I'm wondering how long it generally took in the show (TOS) to refit a large ship (i.e. Constitution Class, Miranda Class), following a 5-year deployment?
Refit Times
- Thread starter CuttingEdge100
- Start date
Depends on what you mean by refit.
If you meant the total rebuilding like we saw happen to Enterprise between TOS and TMP, about two and a half years or so (going by on-screen dialogue).
If you mean the kind of refit a ship might get between missions (repair, refurbishment, upgrades of some systems, etc.), no clue. A few months, maybe?
If you meant the total rebuilding like we saw happen to Enterprise between TOS and TMP, about two and a half years or so (going by on-screen dialogue).
If you mean the kind of refit a ship might get between missions (repair, refurbishment, upgrades of some systems, etc.), no clue. A few months, maybe?
I also think not every ship undergoes a refit after a long mission. Sometimes a ship may be temporarily reassigned to a starbase or a planet for awhile between deep-space missions. For all we know, Pike may have done two five-year missions pretty much back to back with only a few months downtime between them.
The Enterprise's refit during TMP could be looked at as an extreme refit because the ship was also redesigned inside and out. The actual process took eighteen months, but the year prior to that could have been spent simply planning the redesign, something that might not befall other Constitution-class ships refitted afterward, IMO.
The Enterprise's refit during TMP could be looked at as an extreme refit because the ship was also redesigned inside and out. The actual process took eighteen months, but the year prior to that could have been spent simply planning the redesign, something that might not befall other Constitution-class ships refitted afterward, IMO.
Ya- I think that the time really varies depending on the need. I'd say your guess is as good as anyone elses.
Even a large refit like the Enterprise may be longer or shorter with a different vessel because of it's specific mission needs, and any new technologies to assist (or hinder) the refit.
Even a large refit like the Enterprise may be longer or shorter with a different vessel because of it's specific mission needs, and any new technologies to assist (or hinder) the refit.
Everybody
1.) Would three to six months be a good estimate?
2.) I remember a drawing of the pressure hull which showed the saucer consisting of a series of concentric rings, and in the TOS-R, the way the engineering hull was configured looked like it could have had some modularity in the construction of the saucer, and engineering hull.
The saucer had a central section, a series of segments that form rings, with a large rear-section which the impulse deck is mounted to; the impulse engines themselves seemed to be a module in their own right (as they were changed around 2265); the bridge was also modular as it was changed without much alteration to the rest of the design. The engineering hull seemed to be constructed out of cylindrical sections almost like how an airliner is constructed. It's possible that even some of the support structure could be included in the prefabricated sections and connected when the sections were joined.
The warp-nacelles are obviously modular, but for all I know they could be constructed in a series of prefabricated sections. It would make construction far faster, and would also make upgrades quicker (especially with the impulse deck, the bridge, and warp-nacelles that can be removed without making major changes to the primary structure, but for heavy refits, or for repairing damage, you could swap out the damaged "module" and swap in a new one.
1.) Would three to six months be a good estimate?
2.) I remember a drawing of the pressure hull which showed the saucer consisting of a series of concentric rings, and in the TOS-R, the way the engineering hull was configured looked like it could have had some modularity in the construction of the saucer, and engineering hull.
The saucer had a central section, a series of segments that form rings, with a large rear-section which the impulse deck is mounted to; the impulse engines themselves seemed to be a module in their own right (as they were changed around 2265); the bridge was also modular as it was changed without much alteration to the rest of the design. The engineering hull seemed to be constructed out of cylindrical sections almost like how an airliner is constructed. It's possible that even some of the support structure could be included in the prefabricated sections and connected when the sections were joined.
The warp-nacelles are obviously modular, but for all I know they could be constructed in a series of prefabricated sections. It would make construction far faster, and would also make upgrades quicker (especially with the impulse deck, the bridge, and warp-nacelles that can be removed without making major changes to the primary structure, but for heavy refits, or for repairing damage, you could swap out the damaged "module" and swap in a new one.
Good point. A "Redesign and Refit" like in TMP was about 2.5 years.
But a typical stop at a Starbase for repairs, refurbishment or upgrades seem to be less than a week in TOS. In "The Search For Spock", Scotty was thinking about 2-8 weeks for repair before the Enterprise was ready to go back out.
So, unless it is a significant redesign, probable 2 months or less for a refit.
...And even something like the TMP reworking could be done in less than the 18 months specified in the movie, after the hero ship had paved the way and taught the repair crews how to best conduct the refitting. There might have been a great many false starts in the pioneering refit of NCC-1701, and the refitting of NCC-1702 might thus take, say, less than a year.
I gather starships in all Star Trek eras tend to be somewhat unique in configuration, as they return home at irregular intervals and thus receive the hottest new things at different times. When Starfleet R&D is less productive, ships get quick upgrades with tried and true equipment, but when lots of innovations are being made, the construction of equipment may drag behind the speed at which new stuff is designed, and there are some lengthy and experimental refits there.
