Building the Mighty Mushroom - Spacedock

[Timo]

...But the attacks against DS9 prove that this isn't the case. They leave us scratching at our heads on why long range, "standoff" weapons aren't used against both stationary and moving targets (against the latter, they would just need a maneuvering, homing final stage).

We might argue that the enemy wanted to conquer, not destroy, DS9 in all the attacks aimed against it. But failure after failure should eventually make them consider alternate plans that didn't involve capturing of the station...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[SicOne]

I would think that a stationary target would be able to layer its shields against attacks from a known, distant attacker (i.e. concentrating its shields from someone raining down phaser fire from maximum range)...at least long enough for friendly ships to interdict whomever is firing at the station.

Also, we don't really know if the SpaceDock/Starbases have point-defense systems to knock down physical weapons fired from a distance. In "Starship Spotter", mention is made of some eighty phaser banks on SpaceDock, so right there it has more firepower to call upon than 5-8 starships.

I would also imagine that there are hidden torpedo launchers somewhere...

 

[Tomalak]

...But the attacks against DS9 prove that this isn't the case. They leave us scratching at our heads on why long range, "standoff" weapons aren't used against both stationary and moving targets (against the latter, they would just need a maneuvering, homing final stage).

We might argue that the enemy wanted to conquer, not destroy, DS9 in all the attacks aimed against it. But failure after failure should eventually make them consider alternate plans that didn't involve capturing of the station...

Timo Saloniemi

Not sure what you mean by "failure after failure". The Klingon attack would probably eventually have overwhelmed DS9, but the Starfleet reinforcements arrived quicker than the Klingon second wave. It was, after all, an impromptu attack rather than a planned siege.

The Dominion obviously did succeed in taking the station, and it was only sabotage by a Ferengi barman that prevented it destroying the Defiant and in turn the Federation-Klingon fleet. And even then, it was only the happy accident of the commander's daughter turning against him that allowed that Ferengi to do his thing. They were seconds away from total victory.

"Victory was within our grasp!"

 

[Timo]

The Klingons took too long in trying to capture the station - so if standoff destruction were an option, they'd probably have wanted to shorten the game with that when they found out they couldn't get what they wanted. And every subsequent attacker would face more reinforcements and faster, because Starfleet apparently amassed more ships in the region soon thereafter.

Why would the Dominion have wanted to capture DS9 in conventional battle in "Call to Arms"? Only to satisfy their Cardassian minions? Preventing the mining of the wormhole would have been best achieved with standoff weapons that would have disrupted the operation and destroyed any protection the station could afford to the operation.

Perhaps SicOne is right and long range weapons can be countered by return fire. That should be fairly straightforward use of Treknology - and indeed we see Kirk trying to shoot down a torpedo in ST2, only to fail because it's "too late". A standoff launch would give time for such a defensive move. And the attacker would then have to turn his warheads into medium-sized starships so that they would have enough shielding to withstand the counterfire. We'd get those Cardassian missiles we saw in "Dreadnought", and there could be major problems of economy with those. If you can afford to build one of those, you'll be better off completing her as a normal starship that isn't automatically lost at the end of her mission...

Still, there'd be some call for standoff missiles of the "Dreadnought" sort (or the sort referred to in "Blaze of Glory", with cloaks on them). We know these exist. We don't know why they aren't used more. Is it just because DS9, our only wartime vantage point ever, does not warrant such an attack for reason X?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[SicOne]

^ SicOne is ALWAYS right.

Well, except when he isn't. For that, you'd have to ask Mrs. SicOne.

 

[Tomalak]

The Klingons took too long in trying to capture the station - so if standoff destruction were an option, they'd probably have wanted to shorten the game with that when they found out they couldn't get what they wanted. And every subsequent attacker would face more reinforcements and faster, because Starfleet apparently amassed more ships in the region soon thereafter.

