RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,218
Posts: 5,437,846
Members: 24,953
Currently online: 409
Newest member: Kavanc

TrekToday headlines

Cumberbatch In Wax
By: T'Bonz on Oct 24

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


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 9 2013, 05:26 AM   #91
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
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.
You could have fooled me.

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.
I once speculated that NCC-1700 was not necessarily the hull registry for the Constitution, but the basic diagram of a Constitution-class ship with that registry popped up onscreen more than once in Trek (first on a monitor screen Scotty was looking at in "Space Seed," but more clearly for us to look at in Star Trek III and TNG's "Datalore").
http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/...C_Datalore.jpg

It's not unreasonable that repeatedly-shown diagram is a base schematic of a Constitution-class ship featuring the first vessel of the design.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 02:56 PM   #92
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
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.
The question and answer is legitimate as we're not lead to believe these two were lying.
MILITARY AIDE: Bill, are we talking about mothballing the Starfleet?
C in C: I'm sure that our exploration and scientific programs would be unaffected, Captain, but...
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
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?
Sure but part of the phaser coverage discussion was that with the rollbar phasers you wouldn't need to.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
I don't know that the World War-II analogy is or was ever all that appropriate
It's not that appropriate. Like I said, I was working within Forbin's question.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
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.
However, TOS did rip off "Enemy Below" and alternated between gun and torpedo with specific constraints that did not emulate 1960's contemporary naval combat. Phaser guns were their first go-to weapons to attack their targets but was power-intensive and photon torpedoes were used when the ship was power-limited and couldn't fire full phasers.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Those submarines did not use those torpedoes against pursuers.
U-85 fires stern tube in attempt to sink pursuing destroyer.

USS Tang fires stern torpedoes at pursuing tanker and transport attempting to ram it.

Netherlands O-21 sinks pursuing U-95 with stern torpedoes.

Spadefish failed to sink destroyer with stern torpedoes.

etc, etc.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
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.
I was thinking of TOS Enterprise's 6 forward tubes that could be emptied rapidly although still "one at a time". The only different I can tell between the TOS and TMP launchers is that we see the TMP ones fire multiple times indicating either a quicker reloading or holding multiple torpedoes to fire beyond the oval hatch where they are loaded. In either case, more tubes facing forward just means more torpedoes to be fired forward (without having to wait for the ones fired aft to swing around.)

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
OTOH, if Trek had kept pace with the times
Unfortunately Trek never kept up with the times, even their own, IMHO. Even AbramsTrek doesn't really make a change as it still keeps phasers and torpedoes.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 03:03 PM   #93
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

What was the question again?
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 03:54 PM   #94
The Badger
Fleet Captain
 
The Badger's Avatar
 
Location: Im in ur Tardis, violating ur canon.
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

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.
That's an ad hominem fallacy. And totally irrelevant. Both Admiral Cartwright* and the military aide refer to a possible 'mothballing' or 'dismantling' of the fleet. If they were wrong, the Commander In Chief would have said so there and then.

MILITARY AIDE: Bill, are we talking about mothballing the Starfleet?
C in C: Nope, not going to happen.
MILITARY AIDE: Oh, good.

No. Instead the aide asks his question, and gets the reply

C in C: I'm sure that our exploration and scientific programs would be unaffected, Captain, but...

Only exploration and science are mentioned. And that 'but' at the end of the sentence suggests that other programs, perhaps including defence, will be affected.


*And is there any reason to believe Cartwright is a member of the conspiracy at this stage? Or that the conspiracy even exists? At the briefing he shows no knowledge of the situation, having to ask what the proposed negations will be for. Believing, correctly or not, that the Fleet was about to be weakened may well be his motivation for joining the conspiracy in the first place.
The Badger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 04:19 PM   #95
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

^^^ I'm pretty sure Cartwright was deeply in it by this point. Someone heard Kirk tell Spock "Let them [the Klingons] die" after everyone left the conference room, to filter it down to Valeris. A lowly Lieutenant would likely not have been allowed to come anywhere near that room full of top brass - but an Admiral would. And I doubt that was something that Spock would have told Valeris off-screen - too personal a moment between the two old friends. But it would be the perfect thing for a senior officer to use to manipulate a junior officer into doing "her patriotic duty" for the "greater good" of the Federation.

Also, Cartwright's odd, almost forlorn, expression on his face when Kirk spoke up and said the Admiral was right, indicated to me that Cartwright knew exactly what was going on. He knew he was complicit in setting up one of Starfleet's greatest heroes (and the only one in the room to verbally agree with his assessment of the Klingons, augmenting his guilt over the plan) to be thrown into a faked attack on an enemy vessel flying a diplomatic flag, one or more murders, and a BOP that can fire when cloaked, sparking a massive interstellar war, swallowing the entire Alpha Quadrant, that could potentially kill millions, possibly billions. The fact that the Klingons had the time to prep an offensively-cloaking BOP for this mission means that certain members of Starfleet also had the time to set things up on their end.

