But in those giant fleet battles that we saw, how many "Defiant Class" vessels did we see in a fleet?
Usually, only 1, maybe 2 or 3 on special occaision.
Where were the rest of them?
Is Starfleet a military organization?
- Thread starter Commander Troi
- Start date
But in those giant fleet battles that we saw, how many "Defiant Class" vessels did we see in a fleet?
Usually, only 1, maybe 2 or 3 on special occaision.
Where were the rest of them?
Wasn't there a Defiant-class ship in VOY's "Message in a Bottle"?
True.
Two, actually. In fact they both had USS Defiant NX-74205 on their hulls. I am of the opinion one of them really was the Defiant itself, since the two security officers who beam onto the Prometheus bridge actually were regular DS9 background extras. As for the other one, I half seriously consider that to be the Sao Paulo.
I don't see any real reason why the Defiant class wouldn't go into wide production.
True, its firepower makes it most useful as a warship, but it could also do nicely as a fast, lean scout ship, maybe for border patrol or something like that.
It's like the Vengeance from the Kelvin films. Also designed as a warship, but with few modifications would make an excellent choice for disaster relief missions, since it can operate with a minimum of crew. Or possibly none at all.
True, its firepower makes it most useful as a warship, but it could also do nicely as a fast, lean scout ship, maybe for border patrol or something like that.
It's like the Vengeance from the Kelvin films. Also designed as a warship, but with few modifications would make an excellent choice for disaster relief missions, since it can operate with a minimum of crew. Or possibly none at all.
Last edited:
I concur, but why didn't they "Copy & Paste" more Defiant Classes inside the Dominion War battles?
Those battles were fully CGI by that point.
To make sure the hero ship stood out.
I'm not aware of any strictly legal reason why the Enterprise-E (or any Sovereign-class ship) could not be used on DS9, but there was probably some kind of "gentleman's agreement" in place such that the ship would be reserved for the big screen.
Kind of like a question I used to have regarding Babylon 5 - in-universe, does EarthForce have an EAS Enterprise? And while I'm well aware there is a copyright in place regarding that name, AFAIK it only applies to the specific registry prefix USS.
Meaning, no other sci-fi show or film can have a fictional USS Enterprise, but this doesn't apply to B5 because its ships have the prefix EAS as opposed to USS. So while B5 could theoretically have an EAS Enterprise, they would never actually do so, because JMS would no doubt agree that the name 'Enterprise' should be generally reserved for Trek.
Last edited:
Indeed. Just like why we never saw any Intrepid class ships in those battles. Indeed, the one time we saw another Intrepid besides Voyager the studio tried to make a fuss against it.
Hardly a "gentleman's agreement," Paramount simply forbid the Sovereign class from appearing onscreen worried that if it did, no one would go to the theatres to see the the movies. The DS9 Companion details the drama Ira Behr went through fighting with the studio trying to get a Sovereign class in the final battle in WYLB and how the studio would not budge on the matter. As it turns out, no one went to the theatres to see two of the three movies to feature the Sovereign class anyway.
It's not USS Enterprise, but rather the term "Starship Enterprise" that's trademarked. That's why the novels and other tie-in material always italicize and capitalize the term so that it's presented as Starship Enterprise as opposed to the other ships that just have their names written out as starship Defiant, starship Voyager, starship Discovery and so on.
Because the term "Starship Enterprise" is trademarked, other sci-fi franchise avoid naming their fictional starships Enterprise simply to avoid the ensuing legal quagmire. That's the meta reference behind Stargate's "we can't call this ship the Enterprise" joke when trying to decide a name for the Prometheus.
My guess is that bare-bones style has been around since WW2, when orders were being radioed all around the world. It wouldn't surprise me if it was similar in WW1, too.
Wouldn't surprise me if it dates back to the telegraph days.
radio? world war one? which silly movie did you see lately?
Could be, I'd love to see some Civil War or Span-Am traffic like that.
Why must it be silly?
not even navies (besides ours) equipped every man of war with a radio in 1914 - the brits used flag signals at the battle of the skagerrak
when world war two started only one country had a radio in every airplane and tank
But there was a great deal of radio communication going on. The US Navy had transcontinental radio communication by 1915. Flag hoist signals still made sense tactically because they were quicker to read and execute, and couldn't be DF'd.
- in a test environment under peace conditions, with everybody standing by at a certain time
- yeah sure - because flags are so easily seen during a naval battle (no gunsmoke, no water 'blown into the air' by explosive shells
- what ever df'd means* - if it's supossed to be jamming radio was still in it's infancy but it was way more reliable than flags (the battle of the skagerrak would have been a fiasco for the hochseeflotte if they hadn't used radio)
* i really don't know it
The US Navy did not retire the Signalman rating until 2004. They were still using hoist signaling, semaphore and Morse via signal lamps when I served in the 1980s. Especially during unreps.
But we weren't talking about usage. We were talking about the effect that the telegraph and radio had on the format of orders,
edit to add: The typewriter probably played a role as well.
But we weren't talking about usage. We were talking about the effect that the telegraph and radio had on the format of orders,
edit to add: The typewriter probably played a role as well.
According to Wikipedia, it was officially discontinued in late 2003, however it's not unlikely that the cross-rating process for existing personnel (mostly to either Quartermaster -- which took over the signals duties -- or Master at Arms apparently) wasn't finished until 2004.
By contrast, the Royal Australian Navy merged it into the Radio Operator ("RO") rating to form the Communications and Information Systems rating back in 1999, a similar process appears to have taken place in the Royal Navy.
Similar threads
- Poll
