against the Federation. My mission, frankly, is to keep them from doing it.
KIRK: No, I'm not. The mission of the Enterprise is to seek out and contact alien life.
Captain's log, stardate 3497.2. Planet Capella Four. ... Our mission, obtain a mining agreement. But we've discovered a Klingon agent has preceded us to the planet.
Captain's log, stardate 3478.2. On a routine mission to re-supply the experimental colony
Captain's log... Our mission, historical research.
Captain's Log: Stardate 4372.5. On a top-secret diplomatic mission...
Captain's log, Stardate 1513.1. ... Ship's surgeon McCoy and myself are now beaming down to the planet's surface. Our mission, routine medical examination of archaeologist Robert Crater and his wife Nancy.
Captain's log, stardate 5730.2. The planet Ariannus is vital as a transfer point on regular space commercial lanes. It has been attacked by a bacterial invasion which threatens to render it lifeless unless checked. Our mission, to decontaminate it.
etc, etc.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Which sets them apart from Starfleet, which CONDUCTS scientific and exploration programs on its own initiative, using its own ships and resources that are often equipped BY DESIGN to participate in those programs.
Superficially. If the navy had to send science ships out into hostile areas then a warship would tag along.


Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
That still implies that scientific and exploration programs are not part of Starfleet's normal functioning. There is no evidence that this is even REMOTELY the case.
The evidence is that Starfleet at the time of TOS and the TOS movies was a Military that also had scientific and exploration programs. It's in the dialogue so the evidence is there.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Right: every asset that Starfleet has that ISN'T based on the neutral zone outposts. Had the Khitomer conference taken place 30 years earlier, that would have included the Enterprise.
Since the Military Aide included Starfleet specifically in her question then ships would be included. In anycase, it wouldn't be hard to defund or reduce the military programs in favor of their science and exploration. The result is the Starfleet that we see in TNG that is focused on science and exploration.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
So what? Starfleet sent it into combat. So even their science vessels are combat-ready.
To use your example, Hanson never said "We're coming with every frontline and heavily armed ship to assist."

He does say, "every available starship to assist." That'd include anything that can move and stick phaser rifles out to shoot with

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Spock and the CinC knew (since the CinC would likely have to sign off on it.) The Military Aide and Cartright asking doesn't make their questions questionable
It means their questions are not valid concerns based on the reality of the talks. Because:
1) They don't know anything ABOUT those talks and are just finding out about it now and
2) What they HAVE been told makes no mention of "mothballing the Starfleet." It could have been any random question in the universe and it would still not reflect the facts.
They haven't been told anything about mothballing Starfleet until the Military Aide asked it. The answer was some of Starfleet would get affected, but not the science and exploration programs. There isn't anything wrong with their questions and answers other than that you apparently don't like the answers.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
since the CinC answered it with the correct information
On which you continue to equivocate. This is not a rhetorical question: Exactly which part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
The correct question is can the Scientific and Exploration programs function without the Military program? The answer is yes, for many years until Starfleet gets their ass handed to them by the Borg and Dominion and they pivot to restart their military program.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2013, 01:24 AM   #77
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Nob Akimoto wrote: View Post
We know that as of 2366 in the alternate timeline the Federation is facing defeat within 6 months and that 40 billion people have died. Some other observations from within the episode suggest:
  1. The Enterprise-D despite being a "warship" is wandering around hostile space without an escort. When we're later treated to Galaxy-class ships in a warship role (in DS9), they were evidently part of larger formations of ships called "wings" akin to task groups or squadrons. The fact that the E-D is alone might give some indication of just how badly the war is going for the Federation.
  2. Although referred to as a "warship", the Enterprise-D still looks quite similar to the one in the "proper" timeline. Although she has a substantially different bridge module, the basic structure of the ship is the same. This suggests the war started while the Galaxy-class design project was pretty far along, perhaps not as long as the "20 years of war" figure bandied about in the episode.
  3. Yar notes that the Enterprise has been in service for around 4 years at that point, which might mean that she was rushed into service with minimal internal fittings. (Like described of other Galaxy-class ships in the DS9TM). The fact that they seem to have reduced power to give to things like replicators suggests she's at least a much more spartanly equipped vessel.

Some additional extrapolations from official sources:
  • The total casualty figures are surprisingly close to the Borg invasion of 2381. 63 billion vs 40 billion isn't a rounding error, but it is similar enough to give some sense of just how devastating the war has been on the Federation. Given that it's unlikely the 20 year war would've included massive bombardments of several key Federation worlds in the same way the Borg hit out, the casualties were probably far more spread out and suffered in a war of attrition or attacks on civilian infrastructure.
  • Klingons may or may not have wiped out the Betazoids in this timeline.
  • Since this predates the creation of some powers like the Cardassians, they aren't explicitly mentioned, but given the Federation was in active conflict with both them and the Tzenkethi in the 2350s, it's likely that they were also fighting the Federation along with the Klingons.