They wanted the Detapa Council members, presumably to force them to legitimise the invasion and sign some treaty giving away swathes of Cardassian territory. Also, Gowron seemed to be somewhat genuine in his belief that they were Changelings, and he was doing the Alpha Quadrant a favour. He didn't get why the Federation were being Cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys and refusing to back him.

Why would the Dominion have wanted to capture DS9 in conventional battle in "Call to Arms"? Only to satisfy their Cardassian minions? Preventing the mining of the wormhole would have been best achieved with standoff weapons that would have disrupted the operation and destroyed any protection the station could afford to the operation.

They wanted to capture the station to control a crucial sector, and the wormhole which was essential for their plans to end the war quickly. Presumably you can't just throw up a space station in a hurry, and certainly not one as well defended as Deep Space Nine was. There may also have been the attraction of capturing Starfleet officers and intel about the mines.

Besides, why wouldn't you want to capture it? And they did, and it very nearly paid off.

 

[Saquist]

With weapons like Dreadnought from Voyager it explains why DS9's phasers are powerful enough to destroy shielded ships with a single burst...like attack ships, birds of prey. Still cruise missiles should be an incredible component to War arsenals.

 

[Lorna]

Not got time to read the thread so just giving my pennies worth.

Spacedock is not the only station of that size, there is an episode of Next Gen where we see a replica spacedock around another Federation planet. Don't ask me the name of the ep because I've no clue.

I have no problem with the construction of Spacedock because it's actually primarily just hollow, the inside of it is just empty space to house ships, it's only the outer side of it that has rooms and corridors etc

It's therefore took far less construction and far less materials than people think.

 

[Captain]

In the Trek universe that exists only in my head, I always assumed that the Orbital office complex in TMP was the beginning construction of the Spacedock seen in Trek III. I work in the oil patch in Alberta, and before construction starts on a new upgrader or something, the first thing brought in is the trailers and support buildings...then construction starts. Same thinking here. Bring in the office complex and outhouses, then they started the Spacedock itself.

 

[Captain Rob]

In the Trek universe that exists only in my head, I always assumed that the Orbital office complex in TMP was the beginning construction of the Spacedock seen in Trek III. I work in the oil patch in Alberta, and before construction starts on a new upgrader or something, the first thing brought in is the trailers and support buildings...then construction starts. Same thinking here. Bring in the office complex and outhouses, then they started the Spacedock itself.

So can we assume that the big round disc things under construction at the orbital office complex are the poopers?

 

[SicOne]

^ Well, you'd certainly want waste extraction to be a priority in initial construction...

 

[thepatagonian]

In the Trek universe that exists only in my head, I always assumed that the Orbital office complex in TMP was the beginning construction of the Spacedock seen in Trek III. I work in the oil patch in Alberta, and before construction starts on a new upgrader or something, the first thing brought in is the trailers and support buildings...then construction starts. Same thinking here. Bring in the office complex and outhouses, then they started the Spacedock itself.

So can we assume that the big round disc things under construction at the orbital office complex are the poopers?

Yes, there are those. And vending machines. And a car stereo outlet. What they need is a Garak's Clothiers and they're on their way.

 

[Patrickivan]

Forgive me if I am beating a dead horse here. I stopped reading the thread around page 5ish.

Having just re-watched the first 6 movies in a row, I noted Khan's remark that Kirk stranded him 15 years ago. I'd take that as accurate due to his intellegence. Space Seed was around 2267. This places TWOK canonically in 2283.

Kirk's remark about the 2283 Romulan Ale taking a while to fernment? Well, I have always detected a distinct note of sarcasm in that statement. It WAS 2283, and there laid the joke. How good can it be if it was just made this year?

My point is, that since TSFS took place immediately after TWOK and therefore the giant Space Dock had to have already been built by TWOK. So that narrows that down.

