Multi-Vector Assault Mode divides the ship into 3 tactical cruisers: the Primary, Secondary and Tertiary. Is there a consensus on which one is which? Because I've seen them in these configurations: 1 Saucer Section (Primary)- CMDR: CAPT 2 Middle (Secondary) - CMDR: XO 3 Bottom (Tertiary) - CMDR: 2nd Officer or 3 Saucer Section (Tertiary) - CMDR: 2nd Officer 1 Middle (Primary) - CMDR: CAPT 2 Bottom (Secondary) - CMDR: XO The latter actually makes more sense to me, since those would be the more powerful battle cruisers, while crew quarters are on the saucer section, to make a hasty departure from danger. But since it's not populated with civilians, maybe that's a moot point and it would stay and fight. Personally I tend towards the second config, but this is just one of many conflicting standards relating to this class. Others: The existence of holodeck(s) or lab(s). (I say one HD, couple of labs) Astrometrics vs Stellar Cartography (AM - a la Voyager) 3 core system - are they separated or integrated. ("Tricore"; integrated, but seperable). If Voyager was 345m long, and Prometheus 414m long, wouldn't it stand to reason that it would have not only the same facilities available on Voyager, but also some extras too? (or maybe that's taken up by MVAM systems, weapons and storage). Opinions? Synthehol's on me.
It's not really one of those things that's established canonly. The listings above that you list are from role playing games - I've read the same pages for some - and they're just based on fan theory. As for who commands which section it'd probably be up to the Captain where he sent who and it'd probably change. Features would probably be different because the Prometheus was meant to be a warship (akin to Defiant) whereas Voyager is a light explorer (a smaller version of the Galaxy Class).
Maybe the Prometheus is like the Soviet K-19 "Widowmaker" submarine: it has three captains stationed aboard. No kidding! If Prometheus is to make sense as a serious three-starships-in-one, why not? The one issue I have with Prometheus is that not all three "ships" are equal. The "top" third seems pretty weak-looking, like some kind of escape ship. If you wanted a serious three-ships-in-one design, all three "ships" would have to be pretty much the same in terms of capacities, engines, weapons, etc. As it stands, 1+1+1 does not equal three with Prometheus. It looks more like 1/2 + 1/2 + 1/3. Prometheus made me laugh. In the early 1990's, years before VOY's "Message in a Bottle", I came up with a concept for a post-TNG "Tomorrow's Enterprise" type ship. It looked like a highly evolved Galaxy-class vessel. The stardrive section was very similar to the TNG Galaxy, but the saucer was very different. it was somewhat bulkier, and it split into two hemispheres, upper and lower. Each hemisphere-hull had built-in full-size warp nacelles, kinda like a cross between a Galaxy and a Defiant in terms of shape. The design was meant to be a successor to the Galaxy-class, like a "Galaxy II", where the three sets of warp engines that could alternately fire when rigged for sustained high-warp flight to maintain a higher top speed for a much longer period of time. Each "third" of a ship could operate independently for long periods of time, either exploring or for combat or other missions. So, you would really have three starships in one. Kinda makes poor Prometheus look lame.
I just posted some drawings of my Enterprise-H multi-vector, triple-hulled starship, over in the Trek Art forum.
It would depend on what kind of combat you entering into. In sublight only combat the top section might have the advantage, that section being the smallest (small target) and lowest mass (fast turns). The top has the smallest warp engines too and may not achieve the same top speed as the other sections. If you're carrying important passagers or cargo, the lower section possess both full size warp engines and the only full size deflector of the three sections, the best section to run away while the other two sections cover the withdraw. The captain should keep her best people together, instead of breaking up her tactical team. When possible commanding all three sections as a small fleet with middle level officers commanding the other sections. In the first episode of TNG Picard left Lt.(jg) Worf in charge of the saucer when he seperated the Enterprise, instead of leaving Data behind. Wingsley, fine design. Can't help thinking how cool if that ship had been the Enterprise Kirk saw in dry-dock during ST-TMP.