Timo Saloniemi
I gather starships in all Star Trek eras tend to be somewhat unique in configuration, as they return home at irregular intervals and thus receive the hottest new things at different times. When Starfleet R&D is less productive, ships get quick upgrades with tried and true equipment, but when lots of innovations are being made, the construction of equipment may drag behind the speed at which new stuff is designed, and there are some lengthy and experimental refits there.
Timo Saloniemi
Just look at Nimitz class aircraft carriers. By the time the last one in the fleet gets a life cycle upgrade and overhaul, the first one is ready to come back for it's own overhaul. And new stuff is constantly being introduced to whichever ship is in for a life cycle upgrade.
This article in Defense Industry Daily has a nice overview and timeline of an ongoing refueling/overhaul for Teddy Roosevelt. Could be useful background for the OP.
One interesting quote:
So the refits done in between each 5-year mission would probably take about 1 to 2 months at longest with the exception of course the colossal refit in TMP, which could probably be done in a year?
Far smaller than what they should have been if you ask me.
Seriously, even in the 23rd century a redesign of an existing ship shouldn't really take too long if we are talking on the construction side.
Transporters that can convert matter into energy and back again?
Hello?
24th century tech can probably do this in far less time.
Or, another possible explanation as to why it took so long was because it was a redesign of an already done ship (but even then, how hard is it to dematerialize large sections of the ship and rematerialize them as new components that need assembly?).
Refits as such in the 24th century were done internally for the most part.
Complete redesigns were rare if non-existent (apart from adding a thing or two to the main hull).
Seriously, even in the 23rd century a redesign of an existing ship shouldn't really take too long if we are talking on the construction side.
Transporters that can convert matter into energy and back again?
Hello?
24th century tech can probably do this in far less time.
Or, another possible explanation as to why it took so long was because it was a redesign of an already done ship (but even then, how hard is it to dematerialize large sections of the ship and rematerialize them as new components that need assembly?).
Refits as such in the 24th century were done internally for the most part.
Complete redesigns were rare if non-existent (apart from adding a thing or two to the main hull).
Re-design of Enterprise:
Rarely are things ever built exactly to prototype blueprint standards - there's always 'as built' drawings made up to try and accurately show what was actually installed and how. But 30 years of use and repair and modification... who's to say they knew what they were going to be tearing into before they actually started taking things apart?
Plus they'd have to evaluate whether or not X or Y cross member could take the load of the new structures.
I'm sure the basic stuff was already designed, but designing how they integrate to the existing stuff would be a custom job.
Rarely are things ever built exactly to prototype blueprint standards - there's always 'as built' drawings made up to try and accurately show what was actually installed and how. But 30 years of use and repair and modification... who's to say they knew what they were going to be tearing into before they actually started taking things apart?
Plus they'd have to evaluate whether or not X or Y cross member could take the load of the new structures.
I'm sure the basic stuff was already designed, but designing how they integrate to the existing stuff would be a custom job.
Mysterion's point is well-made... the fact is, ST-TMP was guilty of mis-using a word. The Enterprise in TMP was not "refit" from the TOS ship, nor even "uprated" from the TOS ship. It was, for all practical purposes, a total ground-up new-build ship.
Apparently, 23rd-century Federation politics are much like today's politics... where meaningful words get corrupted by politicians to mean something utterly unrelated to what the words really mean.
My own standpoint - the Federation had signed a treaty allowing only a certain number of new-build vessels per year, or a certain number of any particular rating (heavy cruiser, etc). They needed dramatically-improved ships, but were limited from creating them by treaty stipulations. So, they CHEATED... calling the TMP ship a "refit version" of the original ship when it was, quite literally, an all-new vessel unrelated except in terms of general configuration to the original ship. I'm sure that they kept some small core components... maybe a stanchion in the lower "fusebox" compartment?... to justify that it was "the same ship, just refit" under the terms of the treaty. And they may have melted down the existing plating, reforged it, etc, to make the new plating... to meet some "re-use" requirement under treaty.
But it was NOT a refit (which basically means "fix damage and replenish supplies and stores") and it was not even an "uprating" (which means keep the ship largely as before but install some new equipment... which could mean new sensors, new engines, etc, but leaving the hull essentially unaltered). No, this was a near-total rebuild. But I'm sure that the Klingons would have raised a treaty-violation stink if they'd called it that. (On the other hand, I'm sure that the Klingons were hard at work rebuilding older D-7A TOS-style battlecruisers into D-7M TMP-style battlecruisers, under the same "refit" nomenclature, so....)
Apparently, 23rd-century Federation politics are much like today's politics... where meaningful words get corrupted by politicians to mean something utterly unrelated to what the words really mean.
My own standpoint - the Federation had signed a treaty allowing only a certain number of new-build vessels per year, or a certain number of any particular rating (heavy cruiser, etc). They needed dramatically-improved ships, but were limited from creating them by treaty stipulations. So, they CHEATED... calling the TMP ship a "refit version" of the original ship when it was, quite literally, an all-new vessel unrelated except in terms of general configuration to the original ship. I'm sure that they kept some small core components... maybe a stanchion in the lower "fusebox" compartment?... to justify that it was "the same ship, just refit" under the terms of the treaty. And they may have melted down the existing plating, reforged it, etc, to make the new plating... to meet some "re-use" requirement under treaty.