And while I will always be in the camp that ST TMP took place approximately 2.5 years (2272/3) after the 5 year mission, that is only because of Decker's statement about Kirk not logging a single star hour in 2 and a half years, and by Kirk's defence that he was out there with 5 years experience (that I assume he was specifically refering to as in a command position). He was refering to the great 5 year mission of TOS because that's what the audience would have been familiar with.

My point there is simply to pin down my defence of the timeline for the movie. Through this, I can ONLY assume that the Space Dock was under contruction at this time. It may or may not have been in any stage of use. Regardless, just because we don't see it being built or in use in TMP doesn't mean it wasn't. Because it HAD to be there in TWOK due to the timeline and proximity to TSFS.

Since there was 10 years between TMP and TWOK, that Space Dock was more likely around in TMP, under construction, simply due to it's size. And I would dare say it started at least in the mid 2260's.

The movie time line can be extrapolated (if not agreed upon for some odd reason), but the Space Dock construction timeline can not. It can only be reasonable to assume that it APPEARED to be completed in TSFS, and therefore had to have been there in TWOK due to the close proximity of the two movies.

Just to end my take on it- just because we never saw it prior to TSFS doesn't mean it wasn't there. After all, you can't see the moon from the opposite orbit of the Earth...

 

[Timo]

I'd take that as accurate due to his intellegence.

In that case, you'd have to take it as accurate that the movie happened in the 2190s, too, since he says he was prince of millions 200 years prior.

OTOH, we can take that as inaccurate due to his egotism. It can be easily argued that the 1990s were 200 years in Khan's past as of the 2280s - from Khan's own point of view, distorted by time dilation during his sublight voyage. It can similarly be argued that an event 18x365 Earth days old is exactly 15 years in the past - from Khan's own point of view based on the length of the Cetian year...

How good can it be if it was just made this year?

Well, if it's ale, then anything from some bygone year would be suspect - and only worth drinking if one knew that the current stock was based on an inferior recipe and last year's stock, despite being so old, still had a superior taste for that reason.

If the mention of a year gives our hero a pause, then it's most probably evidence that it's not the current year.

..since TSFS took place immediately after TWOK and therefore the giant Space Dock had to have already been built by TWOK. So that narrows that down.

What is narrowed there? We can assume the Spacedock was built e.g. two centuries before Kirk's birth quite regardless of what is said or shown in the movie (or for all we know, two thousand years before, by Vulcans, and later towed to Earth). Absence of Spacedock from earlier shots is no evidence of nonexistence, because space is big and the camera field of view is narrow and centered on our heroes.

Regardless, just because we don't see it being built or in use in TMP doesn't mean it wasn't.

Or in TOS, for that matter.

We get no indication that Spacedock would be capable of refitting, building or overhauling starships. That's what ST:TMP and ST2:TWoK involve, so naturally some other type of installation is seen performing those tasks.

And while I will always be in the camp that ST TMP took place approximately 2.5 years (2272/3) after the 5 year mission, that is only because of Decker's statement about Kirk not logging a single star hour in 2 and a half years, and by Kirk's defence that he was out there with 5 years experience (that I assume he was specifically refering to as in a command position). He was refering to the great 5 year mission of TOS because that's what the audience would have been familiar with.

Those things give us a minimum temporal distance between TOS and TMP. OTOH, Decker's later line gives a greater minimum requirement: he claims Voyager 6 was launched over 300 years prior. If we assume Voyagers 1 and 2 were launched at the same time in both the Trek universe and ours, and Voyager 6 was launched later than Voyagers 1 and 2, then the movie must take place in 2278 or later, thus probably a decade after TOS rather than just 2.5 years.

Of course, even if the Trek space program wasn't more advanced than our own by several decades, Voyager 6 might still have been launched before Voyager 1. After all, Voyager 2 was launched before Voyager 1...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Patrickivan]

I'd take that as accurate due to his intellegence.

In that case, you'd have to take it as accurate that the movie happened in the 2190s, too, since he says he was prince of millions 200 years prior.