It seems likely to me, that the decline of the Federation in this timeline probably stems from having to fight a multi-front war while facing a power with rough parity like the Klingons. It seems unlikely that simply going to war with the Klingons would put the Federation so badly on the back foot, especially since (although some 2 generations earlier) the military brass in the 2290s were confident the Federation could "clean the chronometers" of the Klingon Empire and the weakness of the Klingons in general around the Praxis incident.
Not to sound dismissive of your well-crafted post, but I think it was because the plot called for it.
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2013, 01:57 AM   #78
bullethead
Fleet Captain
 
bullethead's Avatar
 
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Irishman wrote: View Post
Nob Akimoto wrote: View Post
We know that as of 2366 in the alternate timeline the Federation is facing defeat within 6 months and that 40 billion people have died. Some other observations from within the episode suggest:
  1. The Enterprise-D despite being a "warship" is wandering around hostile space without an escort. When we're later treated to Galaxy-class ships in a warship role (in DS9), they were evidently part of larger formations of ships called "wings" akin to task groups or squadrons. The fact that the E-D is alone might give some indication of just how badly the war is going for the Federation.
  2. Although referred to as a "warship", the Enterprise-D still looks quite similar to the one in the "proper" timeline. Although she has a substantially different bridge module, the basic structure of the ship is the same. This suggests the war started while the Galaxy-class design project was pretty far along, perhaps not as long as the "20 years of war" figure bandied about in the episode.
  3. Yar notes that the Enterprise has been in service for around 4 years at that point, which might mean that she was rushed into service with minimal internal fittings. (Like described of other Galaxy-class ships in the DS9TM). The fact that they seem to have reduced power to give to things like replicators suggests she's at least a much more spartanly equipped vessel.

Some additional extrapolations from official sources:
  • The total casualty figures are surprisingly close to the Borg invasion of 2381. 63 billion vs 40 billion isn't a rounding error, but it is similar enough to give some sense of just how devastating the war has been on the Federation. Given that it's unlikely the 20 year war would've included massive bombardments of several key Federation worlds in the same way the Borg hit out, the casualties were probably far more spread out and suffered in a war of attrition or attacks on civilian infrastructure.
  • Klingons may or may not have wiped out the Betazoids in this timeline.
  • Since this predates the creation of some powers like the Cardassians, they aren't explicitly mentioned, but given the Federation was in active conflict with both them and the Tzenkethi in the 2350s, it's likely that they were also fighting the Federation along with the Klingons.

It seems likely to me, that the decline of the Federation in this timeline probably stems from having to fight a multi-front war while facing a power with rough parity like the Klingons. It seems unlikely that simply going to war with the Klingons would put the Federation so badly on the back foot, especially since (although some 2 generations earlier) the military brass in the 2290s were confident the Federation could "clean the chronometers" of the Klingon Empire and the weakness of the Klingons in general around the Praxis incident.
Not to sound dismissive of your well-crafted post, but I think it was because the plot called for it.
The exterior was identical because they didn't have time to come up with a new model or mod the old one due to the rushed schedule for Yesterday's Enterprise, not for any plot reasons.
__________________
A business man and engineer discuss how to launch a communications satellite in the 1960s:
Biz Dev Guy: Your communications satellite has to be the size, shape, and weight of a hydrogen bomb.
bullethead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2013, 10:43 AM   #79
Elvira
Vice Admiral
 
Elvira's Avatar
 
Location: t'girl
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Nob Akimoto wrote: View Post
Although referred to as a "warship", the Enterprise-D still looks quite similar to the one in the "proper" timeline.
The Enteprise in the prime universe looked the same owing to the fact that it was designed with combat capacities in mind.

It wasn't referred to as a battleship, but it could function as one if needed.

Elvira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2013, 03:34 PM   #80
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Although the Federation built more ships (as it should, assuming they were expanding) were they better at fighting? The ending to TUC doesn't show the Excelsior to have more ability to kill a BOP than the Enterprise-A did. And as we've seen in the Dominion War ships like the Lakota in "Way of the Warrior" had to have her weapons upgraded to be competitive in the firepower department. So even though more ships were built and of the bigger variety, they were not necessarily built for combat without having to go back in for upgrades.
The evidence would agree with you, they werent at least at the time of TUC as they would likely have similar phaser banks (dependant on individual ship refits) and the same photon torpedoes. The only difference between the two in a tactical situation when it comes to weaponry would be the number of phaser banks, torpedo launchers and potentially the number of torpedoes carried. The other factor being the strength of the individual ships shields (both from a design point as well as power generation) and the strength of the spaceframe/hull during combat.

