Defiant - where is the airlock at the front?

Discussion in 'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine' started by MarsWeeps, Sep 23, 2012.

  1. toughlittleship

    toughlittleship Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Location:
    United Kingdom
  2. Vanyel

    Vanyel The Imperious Leader Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2001
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    I never understood the reason behind docking nose first. The ship could have docked on her ventral or dorsal sides eliminating all problems of how it docked. A ventral surface docking would have allowed for greater movement between the station and ship, if the shuttle bay could be opened once docked.
     
  3. bullethead

    bullethead Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    The shuttle bay didn't even exist until season 6 or 7.
     
  4. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Shuttles came out of somewhere in "The Search" already...

    Docking nose first allows the ship to reach the bottom of a fairly deep "bay" in the station's structure. The only other way to get in there would be to ease the ship in sideways. Dorsal or ventral approaches would require a telescoping tunnel, which would negate the supposed advantages of the position change.

    Using the shuttlebay to facilitate greater flow of goods or personnel would not work because the narrow airlock at the station is a bottleneck. OTOH, by connecting the nose to the airlock, our heroes leave the shuttlebay and possible cargo bays free to be opened into space, so that goods can flow into the cargo holds of the station by the supposed large cargo doors there (such as the ones seen opening in "Dramatis Personae").

    Docking directly with the high capacity cargo doors might be tricky. But "Dramatis Personae" makes it look as if these are on the inner surface of the outer ring (or perhaps on the sides of the connecting spokes), and indeed there are some features in the model at such locations that could be taken for the doors (although not exactly). Easing a ship inside the ring and turning her belly outward towards the ring or the spoke would be a cool maneuver!

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  5. G2309

    G2309 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009

    Ok i tink that is a good explanation although we've seen sields expand furter in te past.
     
  6. Tosk

    Tosk Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    On the run.
    Did I seem like I was particularly worried? I used a smiley and everything.
     
  7. Kolrad

    Kolrad Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    I was always puzzled by the "ablative armor" that was added to the Defiant in season 4 that protected the ship from damage when the shields were down, but somehow didn't visibly change the ship's appearance at all.

    If I understand the meaning of "ablative" correctly, there should have been an outer layer on the Defiant that would gradually break off in little pieces as the ship took damage.
     
  8. Mark_Nguyen

    Mark_Nguyen Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta
    The ablative armor was just several layers of additional paint. Really, really tough paint. Paint ablates when you rub it. Yup.

    Also, don't forget that the Defiant apparently has some side docking capacity as well. It was only ever shown docked at an upper pylon once (or more specifically departing from it), but it was there.

    Mark
     
  9. Jimi_James

    Jimi_James Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    Gettin' Lucky in Kentucky
    It's been understanding that the detailed paneled surface of the ship itself was meant to represent the ablative armor. This is why we don't see some of the traditional details we're used to seeing on other ships, like standard segmented hull lines representing the presence of a deflector shield grid. Even things that got identified later on, such as thrusters, torpedo launchers, and transporter emitters, don't appear to be the same common variety in use by the rest of Starfleet. They're all covered with armor.

    As for why the hull never appeared to be burning or breaking away as the armor was damage, as the name suggests, I would imagine it has to do with the limits of CGI budgets. Consider that quite often many ships didn't even appear to have shields because it would have been cost/labor intensive for the large fleet scenes, as you can guess at what it might have taken for them to show consistent damage throughout a battle.

    Not to cross forums, but consistent damage has long been a sticking point against Voyager, though they certainly tried to make up for it with the USS Equinox. Outside of Trek, only one recent show that I know of has done a good job with showing consistent and accumulative damage, and that's BSG. It certainly added a great deal of realism to the show, to see the Galactica actually taking damage, some of which couldn't be repaired, leaving her hull scared and burned.

    Timo brought up an inserting point I hadn't thought of, a few posts above, in regards to what the Defiant was up to, during the battle against the Klingons in Way of the Warrior. The ship had taken some damage during the mission to rescue Dukat, but it hardly seemed to slow them down at all.

    I wonder why Sisko didn't leave Dax or Kira on board in command of a skeleton crew, and give them orders to engage the Klingons, particularly given the number of times Defiant was off doing something while action was happening on the station later on. So it's not like they had anything against splitting up the action. It seems strange now, that for the entire battle, we didn't see the Defiant at all and while the ship is certainly tough, I doubt it would have lasted long given the amount of weapons fire that was being exchanged.

    If not in the fight, then surely Sisko would have ordered a skeleton crew to take the ship to Bajor and wait for Starfleet reinforcements.

    Perhaps adding those elements would have disrupted the flow of the episode...or pushed it over in time.
     
  10. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Why should we think it was "added"?

    Exactly. The station is a better combatant than the ship. There's no particular reason to assume otherwise: the ship is small, the station is big. And by not using the ship, the station can shoot more freely.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  11. Tiberius

    Tiberius Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    I agree. My understanding is that the ablative armour was a standard feature that the Defiant had from the beginning.

    Now you will, no doubt, find a way to disagree with me. :lol:
     
  12. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Hey, disagreeing with myself is a favorite pastime of mine.

    Let's see.. Ablative armor is news to Captain Benteen in "Paradise Lost". Doesn't mean it would be new, though. She (and Starfleet Operations) is just ill informed, is all.

    Benteen also believes somebody "equipped" the hero ship with the armor. But since she and SF Ops are out of the loop, there's no way of telling when the equipping took place. And Benteen is being sarcastic anyway.

    Ablative armor first explicitly saves the day in "Way of the Warrior". Doesn't mean it wasn't in place previously, though.

    Naah, can't find a way to disagree. Sorry! In any case, I never disagree with me. See above.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  13. toughlittleship

    toughlittleship Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I think ablative armor was first mentioned in the third season episode "Past Tense, Part I".
     
  14. Tiberius

    Tiberius Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    I meant you always seem to find a way to disagree with me! :P