But it was NOT a refit (which basically means "fix damage and replenish supplies and stores") and it was not even an "uprating" (which means keep the ship largely as before but install some new equipment... which could mean new sensors, new engines, etc, but leaving the hull essentially unaltered). No, this was a near-total rebuild. But I'm sure that the Klingons would have raised a treaty-violation stink if they'd called it that. (On the other hand, I'm sure that the Klingons were hard at work rebuilding older D-7A TOS-style battlecruisers into D-7M TMP-style battlecruisers, under the same "refit" nomenclature, so....)
Exactly. Reminds me of how a pair of destroyers unfortunate enough to have been reduced to steel toothpicks at Pearl Harbor were "repaired" by building two all-new ships and then bolting (largely all-new) identification features referring back to the lost ships onto the newbuilds to carry the fancy and morale-raising pretense...
Even the timing is right, with the Organian treaty and its many rather absurd but at the same time realistic clauses in the recent past of our heroes and our audience alike.
Timo Saloniemi
Even the timing is right, with the Organian treaty and its many rather absurd but at the same time realistic clauses in the recent past of our heroes and our audience alike.
Timo Saloniemi
There's the 'new' Enterprise revealed in the Voyage Home movie. However, given the time frame and the fact that Starfleet had initially planned on decommissioning the Enterprise anyway, its hard to see where they found the time to build a completely new ship.
Word of God; Roddenberry supposedly has stated that the new Enterprise in VH is actually a refit of the Yorktown. The Yorktown was damaged during events of VH, so the refit took maybe a few months or so?
Word of God; Roddenberry supposedly has stated that the new Enterprise in VH is actually a refit of the Yorktown. The Yorktown was damaged during events of VH, so the refit took maybe a few months or so?
We don't know if the ship really was damaged beyond "losing all power". The nature of the power loss was never revealed, and apparently it was reversible for the installations around Earth (because the lights came back on as soon as the Whale Probe left). Perhaps the Yorktown was in pristine condition, only with five hundred corpses aboard because the ship had been completely without power for a day? Ripe for some redecorating and renaming to scare away the ghosts...
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
Given the poor condition of the Enterprise in Final Frontier, it seems to indicate that the ship hadn't been in pristine condition in the first place.
That alone might simply indicate shoddy construction.
However, when we get our glimpse at the E-A innards, we witness several "modern", TNG-style crew and command facilities that seem ahead of the designs aboard all previous starships - combined with TOS-style utility spaces, engineering corridors full of brightly colored GNDN tubes, a shuttlebay that has been less modified from the TOS standards than the shuttlebay of ST:TMP fame.
All this would IMHO indicate that the ship is indeed a partially upgraded preexisting ship, possibly a TOS era veteran undergoing her first, second or perhaps even third post-TOS refitting. A failure of that refit would explain the malfunctions regardless of what damage the ship had recently accumulated, if any. But the idea of a refit would also make it more plausible that the ship indeed is the Yorktown: the modernized parts are quick-to-install cosmetic changes, such as new computer interfaces and new corridor surfaces, while the true "bones" of the ship may remain intact as per the rather TOS-style engineering corridors.
Timo Saloniemi
However, when we get our glimpse at the E-A innards, we witness several "modern", TNG-style crew and command facilities that seem ahead of the designs aboard all previous starships - combined with TOS-style utility spaces, engineering corridors full of brightly colored GNDN tubes, a shuttlebay that has been less modified from the TOS standards than the shuttlebay of ST:TMP fame.
All this would IMHO indicate that the ship is indeed a partially upgraded preexisting ship, possibly a TOS era veteran undergoing her first, second or perhaps even third post-TOS refitting. A failure of that refit would explain the malfunctions regardless of what damage the ship had recently accumulated, if any. But the idea of a refit would also make it more plausible that the ship indeed is the Yorktown: the modernized parts are quick-to-install cosmetic changes, such as new computer interfaces and new corridor surfaces, while the true "bones" of the ship may remain intact as per the rather TOS-style engineering corridors.
Timo Saloniemi
Depends on how you look at it, HMS Furious remained HMS Furious even after being converted from a battlecruiser into an aircraft carrier no less, USS Tennessee was repaired and refitted into something resembling very much a South Dakota class ship, same goes for about every older Japanese battleship before WW-II,l those were nothing like the ships they were when they were build.
As for the 1701, I see it more like a service pack, instead of installing all kinds of small "patches"they just did everything at once.
Would mean that Connies not going on 5 year missions would have been rebuild much more often with little steps between them, maybe with some at one stage looking like the Phase II configuration..
As for the "A" I still think that must have been a prototype vessel of somekind, one that never was really meant to be an operational vessel which also explains its short service life, prototypes mainly have non standard equipment so even small repairs will be costly.
