Prometheus class

[kv1at3485]

You may recall that in MVA mode two of the three sections could operate unmanned and autonomously do battle with their designated targets, using computer-orchestrated tactics but with priority normally placed on protecting the manned primary hull.

I recall no such thing.

I don't see why you'd think an operational Prometheus would have such a tiny crew. The ST way of doing things requires manpower. What happens when sections start taking damage? Who the hell is going to repair it?

And even if it were as you said, why is the "manned" section the one with the afterthought warp nacelles? You'd think the manned section should have the best chances of escaping.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

When it comes to questions of logic that can not be solved in any satisfying fashion, there is only one acceptable response:

 

[Captain Fine]

Nice graphic! LOL!

 

[SilentP]

I think the MVAM could have it's uses in instances where a ship is performing one assignment, but then something happens nearby which makes the Prommie the only local ship that can respond, but can't abandon it's current task.

Consider this example. Our example ship is delivering desparately needed medical supplies to a planet, who's people are dying in droves every second that is delayed. Now as the ship enters the system, they recieve a distress call from an outpost in the vicinity, under attack from pirates, threatened by stellar phenomena etc. The outpost could be saved, but only if the Prommie immeadiately diverts to assist. If they divert, many people will die on the planet.

Now, if this ship were a normal, single-hull vessel, the captain is restricted to a single choice, save the outpost, or save more sick. What's a captain to choose. If, however, our vessel is a Prommie, it's easy (or at least relatively easier). Simply split the ship, having the section that's least capable or useful to the assignment of saving the outpost carry on to the planet with the medical supplies, and letting the other sections go off and deal with the threat to the outpost.

I'll admit now, designing a ship for these kind of eventualities is a bit 'all but the kitchen sink' approach to design, but you never know how often this option could be useful, especially with vessels operating a long way from any kind of support.

 

[kv1at3485]

When it comes to questions of logic that can not be solved in any satisfying fashion, there is only one acceptable response:

I prefer:

"They're idiots."

 

[Praetor]

I'll restate: the only way the MVAM Prometheus makes sense to me is if it's an experiment in automated coordination as Timo suggests. I can see scenarios such as what SilentP suggests where it might be coincidentally useful, but I don't see designing and building it for such scenarios.

 

[N1N]

Im sorry an i missing something? Could someone explain in so uncertain term why the MVAM is a bad idea?

 

[sojourner]

I think the MVAM could have it's uses in instances where a ship is performing one assignment, but then something happens nearby which makes the Prommie the only local ship that can respond, but can't abandon it's current task.

Consider this example. Our example ship is delivering desparately needed medical supplies to a planet, who's people are dying in droves every second that is delayed. Now as the ship enters the system, they recieve a distress call from an outpost in the vicinity, under attack from pirates, threatened by stellar phenomena etc. The outpost could be saved, but only if the Prommie immeadiately diverts to assist. If they divert, many people will die on the planet.

Now, if this ship were a normal, single-hull vessel, the captain is restricted to a single choice, save the outpost, or save more sick. What's a captain to choose. If, however, our vessel is a Prommie, it's easy (or at least relatively easier). Simply split the ship, having the section that's least capable or useful to the assignment of saving the outpost carry on to the planet with the medical supplies, and letting the other sections go off and deal with the threat to the outpost.

I'll admit now, designing a ship for these kind of eventualities is a bit 'all but the kitchen sink' approach to design, but you never know how often this option could be useful, especially with vessels operating a long way from any kind of support.

The Galaxy class could do this already.

Im sorry an i missing something? Could someone explain in so uncertain term why the MVAM is a bad idea?

We could, but then again, you could just read all the reasons posted in the thread thus far.

 

[Deks]

Perhaps we have to look at this from a different perspective.

What's the purpose of the Prometheus to begin with?
It was designed for deep space tactical assignments (as stated in the show).

Furthermore ... the power/technology it had might not have been incorporated into other smaller SF ships to begin with.

Plus, sending 1 ship that can split into 3 equally powerful ships for a deep space tactical mission can be advantageous.
Perhaps 3 smaller ships would attract more attention and it might be difficult to mask their approach.
Now with the Prometheus, it may not present a problem as all it has to do is remain in it's main form to approach a target, and if combat ensues, surprise the enemy through separation and attack from multiple directions.
The enemy isn't dealing with just 1 powerful ship at that point, it's dealing with 3 ships that are equally powerful when connected.