Spock's mind meld on Valeris also basically implied that Cartwright was a part of the conspiracy from the get-go. There is no question, in my mind, that such was the case.
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.

Last edited by 137th Gebirg; August 9 2013 at 04:34 PM.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 05:22 PM   #96
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
However, TOS did rip off "Enemy Below" and alternated between gun and torpedo with specific constraints that did not emulate 1960's contemporary naval combat.
They did, actually. Through the 1960s, guided missiles were unreliable enough that gunfire was still used in close quarters against surface and shore targets almost exclusively. Antiship missiles were available, but expensive and difficult to use, and beam-riding missiles like Tartar and Terrier could be used against surface targets only with a direct line of sight (basically, just outside gun range).

Which means guided missile cruisers of the early/mid 1960s operated the same way as starships: guns at close range, missiles at longer range. This is very much UNLIKE the WW-II analogy, where guns are used at medium range and torpedoes -- which are one-shot kills for anything smaller than a heavy cruiser -- are used at suicidally close range.

U-85 fires stern tube in attempt to sink pursuing destroyer...
And is sunk for her troubles. Desperation tactic is desperate.

USS Tang fires stern torpedoes at pursuing tanker and transport attempting to ram it.
Because they cannot dive to escape like they're supposed to. Desperation tactic is still desperate.

Netherlands O-21 sinks pursuing U-95 with stern torpedoes.
U-95 had been closely following O-21, trying to figure out who they were; O-21 shot the torpedoes at them as soon as they made challenge.

Not a desperation tactic, but part of the pattern that submarines only use the stern tubes "defensively" (if you can call it that) when on the surface. And a submarine that can't dive is a submarine that's just BEGGING to get sunk.

Spadefish failed to sink destroyer with stern torpedoes.
Only because her forward tubes were empty.

Much more to the point: this is not what the stern tubes were INTENDED for, nor was such use either common or particularly successful.

And again, by the 1980s the stern missile launchers on guided missile warships were supplemental on a ship that basically aims its main weapons by turning itself until said weapon is pointed in the general direction of the enemy.

I was thinking of TOS Enterprise's 6 forward tubes that could be emptied rapidly although still "one at a time". The only different I can tell between the TOS and TMP launchers is that we see the TMP ones fire multiple times indicating either a quicker reloading or holding multiple torpedoes to fire beyond the oval hatch where they are loaded. In either case, more tubes facing forward just means more torpedoes to be fired forward (without having to wait for the ones fired aft to swing around.)
But if the forward tube has some kind of autoloader or a quick-launch magazine, it doesn't matter whether you have one tube or twelve, you still launch all twelve torpedoes one at a time until your target dies.

Think of it like the Mk-26 launchers on the old Tico cruisers. Load two missiles, fire them off, reload, repeat. There's no real advantage to moving the other Mk-26 to the forward section of the ship (like they did on the Long Beach) because 90% of the time the ship is only going to fire one or two missiles and rarely needs more than that to get the job done. The VLS system we use now has the advantage of enabling a possible Macross Missile Massacre, but can just as easily fire missiles one or two at a time, and can do either job with identical efficiency.

The only disadvantage to the VLS system is that it cannot be easily reloaded. The NuEnterprise clearly doesn't have this problem.

Unfortunately Trek never kept up with the times, even their own, IMHO. Even AbramsTrek doesn't really make a change as it still keeps phasers and torpedoes.
OUR ships still have 5" guns, do they not? And again, the broadside launchers in STID would count as a timeline update to the design IMO.

ETA: Thought back to this thread and suddenly this image popped into my head:
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!

Last edited by Crazy Eddie; August 9 2013 at 06:02 PM.
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 06:18 PM   #97
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
But those Excelsior prototypes weren't at Wolf 359. And the one Miranda we know of that was, was not all that old.
Not to belabor a point, but how do we know that those prototypes and other ships weren't at Wolf 359? We have a few moments of battle footage from "Emissary" that pins down by visual evidence only a few ships: Yamaguchi, Melbourne, Saratoga, and Bellerophon. The encyclopedia speculated about names for others based on some of the wrecked models that were built... but how do we really know that the unnamed Excelsior prototypes did not participate? The Memory Alpha article on the battle pins down 16 ships, two unnamed, and one from the presumed present mothership of a wrecked shuttlecraft (USS Liberator.)

I have always remained dubious about there only being 40 starships present in the final count as well.

