Another New Series Proposal
- Thread starter Dayton3
- Start date
Tell you what. How 'bout if I repost it in Fan-fiction? That way, everyone who reads this thread can read the story over there.
Here's the link.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2621812&postcount=1
Smiley face aside, are you serious?
Smiley face aside, are you serious?
Always.
Seriously smiley.
C'mon, Dayton, just joking... hence the smiley.
I renamed the captain "Captain Ian Carson" and the main ship for the series the U.S.S. Valkryie
Series Premier-Two Hour
"Turning of the Seasons" pt. 1
Nearly a year away from Federation space, the Federations greatest ever colonization effort the "Tricentennial Colony Project" (TCP) is utterly destroyed by an unknown enemy. Lost are 800,000 colonists and more than 200,000 Starfleet personnel escorting them to their destination. In addition, some 155 starships that includes most of the fleets specialized warships are lost. Captain Carson, commanding an 80 year old Nebula class starship in deep space is recalled to Earth.
"Turning of the Seasons" pt. 2
Captain Carson is allowed to reunite his old crew aboard the highly experimental U.S.S. Valkryie to discover the fate of the TCP and take necessary countermeasures to protect the Federation.
The Typhon Alliance unexpectedly attacks the launching of Valkryie, claiming its very existence is a hostile act.
"Darkness's Long March"
The Valkryie's experimental Transwarp Drive malfunctions and leaves the ship dangerously close to a huge magnastar. Captain Carson discovers many of his crew are spies planted aboard by Starfleet Command.
"An Unexpected Answer"
The Valkryie crew finds indications that some of the TCP ships survived the massacre. Captain Carson moves against the agents of Starfleet aboard his vessel.
"Echos of the Future"
The crew of the Valkryie discover the remains of a vast, advanced but non spacefaring civilization which indicates that the TCP ships were not reporting what they had discovered to Starfleet Command.
Series Premier-Two Hour
"Turning of the Seasons" pt. 1
Nearly a year away from Federation space, the Federations greatest ever colonization effort the "Tricentennial Colony Project" (TCP) is utterly destroyed by an unknown enemy. Lost are 800,000 colonists and more than 200,000 Starfleet personnel escorting them to their destination. In addition, some 155 starships that includes most of the fleets specialized warships are lost. Captain Carson, commanding an 80 year old Nebula class starship in deep space is recalled to Earth.
"Turning of the Seasons" pt. 2
Captain Carson is allowed to reunite his old crew aboard the highly experimental U.S.S. Valkryie to discover the fate of the TCP and take necessary countermeasures to protect the Federation.
The Typhon Alliance unexpectedly attacks the launching of Valkryie, claiming its very existence is a hostile act.
"Darkness's Long March"
The Valkryie's experimental Transwarp Drive malfunctions and leaves the ship dangerously close to a huge magnastar. Captain Carson discovers many of his crew are spies planted aboard by Starfleet Command.
"An Unexpected Answer"
The Valkryie crew finds indications that some of the TCP ships survived the massacre. Captain Carson moves against the agents of Starfleet aboard his vessel.
"Echos of the Future"
The crew of the Valkryie discover the remains of a vast, advanced but non spacefaring civilization which indicates that the TCP ships were not reporting what they had discovered to Starfleet Command.
I like that idea...it's interesting and gritty...
How about this one(i was writing a book about it a few years ago before my computer died.):
The USS Enterprise-F is launched with a new hybrid warp drive (see trek tech, full specs there.) and it's superfast, with a max cruise of just over 15,000 times the speed of light. On their maiden run it is cruising at 15,000 times the speed, but acidentally ruptures space as it passes to close to a micro quantum singularity. As a result, it travells between dimensions at high warp, unable to drop out of warp from the black hole encounter, and is dropped in a different galaxy millions of lightyears away. The rupture promptly collapses after the enterprise is released, trapping them.
UNLIKE Voyager, there is NO possibility of getting home. They are lost, forever, and there isn't anything they can do. What's worst, it's an older galaxy, not near death, but older, and seemingly little intelligent life in it. Also, natural resources are also more scarse.
