Starbases....Warp drive capable?

[Paradise City]

I'd imagine Starbases require -- let's say a hundred pieces to put together -- and various transports are responsible for bringing all this to the site and the scaffolding to build it.

That Starbases have warp capability taken as a unit sounds a bit silly to me.

 

[MarsWeeps]

Yeah and dissolving people into an energy beam and reassembling them somewhere else isn't silly at all!

 

[Longinus]

They can't do it. If they could give those things warp drive, they in effect would be huge starships, massively more powerful than Galaxy or Sovereign classes.

 

[MarsWeeps]

Things are only impossible until they're not.

I bet JJ's Starbases have warp drive!!!

 

[at Quark's]

Or perhaps they can fit them with warp engines, in case they really want them moved to another star system, just not any higher than warp 3 or so due to massive energy requirements . In that case they'd be capable of covering interstellar distances, yet still not make starships obsolete.

 

[Longinus]

Things are only impossible until they're not.

Certainly. I meant at their current tech level.

I bet JJ's Starbases have warp drive!!!

No, they just transwarpbeam them around.

 

[Griffeytrek]

Why would you put warp drive on a space station? It rather is a waste. and defeats the purpose to the structure. Much like we see with the smaller DS9, the various Starbases likely have maneuvering thrusters in order to maintain orbit and allow some local motion (move to a higher orbit etc). Large bases such as the Earth Spacedock in most likely built in place and are meant to permanently remain there. Smaller structures such as Regula 1 and the Orbital Office Station look to essentially be the space going equivalent of modern construction trailers. Towed to where needed and dropped there for the duration. Deep Space located mid to larger sized stations such as K-7 are probably a mixture. Modules that are built near a resource rich construction facility, then towed out and attached to the growing station.

Even with Star Trek future tech, Engineering is still Engineering. Logistics is still Logistics. You don't put wheels and an engine on a skyscraper. It's not that you can't. It's just that doing so is an idiotic waste that tends to make people think the architect has been drinking drain cleaner.

Let's not forget the simple fact that we have literally watched the Earth Spacedock sit in the same place for roughly a century. Clearly it was designed as a long lasting permanent structure that nobody ever intended to move.

 

[Griffeytrek]

Things are only impossible until they're not.

I bet JJ's Starbases have warp drive!!!

And yet things will continue to remain impractical or simply pointless long after they are no longer impossible. It's not a question of "could they bolt engines on a Starbase". It's "Why the hell would you? The whole point is they stay in the same place and ships and people go to them. We call those other things that move around "ships". Do you 20'th century people put engines or wings on your docks? "

 

[MarsWeeps]

^ You have a very limited imagination. It's easy to tell because you have to resort to insults because your mind is incapable of envisioning new ideas.

 

[Spot261]

It's not that you can't. It's just that doing so is an idiotic waste that tends to make people think the architect has been drinking drain cleaner.

Oh this made me happy!

 

[Paradise City]

Yeah and dissolving people into an energy beam and reassembling them somewhere else isn't silly at all!

Beaming isn't silly by in-universe standards. It's a streamlined easy to understand concept.

Warp speed "starbases" wouldn't be bases at all. They wouldn't be stationary but would be a mobile cosmic equivalent of a gargantuan aircraft carrier/dreadnaught. It's a muddled concept all in all. OK, you might swing it but it's a very militaristic device that isn't shared by any other regular species. It's an odd idea that doesn't fit squarely in terms of the universe we're dealing with here.

 

[MarsWeeps]

Yeah if Star Trek started out with Warp Drive starbases, everyone would think they are perfectly normal. It's funny how people are crucified for daring to suggest something new in a science FICTION show.

 

[Spot261]

^ You have a very limited imagination. It's easy to tell because you have to resort to insults because your mind is incapable of envisioning new ideas.

But to be fair, they have a point, if SF tech allowed for structures the size of ESD moving at warp, then why have "capital ships" orders of magnitude smaller? The imagination is fine, I applaud it. However if they could do this you would expect in umpteen hundred on screen hours to have either seen it happen or at least seen evidence of SF technology that powerful.

As it is we are led to believe that building a ship the size of the Galaxy is perceived as a massive undertaking using the very pinnacle of SF engineering and tech. If they could move starbases at warp then those starbases would cease to be starbases and become vast ships, making the Galaxy seem like a shuttle by comparison and making a lie of the idea that she was the height of SF engineering.

