Hangars and small craft

[Unicron]

For my own curiosity, I'd be interested in reading some other opinions. I've often felt like the typical number of shuttles on a design like the TOS Enterprise seemed a bit small, even with the usefulness of the transporter (when the plot didn't mess it up, anyway ). Given the crew complement, there wouldn't be enough shuttles to evacuate the ship if the transporters were either out of commission or if there was no safe place to beam to.

Some of the Jackill's ships have a fairly large complement of small craft, of various classes, with dedicated carriers like the Dakota naturally having a very large number for colonization and emergency transport. Many other designs, both canon and off-screen, also have a larger contingent of lifeboats and escape pods for evacuation, with many of the Jackill's vessels having turbolifts being optional lifeboats as well.

What do you consider the ideal range for support craft?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

What do you consider the ideal range for support craft?

Obviously, the more Shuttle Craft you can cram in, the better IMO.

With a Standard StarFleet ship design, you can have 2x Large Primary Shuttle Bays:
1) Shuttle Bay 1 = Saucer Shuttle Bay
2) Shuttle Bay 2 = StarDrive Shuttle Bay
Both can house a reasonable # of Shuttles (Shuttle Count will vary by Shuttle Size, YMMV), obviously if you elongate the StarDrive to fill out the Warp Field bubble and have more internal volume for the ship, you can put in more Shuttles as well.

That, and add in more room for Simple AI controlled Drones / Bits to assist the ship at range for combat or defensive or investigative purposes.

One thing ST: Discovery in it's 2nd Season got right was the massive deployment of AI powered Bits/Drones per ship on top of Shuttles / Fighters.

That was the right call for the technological future, the wrong call was fighting a at such close quarters that was basically "Age of Sail" combat distances.

That made ZERO LOGICAL sense!!!

Given the TNG Technical Manual states that Phasers have a range of 300,000 km (That's approximately 1 light-second), you should be fighting close to the edge of that range and be constantly on the move.

There's no reason to be in shooting distance if you start the engagement much further out.

That's why you have Shuttles / Drones / Fighters take the initial engagement at ranges MUCH further out.

We're talking Light-Minutes to Light-Hours away.

If the enemy is further out, harass them with the Drones / Fighters / Long Range Torpedoes until you feel safe to move your ship in to lay on the "Big Artillery / Phasers" to take the target down.

That is the smart / effective strategy that we learned from WW2.

If you don't have to fight at close range and risk the MotherShip for any reason, you shouldn't.
That's fundamentally stupid, that's why despite the fact that the US became a Aircraft Carrier based Navy due to Pearl Harbor, it happened to work out as the perfect Naval Doctrine for the future.

Why fight another ship within Artillery range when you can literallly be several hundred Nautical Miles Away and harassing the enemy.

Same with exploration, if you have a massive Shuttle / Drone / Probe fleet, you park your ship in a nice safe area that is far away and send them all to explore.

 

[Ithekro]

Old TOS accounts have Enterprise have four shuttles. FASA had the ship have a dozen shuttles.

 

[scotpens]

According to TMOST, the Enterprise carries a total of six shuttlecraft.

 

[blssdwlf]

For my own curiosity, I'd be interested in reading some other opinions. I've often felt like the typical number of shuttles on a design like the TOS Enterprise seemed a bit small, even with the usefulness of the transporter (when the plot didn't mess it up, anyway ). Given the crew complement, there wouldn't be enough shuttles to evacuate the ship if the transporters were either out of commission or if there was no safe place to beam to.

What do you consider the ideal range for support craft?

Supposedly the primary hull could be separated but in some extreme circumstances shuttles would've been preferable. For example, in "The Doomsday Machine" the Constellation has no power so separating the saucer section probably made no sense and the ship didn't use any shuttles to abandon ship or go for help which suggests that she might not have been carrying any at the time like the Enterprise in "The Enemy Within". The flight deck looks like it could easily hold 6 shuttles and the hangar deck below could hold another 5. Although I imagine that would trade away cargo space.

 

[Unicron]

I have noted that in some series where many capital ships have a fighter complement, dedicated carrier designs are relatively rare (although one could argue Star Destroyers are in ways kind of a hybrid of several different ship classes ). But that typically only applies to military small craft and not to more general purpose or civilian models like shuttles (which are more likely to be carried in bulk, depending on the ship design and role). Capital ships in Battletech use dropships frequently for transport, since dropships are reliant on jumpships for FTL travel.

The Haynes Millennium Falcon book has some interesting details about how different YT models can be fitted with escape pods and emergency vehicles, depending on what the crew wants to do.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I have noted that in some series where many capital ships have a fighter complement, dedicated carrier designs are relatively rare (although one could argue Star Destroyers are in ways kind of a hybrid of several different ship classes ).

Star Destroyers are kind of unique in that they're a full on mobile military base + battle ship AIO (All-In-One).
You can literally argue that they're Mobile Fortresses if you want to classify them.

But that typically only applies to military small craft and not to more general purpose or civilian models like shuttles (which are more likely to be carried in bulk, depending on the ship design and role). Capital ships in Battletech use dropships frequently for transport, since dropships are reliant on jumpships for FTL travel.

