• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

In universe... Why would Romulans need Klingon ship designs?

Why is it so hard to believe that the Romulans had improved their cloaking device since "Balance of Terror"?
I believe it because it happened. I appreciated the balances and consequences of being invisible. The Klingon ship was equivalent to a Starship Class, by giving it a cloak with improvements it would be invincible. Knowing what I know of Klingons I doubt they would form an alliance with anyone; instead would occupy the Romulans.

You don't feel there should be highs and lows of strategic weaponry in Star Trek?
 
...What alliance, though?

No, there is no LaForge mention of such in TNG, or any mention in any other spinoff. There is an exchange in "Reunion" where Riker is worried about a "new" alliance, but no confirmation that this would have been preceded by an "old" one - new in the sense of recently introduced would fit the bill just as well.

In contrast, every other mention of Romulans vs. Klingons, including in the TOS movies, indicates great hostility between the players, extending back to the mists of time. As does LaForge's contribution to the above discussion...

Timo Saloniemi
 
So the Romulans stole the ship designs from the Klingons. I'd buy that then some faux alliance between the two.
 
I'd also prefer to think the Romulans didn't steal (buy, exchange, whatever) just the D7 but a broad range of Klingon designs (and other hardware) during their centuries of conflict. It's for specific reasons (pure chance, tactical deployment patterns, whatever) that our heroes here happen upon D7s specifically, and not a mix of D5s and D8s, or a pair of Arkonian or Kinshaya war prizes or whatever.

That is, any investigation into why the Romulans would be using Klingon ships is severely misled if one just compares the D7 to the Praetor's newest flagship and tries to see the explanation hidden in their technical specs.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Sorry if this has been broached, has the idea been put out there that the Klingons never designed their own ships?

To me, the DSC Klingon ships could be leftover Hur'q ships, or at least based on those ancient designs. Some of them still have the long neck and fat head design, which might ruin the rest of my theory.

Then the later Klingon ships we see from ENT, TOS, TNG & DS9 are all fairly bird-like in their style. Why would the Klingons make ships that resemble birds? The movie & TNG BoP fit this style the most.

The Romulan ships outside of the BoT BoP were somewhat similar in that they had a long neck and fat head. Really we only saw the D'Deridex and the scout ship/shuttle on DS9, but there's a certain style lineage there.

Even though there are Klingon scientists and poets and scholars, they're a warrior race that probably doesn't put a lot of thought into ship design as such.

Even the earliest Klingon ships could have been designs either bought or stolen from the Romulans. Then the Klingons could reverse engineer from those. I could certainly see them being able to manage that much.

In fact, most or all of of the ships we saw were bird-like in their design, which is really more of a Romulan thing.
 
Maybe allowing them to steal a ship to emulate to think that they are superior or just as good but have it be a way to sabotage them or at least keep them in check as per the unified alliance against the Federation. Or bad guys using other bad guys tech.
 
Calling the ships "birds" of assorted feather may be a purely Vulcan thing. Its Vulcans who teach the terms "Warbird" and "Raptor" to our ENT heroes, after all.

But building flying things that look like birds would probably be pretty universal. Those with imagination, resources and a flair for aesthetics would go for bird shapes in their spacecraft just because. Those without would simply stick to that which works - that is, the flying machines that first took them to space, bird-shaped by necessity of physics.

Why humans abandon wings and lifting bodies after ENT and go for saucers is not well established... They just stand out of the obvious crowd. Which is the point, I guess.

Timo Saloniemi
 
...What alliance, though?

No, there is no LaForge mention of such in TNG, or any mention in any other spinoff. There is an exchange in "Reunion" where Riker is worried about a "new" alliance, but no confirmation that this would have been preceded by an "old" one - new in the sense of recently introduced would fit the bill just as well.

Relevant quotes:

"Reunion":
Worf: "The Duras family is corrupt and hungry for power... with no sense of honor or loyalty. They represent a grave threat to the security of the Federation. Captain, you and I know that they have conspired with Romulans in the past. If they should be the victors in this war, they will surely form a new Klingon/Romulan alliance. That would represent a fundamental shift of power in this quadrant. Starfleet must support Gowron...it is in the interests of both the Federation and the Empire. I beg you to support us in our cause."

"Redemption Pt. 2":

Geordi: "Klingons and Romulans working together? They've been blood enemies for seventy-five years.

Picard: "Perhaps Duras or Gowron wishes to improve that relationship."

Riker: "A new Klingon alliance with the Romulans?"

Data: "If true, it would represent a fundamental shift of power in the quadrant."

