Manufacturing Starships
- Thread starter HIjol
- Start date
It should be. But I recall a note in the TNG Tech Manual which pretty much said they can't, for the sole reason it would make it too easy story-wise to make starships.
Not that it's particularly hard for them anyway (when the plot demands it) - at the end of "Best of Both Worlds" Shelby said they'd "have the fleet back up in less than a year", replacing 39 lost ships, and in Star Trek Into Darkness, Starfleet built an insanely enormous deathship (1,500m long - that's more than twice the length of the Enterprise-D!) in less than a year.
Then there are the times it takes years and years to put these things together (ENT, ST'09, the TNG manual etc...)
Not that it's particularly hard for them anyway (when the plot demands it) - at the end of "Best of Both Worlds" Shelby said they'd "have the fleet back up in less than a year", replacing 39 lost ships, and in Star Trek Into Darkness, Starfleet built an insanely enormous deathship (1,500m long - that's more than twice the length of the Enterprise-D!) in less than a year.
Then there are the times it takes years and years to put these things together (ENT, ST'09, the TNG manual etc...)
I remember a JETSONS cartoon where a new building was constructed. A hovering, UFO-like machine settled to the ground. As it rose up, a new building—complete in all details—"extruded" from the bottom.
With that kind of technology in TREK, new starships wouldn't need to be built (or rendered, or printed, or whatever they call it) because the ships in service would be able to morph new features as needed. "Geordi, did you download that new warp engine file from Starfleet?"
With that kind of technology in TREK, new starships wouldn't need to be built (or rendered, or printed, or whatever they call it) because the ships in service would be able to morph new features as needed. "Geordi, did you download that new warp engine file from Starfleet?"
Perhaps there are some parts of the ship that are too complicated for replicators. We know that there are things that can't be replicated... that is one of the reasons why Voyager would stop at different planets to pick up various minerals.
Maybe there is also the chance that it is more economical to use raw materials for certain parts vs. replicated materials.
Maybe there is also the chance that it is more economical to use raw materials for certain parts vs. replicated materials.
It could be that Starfleet transporters/replicators have two versions- the 'Quantum' level for human transfer and the molecular level for food and routine parts. It could be a Starship needs to have materials accurate to a very high degree to be reliable and long lasting, any parts would need a quantum resolution replication or the real thing. This would take more time and power, perhaps to the poing using real materials would be more time/cost effective.
When you are in a devastating war of attrition having the most ships in the field trumps the reliability aspect. Most will probably be destroyed in battle anyway. The ships were also sent out with portions of the interior missing, no need for labs and extensive crew support if you are trying to get as many as possible weapons mobile with skeleton crews. Same with rebuilding the fleet from Wolf359- Starfleet lost a LOT of ships and had no idea when the next attack would occur of is some other party may try to take advantage of the depleted fleet.
A lot of the ships which were built with the cheaper low res replicators may have been in need or repair and upgrades after the war to become properly full functioning vessels, but Starfleet could do that at their leisure since they would no longer be as many needed as just flying guns...
When you are in a devastating war of attrition having the most ships in the field trumps the reliability aspect. Most will probably be destroyed in battle anyway. The ships were also sent out with portions of the interior missing, no need for labs and extensive crew support if you are trying to get as many as possible weapons mobile with skeleton crews. Same with rebuilding the fleet from Wolf359- Starfleet lost a LOT of ships and had no idea when the next attack would occur of is some other party may try to take advantage of the depleted fleet.
A lot of the ships which were built with the cheaper low res replicators may have been in need or repair and upgrades after the war to become properly full functioning vessels, but Starfleet could do that at their leisure since they would no longer be as many needed as just flying guns...
It also said that if you could make an entire starship at the push of a button you wouldn't need to (you'd be so advanced that you'd be at Q level by then IMO).
IMHO Sternbach and Okuda once again shine with their speculation in the TNG Tech Manual: they accept the benefits of replication on general shipbuilding, but then evoke the concept of specific components that need to be created differently, for whatever reason (perhaps replication would be too slow or energy-consuming or computing-power-hungry compared with this other method?).
What they do is claim that warp coils need to be "cast", in a process that takes time and can go wrong and require recasting and might even dictate uneven quality for the end products. This is very similar to a famous bottleneck from actual historical shipbuilding: the casting of gun barrels. As late as WWII, entire battleships might be built and launched but then seriously delayed because the barrels could not be obtained fast enough - and ships might be designed around existing barrel spares rather than around keels or engines or tactical or strategic needs!