When it comes to the time of TUC I would say that Starfleet was deffinately more militaristic, a side affect of the post WOK Nick Meyer slant on the universe.

However I never believed Starfleet to be pure military, just more of one than during the TOS and TMP eras. To me Starfleet from TOS was an organisation tasked with exploration, scientific research as well as policing Federation borders, defense of Federation worlds and colonies and when needed war.

The military aspect of Starfleet is a question also asked by Scotty in STID when he asked "is that what we are now? I thought we were explorers?"

We cant consider the TNG/DS9/VOY era as it is so different to TOS as TOS is to the movie era.

Ships like the Enterprise, Excelsior and co were top line multi-role ships which could be tasked to be as comfortable surveying a planet as it would be to defend that planet from an agressor, something a ship like USS Grissom a pure science ship.

Getting back to TUC and 'mothballing the Starfleet' I think the general idea that this happened is due to the Enterprise being so quickly called in to be decomissioned and no other ships of her type being seen after. This was probably on the cards anyway with the Excelsior being seen as a larger and natural replacement to both the class and the Enterprise herself (as likely earned by her crew along with Excelsior's ensuring galactic peace).
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2013, 05:57 PM   #81
Mark_Nguyen
Commodore
 
Mark_Nguyen's Avatar
 
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Just throwing in this tidbit, but there are many examples of naval battles during wartime where a single ship engages, or is engaged by just one ship.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ns#World_War_I

Broadening it a bit, in WWII Bismarck put to sea with a single escort (Prinz Eugen) on a mission to sink Allied shipping, and was quickly separated from that cruiser when the action started. I feel that even in wartime, Starfleet can and will send single ships out on particular missions of destruction, just like the examples linked above. Sure, in real life support was more than likely a few hundred miles away at any given time, but given the length of typical Trek engagements a few hours or days away at warp means nothing in the typical vastness of space...

Mark
__________________
Mark Nguyen - Producer
The 404s - Improv Comedy Group

Oh, I like that Trek thing too...
Mark_Nguyen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2013, 06:50 PM   #82
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

In terms of single ship engagements, those tend to either be cruiser sized ships, or ships from a blockaded force being forced to leave a harbor.

Once capital ships (battleships) became so expensive that their numbers were measured in one or two dozen rather than the scores like they were pre-armored ship era, the frequency of sorties without a substantial fleet escort basically fell to zero.

Based on the episode, though, it seemed pretty clear that Enterprise was relatively isolated. If reinforcements were close enough that they could arrive in time to help defend the Enterprise-C we certainly didn't get that impression.

The Bismarck's sortie was essentially one of desperation from a navy that had ceded maritime superiority from the start. The Kriegsmarine was outnumbered pretty substantially in battleship tonnage, with only 4 capital ships (Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Bismarck and Tirpitz) opposed to the Royal Navy which had 9 battleships in the Atlantic and 7 fleet carriers.

That is to say, if Starfleet's putting Enterprise out there like the Kriegsmarine was using Bismarck, it was in a LOT of trouble.
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4 2013, 12:14 AM   #83
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
If the navy had to send science ships out into hostile areas then a warship would tag along.
Starfleet wouldn't, and doesn't. As far as we've seen in the 23rd century, ALL of their ships are fully equipped for scientific missions.

The evidence is that Starfleet at the time of TOS and the TOS movies was a Military that also had scientific and exploration programs.
And still you lack any evidence for your assertion that a significant part of the fleet was NOT involved in those scientific programs. Whether they are a military or not doesn't matter; the question is, how much of Starfleet was PURELY military?

Since the Military Aide included Starfleet specifically in her question then ships would be included.
In her question, yes. It doesn't change the fact that her question is irrelevant to the actual negotiations.

They haven't been told anything about mothballing Starfleet until the Military Aide asked it.
Correct. She therefore has NO BASIS to ask that question other than simple alarmism. It's a strawman, nothing more.

The answer was some of Starfleet would get affected
No. The answer was that certain programs would NOT be effected. Bill doesn't even confirm that your putative "pure military" programs WOULD be affected. Even the filming script doesn't bear that out.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
since the CinC answered it with the correct information
On which you continue to equivocate. This is not a rhetorical question: Exactly which part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
The correct question is can the Scientific and Exploration programs function without the Military program?
Begging the question: IS there a separate military program? No such distinction has ever been made in Star Trek, especially in TUC.

