Prometheus-class questions (Mr. Sternbach, feel free...)

[Timo]

The actual logic behind MVAM seems solidly built into the story: this ship is supposed to fight without a live crew. Or at least two thirds of it are...

The command section is the only crewed one in the fight we see. But how could it ever be different, when Starfleet has only trained four people to operate the ship so far, and it takes four at least to crew the command section bridge? And if those four aren't enough to test the MVAM, what sense would the secrecy make? What special training would it take to fly the ship without the MVAM, and why?

This doesn't look like a supership as much as it looks like two relatively ordinary ships somewhat disadvantaged by not having crew aboard. It's clearly something Starfleet would love to have, as they don't believe their employees to go to warriors' paradise when dying gruesomely in battle, but it's not something that would give Starfleet an "unfair" edge dramatically. Although on the long term, it might undermine drama by removing the risk of fatally deadly demise of the heroes.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Deks]

It actually makes sense that only 4 people would be trained on how to operate the ship as its likely it has high levels of automation installed (much like any other SF ship).

This is one of the things that was never used properly on Trek... namely, Federation ships don't NEED large crews next to all the automation that can go into a ship, and the crew can still be trained for emergencies when automation systems fail beyond their ability to repair themselves (in which case, the crew would need to first repair those systems and let the ship mend itself - which would be infinitely faster).

The crews could have been regularly seen dedicating themselves to research, development, art, etc., not really having 'duty shifts' in any regular sense of the word, or such notions would have been incorporated into their daily lives but wouldn't be seen as 'work', more like a side-glance and a means to contribute to daily operations of the ship (if needed).

But in the case of Prometheus, a vessel designed for deep space tactical assignments with full scale automation could be more or less useful in case of attacks and minimize the potential casualties (if the ship has proper anti-transporter and anti-intruder systems - in the case of the episode where Prometheus was introduced, it could be excused as a simple matter of the ship being incomplete when it comes to those particular measures).

 

[Timo]

The fact still remains that the two fighting components needed zero crew in order to fight, while the third component had seating for four. Or three chairs and two stools, but the fourth crew member walked between the aft wall consoles all the time anyway, ignoring the stools, and still supposedly managed to operate the ship as intended.

When "fully crewed", I could see the Prometheus bunking largish repair teams in the "alpha section" with the tiny nacelles and deploying those to the fighting sections during combined flight - then evacuating the teams when the time came to deploy the drones for fighting. Four people pushing bridge buttons could still conduct all the fighting, preferably from a great standoff distance.

If each of the three sections were crewed (even if sparsely), it would make no sense to dock three starships into one cluster. But if two of the sections are drones that need to return to the mothership for repairs, the clustering does make sense. Even if it differs a bit from the "classic" carrier model where the mothership provides the long range propulsion (as Star Trek dictates that long range propulsion is the same thing as fighting propulsion, so the big engines should be in the drones), or from the "classic" tender model where the mothership doesn't move with the fighting units but lies at anchor somewhere safe.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[T'Girl]

The actual logic behind MVAM seems solidly built into the story: this ship is supposed to fight without a live crew. Or at least two thirds of it are...

I compare the Prometheus needing four people (or two EMH's) to the Enterprise Dee probably only needing a similar number. Twice TNG said that Data could operate the ship by himself. Once with the crew otherwise incapacitated he was ordered to take the ship to the Neutral Zone and make a presence. The other he commandeered the ship to met his maker.

The command section is the only crewed one in the fight we see. But how could it ever be different, when Starfleet has only trained four people to operate the ship so far, and it takes four at least to crew the command section bridge?

Maybe four for limited high security flight testing, but considerably more for a regular deployment. If it takes four to run the bridge, how long could those four remain on duty? Three shifts of one officer, plus the captain alway on call. No days off, no leave, no sickbay time.

Likely, a normal cruise (post fight testing) would see the ship with a crew of several hundred, larger bridge crew, engineers, doctors, etc. The majority of the equipment aboard is probably not too dissimilar to that of rest of the fleet.