Also ... the Prometheus was designed to be the fastest in the fleet ... likely while connected, with the separated parts having an ability to maintain such a velocity for a period of time before they are forced to slow down or reconnect.

The MVAM can be operated mainly by the computer ... but also keep in mind that only 10 people in SF know how to use the ship properly.
The Romulans are an exception as they could have been spying (which they probably did), and the EMH's were flying at the seat of their underwear, using the computer for the most part.

The Doctor also used the computer on numerous occasions to automate Voyager's functions as well ... so it's not like it's a novelty.

The computer can use the MVAM to execute numerous maneuvers, but with a live crew and a heated combat, it would have been slightly different as you cannot really predict human(oid) behaviour ... of course the computer could be executing the maneuvers randomly ... but I think SF would prefer for people to do the actual flying and not the computer itself.
As Janeway said herself ... if SF wanted to just chart anomalies and pockets of space, they'd build a fleet of probes ... not send people.

Besides ... remote operations over long distances while possible are a tad out of SF's reach for the moment (unreliable).
The Midas array has a long range ... about 20 000 LY's for real time communications if I'm not mistaken?
Still, if something were to go wrong and the ship's comm relay with SF cuts out ... even though it's automated, SF could find itself in a pickle.
While their ships are supposedly self-repairable ... some of the tech still needs to be maintained by the crew.
Prometheus is likely not different in this regard even though it may be highly automated.

 

[Praetor]

I'm still not convinced that any of that supports building a ship that can separate like the Prometheus. So you want a fast, low-profile, tactically efficient ship? Built one. Hell, they already did - it's called the Defiant. You can think of ways to justify MVAM, but that's about all you can do.

The MVAM was just a plot device to allow two tactically inexperienced EMHs to be heroes, just as much as the "Batmobile" armor and the transphasic torpedoes from "Endgame." The Prometheus was pretty, but MVAM still makes little sense beyond an automation/coordination experiment.

 

[Kross]

Hell, non-canonically speaking, SF already has a deep penetration ship - the Achilles class (from the Dominion Wars game).

 

[N1N]

I'm still not convinced that any of that supports building a ship that can separate like the Prometheus. So you want a fast, low-profile, tactically efficient ship? Built one. Hell, they already did - it's called the Defiant. You can think of ways to justify MVAM, but that's about all you can do.

The MVAM was just a plot device to allow two tactically inexperienced EMHs to be heroes, just as much as the "Batmobile" armor and the transphasic torpedoes from "Endgame." The Prometheus was pretty, but MVAM still makes little sense beyond an automation/coordination experiment.

Ok try this scenario on for size. The episode is "The way of the warrior" season 4 eps 1&2. The defiant is sent in to rescue the members of the detuppa council and is initialy met two klingon attack cruisers ( cant remember the classes ). In this instance the defiant had to drop its sheilds to beam aboard the council. If it had been the promethus MVAM could have been used to safely retrive the survivors and escape. Also in a battle/war situation time is always of the essence, your not always gonna have back up so having more firepower and options is never a bad thing.

Also consider this, if you were an federation admrial in the midst of the dominion war and you had an assignment to dish out. Resources and personal are spread thing which do you send 1 crew 1 ship ( with the power of 3 ) or 3 crews and 3 ships?

MVAM is hardly a plot device if you think about it. Isnt it just the next logical step of a technology that was already in use?

The United States Army Field Manual 3-0 offers the following definition of tactics: "Tactics – (Department Of Defense) 1. The employment of units in combat. 2. The ordered arrangement and maneuver of units in relation to each other and/or to the enemy in order to use their full potentialities. (Army) The employment of units in combat. It includes the ordered arrangement and maneuver of units in relation to each other, the terrain, and the enemy in order to translate potential combat power into victorious battles and engagements. (FM 3-0)."

Given this statment and the capabilites of the promethus, its clear that the would definately have the edge in 1 on 1 ship combat unless there were staggering odds against it. Now dont get me wrong im not saying the MVAM is the be all end all, or that it has to be spammed and used in every situation. All im saying is that what is offers should not be shrugged off as a gimick or whatever just because biased people dont like it!

 

[kv1at3485]

snip

Oversimplification.

If they could afford to station something Prometheus sized (plus crew) at DS9, they could probably afford to station multiple Defiants (plus crew) at DS9.

And no, I don't buy Prometheus' operational crew was supposed to be ten or something like that. More like many hundreds.