OTOH, we can take that as inaccurate due to his egotism. It can be easily argued that the 1990s were 200 years in Khan's past as of the 2280s - from Khan's own point of view, distorted by time dilation during his sublight voyage. It can similarly be argued that an event 18x365 Earth days old is exactly 15 years in the past - from Khan's own point of view based on the length of the Cetian year...
Timo Saloniemi

He can be insane yet remain intelligent. His statement about 200 years ago may also have been some confusion based on being in stasis for 300 years. His hatred of Kirk would fester. He would probably have it down to the standard hour. He wouldn't be looking at it from his point of view. He would be using a reference that Chekov and Terell would understand.

How good can it be if it was just made this year?

Well, if it's ale, then anything from some bygone year would be suspect - and only worth drinking if one knew that the current stock was based on an inferior recipe and last year's stock, despite being so old, still had a superior taste for that reason.

If the mention of a year gives our hero a pause, then it's most probably evidence that it's not the current year.


What is narrowed there? We can assume the Spacedock was built e.g. two centuries before Kirk's birth quite regardless of what is said or shown in the movie (or for all we know, two thousand years before, by Vulcans, and later towed to Earth). Absence of Spacedock from earlier shots is no evidence of nonexistence, because space is big and the camera field of view is narrow and centered on our heroes.Timo Saloniemi

[/QUOTE]

From the writers point of view, if we interpret the romulan ale comment as being something other then referencing the present year, then the line is completely pointless because it says nothing really. From a sarcastic point of view, then it becomes humourous and dates the year for the audience.

As for spacedock's absence. Why would you even comment here, when I go on to say exactly that? I said just because we don't see it, doesn't mean it's not there... In fact, you quote me below...

Regardless, just because we don't see it being built or in use in TMP doesn't mean it wasn't.

Or in TOS, for that matter.

We get no indication that Spacedock would be capable of refitting, building or overhauling starships. That's what ST:TMP and ST2:TWoK involve, so naturally some other type of installation is seen performing those tasks.

And while I will always be in the camp that ST TMP took place approximately 2.5 years (2272/3) after the 5 year mission, that is only because of Decker's statement about Kirk not logging a single star hour in 2 and a half years, and by Kirk's defence that he was out there with 5 years experience (that I assume he was specifically refering to as in a command position). He was refering to the great 5 year mission of TOS because that's what the audience would have been familiar with.

Those things give us a minimum temporal distance between TOS and TMP. OTOH, Decker's later line gives a greater minimum requirement: he claims Voyager 6 was launched over 300 years prior. If we assume Voyagers 1 and 2 were launched at the same time in both the Trek universe and ours, and Voyager 6 was launched later than Voyagers 1 and 2, then the movie must take place in 2278 or later, thus probably a decade after TOS rather than just 2.5 years.

Of course, even if the Trek space program wasn't more advanced than our own by several decades, Voyager 6 might still have been launched before Voyager 1. After all, Voyager 2 was launched before Voyager 1... Timo Saloniemi

[/QUOTE]


You got me there... Decker was either wrong, or the movie would have to be between 78 and 83. Stupid writers!

Timo Saloniemi[/QUOTE]

 

[Aahz]

Like some other posters, I'm coming into this discussion late, so forgive if my points have already been made somewhere else in the middle of the thread.

TWOK was indeed placed in the year 2283. The Romulan Ale comment was a joke along the line of Robin Williams' comment about Thunderbird Wine ("It was a good week"). Also, a bottle of ROMULAN ale is labeled with an EARTH year -- obviously it was SUPPOSED to be exported from Romulus to Earth illegally!

Meanwhile, back to the topic at hand...

The enclosed spacedock had multiple purposes in TSFS. First, the crew of the Enterprise had to be able to see the Excelsior as they arrived so those various comments could be made and the setup for Scotty to be transferred to the Excelsior could be done. The spacedock we saw in TMP and TWOK could hold only a single starship, so it couldn't be used in TSFS.