 

[Captain_Amasov]

The Prometheus having holo-emitters on all decks suggests that the ship might eventually have been protected, or even crewed, by holographic entities.

 

[David cgc]

Another point arguing for a conventionally-sized crew-compliment is the number of windows and escape pods. The middle section even has windows on the upper part of the "saucer," where they'd be covered when the ship was joined, suggesting the designers may have anticipated the ship spending significant amounts of time separated (enough for the psychological benefit of windows to be needed). I suppose it could also split into two sections rather than three, with the middle remaining attached to the top or bottom while the other section did its own thing.

But that gets into the whole cost/benefit analysis of separating, joining, or just making three ships that the Prometheus always invites. There's conflicting evidence for how the Enterprise-D performed while separated; Riker said in BoBW that the extra power from the saucer's impulse engines made a significant difference, but Worf said in "Heart of Glory" that detaching the saucer made the Enterprise an "exceptional weapon." Context matters, of course. Maneuverability might not matter as much against the Borg as just being able to plow power into the shields for as long as possible, but there's at least some performance benefit to leaving a Galaxy joined than easy access to the science labs and dolphin tanks and shopping mall.

I suppose the simplest explanation is that the full Prometheus is greater than the sum of it's parts in some important ways, yet the parts themselves are still a match for most ships of their size. The combined ship is faster for longer periods, or more efficient, or something, but it still can't be in three places at once. A better bang for the buck than, say, an Excelsior-sized base ship with two Defiants docked to it.

 

[Timo]

I compare the Prometheus needing four people (or two EMH's) to the Enterprise Dee probably only needing a similar number.

Fair enough. The four people trained by Starfleet were intended to be specially trained, supposedly meaning nobody else in the universe could fly this ship. And indeed the Romulan hijackers had trouble with the "unfamiliar new systems". Yet they could operate the ship, including its newest and most secret systems... Where does that leave us?

IMHO, this undermines the idea that the training was special because of the task being demanding, and thus supports the idea that secrecy was behind the refusal to train more people. But this also implies Starfleet was going to test the ship with only those four people and not train more until the testing was completed. And clearly those four could have tested all the relevant modes, when less trained Romulans already put them to operational use.

So we're now essentially speaking of an operational crew of four, as opposed to a ferry crew capable of moving the E-D from A to B provided the ship is already "primed" for it. "Operational" in the sense of being the minimum number for brief operations, but still. And this would be exceptional, us seeing the first-ever truly optionally crewed combatant.

Another point arguing for a conventionally-sized crew-compliment is the number of windows and escape pods.

Yup, Alpha (command triangle) has 12 pods and an apparent aft shuttlebay door, Beta (upper fighting section) has 8 pods and an aft shuttlebay, and Gamma (lower fighting section) has 8 pods and no shuttle facilities in evidence. Alpha has an obvious topside bridge, Beta may have one, Gamma has nothing looking like one. Alpha has a tiny blue perhaps-deflector at bow, Beta has what looks more like bow windows, Gamma has big dish. Alpha has tiny warp engines, Beta and Gamma huge ones.

The three sections are quite dissimilar, then. Does that suggest three completely different roles? Or its conceptual opposite, an even splitting of the burden of carrying all the gear that is superfluous to the separated mission but essential for the combined mission?

The former might go against the concept of a command section operating two drone sections. The latter accommodates that concept.

Maneuverability might not matter as much against the Borg

We've never seen maneuverability matter against any opponent, really: it's not possible to dodge enemy fire in the general case, or to gain a firing position that would be more advantageous than any other. And the sections of the Prometheus don't really do any maneuvering, either.

The ability to be in three places at once seems to matter. Moving once there might not be all that essential.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[T'Girl]

an even splitting of the burden of carrying all the gear that is superfluous to the separated mission but essential for the combined mission

This is what I consider one of the Pro's prime features, each segment only carries a portion of the non essentual bulk into combat.