The basic premise is how de-starfleeted will they get? What will happen to the crew when they're removed from the sterile PC starfleet culture? Will they even still wear their uniforms? It's also not going to be such a cake walk, with the deflector dish solving all their problems and langauge and technilogical barriers easily solved. No. There will be firewalls, uncompatible tech, language barriers, and aliens that AREN'T humanoid in the least. This will be more real life.
The Captain is female, her first officer is andorian, the tactical officer is human (and gay), the helmsman is a Romulan (after the Romulan/Federation peace talks an exchange program was initiated.), the engineer is a new race we've never seen with an adopted human son, the medic is an elurian, and the counselor is Vulcan.
The ship itself is 30 decks, with type 14 warp capable phaser arrays (VERY high output, triple the E-E), carries full size and micro quantums, a VERY sophisticated sensor and scientific compliment, two shuttle bays, each with 4 fighter squadrans and various shuttles, a rotating torpedo turret with three torpedo tubes on the ventral saucer with it's own deflector, capable of tracking and moving along with a target of up to three. There are two fixed focus foward launchers and three aft. Most of the systems have been scaled down, allowing for a crew of 1500 and sophisticated provisions for families.
How about this one(i was writing a book about it a few years ago before my computer died.):
The USS Enterprise-F is launched with a new hybrid warp drive (see trek tech, full specs there.) and it's superfast, with a max cruise of just over 15,000 times the speed of light. On their maiden run it is cruising at 15,000 times the speed, but acidentally ruptures space as it passes to close to a micro quantum singularity. As a result, it travells between dimensions at high warp, unable to drop out of warp from the black hole encounter, and is dropped in a different galaxy millions of lightyears away. The rupture promptly collapses after the enterprise is released, trapping them.
UNLIKE Voyager, there is NO possibility of getting home. They are lost, forever, and there isn't anything they can do. What's worst, it's an older galaxy, not near death, but older, and seemingly little intelligent life in it. Also, natural resources are also more scarse.
The basic premise is how de-starfleeted will they get? What will happen to the crew when they're removed from the sterile PC starfleet culture? Will they even still wear their uniforms? It's also not going to be such a cake walk, with the deflector dish solving all their problems and langauge and technilogical barriers easily solved. No. There will be firewalls, uncompatible tech, language barriers, and aliens that AREN'T humanoid in the least. This will be more real life.
The Captain is female, her first officer is andorian, the tactical officer is human (and gay), the helmsman is a Romulan (after the Romulan/Federation peace talks an exchange program was initiated.), the engineer is a new race we've never seen with an adopted human son, the medic is an elurian, and the counselor is Vulcan.
The ship itself is 30 decks, with type 14 warp capable phaser arrays (VERY high output, triple the E-E), carries full size and micro quantums, a VERY sophisticated sensor and scientific compliment, two shuttle bays, each with 4 fighter squadrans and various shuttles, a rotating torpedo turret with three torpedo tubes on the ventral saucer with it's own deflector, capable of tracking and moving along with a target of up to three. There are two fixed focus foward launchers and three aft. Most of the systems have been scaled down, allowing for a crew of 1500 and sophisticated provisions for families.
Friendly fire is not a blunder. Just a part of war. In fact, the more successful a military action is, the more friendly fire fatalities you will have.
Considering I'm well intuned with war history and have quite enough experience in facts regarding this being, well I can;t go into detail of exact operations but civilian analyst for certain operations which soemtimes touched on this...actual fact changes between which military you view.
Todays combat tactic is more skirmish than full force brunt assault. Friendly fire should be virtually eliminated. Research into friendly fire of the past 10 years has proven that the soliders weren't trained as well in identification as they should have been.
These are results of investigation.
Australian/British soldiers can identify almsot all vehicles used by any military right away.
Most american soldiers can barely identify all the vehicles in their own military on site.
Australian/British are often furtherest in enemy territory in combat role operations, (when they are jointly in oepration for the same mission with americans) and the americans are usually coming in behind them.
