because...we haven't built a STARSHIP yet?
As for MVAM: I'm sure there's procedures in place for the remaining sections to connect and function, if one is destroyed. Sure, they didn't show it, but they don't need to. It's easy to assume.
Prometheus-class questions (Mr. Sternbach, feel free...)
- Thread starter SicOne
- Start date
because...we haven't built a STARSHIP yet?
As for MVAM: I'm sure there's procedures in place for the remaining sections to connect and function, if one is destroyed. Sure, they didn't show it, but they don't need to. It's easy to assume.
Does it have a super-dimension energy cannon when it transforms into its giant robot form?
I see lifeboat hatches, which implies lifeboats, and while that is an assumption on my part, I think it a reasonable one.
Similarly, having the top and bottom segments being able to directly attach to each other in the event of the destruction (or non-availability) of the middle segment is an assumption, but a reasonable one.
It's reasonable because it makes sense that this capacity would be designed in.
Like the one on the three engine Enterprise Dee, in All Good Things?
And that's where compromise comes in. What engineering compromises are you making to add this capability? You can't just keep adding things without impacting other functions.
There's a saying in aerospace engineering:
"faster, better, cheaper. pick any two"
It represents the fact that you can't get everything. Every change you make in one area affects another area.
But we are not discussing real-life engineering. Only what onscreen Trek has done. We're not talking about whether MVAM would "work" in real life, just whether or not it might have made sense, in-universe, for Starfleet to make a ship which uses it. Real engineering principles are not relevant here, because Starfleet operates on a scale far, FAR beyond anything we can do.
Obviously we have never had any real-world ship which has MVAM-like capabilities. There's no technology on Earth that would allow for anything like that. But obviously Starfleet has that ability - we've seen it. It's just a fictional thing that looks cool, that's all it is.
And given this, MVAM's status as a fictional trope means that we are perfectly free to speculate about what Starfleet might do with a ship like this, or what precautions they would take if it fails. Such as what happens if one of the three segments is destroyed; in all likelihood, Starfleet probably DID build the Prometheus with the ability to reconnect the other two. I don't care if we never saw this, I just think it's LIKELY that such a safety precaution exists. We will probably never see the Prommie ever again, so we can speculate all we want.
Obviously we have never had any real-world ship which has MVAM-like capabilities. There's no technology on Earth that would allow for anything like that. But obviously Starfleet has that ability - we've seen it. It's just a fictional thing that looks cool, that's all it is.
And given this, MVAM's status as a fictional trope means that we are perfectly free to speculate about what Starfleet might do with a ship like this, or what precautions they would take if it fails. Such as what happens if one of the three segments is destroyed; in all likelihood, Starfleet probably DID build the Prometheus with the ability to reconnect the other two. I don't care if we never saw this, I just think it's LIKELY that such a safety precaution exists. We will probably never see the Prommie ever again, so we can speculate all we want.
To the extent that the Prommie makes any sense at all (in universe), it is as an experimental vehicle. A test bed for bleeding edge technologies, such as MVAM and EMH mk II.
The only sensible reason I can think of for arming the thing is sheer desperation.
The other in universe explanation for the Prommie is that the brass thought MVAM is sexy.
The only sensible reason I can think of for arming the thing is sheer desperation.
The other in universe explanation for the Prommie is that the brass thought MVAM is sexy.
Last edited:
What was needed was a defense build up ASAP.
1. The Defiant, as a small topedo/gunboat, made some sense. The small size fits a crash program better than a larger design. Quicker to build than a larger design, so you get some real firepower to the front lines quite soon.
Other options?
2. If an older design is modular, add additional firepower to existing ships with a special weapons module. This would likely be the option that could be implemented fastest.
3. Another concept would be to rework an older design, adding weapons.
4. The Sovys as a new, large warship.
It has been suggested that the Sovys had been intended as a replacement for the aging Excelsiors. Conceivably, if this project was well underway when the Borg threat appeared, I can see this project being continued, rather than cancelled.
1. The Defiant, as a small topedo/gunboat, made some sense. The small size fits a crash program better than a larger design. Quicker to build than a larger design, so you get some real firepower to the front lines quite soon.
Other options?
2. If an older design is modular, add additional firepower to existing ships with a special weapons module. This would likely be the option that could be implemented fastest.
3. Another concept would be to rework an older design, adding weapons.
4. The Sovys as a new, large warship.
It has been suggested that the Sovys had been intended as a replacement for the aging Excelsiors. Conceivably, if this project was well underway when the Borg threat appeared, I can see this project being continued, rather than cancelled.
Last edited:
Why compromises? You might be able to use many of the same latches on the upper surface of the bottom segment to join to the underside of the top (maybe with the top sitting a bit further aft, maybe not). The main thing holding them together would be the structural integrity field anyway. Don't want to use latches, okay use multiple tractor beams.
Okay, I pick faster and better.
The Prommie does not make sense as a crash program. You want a relatively simple design for that. Something that you can produce in a relatively large quantity ASAP.
The Sovys were likely fairly resource intensive, but at least the design was quite conventional. No worries about whether MVAM was workable or not.