Unlike three entirely separate ships.

 

[sojourner]

an even splitting of the burden of carrying all the gear that is superfluous to the separated mission but essential for the combined mission

This is what I consider one of the Pro's prime features, each segment only carries a portion of the non essentual bulk into combat.

Unlike three entirely separate ships.

So, the enemy ship just targets the ship with all of that "non-essential" stuff. destroys it, and leaves the other two parts to die of starvation.

Brilliant!

I'll take the three complete ships, thankyou.

 

[T'Girl]

So, the enemy ship just targets the ship with all of that "non-essential" stuff

Except no one of the three segments has "all" the non-essentials, the non-essentials are divided between the three.

One has the cargo holds, another has the flight deck, another has the holodecks and the geology labs.

and leaves the other two parts to die of starvation

Or at the end of combat, continue as before, regrettable without holodecks. I would regard food production as a essential, so each segment would be capable of this.

I'll take the three complete ships, thankyou.

Each of which in a combat situation would be weighted down with all the "non-essentials," three separate flight decks, three times the cargo holds, so on.

No thank you.

.

 

[Go-Captain]

So, the enemy ship just targets the ship with all of that "non-essential" stuff. destroys it, and leaves the other two parts to die of starvation.

Brilliant!

I'll take the three complete ships, thankyou.

That's why I think the Prometheus is another anti-Borg design, not a conventional fleet combatant, and why I think a normal version would be a single hull vessel incapable of MVAM.

There is this thing called N Squared law, which says given a number of guns, the more hulls you have (splitting the amount of guns between more hulls), the more survivable your firepower is, and the better its chance at victory. Prometheus can split into more hulls, so it is increasing its survivability at the cost of attrition, but similar to what you mention, why not use three smaller ships? I believe it has to do with speed.

Smaller ships are less likely to have the power output to reach very high warp speed. Look at the Defiant, it's oozing power, but is still slow, and similar in size to a single Prometheus hull division. The combined power of a larger ship can easily hit high speeds, so the Prometheus is designed to move very fast as a single unit, and split on arrival to maximize victory by using superior attrition. Even the placement of holoprojectors everywhere is an acknowledgment of how much attrition might happen. That implies it is expected to face off against superior force every time, and it is expected to take losses no matter what, and it needs to respond faster than anything else. The Borg is the only threat which fits the need for a rapid response to overwhelming power, where acknowledging attrition is the best way to maximize group survival.

The Prometheus is complementary to the Defiant's logic. The Defiant is short ranged due to low top speed, small as reasonably possible to reduce individual ship losses, but packing as much firepower as possible. The Prometheus is all those things and fast, allowing it to intercept Borg attacks away from important places, and offer aid to places which might not having standing forces of Defiant. In "The Best of Both Worlds" the Prometheus would have gone to Wolf 359, while the Defiant would stay in the Sol system.

 

[T'Girl]

My take on the battle with the cube at the beginning of First Contact was the initial interception was with the most number of ship that could be arrange from those in the vicinity.

The further back they intercepted, the more ships Starfleet could have mustered, but at the same time they didn't want the cube to penetrate too far without beginning their defense in depth. After the interception there was a running battle all the way to Earth, with ships dropping out and being destroyed, and new ships joining the battle. If they ever did drive the cube out of warp, the drones would repair it, and it continued on it's way.

If Starfleet could have massed enough ships at the same time, the cube could have been stopped and destroyed. But they just couldn't.

Now following your idea, a fleet of Prometheus class ships could reach a rendezvous point at high speed from multiple starting locations, triple their numbers by separating the hulls, and swarm the cube.

.

 

[sojourner]

three times the cargo holds, so on.

No thank you.

.