So again: what part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4 2013, 02:36 AM   #84
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
If the navy had to send science ships out into hostile areas then a warship would tag along.
Starfleet wouldn't, and doesn't. As far as we've seen in the 23rd century, ALL of their ships are fully equipped for scientific missions.
Except for the Defiant, which needed the Runabout Rubicon to do the science work. ("One Little Ship").

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The evidence is that Starfleet at the time of TOS and the TOS movies was a Military that also had scientific and exploration programs.
And still you lack any evidence for your assertion that a significant part of the fleet was NOT involved in those scientific programs. Whether they are a military or not doesn't matter; the question is, how much of Starfleet was PURELY military?
And you still lack any evidence that a significant part of the fleet was NOT involved in those military programs. The percentage of military or scientific doesn't matter; the answer is that Starfleet was called "The Military" in TWOK and identified with Military Forces in "Errand of Mercy".

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
In her question, yes. It doesn't change the fact that her question is irrelevant to the actual negotiations.
It's perfectly relevant since she wanted to know if Starfleet was affected, beyond just the stations.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Correct. She therefore has NO BASIS to ask that question other than simple alarmism. It's a strawman, nothing more.
You're the one with the strawman. Her question is perfectly valid even if you don't like the answer.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
No. The answer was that certain programs would NOT be effected. Bill doesn't even confirm that your putative "pure military" programs WOULD be affected. Even the filming script doesn't bear that out.
By answering that CERTAIN programs would not be affected it tells us that the REMAINING programs will be affected. Since Starfleet was The Military back then, it makes it easy to point to that being affected.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
On which you continue to equivocate. This is not a rhetorical question: Exactly which part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
The correct question is can the Scientific and Exploration programs function without the Military program?
Begging the question: IS there a separate military program? No such distinction has ever been made in Star Trek, especially in TUC.
Colonel West is wearing a Starfleet uniform and he's rather military. As you've pointed out in previous posts, the MACO's, aka military of the Enterprise-era were military and sported ground-based ranks. Kirk has called himself a soldier in TOS and in TWOK, Starfleet was called "The Military". Like I said, you're the one who lacks evidence here.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
So again: what part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
That's an odd question given that the military leverages scientific research and exploration for tactical and strategic goals (see "One Little Ship".) To answer you, it's the part that isn't necessary to be always available to wage war against the Klingons. It's the part that is no longer needed that leads to Picard in TNG's time to claim that Starfleet is not a military
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4 2013, 06:50 PM   #85
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

At this point, you guys are kinda talking in circles without much progress. Can we move on a bit?
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4 2013, 11:38 PM   #86
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
And you still lack any evidence that a significant part of the fleet was NOT involved in those military programs.
Irrelevant: even if all of them were involved in a military program, only the ones who were not also involved in the scientific and exploration programs would have to stand down.

So according to you, how many had to stand down?

It's perfectly relevant since she wanted to know if Starfleet was affected
No she didn't. No more than Cartwright was protesting the idea of offering Klingons "safe haven within Federation space." That, too, was a strawman argument.

You're the one with the strawman. Her question is perfectly valid even if you don't like the answer.
The answer was "no". I therefore like it just fine.

By answering that CERTAIN programs would not be affected it tells us that the REMAINING programs will be affected.
It doesn't tell us that at all. Only that certain programs won't be affected. He doesn't say -- and at this point, cannot really know -- if anything else will.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Begging the question: IS there a separate military program? No such distinction has ever been made in Star Trek, especially in TUC.
Colonel West is wearing a Starfleet uniform and he's rather military...
Unless Colonel West is a separate military program, this does not answer the question.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
So again: what part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
To answer you, it's the part that isn't necessary to be always available to wage war against the Klingons.
You're just being contrary now.

Again.

Welcome to the ignore list.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5 2013, 03:27 PM   #87
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Nob Akimoto wrote: View Post
At this point, you guys are kinda talking in circles without much progress. Can we move on a bit?
Sure. Supposedly Crazie Eddie has added me to his ignore list, but this isn't the first time he's said that so we'll see.


Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
And you still lack any evidence that a significant part of the fleet was NOT involved in those military programs.
Irrelevant: even if all of them were involved in a military program, only the ones who were not also involved in the scientific and exploration programs would have to stand down.

So according to you, how many had to stand down?
The ones that couldn't convert easily from soldier to explorer. Some ships that were primarily built for warfighting, such as dreadnoughts and ships that were kept around more for fighting in wars but were inefficient for hauling cargo and supporting expansion efforts.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
It's perfectly relevant since she wanted to know if Starfleet was affected
No she didn't.
I like how you completely ignore her dialogue.