I don't think it splits into 3 cruisers. It splits into 2 little frigates and a corvette. Galaxy/Sovereign/Defiant would probably wipe the asteroid field with it.
One could argue that the ship is intended to split into a command section and two combat drones. After all, when the Romulans separated her, all of them stayed in the same place, on the same bridge: there was never any suggestion that all three hulls were crewed. If so, it seems clear that the top section is the drone command center; it has the smallest engines and is the odd one out in terms of shape and size anyway. The drone command section can fight, too, with both phasers and torpedoes, but it probably still is approved doctrine to first attack with the two drones and keep the command section as a rear guard. Makes at least some sense IMHO. A ship that splits three ways is just an exotic curio. A ship that can go to battle without risking the lives of UFP citizens is a real technological breakthrough. And if one wants to carry to battle a couple of drones that are big enough to make a difference, one could just as well enlist their help on the route to the battle as well, by integrating them into a joint propulsive system for the combat unit. The ship probably does have two very distinct "modes". When in one piece, she is a true starship, with people scurrying about everywhere and making use of the shuttle hangar in one of the combat drones and the tractor laboratories in another and so forth. When split three ways, the ship becomes a pure war machine, two-thirds uncrewed, and the shuttlebay and labs are completely abandoned; she ceases to be a ship, or even three little ships, and becomes a robotic weapon instead. Timo Saloniemi
Well maybe not Galaxy but a Prometheus held its own against several Romulan Warbirds and even destroyed one, in Message in a Bottle. Albeit 3 against 1. And the warbird is equivalent to a Galaxy, except it has more firepower, and a slower top speed, which was not an issue in that fight. [ref: http://kitsune.addr.com/SF-Conversions/Rifts-Trek-Ships/Romulan_Warbird.htm ] Thanks everyone for your input, every poster has really been helpful. Wingsley that's a cool concept ship! Be nice to see it in a mesh form. So here's what I'm thinking: The Enterprise D separated into 2, the primary and secondary, or battle cruiser. So they had the luxury of putting the second officer in command of the saucer section while the main bridge crew stuck together, as T'Girl mentions. So using the D as the trendsetter, a Prometheus may not always have the luxury of keeping the command crew intact, since it has an additional section. It might be reasonable to assign that to the first officer or chief engineer. Given the custom of naming the saucer section the primary hull, I'd bet it would still hold true for a Prometheus class. So in my idea, it would run: Primary (saucer)- CMDR: 2nd officer Secondary (middle)- CMDR: CAPT (& 1st officer) Tertiary (bottom)- CMDR: 1st officer / (Chief Engineer) Giving the saucer section the option of beating a retreat. Of course, like nx1701g says, there may be varying configurations of command depending on the tactical situation. They may need more maneuvering at sublight, or they may need longer distances for a chase, or to protect a delegation. I'd say it's captain's prerogative depending on the situation. Given its automated capabilities it's even conceivable everyone could stay on one cruiser and the others operate by remote, as Timo suggests (and it pays to listen to Timo!). And then of course each cruiser would have its own engineering section so you'd have to divide that department up.
I would say that the rank and positioning of the officers depends on what "kind of starship" the Prometheus (or my Massena) would ultimately become as part of the Federation fleet. If either of these ships were more than just a prototype, and an actual class of space vessels of this type were to be commissioned, how would the class be classified? "Multi-hulled battlecruiser"? "Multi-frigate"? Quite a bit would depend on how the ship would be used. My Massena was meant to function both ways, as a consolidated uber-Galaxy-class jumbo explorer/battlecruiser, and as each hull operating either independently or quasi-independently. The whole ship is so big, and each hull is actually like its own light cruiser ( each probably having superior capacity over Kirk's Enterprise) that it's possible that a full commander or captain could be assigned to each hull as its "watch skipper", while the whole consolidated ship would be overseen by either a captain or a commodore. So it is possible that there could be as many as four captains aboard such a ship, but I would expect it to be more likely that there would be three commanders and maybe only one captain or commodore. Keep in mind it all depends on how you would envision that ship "working". Do the hull separate and operate independently a significant portion of the flight time, or is separation a once-in-a-blue-moon thing, like with the TNG Galaxy-class?