I'm sure replication plays a big part in starship construction, and indeed makes it relatively fast. But oddly enough, the only ship ever built in Star Trek within a timeframe known to the audience is the Mirror universe Defiant, which came to be very quickly indeed. There is no evidence of any sort of Federation shipbuilding during the Dominion War, for example, allowing us to think that it takes more than four years to complete even the simplest possible combat vessels.
Perhaps one can put together something like the Delta Flyer quickly because starships carry spare warp coils in shuttlecraft size like so many spare tyres, perhaps even in similar-looking piles... But comparable piles of starship size coils would not be found except at the very largest starbases.
Timo Saloniemi
What they do is claim that warp coils need to be "cast", in a process that takes time and can go wrong and require recasting and might even dictate uneven quality for the end products. This is very similar to a famous bottleneck from actual historical shipbuilding: the casting of gun barrels. As late as WWII, entire battleships might be built and launched but then seriously delayed because the barrels could not be obtained fast enough - and ships might be designed around existing barrel spares rather than around keels or engines or tactical or strategic needs!
I'm sure replication plays a big part in starship construction, and indeed makes it relatively fast. But oddly enough, the only ship ever built in Star Trek within a timeframe known to the audience is the Mirror universe Defiant, which came to be very quickly indeed. There is no evidence of any sort of Federation shipbuilding during the Dominion War, for example, allowing us to think that it takes more than four years to complete even the simplest possible combat vessels.
Perhaps one can put together something like the Delta Flyer quickly because starships carry spare warp coils in shuttlecraft size like so many spare tyres, perhaps even in similar-looking piles... But comparable piles of starship size coils would not be found except at the very largest starbases.
Timo Saloniemi
I don't think an entire ship. I mean the replicator would have to be larger than the ship in question, anyway.
But I see no reason why complicated parts like control panels, or even entire modules of a ship couldn't be replicated, then assembled later.
Not an entire starship. What most likely happens is that parts of the starship are replicated by industrial replicators and then assembled to form them. The time for assembly would vary between starships. That would be simply just putting together the hull, not to mention all of the inner workings of the vessel.
As for the comment by Shelby, perhaps they also meant dragging some of the older ships out of mothballs? Bring a bunch of Ambassadors, Excelsiors, and Mirandas back into service with upgraded parts and, on paper, you've technically restored the fleet.
As for the comment by Shelby, perhaps they also meant dragging some of the older ships out of mothballs? Bring a bunch of Ambassadors, Excelsiors, and Mirandas back into service with upgraded parts and, on paper, you've technically restored the fleet.
And/or you take the fleet from a peacetime footing (half the ships exploring the far frontier, the other half hosting banquets or doing polls or parading) to a crisis footing (everybody recalled to be within a "practical response distance" of Earth).
Despite seeing many kinds of space station or repair yard, we so far have failed to see a location where a Federation starship would be constructed. All the fancy docks in the movies or at Utopia Planitia in VOY "Relativity" have been shown processing preexisting vessels, and all the reputed newbuilds have first appeared already completed and usually outside such docks.
On the other hand, we did see the Columbia supposedly constructed in ENT, in a box dock not significantly unlike the one where the sister ship Enterprise was being repaired or overhauled or whatnot, and not significantly unlike the TOS movie or TNG docks. So construction could take place in such facilities. Although admittedly ENT also represents an era with more primitive construction methods.
Timo Saloniemi
Despite seeing many kinds of space station or repair yard, we so far have failed to see a location where a Federation starship would be constructed. All the fancy docks in the movies or at Utopia Planitia in VOY "Relativity" have been shown processing preexisting vessels, and all the reputed newbuilds have first appeared already completed and usually outside such docks.
On the other hand, we did see the Columbia supposedly constructed in ENT, in a box dock not significantly unlike the one where the sister ship Enterprise was being repaired or overhauled or whatnot, and not significantly unlike the TOS movie or TNG docks. So construction could take place in such facilities. Although admittedly ENT also represents an era with more primitive construction methods.
Timo Saloniemi
Agreed.
I'd always assumed that as well. It would also explain how even serious damage can be repaired so quickly and 'as new', even the Voyager.
Isn't a half complete Enterprise-D shown in "Booby Trap" as part of the holodeck simulation?