The fact the the word "new" was used on two separate occasions to describe a possible alliance, and Geordi's comment about the two powers being enemies for seventy-five years (implying that seventy-six-plus years ago they were not enemies, which also coincides with when "The Enterprise Incident" takes place), it's pretty obvious that the intent was that there was indeed a Klingon/Romulan alliance during TOS.
 
Last edited:
Worf is speaking of specific recent past alliances he has personally been victimized by, though - and merely positing new entries in the long list of Duras sins. Conflating that with LaForge's specifics seems uncalled for.

If anything, three quarters of a century before the events would take us to the time of TUC and the three-power cabal there. And we know Klingons and Romulans fought each other before that, as Kor boasts on slaying them pointy-ears around the time of ST:TMP.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Worf is speaking of specific recent past alliances he has personally been victimized by, though - and merely positing new entries in the long list of Duras sins. Conflating that with LaForge's specifics seems uncalled for.

No he isn't. He practically says the exact same thing Geordi, Picard, Riker and Data are saying. He even apes Data's comment almost word for word.

If anything, three quarters of a century before the events would take us to the time of TUC and the three-power cabal there. And we know Klingons and Romulans fought each other before that, as Kor boasts on slaying them pointy-ears around the time of ST:TMP.

Which is why I said seventy-six-plus years.
 
Last edited:
I believe it because it happened. I appreciated the balances and consequences of being invisible.
I wasn't debating the Romulan cloaking device having limitations. I was debating your apparent belief that it should have the exact same limitations that it had in "Balance of Terror," two seasons before.
You don't feel there should be highs and lows of strategic weaponry in Star Trek?
Again, not what I was saying at all.
 
It's a win-win in the end: the "old" cloak is a relatively weak weapon, while the dialogue of "Incident" establishes a "new" cloak that is frighteningly potent, which is exactly what the plot requires, intentional or not.

DSC makes the further point of showing how Starfleet is familiar with invisibility and other visual trickery as a thing (as established in pretty much every show), and merely surprised at seeing specific technologies find their way to the hand of specific villains - and how the Klingons in the mid-2250s get the exact same sort of crappy cloaks the Romulans in the mid-2260s gained, the ones that only fool the naked eye and complicate the job of the targeting scanner but can't keep the other sensors from telling the heroes where the enemy goes.

No he isn't. He practically says the exact same thing Geordi, Picard, Riker and Data are saying. He even apes Data's comment almost word for word.

Umm, Worf is specifically speaking about how the House of Duras working in cahoots with Romulans has caused him and his crewmates personal grief. Whether his subsequent musing about a "new alliance" should be considered more general is quite open to debate, then - especially as such a putative alliance would once again be a Duras thing specifically and exclusively (only with Empire-wide consequences now if Duras gets to lead).

The later Observation Lounge discussion is on the more general level from the get-go. It can be conflated with what Worf says. But it need not be.

Which is why I said seventy-six-plus years.

Which still doesn't help, since the Romulan-Klingon enmity is an on-off thing by the TUC token (unless the senile Kor was misremembering his dates when referring to hot pre-TUC animosity). If LaForge wanted to refer to an alliance during TOS, why round out to 75 years when the even rounder 100 years is more accurate and more appropriate for both the earliest and latest possible date for such an alliance?

Of course, LaForge is implying something odd anyway. Klingons and Romulans have indeed been blood enemies for the past 75 years, from what one can tell. Despite this, they have worked together to sinister goals, as LaForge very well knows. So why bring up the fact that these repeat offenders hate each other's guts, as if that somehow mattered? Conversely, back in the pre-75-yrs days, did the Klingons and Romulans not hate each other when alternately fighting and (allegedly) helping out each other? Why not? How not?

Timo Saloniemi
 
Feel free to interpret stuff in your own unique way. I stand by what I wrote based on a logical interpretation of the dialogue.
 
Oh, my point above is very much to dispute the validity of your logic. As regards what Worf is saying, that is. The resulting interpretation is a separate matter, and can go whichever way.

That Worf is discussing his personal history with Duras, rather than some galactic abstractions, should not be in dispute, not semantically nor in terms of plot logic.

Timo Saloniemi
 
I stand by what I wrote based on a logical interpretation of the dialogue.
I agree with you. The clincher is the line, "They've been blood enemies for seventy-five years." If they weren't something other than enemies immediately prior to that, then there would be no point in pinning it down to seventy-five years, give or take. By the way, that line occurs in "Reunion."

Moreover, as you said, that time is proximate to the events of "The Enterprise Incident." That's clear support for the position that they were allies at the time of TEI, for however brief a period.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top