• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Starfleet: Sci-fi's Weakest Military.

Infinitus

Lieutenant Junior Grade
Red Shirt
Compared to other Science Fiction franchises, Starfleet kinda sucks in terms of military power. I know Roddenberry didn't to militarize the Federation, but common dude be realistic. Starfleet ships aren't designed to handle themselves in a war-type setting or against multiple adversaries(The Dominion War doesn't count because they only won because of the help from the Klingons and Romulans.) I mean, unless your ship's named Enterprise, your ship is boned. I mean, Federation ships are only good for two main things: deep-space exploration and scientific discovery. Sure they have anti-matter weapons, but their not made for combat.

If you have differing view points, I will counter them.
 
Yet Starfleet was never defeated by primitive teddy bears and a couple of well placed blaster shots. Nor are they running from their foes while on what could be a wild goose chase. ;)
 
The Battle of the Line in B5 was a complete slaughter, Earth was very weak in that universe.

Earth <= Narn < Centari < Minbari
 
I agree that the Battle of the Line was basically Earth getting bitch-slapped. But that was mainly due to Earthforce being centuries less advanced than the Minbari in terms of technology. But unlike Starfleet, B5 ships are designed for combat. Starfleet ships are only desgned to handle small space battles.
 
The novels of David Weber did do it better, the tactics of the US Navy during the WWII/pacific campaign make Starfleet look like morons. The Galaxy Class is (from the tech manual) a fine warship, it appears that Starfleets main problem is tactics.

Starfleet is charged with the defense of Earth, but there is no multilayered defense in depth. The DS9 station was fairly heavily armed with phasers and torpedoes. We've never seen any signs that Earth, a very important world, had a couple of hundred armed stations in orbit. Earth has no dedicated "home fleet" to protect it and yes it does periodically get attacked. During First Contact we saw no offensive fire coming up from Earth's surface striking the Borg cube. So no surface phaser batteries. No launchers holding hundreds of thousands of gigantic quantum torpedoes.

Numerous time we see a Starfleet ship allow a potential opponent to close to within a mile or two, given the speed of travel of 24th century weapons, that's inside your reaction time.
battle space: a zone around a naval force within which a commander is confident of detecting, tracking, engaging and destroying threats before they pose a danger.
The two big Dominion War battles I can remember both involved massed frontal assaults, no maneuvering, no coming in from multiple angles, no feints.

Starfleet is denied a cloaking device by their political masters.
 
Weak trolling attempt is weak.

IIRC, the ONLY Starfleet ship we've ever seen that can't be a capable warship for its time is the Oberth, which is a sad, pathetic joke waiting to explode.

And it arms itself better and better going forward, especially when you look at the Sovereign, Akira, and Defiant.
 
Star Trek is less militaristic, because unlike most sci-fi militaries, which are just modern military IN SPACE, Starfleet is an attempt to do and be something different- not soldiers as such, but scientists, explorers, peacekeepers and diplomats who are prepared to jump into the role of soldiers should it be needed- who carry guns, have rank and wear uniforms to aid them in doing so. Defending and fighting for the Federation is part of their job when necessary but it doesn't define their job. I've always thought relating to Starfleet as though it were just like modern militaries is rather foolish- they''re not the same thing, although there are certainly overlaps.

And you shouldn't confuse "non-militiaristic" with "weak". :)
 
The novels of David Weber did do it better, the tactics of the US Navy during the WWII/pacific campaign make Starfleet look like morons. The Galaxy Class is (from the tech manual) a fine warship, it appears that Starfleets main problem is tactics.

...

The two big Dominion War battles I can remember both involved massed frontal assaults, no maneuvering, no coming in from multiple angles, no feints


Indeed, it's hard to say which one is worse: in-universe space cadets who don't know that space has three dimensions, or real-life professional science fiction writers who don't know that space has three dimensions.

All that said, as far as I can tell, Star Trek combat is more like Fail Safe than Midway, and Starfleet relies on a widely distributed second-strike capability, apparently assuming that Earth could not be defended against a cloaked warbird intent on actually glassing the place, and also that no enemy homeworld could, either.

Then again, it makes you wonder why the Dominion didn't, since they had absolutely nothing of value to lose (hell, they glassed Cardassia themselves!). The real reason, of course, is that Earth is basically plot-invulnerable in Trek, despite having nearly zero relevance to 99% of all Trek stories, despite not being of great in-universe value because of the billions of off-world humans and dozens if not hundreds of human colonies, and despite rarely being interesting at all.
 