BattleTech is also designed around the giant hulking mechs and need drop ships to get them into Atmosphere.

The Haynes Millennium Falcon book has some interesting details about how different YT models can be fitted with escape pods and emergency vehicles, depending on what the crew wants to do.

YT series are supremely customize-able, they're the Honda Civics / JDM vehicles of the Star Wars Universe, the after market part selection is so large & ridiculous that it's a sub economy in itself.

 

[Victoria]

. Given the crew complement, there wouldn't be enough shuttles to evacuate the ship if the transporters were either out of commission or if there was no safe place to beam to.

Surely that's the purpose of escape pods - to provide sufficient capacity to evacuate the ship.

 

[publiusr]

Probert had expandable enclosures moved via workbee…as opposed to smaller hardshell pods. The largest look to fit in 24th Century Miranda class bays.

 

[Mytran]

Surely that's the purpose of escape pods - to provide sufficient capacity to evacuate the ship.

In TOS those escape pods would still need to be collected after launch though, there's nothing to suggest that compact long range craft of that size existed. This is the type of escape pod described in Mister Scott's Guide To The Enterprise

Supposedly the primary hull could be separated but in some extreme circumstances shuttles would've been preferable. For example, in "The Doomsday Machine" the Constellation has no power so separating the saucer section probably made no sense and the ship didn't use any shuttles to abandon ship or go for help which suggests that she might not have been carrying any at the time like the Enterprise in "The Enemy Within". The flight deck looks like it could easily hold 6 shuttles and the hangar deck below could hold another 5. Although I imagine that would trade away cargo space.

I think even in this case it would be preferable to stay on board ship than launch oneself off into space in a tiny metal box though; the Constellation still had life support, food, resources and more. The Impulse Engines were offline for a while but the repair team soon got them working again. Under different circumstances the saucer could have jettisoned the engineering hull and flown away to safety (or at least stayed put in comfort and sent a distress call)

 

[blssdwlf]

I think even in this case it would be preferable to stay on board ship than launch oneself off into space in a tiny metal box though; the Constellation still had life support, food, resources and more. The Impulse Engines were offline for a while but the repair team soon got them working again. Under different circumstances the saucer could have jettisoned the engineering hull and flown away to safety (or at least stayed put in comfort and sent a distress call)

Yeah, in my imagination I figured the reason the Decker abandoned the Constellation instead of staying on it was that he assumed it would crash into the planet as it had no power and probably could not maintain orbit for long. Otherwise it would seem much more preferable to stay in the saucer.

 

[valkyrie013]

Shuttles aren't meant to be Emergency escape vehicles for ALL the crew (Kelvin withstanding.. )
There designed as support craft. so 4 for the Tos Enterprise is fine. You'd only use them if there was a need, say go into a system, and something interesting going on in a nearby system, or want a closer look at another planet while the main ship studies another. Or if Transporters are down.

For emergency's, there is enough escape pods for the crew + with enough propellant to get you out of a danger area (hopefully). After the ejection, shuttles would "Coral" the pods and link them up, and tow them to safety.

Now, this is why you have procedures to eject the warp core, or antimatter pods, You really DON"T want to abandon a ship, even if it was 30% functional thats still better than a cramp pod. and for longevity, some ships are weeks away from any other ship, so you need to survive for awhile, like the Stargazer.

As for Drones, fighters. Its a matter of Power. I've always thought that the shields of a Trek ship couldn't be penetrated by low powered weapons. Case in point the number of times the Ent D came across ships that posed no tactical threat. Shuttles and fighters don't have a large enough reactor to pump out the Jiga watts needed to power a phaser powerfull enough to make a difference. Only thought is if it carries full sized torpedos, but due to the size, not many can be equpied.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

As for Drones, fighters. Its a matter of Power. I've always thought that the shields of a Trek ship couldn't be penetrated by low powered weapons. Case in point the number of times the Ent D came across ships that posed no tactical threat. Shuttles and fighters don't have a large enough reactor to pump out the Jiga watts needed to power a phaser powerfull enough to make a difference. Only thought is if it carries full sized torpedos, but due to the size, not many can be equpied.

Until the Dominion War Era came about and "Fighter Craft" + Small Reactor + Batteries became viable =D

Remember, that the Defiant had a Warp Core that was WAY too powerful for a ship of it's size.

The same could probably be applied to fighters / shuttle craft, shove in reactors that are way too powerful for it's relative meager size / volume.

Add in some Batteries that can store a excessive amount of energy like the CEM (Condensed Energy Matrix) that allowed a Torpedo to travel many light years to it's target and be competitive with the USS Voyager.

A battery that compact that can contain that much energy would be a game changer for so many reasons.

And the USS Voyager scanned the shit out of that Torpedo in the episode "WarHead".

 

[blssdwlf]

Until the Dominion War Era came about and "Fighter Craft" + Small Reactor + Batteries became viable =D

Remember, that the Defiant had a Warp Core that was WAY too powerful for a ship of it's size.