 

[Praetor]

My response to the "but the Prometheus could separate" argument remains: simply send three starships instead of one to start with.

 

[Timo]

Still no reason to have living spaces in a purely combat oriented drone.

Umm, were there any?

I mean, the sickbay and the bridge seemed to be in the one and same section of the triple-ship. There's no evidence the other sections had living spaces, now is there?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[sojourner]

Still no reason to have living spaces in a purely combat oriented drone.

Umm, were there any?

I mean, the sickbay and the bridge seemed to be in the one and same section of the triple-ship. There's no evidence the other sections had living spaces, now is there?

Timo Saloniemi

Absence of proof is not proof of absence. If you have crew in each section, then you will need support for that crew. So, with MVAM you actually increase redundance by have 3 sets of life support, 3 sickbays, etc. Not so in a pure drone.

Also consider this, if you were an federation admrial in the midst of the dominion war and you had an assignment to dish out. Resources and personal are spread thing which do you send 1 crew 1 ship ( with the power of 3 ) or 3 crews and 3 ships?

Same argument as above. If you have the capabilites of 3 ships, then you have the requirements of 3 ships. Just build 3 ships and don't waste the extra time and effort to make them "zomg! interlocking transformacons!"

 

[sojourner]

The enemy isn't dealing with just 1 powerful ship at that point, it's dealing with 3 ships that are equally powerful when connected.

This is basically saying that the promy is only 1/3rd as powerful when it is joined together. Which is about right when you consider compromises in warpcore sizes, weapons unable to fire because they are blocked by the other combat sections, systems that have to be built in triplicate because they are needed in each section, etc.
For the resources involved, you can maximize your investment 2 ways. Build 1 large ship which exceed the capabilites of the promy when joined, or build 3 small ships that exceed the promy when joined or seperated. Either way will be more effective than the promy.

 

[Deks]

The enemy isn't dealing with just 1 powerful ship at that point, it's dealing with 3 ships that are equally powerful when connected.

This is basically saying that the promy is only 1/3rd as powerful when it is joined together. Which is about right when you consider compromises in warpcore sizes, weapons unable to fire because they are blocked by the other combat sections, systems that have to be built in triplicate because they are needed in each section, etc.
For the resources involved, you can maximize your investment 2 ways. Build 1 large ship which exceed the capabilites of the promy when joined, or build 3 small ships that exceed the promy when joined or seperated. Either way will be more effective than the promy.

I meant that the Prometheus can fire equal firepower when both connected and when separated.
When separated, you gain the ability to attack from multiple directions at once using the same firepower as if you were attacking when connected from just 1 direction.

The only 2 possible disadvantages might be reduced shield intensity for separated sections when in MVAM (however that may not be the case as each core could provide high capacity shield power for their own section in either connected or separated modes, therefore you lose nothing in terms of shield intensity when the ship separates) and/or inability to maintain highest warp velocity in MVAM for a long period of time before the sections have to reconnect.

The Defiant may have been a warship, but it was not designed for deep space tactical assignments to my recollection, while the Prometheus was.

As for sending 3 small ships instead of just 1 that could separate in 3 ... I disagree, as I can see benefits in having a ship such as the Prometheus during a deep space tactical mission and surprising enemy forces for example in combat when it separates into 3 ships (but also easily mask the entire ship in fully connected mode).

As for the argument that you lose weapon ports when the ship is fully connected ... that's just rubbish since the ship has full coverage from all 3 sections in connected mode.
The secluded weapon ports and strips are there to provide full angle coverage for the sections in MVAM.
It's quite simple really.

And if you want to get detailed:
The Galaxy class had a secluded torpedo tube and phaser strip in fully connected mode which didn't become available until the ship separated.
Also, the Galaxy class saucer doesn't have warp capability (most likely an ability to sustain an existing warp field for a period of time).

 

[Abercrombie]

My response to the "but the Prometheus could separate" argument remains: simply send three starships instead of one to start with.

Two problems with that.
1) you assume that starfleet is "sending" them on a mission instead of just encountering an issue or being "the closest ship". By that theory, starfleet would operate like the klingons or romulans and send 2 or 3 ships everywhere, all the time.

2) Sending 3 ships would require 3 crews, 3 captains, 3 first officers, etc.

 

[Praetor]

I'll concede that requiring three full ships requires three full crews, which makes the Prometheus look even more like an automation experiment to me, but I am skeptical that each MVAM section could produce power equal to a full, independent starship.