RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,839
Posts: 5,327,350
Members: 24,551
Currently online: 509
Newest member: Mycroft

TrekToday headlines

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

New Trek Home Fashions
By: T'Bonz on Jul 4

Star Trek Pop-Ups Book Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3


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 January 5 2014, 12:55 AM   #16
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

Doesn't the same issue apply to the Enterprise-D as well? We see the ship unleash a wall of phaser beam and photon torpedo death at the Borg in "Best of Both Worlds" but in all other conflicts before and since it fires like the Akira in FC, one beam at a time with the odd photon thrown in for good measure.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 02:58 AM   #17
USS Triumphant
Rear Admiral
 
USS Triumphant's Avatar
 
Location: Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

Tribble puncher wrote: View Post
But I guess it will be a miranda replacement in my own personal world. The Miranda was a robust design, The Akira seems to me like a continuation of that design lineage but a little more multipurpose, and probably much better crew accommodations.
Really? You think so? *I've* always thought the design that was the natural inheritor of the Miranda line, so to speak, was the Nebula-Class. But, to each their own.
__________________
As the brilliant philosopher once said... Everybody, have fun tonight. Everybody, Wang Chung tonight.
USS Triumphant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 03:15 AM   #18
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

Tribble puncher wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Ah, the Akira class...

On the one hand, its a sort of fanboi wannabe supership produced for a franchise that could not handle superships in any way shape or form, so the entire concept was dead on arrival. The giant "weapons pod" between the impulse farings was drawn with seven forward torpedo tubes, which ILM simply ignored and drew the torpedoes just coming from a random spot in the middle of all of them (which blows my mind to think of it: they KNEW it was a weapons pod, but they still didn't bother to put the torpedoes coming out of the actual tubes ). The features intended to be doors for a through-deck shuttlebay are too small for standard shuttles, let alone any known fighter the Federation has ever used. Last of all, the only time we see the Akiras, there are no fighters in the area; the only time we see the fighters, there are no Akiras in the area.

On the other hand, the concept itself is basically a non-starter. The whole reason for HAVING specialized high-tech torpedo tubes is so that you do not need multiple tubes to maintain a high rate of fire. As alluded to above, its the difference between a submachinegun and a harness with fifty derringers strapped to it. That single torpedo launcher is generally perfectly sufficient: you can launch one at a time in rapid succession or six at a time in a scattershot. If you're in a situation where you need more than six photon torpedoes in a single volley, you're probably better off surrendering.

As DESCRIBED, Akira is a starship that should be able to perform a Macross Massacre of up to 90 torpedoes in a single volley and should be able to launch a BSG-style fighter patrol to pound the hell out of its enemies. As DEPICTED, Akira is just an enlarged Miranda with a single torpedo tube and a forward phaser bank that goes "Bzzzzaaaaaawwwwww....bzzzzaaaaaaaawwwwww" and that's it. Its a fundamental dissonance between what the FX people want to do and what the designers want to do and the Akira class is born in the mutual ignorance between them.

Similar thing happened for the Scimitar in Nemesis:
Jaegar: The ship has 52 disruptor banks and 26 photon torpedo launchers
ILM: We will render four disruptors and an occasional torpedo.
Jaegar: But... but... 52 disruptor banks...
ILM: Pew pew... pew pew pew... pew... pew pew... How's that?
Jaegar: Couldn't you just show me what it would look like if it fired all 52 of those disruptors at once?
ILM: Well, it does fire about 50 disruptor bolts during the course of the entire film....
I like the look of the Akira, it's a cool looking ship. But I guess it will be a miranda replacement in my own personal world. The Miranda was a robust design, The Akira seems to me like a continuation of that design lineage but a little more multipurpose, and probably much better crew accommodations.
Don't misunderstand, there's nothing wrong with the LOOK of the ship. It's a great design, fits right in there with Starfleet's overall patterns.