Indeed, it's hard to say which one is worse: in-universe space cadets who don't know that space has three dimensions, or real-life professional science fiction writers who don't know that space has three dimensions.
It's hard to say in terms of which one is "worse", as you say, meaning which one is more pathetic. However, personally, I know which one I consider worse, meaning which one I can tolerate. I can swallow writers getting things wrong much easier than I can accept the idea that in-universe, people are just that dumb. Things like having supposedly well-trained officers demonstrate zero tactical aptitude due to lazy writing, or when Data uses his super-fancy positronic brain to calculate some very high level math and gets the answer wrong (and no one corrects him)... The way I look at those kinds of writing mistakes is to just say "Well, if Star Trek were 'real', that wouldn't have happened quite that way, since it makes absolutely no sense." Works very well. :D

All that said, as far as I can tell, Star Trek combat is more like Fail Safe than Midway, and Starfleet relies on a widely distributed second-strike capability, apparently assuming that Earth could not be defended against a cloaked warbird intent on actually glassing the place, and also that no enemy homeworld could, either.
I will say that this always bugged me. I find it beyond impossible to believe that the defenses for Earth would be as lame ("lame" in this case boiling more or less down to "defenses?") as we are shown.
Then again, it makes you wonder why the Dominion didn't, since they had absolutely nothing of value to lose (hell, they glassed Cardassia themselves!). The real reason, of course, is that Earth is basically plot-invulnerable in Trek, despite having nearly zero relevance to 99% of all Trek stories, despite not being of great in-universe value because of the billions of off-world humans and dozens if not hundreds of human colonies, and despite rarely being interesting at all.
Well, to be fair, the Federation and Starfleet do keep their HQ there. One has to assume that if Earth fell, neither the Federation government nor Starfleet Command would just immediately be thrown into a state of decapitated chaos; there have got to be contingency plans involving government and military infrastructure in place on other worlds (Vulcan or Andor, perhaps). That said, even if you have backup plans, your primary HQ going under would have to suck, so Earth at least has in-universe importance. And personally, I'd like to see Earth a little more directly involved in some way in a Trek story or two.

All of that said, I think the boat has been sorely missed by the OP with regard to the "weakness" of Starfleet (both in terms of their effectiveness as a military, as a whole, and in terms of the power of individual ships). Nasat sums up the difference between "non-militaristic" and "weak" beautifully.
The Dominion War doesn't count because they only won because of the help from the Klingons and Romulans.
Unless your claim is "Star TREK military forces are weak" (meaning not JUST Starfleet), this isn't relevant, because without the Federation, neither the Klingons nor the Romulans would have had a shot in hell against the Dominion, either. And the real reason it took all three of them is just because the Dominion is HUGE. Which brings me to...
I agree that the Battle of the Line was basically Earth getting bitch-slapped. But that was mainly due to Earthforce being centuries less advanced than the Minbari in terms of technology. But unlike Starfleet, B5 ships are designed for combat. Starfleet ships are only desgned to handle small space battles.
So the Minbari being far more advanced technologically excuses Earthforce getting their asses kicked by them, yet the immense size and strength of the Dominion military (and their initial ability to shoot through Starfleet shields like they weren't even up) doesn't excuse Starfleet needing allies to win the war?

And no, Starfleet ships aren't designed to handle "only small space battles." Starfleet as a whole needed allies to win, due to being grossly outnumbered, but individual Starfleet ships did fine in large fleet battles against Cardassian and Jem'Hadar ships. They wouldn't have won the war otherwise.

Besides, at the VERY least (as Nerys pointed out), Starfleet > Imperial Stormtroopers. :rommie:
 
During First Contact we saw no offensive fire coming up from Earth's surface striking the Borg cube. So no surface phaser batteries. No launchers holding hundreds of thousands of gigantic quantum torpedoes.

I doubt there are any surface-to-orbit weapons emplacements on Earth. Starship-scale weapons are usually powered by antimatter reactions; you don't want to keep a lot of antimatter on your homeworld. Starfleet's safety record with the stuff isn't quite perfect. SO phaser or disruptor fire could wreak havoc with the atmosphere, creating all kinds of EM interference, cooking bystanders, or even changing global weather patterns. Nor do you want to keep torpedoes anywhere in your atmosphere; a Port Chicago or Black Tom event could have extinction-level consequences. Finally, weapons emplacements are targets, and if you put weapons on the surface of your planet, your planet is going to get shot up.
 