Second, the buildup of suspense for the "stealing the Enterprise" sequence necessitated (well, not really, but it helped) having an enclosed spacedock. Scotty working frantically to open the spacedoors, the powerup of Excelsior prior to Enterprise's exit, etc., just would not have worked as well with an open spacedock complex like that in TMP/TWOK.

Third, Excelsior was supposed to be this highly-classified secret project for the trans-warp testbed. Building it out in the open invites wandering eyes. Even with today's technology, orbital craft are visible from the ground with remarkable detail. Imagine what 300 years would do...

So, it's prime function wasn't technical or based in "Trek-nology" but was story-driven. However, given that it is now part of canon, explaining it is an exercise left to the viewers.

I would agree with several of the earlier posters that such a spacedock was built over a long period of time, and very likely evolved. The four-pier docking complex could easily have been an open-space facility prior to its being enclosed by the cap of the mushroom. There could conceivably have been numerous versions of this facility in orbit. But the Starfleet "Skunk-Works" probably made the case to the top brass for creating at least one enclosed four-pier complex for their secret technology projects, possibly including its own design and fabrication facilities so that no parts of such projects would be handled outside the complex. Thus, the first spacedock was created.

Then later, once the feasability of such a large complex was established, it was slightly re-designed as a remote starbase for locations where a ground-based starbase wasn't possible but a major facility was needed. The enclosed complex would offer protection of Starfleet vessels undergoing repairs where their shields may not be available for protection. And even later, in the TNG era, the design that had proven successful for Constitution- and Excelsior-class ships was enlarged to harbor Galaxy- and Nebula-class ships.

Such an enlarged facility was first seen in "11010110" where the Binars upgraded the Enterprise-D's computer (and holodeck) systems. If the main computer was off-line for any portion of the upgrade, the shields may not have been available, necessitating an upgrade at an enclosed, protected facility.

Make sense to anyone?

 

[The Inquisitor]

Apologies if this is marginally off topic but I didn't think it warranted an entirely new thread.

Does anyone have any idea how many decks/floors the space-dock has? From looking at some images on-line and comparing them to the galaxy class I would guess at 1,200 from base to top (not including the antenna either end).

Any other thoughts or am I way off?

 

[Saquist]

Does anybody know where I could maybe find a pic comparing spacedock the size it was in the movies to the size the starbase version was supposed to be...?

Also...how big is the movie spacedock? how long/tall? Etc? (And what about the TNG "starbases"?)

I have CAD software that could determine that if you wish based on the size of the 305 meter Enterprise and I could scale it to the ENT-D.

Last time I looked ....

Galaxy accommodating Starbase

Length:

18 483. meters = 11.4848037 miles



Diameter
12 270.7599 meters = 7.62469671 miles


----------------------------------
Earth Space Dock

Length:
13 351.4244 meters = 8.2961905 miles


Diameter :
8 856.1296 meters = 5.50294381 miles


The original Spacedock seen in Star Trek III should have...

A crew of 961,757 or more and 4,450 levels or decks.
(crew based on volumetrics of a Galaxy Class Starship which offers almost 2300 square meters per person)
Theoretically the Space Dock could accommodate 2 million people or more.

Apologies if this is marginally off topic but I didn't think it warranted an entirely new thread.

Does anyone have any idea how many decks/floors the space-dock has? From looking at some images on-line and comparing them to the galaxy class I would guess at 1,200 from base to top (not including the antenna either end).

Any other thoughts or am I way off?

A crew of 961,757 or more and 4,450 levels or decks.
(crew based on volumetrics of a Galaxy Class Starship which offers almost 2300 square meters per person)
Theoretically the Space Dock could accommodate 2 million people or more.

 

[T'Girl]

Regardless, just because we don't see it being built or in use in TMP doesn't mean it wasn't.

Or in TOS, for that matter.

Just because we can't actual see it, is no reason to assume that it didn't exist during ENT either.

If I'm following your logic correctly.