The problem is, trained mentality. Whereas most british/australian forces deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan are trained special forces, they are backed up by not so special forces american marines who are soemwhat more trained in the art of atrition than skirmish warfare. Hence they shoot first before identifying the targets, which in mnay cases upon ivnestigation has turned into: "it moved, he shot...the position was listed on his recon sheets as friendly"
Only americans in the past 10 years have freindly fired. The only Australian who friendly fired...shot himself.
The evidence thus far, is difference in training. Not difference in warfare.
In wars like vietnam and ww1/ww2 yes friendly fire was acceptable since these were usually high numbered assaultsd of several hundred to thousands per a side. Friendly fire was expected and not frowned upon. But in todays modern low numbered skirmish form of warfare...friendly fire is negligence and akin to trigger-happy.
Skirmish warfare requires soldiers that think before they act.
When comparing successful operations, in which british and australian SAS have more than most americans would realise even over the recent years...friendly fire is virtually non-existant...only when americans are invovled.
Going back decades, when friendly fire was more unavoidable due to the scope of numbers invovled, the rate of friendly fire is also much less when americans are not invovled.
its not a gripe to offence, its a fact in difference of training.
Todays combat tactic is more skirmish than full force brunt assault. Friendly fire should be virtually eliminated. Research into friendly fire of the past 10 years has proven that the soliders weren't trained as well in identification as they should have been.
These are results of investigation.
Australian/British soldiers can identify almsot all vehicles used by any military right away.
Most american soldiers can barely identify all the vehicles in their own military on site.
Australian/British are often furtherest in enemy territory in combat role operations, (when they are jointly in oepration for the same mission with americans) and the americans are usually coming in behind them.
The problem is, trained mentality. Whereas most british/australian forces deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan are trained special forces, they are backed up by not so special forces american marines who are soemwhat more trained in the art of atrition than skirmish warfare. Hence they shoot first before identifying the targets, which in mnay cases upon ivnestigation has turned into: "it moved, he shot...the position was listed on his recon sheets as friendly"
Only americans in the past 10 years have freindly fired. The only Australian who friendly fired...shot himself.
The evidence thus far, is difference in training. Not difference in warfare.
In wars like vietnam and ww1/ww2 yes friendly fire was acceptable since these were usually high numbered assaultsd of several hundred to thousands per a side. Friendly fire was expected and not frowned upon. But in todays modern low numbered skirmish form of warfare...friendly fire is negligence and akin to trigger-happy.
Skirmish warfare requires soldiers that think before they act.
When comparing successful operations, in which british and australian SAS have more than most americans would realise even over the recent years...friendly fire is virtually non-existant...only when americans are invovled.
Going back decades, when friendly fire was more unavoidable due to the scope of numbers invovled, the rate of friendly fire is also much less when americans are not invovled.
its not a gripe to offence, its a fact in difference of training.
Um, I can;t as that would be a breach of a signed document. Read again where I mentioned the research was done as an analyst for the military. That's as much detail on where and why I am legally allowed to get into.
Such exists on paper in a military base, not on the internet.
Such exists on paper in a military base, not on the internet.
^The analysis is flawed anyway.
You admit that it largely compares British and Australian elite units against general U.S. line units.
Naturally, an elite unit is going to have a better record of target identification than a general combat unit.
The American reputation as a military forces that shoots first and asks questions later so to speak is an urban myth.
You admit that it largely compares British and Australian elite units against general U.S. line units.
Naturally, an elite unit is going to have a better record of target identification than a general combat unit.
The American reputation as a military forces that shoots first and asks questions later so to speak is an urban myth.
hellsgate
Commodore
Kent: Seems a bit uber. I could see a prototype 'scout' (Oberth-Class or other smaller expendable vintage TMP-era ship,) with a "Type 1-A Quantum Drive".