Like I said, the two remaining crews starve to death. And what happens if the destroyed part happens to be the middle one? Now you've got 2 pieces not designed to reconnect and most likely, in the bid to make this thing MVAM there have been compromises to how well the parts operate on their own. So now you're left with two parts that are less capable than 2 whole surviving ships. With one kill the enemy has reduced your fleet strength by more than one ship.

MVAM is silly. You don't see any real world analogs to it for a reason.

You want MVRAM capability? build a carrier.

 

[T'Girl]

cargo holds

Like I said, the two remaining crews starve to death.

Because we see Starfleet replicators being kept in the cargo holds? Being essential equipment, the replicators would be present in all segments.

And what happens if the destroyed part happens to be the middle one? Now you've got 2 pieces not designed to reconnect

Given the possibility that the middle segment might be destroyed, it would make abundant sense for the top and bottom segments to be able to join together directly.

With one kill the enemy has reduced your fleet strength by more than one ship

More a case of one ship would lose a third of it combat capacity, plus whatever unique attributes the destroyed segment possessed. In the case of the middle segment, the ship as a whole would lose the main flight deck.

This would similar to the Enterprise Dee losing it's saucer in combat and being deprived of any facilities not duplicated in the engineering section.

MVAM is silly. You don't see any real world analogs to it for a reason

That reason being we don't possess large combat spacecraft.

You want MVRAM capability? build a carrier.

Hardly the same thing, fighters would lack the speed and fire power of a Prometheus segment. But I am in favor of Starfleet operating carriers, fighter do have their place.

.

 

[David cgc]

So now you're left with two parts that are less capable than 2 whole surviving ships.

Which two whole ships? A Defiant is less capable than an Intrepid is less capable than a Galaxy. If you assume each part is more-or-less equal to a Defiant (no science lab, no holodeck, barely any sickbay, barely any shuttles, low crew for damage control or boarding or crowd control or whatever you use redshirts for), but with one extra. A few science labs, or a holodeck, or a full-sized sickbay spread out among the different sections, leading to a combined ship equivalent to a more martial version of the Intrepid (or a Sovereign's little sister). That's pretty good, but three (or two) slightly-more-capable Defiants aren't bad, either. Hardly useless to Starfleet.

And anyway, the surviving sections don't need to survey the Beta Quadrant, they just need to be able to make it to a starbase. Even if the combined ship had greater speed or range than the individual sections, even a fairly short-range, short-duration ship like Voyager could travel hundreds of times the distance any Prometheus would be deployed out to under warp. It might take a bit longer, but the survivors could still get to useful places in reasonable periods of time.

 

[sojourner]

So now you're left with two parts that are less capable than 2 whole surviving ships.

Which two whole ships? A Defiant is less capable than an Intrepid is less capable than a Galaxy. If you assume each part is more-or-less equal to a Defiant (no science lab, no holodeck, barely any sickbay, barely any shuttles, low crew for damage control or boarding or crowd control or whatever you use redshirts for), but with one extra. A few science labs, or a holodeck, or a full-sized sickbay spread out among the different sections, leading to a combined ship equivalent to a more martial version of the Intrepid (or a Sovereign's little sister). That's pretty good, but three (or two) slightly-more-capable Defiants aren't bad, either. Hardly useless to Starfleet.
.

Imagine it this way. The promy costs 100 points to build. Now you build 3 ships each of 33.3 points. Sounds like an even trade for that MVAM right? but the promy has to use some of those points for the magical MVAM hardware for mating. We'll be conservative and say it takes 10 points. So each part of Promy comes out to only 30 points of useable ship. I'll take my 33 point ships and trash your 30 point ships all day long. You want a great example of tactics and strategy? Dig up an old pen and paper game called Star Fleet Battles.

cargo holds

Like I said, the two remaining crews starve to death.

Because we see Starfleet replicators being kept in the cargo holds? Being essential equipment, the replicators would be present in all segments.

Given the possibility that the middle segment might be destroyed, it would make abundant sense for the top and bottom segments to be able to join together directly.