It's the SPECS of the ship that are absolute baloney. No Starfleet vessel needs 15 photon torpedoes; they only ever fire them one at a time anyway, and even if they didn't, Star Trek is deeply enamored with the "They've hit us with our shields down, which means every single one of our 13 phaser emitters and six different torpedo launchers are now totally off-line" plot dvice.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 03:16 AM   #19
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Doesn't the same issue apply to the Enterprise-D as well? We see the ship unleash a wall of phaser beam and photon torpedo death at the Borg in "Best of Both Worlds" but in all other conflicts before and since it fires like the Akira in FC, one beam at a time with the odd photon thrown in for good measure.
Yeah, it is an unfortunate let down regarding post-TNG effects. They did the everything that can be brought to bear with the E-D in "Best of Both Worlds" and "The Survivors" and then stopped doing that for all other combat.
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 03:21 AM   #20
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

USS Triumphant wrote: View Post
Tribble puncher wrote: View Post
But I guess it will be a miranda replacement in my own personal world. The Miranda was a robust design, The Akira seems to me like a continuation of that design lineage but a little more multipurpose, and probably much better crew accommodations.
Really? You think so? *I've* always thought the design that was the natural inheritor of the Miranda line, so to speak, was the Nebula-Class. But, to each their own.
The Nebula class has virtually nothing whatsoever in common with the Miranda class other than the fact that its nacelles are beneath its saucer. If anything, it's an immediate predecessor of the Galaxy class.

Akira works in the Miranda lineage because of its features. It's a (relatively) smaller vessel with a fairly large shuttlebay and a torpedo pod on the top of it. Probably not a very glamorous assignment, but they seem to do a lot of the Federation's grunt work.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Doesn't the same issue apply to the Enterprise-D as well? We see the ship unleash a wall of phaser beam and photon torpedo death at the Borg in "Best of Both Worlds" but in all other conflicts before and since it fires like the Akira in FC, one beam at a time with the odd photon thrown in for good measure.
In Best of Both Worlds the point was trying to find a frequency the Borg couldn't adapt to. Otherwise, they'd just dump as much power as they could channel into whichever phaser strip was facing the target.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 03:30 AM   #21
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

IIRC they reused some of the "arsenal of death" VFX in some early season scenes. They did a lot of volley firing in early TNG, ranging from Yesterday's Enterprise to Best of Both Worlds. It seems like the emphasis changed a bit between seasons and shows as they went from a focus on relative static ships firing lots of things at once, to high speed maneuvering plus relatively low rates of fire. There's probably stylistic reasons for it, as well as the slow move toward CGI. Doing big battle scenes with too much VFX makes the scene look excessively busy, too, which might have something to do with the lack of it.
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2014, 09:54 AM   #22
Darkwing
Commodore
 
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
It's the SPECS of the ship that are absolute baloney. No Starfleet vessel needs 15 photon torpedoes; they only ever fire them one at a time anyway, and even if they didn't, Star Trek is deeply enamored with the "They've hit us with our shields down, which means every single one of our 13 phaser emitters and six different torpedo launchers are now totally off-line" plot dvice.
Which is why I interpret Jaeger's 15 tubes as an attempt to circumvent the trope. We never specifically see it, but they're not the hero ship, so we also don't see them lose all tubes on a single hit, either. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
__________________
If you don’t drink the kool-aid, you’re a baaad person - Rev Jim Jones
Almond kool-aid, anyone? Or do you prefer pudding?- Darkwing
Darkwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6 2014, 02:20 AM   #23
Tribble puncher
Commander
 