The same could probably be applied to fighters / shuttle craft, shove in reactors that are way too powerful for it's relative meager size / volume.

Add in some Batteries that can store a excessive amount of energy like the CEM (Condensed Energy Matrix) that allowed a Torpedo to travel many light years to it's target and be competitive with the USS Voyager.

A battery that compact that can contain that much energy would be a game changer for so many reasons.

And the USS Voyager scanned the shit out of that Torpedo in the episode "WarHead".

There is still a pecking order on power output and size.

A "fighter" the size of a Runabout doesn't put out the same power as a "fighter" the size of a Jem-hedar bug/Klingon BOP.

That is demonstrated in the Dominion War. A Runabout has no chance against a Jem-hedar bug. A Klingon BOP is a match for a Jem-hedar bug. The Defiant is more than a match for a Klingon BOP but it isn't against the Lakota.

I do think you are right in that power systems have advanced enough post-Dominion War that they can be much smaller yet safely output the same amount of power an older and larger ship.

 

[Unicron]

Surely that's the purpose of escape pods - to provide sufficient capacity to evacuate the ship.

Right, but at least for TOS it's never mentioned whether other small craft existed besides the basic shuttlecraft. Most later Trek eras seem to accommodate having generally enough for a full evacuation. It just seems to me like having a larger shuttle complement is generally better (which is always one reason I like that the Jackill's vessels usually have a range of models, not just a single type) in case you can't rely on transporters.

As for Drones, fighters. Its a matter of Power. I've always thought that the shields of a Trek ship couldn't be penetrated by low powered weapons. Case in point the number of times the Ent D came across ships that posed no tactical threat. Shuttles and fighters don't have a large enough reactor to pump out the Jiga watts needed to power a phaser powerfull enough to make a difference. Only thought is if it carries full sized torpedos, but due to the size, not many can be equpied.

I think generally, small craft and fighters aren't a threat against a single capital ship unless you have a lot of them, they have support from bigger friendly units (like other capital ships or orbital defenses), and/or the target might have already taken damage from another source. The Maquis fleet that hit Gul Evek's ship in "Preemptive Strike" would be one example, and the Federation fighters in "Sacrifice of Angels" seemed to be getting a few lucky hits in even though they were mainly trying to goad the enemy fleet into splitting up.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

There is still a pecking order on power output and size.

A "fighter" the size of a Runabout doesn't put out the same power as a "fighter" the size of a Jem-hedar bug/Klingon BOP.

That is demonstrated in the Dominion War. A Runabout has no chance against a Jem-hedar bug. A Klingon BOP is a match for a Jem-hedar bug. The Defiant is more than a match for a Klingon BOP but it isn't against the Lakota.

I do think you are right in that power systems have advanced enough post-Dominion War that they can be much smaller yet safely output the same amount of power an older and larger ship.

You have to remember that when one of Voyager's Shuttles was used to re-take back Voyager, it's damage output was notice-able, but not amazing.

That's why you have Super Energy Dense batteries like the CEM (Condensed Energy Matrix) to help power weapons and other systems.

They offer a short-term High Energy Output that could make you a threat to a StarShip, especially in groups of StarFightes / Shuttles.

This gives you a form of Super Battery to store all that excess energy for combat.

 

[Henoch]

Old TOS accounts have Enterprise have four shuttles.

According to TMOST, the Enterprise carries a total of six shuttlecraft.

TOS-The Galileo Seven: Enterprise carried only two shuttlecraft at the time; Galileo and Columbus.
TOS-The Omega Glory: Exeter carried four shuttlecraft at the time.
TMOST: Starships like the Enterprise and Exeter can carry six shuttlecraft, though there's no on-screen evidence for Enterprise ever carrying six shuttlecraft, at least until TAS.
ST-V, TFF: Enterprise-A carried two shuttlecraft at the time.

During TOS, it seems that Starfleet has a persistent shortage of shuttlecraft.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

During TOS, it seems that Starfleet has a persistent shortage of shuttlecraft.

The days when there was no "Industrial Replicator / Assembley Arm" to make a new shuttle for you.

You had to go back to Starbase and wait for them to deliver one to you.

 

[Mres_was_framed!]

The dark triangular shapes on the bottom of the TOS saucer might be doors, as there are cargo bay doors located there on the 1701D and NX01. More specifically, I suggest that those bays could be used for the entrance and exit of travel pods, and not just cargo. That would explain how it can be that there is no shuttlebay on classes like the Saladin and Ptolemy: smaller less independent craft could use those doors for ingress/egress and be able to manipulate the cargo also. So basically a TOS ship could hold about as many craft as you feel you can squeeze into those decks.

This helps to be used a basis for explaining away the "B Deck" engineering line. If Deck, which could be open to hold small craft, is renumbers and Deck 1, then Engineering would be on "B" Deck, two decks above Deck 1.

 

[Unicron]

Jackill suggested that designs like the Saladin and other smaller vessels could use retractable elevator style sections for launching small craft, similar to how the runabout bays on DS9 work. The idea has also shown up in some other fan works dealing with those classes.