A Theoretical Physics Question

[dgguy2006]

I have an Idea for a new M.V.A.M. Starfleet vessel. This vessel will separate into 4 sub-vessels. The dorsal and ventral sections will be identical in exterior/interior design and layout. My question is: Would current Starfleet technology (as relates to environmental control) allow the ship to invert artificial gravity at the horizontal center-line? I am imagining spheroid turbo-lift cars that are capable of reorienting to the correct gravitational plane as they cross the inversion point. Therefore, when separation occurs, the twin sections (as well as their own, smaller sub-vessels) can orient on the same relative spatial plane and appear to be identical vessels. According to some capabilities of the U.S.S. Titan from the recent novels, it seems this would be possible. Thoughts?

 

[BillJ]

I always thought the MVAM (multi vehicle assault mode) was pretty much a useless idea. When a ship breaks into a 'war machine' and 'lifeboat' that makes sense as they have two distinct functions. But breaking a ship into multiple pieces for combat just doesn't make sense. You have to crew it with multiple capable command crews to work each component when the ship is in MVAM mode. Then you have to give it multiple components (warp drive, impulse engines, phaser banks and torpedo launchers) to allow each separate entity to survive independently in the event one or more is destroyed.

Just build multiple starships.

 

[AstroSmurf]

This would probably receive more useful posts in the Trek Tech Forum.

Moving now...

 

[dgguy2006]

Sorry for posting to the wrong thread... Forum noobs r us...

 

[dgguy2006]

I always thought the MVAM (multi vehicle assault mode) was pretty much a useless idea. When a ship breaks into a 'war machine' and 'lifeboat' that makes sense as they have two distinct functions. But breaking a ship into multiple pieces for combat just doesn't make sense. You have to crew it with multiple capable command crews to work each component when the ship is in MVAM mode. Then you have to give it multiple components (warp drive, impulse engines, phaser banks and torpedo launchers) to allow each separate entity to survive independently in the event one or more is destroyed.

Just build multiple starships.

I can certainly understand your point, and can not truly argue against it, at least under normal circumstances. However, I do feel that with a certain amount of autonomous functionality the crewing requirements would be greatly decreased. And it was my thought that, while often used in a combat setting, M.V.A.M. would be highly effective for vessels assigned to deep exploration, allowing quicker and more thorough investigative powers.

 

[dgguy2006]

Upon further consideration, I feel that BillJ is correct. Perhaps the twin hulls could serve different purposes. One could be a survey/exploration vessel, while the other could be the "battle" section. The two smaller sub-vessels may be extraneous. Although they might serve as emergency escape vehicles, designed to house crew only, with minimal capabilities. Something to think about. Thanks for the food for thought, Bill.

 

[dgguy2006]

Getting back to my original question: Would current Starfleet technology (as relates to environmental control) allow the ship to invert artificial gravity between one deck and the next?

 

[JoeFromEarth]

I don't see why not. It'd be no different than having two starships in a similar position (didn't they do something like this on Enterprise?)

Also having a ship separate into separate ships could be very useful in combat. Your giving the enemy multiple targets, plus there long-range sensors will only think one ship is in the area.

 

[DonIago]

I was under the impression that in MVAM one or more sections were either fully or largely automated...note that both times we see MVAM initiated a specific attack pattern is specified. If the sub-ships were crewed this would seem to be unnecessary.

 

[SWHouston]

dgg,

I don't think it's an issue of how many components there are, but the collective mass of a vessel like that, may be a little chunky, given the redundancy of necessary equipment.

Good idea though on the Gravitational opposites, I'm thinking that when used properly, the components could separate rather quickly. Surprise, diversification and a quick attack, would be advantageous.

But all in all, Akira has that covered for the most point. It is rather simple to have a Launch Bay, and just burp out some Defiant or smaller Fighter size vessels.

So, I'd rate this...
Application: Ummm so so.
Concept: GREAT !

So, why not focus on the Concept...
What else could one do with highly controllable Gravitational Fields ?

Have a good Day !
S.W.

 

[T'Girl]

My question is: Would current Starfleet technology (as relates to environmental control) allow the ship to invert artificial gravity at the horizontal center-line?

As I understand the way the artificial gravity work, yes. The system pull you down onto whatever section of decking you're standing above. All the decks do not have to be parallel to each other.

you have to give it multiple components (warp drive, impulse engines, phaser banks and torpedo launchers) to allow each separate entity to survive independently in the event one or more is destroyed.

Each of the four sections would possess it's own bridge, engineering, life support, medical and weapons, however all the other facilities that a starship must also possess, living quarters, flight deck, storage holds, replicators, science labs, etc. can be divided among the four sections or only be present in one section.

Just build multiple starships.

Where the four part MVAM ship has the advantage over four individual ships is when separated the different sections each only carry a portion of the non-combat "bulk" into battle, the four individual ships each have lug into combat everything that make for a full starship, the MVAM ship only needs everything when it's joined.

You have to crew it with multiple capable command crews to work each component when the ship is in MVAM mode.

There's no need for each section to be "fully"crewed. The MVAM ship in Voyager demonstrated that sections can perform with no crew at all and while I believe that in most separated combat scenarios there would be a command/medical/engineering/damage control crew in each section, this wouldn't always be the case. In some tactical situations two or three sections might be employed in a "suicide mode" penetrating a enemy formation without any expectation of getting all the unmanned sections back (if you do, so much the better). The various sections can most likely join with with whatever other sections survives combat directly if necessary.