MILITARY AIDE: Bill, are we talking about mothballing the Starfleet?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
No more than Cartwright was protesting the idea of offering Klingons "safe haven within Federation space." That, too, was a strawman argument.
How is that a strawman argument? What is he misrepresenting?

1. Offer a safe haven for Klingons in Federation space.
2. Klingons would become the alien trash of the galaxy.
3. Strawman Fallacy ???? or Racism/Specism ????

1. Dismantle the fleet
2. We'd be defenseless
3. With an aggressive species with a foothold on our territory
4. Strawman Fallacy ????

CARTWRIGHT: I must protest. To offer the Klingons a safe haven within Federation space is suicide. Klingons would become the alien trash of the galaxy. And if we dismantle the fleet, we'd be defenseless before an aggressive species with a foothold on our territory. The opportunity here is to bring them to their knees. Then we'll be in a far better position to dictate terms.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
It doesn't tell us that at all. Only that certain programs won't be affected. He doesn't say -- and at this point, cannot really know -- if anything else will.
Sure it does. She asked him if the Starfleet is affected and he says only a part of it will not be.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Unless Colonel West is a separate military program, this does not answer the question.
So you think that Colonel West is not in a separate military program in Starfleet? And again, there's TWOK that said Starfleet was The Military and "Errand of Mercy"'s military forces.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
So again: what part of Starfleet ISN'T involved in scientific research and exploration?
To answer you, it's the part that isn't necessary to be always available to wage war against the Klingons.
You're just being contrary now.
I'm just answering your question with the evidence we have.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Again.

Welcome to the ignore list.
You've said something like that before.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 02:17 AM   #88
Undead
Continuity Spackle
 
Undead's Avatar
 
Location: Unicron (The mockingjay soars)
Send a message via ICQ to Undead
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

I agree it's probably time for this to move on. RL is sometimes hectic so I apologize if perhaps I should have made such a suggestion sooner.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
You're just being contrary now.

Again.

Welcome to the ignore list.
Eddie, if you feel exasperated and the need to ignore someone, sometimes that's the best option. But under most circumstances this would be considered a flame. I'm giving you a friendly this time, but please don't do it again. Same goes for everyone else.
__________________

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


Knight Exemplar
Undead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31 2013, 01:41 AM   #89
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

I think one of the strengths of "Yesterday's Enterprise" is just how well sketched the alternative universe seems to be, without it actually going into too great detail. It just does it all with broad strokes. But that's what makes it so compelling, because it seems real enough to convince us that it was a valid alternative path to the 24th century we 'know'.

To the broader question posed by the OP, I can't imagine that the Federation changed so radically all at once. I imagine that following the Narendra III incident, tensions escalated out of control, but people like Ambassador Spock maybe still tried to negotiate and maintain the Khitomer accords. I can only imagine that the Klingons made some major attack that caught the Federation with their pants down, and therefore the Feds had trouble regaining ground.

One thing that needs to be remembered (but often isn't) in these discussions is that even canonically, in our own 'real' TNG universe, the episode "Aquiel" stated that the last Klingon raid on Federation territory was in 2362, only two years before the Enterprise-D was launched. That's not an alternative universe, that's a solid fact that happened in the 'real' version of Star Trek history.

So, it is apparent from this incident, and from events in DS9, that the Federation/Klingon treaty remains fragile even in the supposedly peaceful 'prime' universe. All I can imagine is that the tipping point that turned everything into a war zone was that one straw incident that didn't happen in 'our' Star Trek universe. "Yesterday's Enterprise" itself evidently implies it was as simple as the Enterprise-C not being where it was supposed to be, but I reckon there was probably in 'reality' more than that. It was an escalation of events.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31 2013, 08:09 PM   #90
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Yesterday's Enterprise: How is the Federation Losing So Badly?

Lance wrote: View Post
One thing that needs to be remembered (but often isn't) in these discussions is that even canonically, in our own 'real' TNG universe, the episode "Aquiel" stated that the last Klingon raid on Federation territory was in 2362, only two years before the Enterprise-D was launched. That's not an alternative universe, that's a solid fact that happened in the 'real' version of Star Trek history.
I tend to view that as a case of over a century of hostilities between the Klingons and the Federation not disappearing overnight. Some Klingon factions couldn't have cared less about the Khitomer Accords and did continue aggression towards the Federation on their own (without being sanctioned by the Empire). Some of these factions may even have been supported by a few members of the Klingon High Council who may have let them off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans 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 07:06 PM.

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