 

[Griffeytrek]

There is evidence of this in the shows. Voth City ships for example. But as MarsWeeps says this is Science Fiction. The corollary being "not Fantasy". Imagination is tempered with Science, and Logic. In SF the rules of "what purpose does it serve" still come into effect. The structures in question are Docks. Which are by definition and function fixed anchor points not intended to wander around the landscape.

Can there be exceptions? Sure as I said the Voth City ship is essentially a mobile version of the Earth Spacedock. It's a fully mobile spacefaring city. Which is a solution for a migratory wholly spaced civilization, no longer settling on planets. The Borg, much the same. But there really is no reason or purpose for any of the primary Federation races to go to such lengths. You don't add mobility to a construction that has no need to move.

Heck back in the day the FASA rule books included a small warp capable folding version of the TMP Drydock for use as a forward repair station for ships during times of war. (The same book as I recall also outlined how the Regula type stations would be towed into place.)

The main question when using imagination to envision future tech in SciFi is "What problem is it solving". And "Is that even actually a problem". Outside of SciFi the best examples of this can be found in the post WW2 technology boom in the US. Look at some of the things built or invented that soon got dropped because at the end of the day they solved no real problems. "Flying Cars" and "Jet Packs" are probably the two best examples, but there are hundreds if not thousands of similar ones in Aerospace alone.

 

[Spot261]

at least seen evidence of SF technology that powerful.

There is evidence of this in the shows. Voth City ships for example

I have a sneaking suspicion you are interpreting SF to mean "sci fi" where I am using it to mean "starfleet". Trek is of course full of starbase sized vessels, just not ones built by starfleet.

 

[Unicron]

There are a few drydock designs (FASA's Pearl class used in the Four Years War, and Jackill's Aztec class) in offscreen material that are warp capable to a limited degree, in order to provide an extra level of support to other bases or ships during war time or other special situations (Aztecs could be loaned to the site of a new shipyard, until enough fixed docks are built). If you're fighting the Klingons and you want to make sure your ships on the frontier can be repaired in time, then sending a mobile drydock to support them is handy. But generally most bases are fixed structures for specific areas. There's also the highly specialized Kentwood class bulk transports from Jackill's reference series, which can transport huge components or even other vessels.

The BattleTech universe originally developed by FASA had two unusual mobile yardship designs, the Newgrange and Faslane classes. They were essentially hybrids with drydock components and traditional capital ship elements.

 

[Captain Rob]

Excuse me. May I wave a finger at this for a moment?
A warp capable starbase would BE a Galaxy class starship.
A base, by definition, would be immovable. If you needed a starbase to move around at warp. Then you need a Galaxy class starship. It could be given temporary duty to act as a temporary starbase over a newly negotiated treaty world and be there until a permanent starbase is constructed. The Galaxy class has all of the features of a starbase. Except that it can move. But it can't handle heavy work on the largest starships. It's main Landing Bay is big enough to house and maintain almost any vessel needed.

 

[publiusr]

Good point.

I remember "billion ton super spacers" low warp capable I think.

In Sternbach's Chronology--they had tugs in a certain type of formation. I liked that.

 

[Spot261]

Excuse me. May I wave a finger at this for a moment?
A warp capable starbase would BE a Galaxy class starship.
A base, by definition, would be immovable. If you needed a starbase to move around at warp. Then you need a Galaxy class starship. It could be given temporary duty to act as a temporary starbase over a newly negotiated treaty world and be there until a permanent starbase is constructed. The Galaxy class has all of the features of a starbase. Except that it can move. But it can't handle heavy work on the largest starships. It's main Landing Bay is big enough to house and maintain almost any vessel needed.

Which is pretty much what happened at Bajor, except SF didn't so much build a station as ferry in a crew for an existing scuppered one.

 

[Paradise City]

Yeah if Star Trek started out with Warp Drive starbases, everyone would think they are perfectly normal. It's funny how people are crucified for daring to suggest something new in a science FICTION show.

I think it's funny when a poster offers mild criticism of a minor aspect of Trek -- in this case the muddled concept of "warp powered" Starbases - some posters get upset and loose their cool.