Again, the different sections would usually carry a crew into battle.

 

[Timo]

Each of the four sections would possess it's own bridge, engineering, life support, medical and weapons

But the Prometheus sections apparently didn't. Only one sickbay was used and implied, and there was no crew in the sections that separated to fight the Bonchune.

Indeed, the big plus of a separating ship would be that her various components can be maintained and repaired by crew during combined flight, but can fight without risking any lives during separated flight.

Just sending out droneships from Starbase 123 would mean that they may suffer engine breakdowns en route, or may arrive with outdated intelligence and can't think smartly enough to adapt to the new circumstances. But sending these drones aboard a crewed carrier eliminates those problems - and making the drones larger than the carrier is a sensible move, because big drones with big engines and big guns are likelier to score victories.

And yeah, gravity should be freely adjustable, in direction as well as strength: we have seen that side-by-side rooms can have different gravity settings... If anything from one gee to zero gee is possible, why not from zero gee to minus one gee, too?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[dgguy2006]

Thanks for all the great responses, guys! I have to rethink the mission parameters, based upon your input, though now I am thinking about a through-deck flight bay on at least one of the sections. By the way, does anyone know a good schematic artist? I will soon be scanning some penciled interior sketches that i would like to see made more professional. If you know someone that does commissions, please PM me. Thanks!

 

[sojourner]

Where the four part MVAM ship has the advantage over four individual ships is when separated the different sections each only carry a portion of the non-combat "bulk" into battle, the four individual ships each have lug into combat everything that make for a full starship, the MVAM ship only needs everything when it's joined.

This is bad math. assuming both sets of four are relative in size, they both have to carry facilities for the same amount of crew. If the MVAM ship carries 100 crew and the 4 single ships each carry 25 crew, it still adds up to facilities for 100 crew total. Now, you could make the MVAM units unequal in size. Have one be the "mother" so to speak. but in that case, just build a carrier for a couple Defiant class ships and be done with it.

MVAM as a ship design is stupid.
MVAM as a tactic is smart. (which can be achieved with any group of ships)

 

[T'Girl]

MVAM as a ship design is stupid.

Considering the "MVAM" attack by the separated Enterprise Dee upon the Borg cube in The Best of Both Worlds that resulted in the rescue of Captain Picard, apparently not all that stupid.

 

[T'Girl]

But the Prometheus sections apparently didn't. Only one sickbay was used and implied

While perhaps each section would not possess a full sick bay, there would only be one of those, it would seem to make sense that each section would have a emergency room/clinic arrangement, to handle combat casualties.

In both The Making of Star Trek and in the FJ blueprints the Enterprise Prime had a second smaller sick bay down in the engineering section.

 

[dgguy2006]

It would seem to be more efficient to have full facilities on the fully crewed primary section, and only small essential facilities on the sections with minimal crew.

While at first I thought a true twin-hull vessel would be very cool looking, after all the discussion about it, it would make more sense to have one large fully crewed section, with 2-3 additional smaller sections with minimal crew requirements at all. This design would also lend itself to more traditional Starfleet ship styles, I suppose.

 

[BillJ]

MVAM as a ship design is stupid.

Considering the "MVAM" attack by the separated Enterprise Dee upon the Borg cube in The Best of Both Worlds that resulted in the rescue of Captain Picard, apparently not all that stupid.

But it wasn't why it was designed that way. The reason why the plan worked was because Riker knew the Borg would ignore the saucer, based on the knowledge of what the saucer was when extracted from Picard. Riker was using it in a way that wasn't intended by the designers.

The Borg wouldn't ignore the saucer a second time and they wouldn't ignore the sub-components of something like the Prometheus.

 

[sojourner]

MVAM as a ship design is stupid.

Considering the "MVAM" attack by the separated Enterprise Dee upon the Borg cube in The Best of Both Worlds that resulted in the rescue of Captain Picard, apparently not all that stupid.

You did read the sentence directly below the one you quoted from me? I said the tactic was smart. As a ship design, it's stupid.

 

[The Inquisitor]

I don't necessarily think MVAM is a stupid idea. I understand the argument against but also think there are some fairly strong arguments for.

Firstly, it was designed to be piloted by minimal crew for the soul purpose of combat (it can be piloted by a mere 4 personnel if i remember correctly). Such a vessel would not require the perks and facilities of a mainline exploration starship (holodecks, science facilities etc.). Also, its high degree of automation also negates the need for a large crew. The less crew on board the less space and energy required to accommodate them.

Generally speaking the more opponents you face the lower your chance of victory. History dictates that if you are surrounded you are effectively stuffed (take any major European war from the Napoleonic to WW2). Having a ship that splits into 3 just gives you more options in a fight and options are always a bonus in a crisis.

I should imagine the extra surface area exposed after MVAM is initiated would be a bonus due to previously hidden phaser strips being exposed and added to the already formidable arsenal.

Either way, I will search for a more Prometheus/MVAM based thread to carry on sticking my ore in. In regards to the original post I should imagine grav plating could be fitted however you like, as long as 'Warning: Variable Gravity Area' signs were posted nearby. I can imagine the accidents now.