At any rate, the Constitution class seems to have at least one present, in addition to the one confirmed Miranda class. There really seems to be no "class bias" when it came to this battle.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 06:22 PM   #98
Roboturner913
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

LOL at the fat guy macking on the chick in the turbolift
Roboturner913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 06:51 PM   #99
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Praetor wrote: View Post
Not to belabor a point, but how do we know that those prototypes and other ships weren't at Wolf 359?...but how do we really know that the unnamed Excelsior prototypes did not participate?
We don't know that those ships participated any more than we know that the rest of the fleet was composed completely of Nebula class ships. Some people seem to think that because they were seen at the surplus depot, they were from the battle because other ships form the battle were there as stock footage. So does that mean that the two spacedock study models, the two Talarian freighters, the two Talarian warships and the 'V" miniseries saucer were at Wolf 359 too?

Based on what I can see (8 Galaxy family ships, one Ambassador, one Excelsior, one Miranda (with updated interiors), one Oberth, one shuttle from presumably another Galaxy family ship, and what hasn't been conclusively proven to be a fully intact Constitution), it appears that if this sample is a representation of the entire fleet, then it was probably composed mostly of more advanced ships from the 2350's and '60's, while the older designs tended to be less, but still hardly "antiquated."
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 07:10 PM   #100
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Somewhere I got the impression that the Connie that was present at W359 had nacelles that were situated perpendicular to how they normally appeared, pointing outward sideways, rather than the usual straight up-and-down, with Constellation-style endcaps. I vaguely remember a pic of this from many years ago, and it looked like this (discovered this one back in early 2006).
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 07:27 PM   #101
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

^No, you're thinking of an AMT desktop model from "Booby Trap." Its nacelles were indeed flipped for some reason, and the window inserts were missing, giving the saucer these weird openings reminiscent of the Stargazer's shuttlebays.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 07:31 PM   #102
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

AH! Thank you for that clarification. Always wondered about that one.
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 08:08 PM   #103
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

137th Gebirg wrote: View Post
Somewhere I got the impression that the Connie that was present at W359 had nacelles that were situated perpendicular to how they normally appeared, pointing outward sideways, rather than the usual straight up-and-down, with Constellation-style endcaps. I vaguely remember a pic of this from many years ago, and it looked like this (discovered this one back in early 2006).
I wonder if that's also related to the silver study model (actually an assembled AMT model kit) that floated around the TNG sets in the early seasons, which had its nacelles turned in that manner?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
We don't know that those ships participated any more than we know that the rest of the fleet was composed completely of Nebula class ships. Some people seem to think that because they were seen at the surplus depot, they were from the battle because other ships form the battle were there as stock footage. So does that mean that the two spacedock study models, the two Talarian freighters, the two Talarian warships and the 'V" miniseries saucer were at Wolf 359 too?
Maybe Starfleet had some captured Talarian ships, and one from a reptilian race? I mean, they did seem desperate.

Really not trying to belabor, I'm just trying to point out that we can't really rule anything out. Some of the surplus depot footage did start as Wolf 359 footage after all.

Dukhat wrote: View Post
Based on what I can see (8 Galaxy family ships, one Ambassador, one Excelsior, one Miranda (with updated interiors), one Oberth, one shuttle from presumably another Galaxy family ship, and what hasn't been conclusively proven to be a fully intact Constitution), it appears that if this sample is a representation of the entire fleet, then it was probably composed mostly of more advanced ships from the 2350's and '60's, while the older designs tended to be less, but still hardly "antiquated."
Agreed with that assessment, although we might not assume that the shuttle came from a Galaxy family member - remember that the Repulse, an Excelsior class ship, had such a shuttle in "The Child." USS Liberator might be our Connie, for all we know.

The Oberth in itself is quite the curio, although perhaps I should not open that can of worms. Having it at Wolf 359 certain seems, well, desperate, as earlier mentioned, especially if the registry numbers of the earliest seen Oberths are representative of their true age. Perhaps they are just that economical that continuing to use them for close to 200 years is okay.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9 2013, 11:15 PM   #104
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Praetor wrote: View Post
The Oberth in itself is quite the curio, although perhaps I should not open that can of worms. ... especially if the registry numbers of the earliest seen Oberths are representative of their true age. Perhaps they are just that economical that continuing to use them for close to 200 years is okay.
Then maybe you let me have the honor of opening that can of worms? I've repeatedly threatened the BBS with my Oberth Class treatise, maybe now would be a good time (in a different thread, of course)

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10 2013, 01:44 AM   #105
Undead
Continuity Spackle
 
Undead's Avatar
 
Location: Unicron (The mockingjay soars)
Send a message via ICQ to Undead
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Fine with me, if you guys want to start it. We've had a few good discussions on the Oberth in the past, and I can certainly throw a few worms into the mix. Specifically, since I like to mesh as much of the onscreen and offscreen material that will fit together as possible, I like to think the design started as FASA's Gagarin build and Oberth is the mid TMP-TNG era update. Visually there wouldn't be a lot of obvious modifications, but the interiors and systems would likely be updated.
__________________

"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
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 09:17 AM.

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