12 August 2382
Just after Voyager makes it home, The CoE gets the time, specialists and credits to 'do-over' "The Great Experiment" (properly) this time. As you explained, the Titan assists with the Romulan / Vulcan Peace Talks after the events of "Nemesis", and an Officer Exchange is initiated. However, nothing's perfect. The Romulans are freaked out about the possibility of The Federation getting QSS & a distinct tactical advantage. The Tal Shiar may be dismantled, scattered, but wasn't altogether annihilated as a result of Shinzon's attack on the Senate. There are still some within Vulcan society that haven't been "outed" and paying close attention to Starfleet's every single move.
However, in the process of initiating the QSS, something goes awry on the return leg of the (very classified) trip as something inexplicably attracts one of the large storm columns from The Badlands to the QSS system aboard the "U.S.S. ----------". In the process of entering a necessary course correction to avoid the anomoly, a brief interaction with their slipstream and the left-overs of destroyed warbirds from Kirk's time, causes an unintentional side-trip (much like the ENT-D's encounter with The Cytherians.)
12 August 2382
Just after Voyager makes it home, The CoE gets the time, specialists and credits to 'do-over' "The Great Experiment" (properly) this time. As you explained, the Titan assists with the Romulan / Vulcan Peace Talks after the events of "Nemesis", and an Officer Exchange is initiated. However, nothing's perfect. The Romulans are freaked out about the possibility of The Federation getting QSS & a distinct tactical advantage. The Tal Shiar may be dismantled, scattered, but wasn't altogether annihilated as a result of Shinzon's attack on the Senate. There are still some within Vulcan society that haven't been "outed" and paying close attention to Starfleet's every single move.
However, in the process of initiating the QSS, something goes awry on the return leg of the (very classified) trip as something inexplicably attracts one of the large storm columns from The Badlands to the QSS system aboard the "U.S.S. ----------". In the process of entering a necessary course correction to avoid the anomoly, a brief interaction with their slipstream and the left-overs of destroyed warbirds from Kirk's time, causes an unintentional side-trip (much like the ENT-D's encounter with The Cytherians.)
Not really, considering Australian SAS is australia's mainstream fighting force. So comparing one mainstream to the next mainstream is not flawed at all.
And you still speak as if I'm using non-factual evidences...you refuse to udnerstand this was using untampered unbended military documents to make a thruthful analysis for one small part of a much larger report.
You're just refusing to accept because I can;t go into any more detail than I am.
The best i can say is its difference in training, not difference in quality of said training. American training is great for certain types of warfare...but needs to be adjusted for skirmish warfare which is the new mainstream form.
But to go to where I am allowed to go into detail publically.
In afghanistan a few years back, there was a squad of American Navy Seals pinned down by sniper fire in the middle of the night, they requested backup. Most units in the area were out on mission and backup was not available for a while. 2 SAS soldiers returned ahead of their unit and were asked to zero in and assist.
Once there, they found that the Navy Seals had forgotten the basic rule of thumb when facing snipers in a nighttime environment. Be watchful when each shot is fired. A weapons barrel flashes at nighttime...look up. Which is exactly what the SAS did and they spotted the snipers by doign exactly that, and taking them out. Again, difference in training.
Navy Seals should've known that. It took 2 SAS to save 9 "elite"
And you still speak as if I'm using non-factual evidences...you refuse to udnerstand this was using untampered unbended military documents to make a thruthful analysis for one small part of a much larger report.
You're just refusing to accept because I can;t go into any more detail than I am.
The best i can say is its difference in training, not difference in quality of said training. American training is great for certain types of warfare...but needs to be adjusted for skirmish warfare which is the new mainstream form.
But to go to where I am allowed to go into detail publically.
In afghanistan a few years back, there was a squad of American Navy Seals pinned down by sniper fire in the middle of the night, they requested backup. Most units in the area were out on mission and backup was not available for a while. 2 SAS soldiers returned ahead of their unit and were asked to zero in and assist.
Once there, they found that the Navy Seals had forgotten the basic rule of thumb when facing snipers in a nighttime environment. Be watchful when each shot is fired. A weapons barrel flashes at nighttime...look up. Which is exactly what the SAS did and they spotted the snipers by doign exactly that, and taking them out. Again, difference in training.
Navy Seals should've known that. It took 2 SAS to save 9 "elite"