Tribble puncher's Avatar
 
Location: Lexington, KY
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

According to memory alpha...(not cannon I know) the Galaxy Class was launched in the (late)2350s. The Akira class was Launched in early 2370's. so thats nearly a ten year gap. Starfleet became aware of the Borg in 2365 (memory alpha), so the ONLY reason I can see the 15 torpedo tubes reasoning is that the Akira fires a Torpedo Orgy basically at a borg cube, hoping for a knockout punch. possibly working in concert with defiant class ships. still seems over the top but thats the only reasoning I could find behind such a large amount of tubes on a medium sized ship. considering most other fed ships have 2-3 tubes that can fire in bursts, it sort of renders the whole broadside cannons thing moot. its like replacing a machine gunner with a WWI rifle line.
Tribble puncher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6 2014, 04:28 AM   #24
Darkwing
Commodore
 
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

and the only reason to dtep back like that is to increase robustness
__________________
If you don’t drink the kool-aid, you’re a baaad person - Rev Jim Jones
Almond kool-aid, anyone? Or do you prefer pudding?- Darkwing
Darkwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 6 2014, 05:04 AM   #25
bullethead
Fleet Captain
 
bullethead's Avatar
 
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

15 photon torpedoes doesn't make sense unless you go with the hypothetical DITL torp magazines that have 640 torpedoes in them. And even then, you'd need to radically alter the pod geometry to get more than 2560 torps in there (half of the article's example of a reasonable number for an Intrepid class ship).
__________________
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 January 6 2014, 09:09 PM   #26
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

^^^ Not unless they figured out a way to miniaturize an industrial replicator at the center of the weapons pod to keep pumping out torpedoes. Thus, necessitating only the smallest size magazine for queuing purposes. Their only limits, at that point, would be the amount of deuterium they have on hand to make up the casing, the antimatter to make up the warhead and the speed at which a fixed number of torpedoes could be replicated per minute under combat operations.
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2014, 02:22 AM   #27
SicOne
Commodore
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

bullethead wrote: View Post
15 photon torpedoes doesn't make sense unless you go with the hypothetical DITL torp magazines that have 640 torpedoes in them. And even then, you'd need to radically alter the pod geometry to get more than 2560 torps in there (half of the article's example of a reasonable number for an Intrepid class ship).
Could there be lines of photon torpedoes in the hull struts connecting the torpedo pod to the rest of the ship? Kind of like ammunition belts for machine guns? I tend to think of the Miranda-class torpedo pod in such terms, with the majority of the torpedo magazine extending down the rollbar. There's not a helluva lot of magazine space in the torpedo pod, either for the Akira or the Miranda.
SicOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2014, 02:32 AM   #28
SicOne
Commodore
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

With all due respect, despite the designer's intentions for that many torpedo launchers to cover so many lateral fields of fire (and hey, what about targets above/below the Akira?), I can't really see a whole lot of space for torpedo magazines in the primary hull when a lot of that internal space is needed to support shuttlecraft/fightercraft operations. Unless, that is, the torpedoes are already stacked up in the tube nose-to-rear, a la Metalstorm. Even then, photon torpedoes are very maneuverable and it doesn't make much sense from my viewpoint to install all of these unnecessarily redundant launchers. A torpedo pod that has multiple launchers covering fore and aft should be able to spit out enough torpedoes to keep a threat occupied quite handily.
SicOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2014, 02:34 AM   #29
SicOne
Commodore
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

Was it ever determined how big the Akira-class is? I think there were a lot of different ways to calculate it by comparing items like the size of the bridge module and/or escape pods, but I had heard there was a discrepancy between designed size and what the VFX folks actually did. Like, 400+ meter design vs 250+ meter VFX, something like that.
SicOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2014, 04:56 AM   #30
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: I never got the Akira class as a carrier.

I think it was e biggest of its cousins in First Contact but still smaller than the Enterprise-E. I think it was more on par with the Ambassador or Nebula with regard to length.

As with all things, Ex Astris has an article about it with size comparison charts. It is in kind of a gray area.

As for it being a carrier, yes it does have what appears to be landing bay doors in back of the saucer and force-field protected launch bay doors in a cut-in at the front of the saucer.
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg 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 07:47 AM.

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