More a case of one ship would lose a third of it combat capacity, plus whatever unique attributes the destroyed segment possessed. In the case of the middle segment, the ship as a whole would lose the main flight deck.

This would similar to the Enterprise Dee losing it's saucer in combat and being deprived of any facilities not duplicated in the engineering section.

MVAM is silly. You don't see any real world analogs to it for a reason

That reason being we don't possess large combat spacecraft.

You do know how analogies work, don't you? Seen any MVAM submarines put into service? Sea going warships? Combat aircraft? Tanks?

Ask the Navy why they don't build battleships that split into 3 destroyer sized ships.


Sigh, what do you think is in those cargo holds? Hmmm, maybe the raw material for the replicators?

"Commander, where were the spare parts to repair our battle damage?"
"um, in the cargo hold, sir"
"I see, then we're fucked."

Hey! will just make everything able to join together with everything! Magical engineering! Yeah, it doesn't work like that.

Fighters are the true MVAM. You carry them into combat on a big, heavily armored ship, then deploy these cheap and easy to replace weapons platforms that can attack from - gasp!- Multiple Vectors!!!! with no down sides of the magical silly MVAM ship.

 

[T'Girl]

Fighters are the true MVAM

Not in the least, we saw fighters during Sacrifice of Angels, and we saw the an actual MVAM in Message in a Bottle, totally dissimilar. Even divided each piece of the Prometheus is huge in comparison to a fighter, the largest piece of the Prometheus was about 1300 feet long. The thing packs multiple warp cores, multiple torpedo magazines, hell it could probably carry a few fighters.

That reason being we don't possess large combat spacecraft.

You do know how analogies work, don't you?

Of course, but I stand behind my response, outside of a zero gee environment I don't see this working. Reconnecting in a heaving sea would be beyond our technology.

Ask the Navy why they don't build battleships that split into 3 destroyer sized ships.

In a way this is what happen, a small number of surface warfare battle-wagons were (eventually) replaced with large numbers of Arleigh Burke class destroyers.

Imagine it this way. The promy costs 100 points to build. Now you build 3 ships each of 33.3 points. Sounds like an even trade for that MVAM right? but the promy has to use some of those points for the magical MVAM hardware for mating.

Magic how? We talking about something like the big latches that connect the Enterprise Dee's saucer and engineering. That's all.

Given how basic of engineering we're talking about, let say 1/100th of one point.

Because we see Starfleet replicators being kept in the cargo holds? Being essential equipment, the replicators would be present in all segments.

Sigh, what do you think is in those cargo holds? Hmmm, maybe the raw material for the replicators?

No, the cargo hold would hold cargo. Hence the name "cargo hold."

With each segment possessing their own replicators (essential equipment), those replicators would come with their own tanks of base materials.

"Commander, where were the spare parts to repair our battle damage?"

"Being replicated as we speak, Captain."

Given the possibility that the middle segment might be destroyed, it would make abundant sense for the top and bottom segments to be able to join together directly.

Hey! will just make everything able to join together with everything! Magical engineering! Yeah, it doesn't work like that.

Again, magic how?

The two remaining segment latch together in such a way that at least one turbolift shaft and some of the latter wells line up, the power and control lines as well. It would a consideration of the original design. There'd be a program with the structural integrity field that would take this configuration into account.

.

 

[sojourner]

Ya know? forget it. there are plenty of old threads where this has been debated to death:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=117859&highlight=prometheus
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=94334&highlight=prometheus
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=107687&highlight=prometheus

Choose your poison.

 

[T'Girl]

old threads

Yes, I'm present in two of them, one was from before I joined the board. Lot's of people with great postings as to why the Prometheus is a superior design.

 

[sojourner]

old threads

Yes, I'm present in two of them, one was from before I joined the board. Lot's of people with great postings as to why the Prometheus is a superior design.

And just as many with postings showing the folly in the idea.

Learn how things work, learn some tactical/strategy simulations. Try out the promy then get back to me.