The Sovys were likely fairly resource intensive, but at least the design was quite conventional. No worries about whether MVAM was workable or not.
I think the Prometheus-class looks cool as a new Federation ship- having extra nacelles is great when you have some combat damage.
I think though instead of a ship designed to separate into three custom shaped vessels, having a powerful warp carrier with attachment points for several smaller ships (maybe Defiant class). It gets your strike force to the battle quickly, the smaller vessels do their MVAM attack thing as fully functional starships. As newer advanced technologies are developed, you make newer ships which can attach to the warp sled carrier.
I think though instead of a ship designed to separate into three custom shaped vessels, having a powerful warp carrier with attachment points for several smaller ships (maybe Defiant class). It gets your strike force to the battle quickly, the smaller vessels do their MVAM attack thing as fully functional starships. As newer advanced technologies are developed, you make newer ships which can attach to the warp sled carrier.
Starfleet launched six Galaxy-class starships on ten-year missions with something like 75% of their volume empty for future expansion. And then during the war, they sent out the rest even emptier than that. Starfleet is not above throwing money around even if it may not be the most economically efficient allocation of shipbuilding resources. And raw material, manpower, and engineering aren't the only things to go into starships. Or in the real world, for that matter. Look at how people continue trying after decades to make an aircraft that flies as fast as a plane but can also hover, despite how intractable the problem has been. Considering that reversible saucer-separation is a proven technology in Trek, it seems a lot more defensible that Starfleet's designers would try taking a shot at attaching a third separable section, and making them all more independent.
To use your earlier model, the choice between three 33-point Defiants or three 30-point-equivalent thirds of a Prometheus seems like more of a fair trade-off if those Defiants will spend most of their time at a starbase waiting for a Defiant-worthy job to come up, while the whole Prometheus can also (or, more likely, will mostly) do jobs that are suited to a larger, more versatile ship.
(I'm suddenly imaging the Prometheus pitch meeting taking after the original iPhone announcement. "We're here to show you three revolutionary new starship designs. One, a trio of stripped-down, combat-ready escorts capable of outflanking any enemy. Two, a medium cruiser with a focus on tactical missions, but still fully equipped for peacetime exploration and patrol. And three, a high-speed command ship capable of coordinating an entire sector and getting to trouble spots faster than anything in the fleet. A set of escorts, a next-generation medium cruiser, and a fast-response C&C vessel. Are you getting it? These are not three separate designs, this is one ship, and we're calling it the Prometheus.")
Wargame point mechanics are great for setting up even fights between diverse sides, but in the narrative would of Star Trek, if you try to send ten Defiants to survey a planet when the mission profile calls for a Galaxy, it doesn't matter if their credit-value is the same, they still can't do the job.
For that matter, there are also resource costs to making it possible for the Intrepid to land and take off, but Starfleet still did it, even though the Cardassians could theoretically build a bunch of space-only Intrepid-equivalent ships that would consistently kick their asses by a nose in an even fight.
Millions for defense, not one penny for tribute.
I'm not sure why there should be a "crash program for defense" there. Just keep doing more of the same old, at the same well-tested levels of firepower as ever, because that's what you have already been doing for the past two centuries - preparing for a conventional war with a conventional enemy. It's pretty unlikely that you would have been doing anything less than your best until now.
OTOH, perhaps that 50k range registry on the Prometheus isn't there for naught: Starfleet may have been conducting all sorts of idle research on the side for a long time while constantly building up its conventional fleet... No need to "crash" anything when at any arbitrary timepoint you already have half a dozen superweapons in the brewing, some of them pretty mature already.
A "crash program" to defeat the Borg I can understand, now: this is a new type of enemy requiring an all-new doctrinal approach. (And obviously, something like the Defiant is a poor idea for the sheer timid conventionality: the Borg just love it when somebody builds assimilable "superweapons" for them. But it suddenly also becomes a known quantity you can now build for conventional uses...)
Timo Saloniemi
OTOH, perhaps that 50k range registry on the Prometheus isn't there for naught: Starfleet may have been conducting all sorts of idle research on the side for a long time while constantly building up its conventional fleet... No need to "crash" anything when at any arbitrary timepoint you already have half a dozen superweapons in the brewing, some of them pretty mature already.
A "crash program" to defeat the Borg I can understand, now: this is a new type of enemy requiring an all-new doctrinal approach. (And obviously, something like the Defiant is a poor idea for the sheer timid conventionality: the Borg just love it when somebody builds assimilable "superweapons" for them. But it suddenly also becomes a known quantity you can now build for conventional uses...)
Timo Saloniemi
Re: Defiant conventional Super Weapon
. The Defiant may have been ineffective against the Borg, but was quite useful against the Dominion.
. The Defiant may have been ineffective against the Borg, but was quite useful against the Dominion.
Re: The Valiant
A single Defiant ship was over matched by a Dominion battleship. But it was effective against a Dominion bug ship.
A single Defiant ship was over matched by a Dominion battleship. But it was effective against a Dominion bug ship.
Similar threads