Just for the record, each section of the Prometheus has all the basic features of modern Starfleet ships, which is evident clearly in Rick's final concept art. Although the final Prometheus mesh was on par with Voyager's "hero" mesh (i.e. a pile of deformed garbage), most of those features are still alluded to, if not properly textured or modeled. I just want to avoid stupid statements like "The bottom hull doesn't have a bridge," "The saucer doesn't have a deflector," or "There are no torpedo launchers!"
Indeed. However, even the original plans feature impulse engines that blast straight into the front ends of the warp engines... A somewhat strange arrangement which is nevertless present in many starships, regardless of their designer (Prometheus, Enterprise-B, Steamrunner, Class Y freighter, etc). Another case of Homer asleep at the wheel, or a deliberate statement against impulse engines being rockets? I wonder... Did the model builders know in advance which angles of the ship would be used for shooting? The remarkable lack of ventral detailing is justified by the way the ship was shot, after all. Timo Saloniemi
Right. According to Rick the only exception it would seem is that the secondary hull had the shuttle bay. Unfortunately they weren't so clear on interior facilities, as in whether each hull was complete. Three bridges, sure. Three warp cores. But three sickbays? Holodecks? Mess halls? Etc. I'm thinking, multipurpose or convertable rooms. Otherwise it's a pretty good waste of space, or personnel overkill. Of course that might be where the holos come in. Great responses, guys, I for one am learning a lot.
Well having 3 sickbays might be true. If you have a look at the prometheus's sickbay, it's tiny. They only have 1 bio bed, and would be the worst sickbay in starfleet if not for it's advanced tech. I mean come on, even the defiant sickbay managed to put in 3 bio beds.
^ That might have been the bio bed in the examination room with a medical ward in another compartment. Unless the second and third sections of the ship are in fact robot warships commanded from a single bridge, then all the basic facilities would be present in all the sections. The small first section might be mostly engines and weapons, but would also contain the living quarters, a mess hall and a sickbay for the crew assigned to that section when seperated. The larger two sections might have holo decks, cargo holds, gymnasiums, transporters, shuttle and so forth.
Yeah that would of been my first guess, but ive seen the pic of the sick bay and there isnt much to sugest there is anything else to the room.
There would almost have to be separate facilities at some level. Take the sickbay discussed above. If the section that has sickbay in it blows up, then there is no backup sickbay. Probably a mixture of actually rooms and holodecks with real doctors manning the sickbay (with backup by the good EMH).
It all breaks down to MVAM as presented on the show is not as effective as just building 3 ships. Breaking 1 ship into equal parts just does not make sense tactically. Now, what would work is something that could be held in the shuttlebay. Something the size of a runabout but unmanned and stuffed to the gills with weapons.
I would think that an even better strategy would be to use the undercut on the aft-underside of a starship's secondary hull as a kind of docking port to "piggy back" a Defiant-class "escort". If a large starship class like the Galaxy or Sovereign did this, it would be like assigning a Marine detachment to a mothership. I've long been in favor of this idea. I suppose the notion of MVAM ships depends on what the strategy is behind the design. The Prometheus, as presented, looked like a cobbled-together, convoluted folly. A "Starship Edsel", if you will. If the whole purpose of designing and building Prometheus was to do what it did in "Message In a Bottle", then the whole exercise was a waste. But if Prometheus was a testbed for a new family of multi-hulled starships built to do something truly compelling, like extend the range of exploration and give a deep-space exploration cruiser some serious built-in redundancy and tactical capabilities like what I proposed with the Massena, then the concept makes a great deal of sense. A TNG-era Federation that could build a Galaxy-class and a Defiant-class could be seen building a Massena as well. That's my take on it, anyway.