I think Earth does have Orbital defence stations. Wasn't there a mention about it when the Breen attacked Earth? A portion of their force was taken out.
 
I remember in the episode "best of both worlds" when the borg cube enters the system someone says that the cube made it past the "mars defence lines" or something like that. Never showed on screen, but then niether was the battle of wolf 359.
And its hard to say much about tactics in star trek when all the other races use the same generic tactics as well. The tactics used are very different from real life. Star wars for example basicly uses 17th century naval tactics, broadsiding enemy ships. They have large carrier ships and really rely on fighter support to win the day. Star Trek is very different. No carrier ships, almost no fighters and the ones that are shown are more like small gun boats than fighter planes, and the ships themselves employ fighter like manuvers. This is something that almost no starships in Star Wars can do.
The thing that really bothers me though is the fact that all of the alien races in star trek use the same tactics. I mean, how is it that NO other races decided to fight more like star wars? I think there would be at least ONE race that uses a whole shit load of fighters and huge support ships. (wouldn't do any good agianst the enterprise when it can shoot down severl small ships at the same time and up to 4 torpedoes at once and obliterate a whole squadron at once:p)
 
It's mentioned that Earth's own defenses destroyed the Breen fleet in DS9, and the novelization of TMP described Earth as having a LOT of planetary defenses but most of them ARE on the planet and not in space.
 
I think Earth does have Orbital defence stations. Wasn't there a mention about it when the Breen attacked Earth? A portion of their force was taken out.

I believe they said Starfleet took out the majority of the Breen ships.

Surface stations in any case make little or no sense - as in order to engage and destroy them the enemy would be attacking the Earth's surface from the start of the battle, so even if you win the Earth takes a pounding.

Orbital stations again have issues because of the number you would need, the horizon, and the fact they cannot manoeuvre to protect themselves.

Earth in the Dominion War seems to have at least one fleet protecting it at any one time. Fast manoeverable starships that can concentrate their firepower might make a much better investment than thousands of stations, at any one time more than half of which cannot engage the enemy.
 
Look I'm just saying that most of the time, Starfleet is out matched in a war-type situation due to all of their Ships being a science vessel, exploration vessel, and a battleship all in one. But they focus more on the science and exploration than on defense. This is because Starfleet focuses one solving problems with democracy that with armed weapons. That all well and good, but niave. Not every alien race wants to solve their problems with words(like the Klingons) At best, Starfleet should have three types of starships: The standard ship(Exploration/Science/Warship) A science vessel, and Battleships that are used only in times of war or as a last resort.
 
It's mentioned that Earth's own defenses destroyed the Breen fleet in DS9, and the novelization of TMP described Earth as having a LOT of planetary defenses but most of them ARE on the planet and not in space.
It refers to "Earth and Luna firepower," but doesn't specify whether that firepower is on the Earth, orbiting the Earth, or assigned to the Earth. Just that Vejur shut them down.
 
Earth in the Dominion War seems to have at least one fleet protecting it at any one time.
And after the war as well. IIRC, in VOY's 'Endgame' a rather sizable fleet responded almost imediately to a transwarp conduit opening near Earth.
 
Look I'm just saying that most of the time, Starfleet is out matched in a war-type situation due to all of their Ships being a science vessel, exploration vessel, and a battleship all in one. But they focus more on the science and exploration than on defense. This is because Starfleet focuses one solving problems with democracy that with armed weapons. That all well and good, but niave. Not every alien race wants to solve their problems with words(like the Klingons) At best, Starfleet should have three types of starships: The standard ship(Exploration/Science/Warship) A science vessel, and Battleships that are used only in times of war or as a last resort.
But don't they win? In the end isn't that what matters?
 
Compared to other Science Fiction franchises, Starfleet kinda sucks in terms of military power. I know Roddenberry didn't to militarize the Federation, but common dude be realistic. Starfleet ships aren't designed to handle themselves in a war-type setting or against multiple adversaries(The Dominion War doesn't count because they only won because of the help from the Klingons and Romulans.) I mean, unless your ship's named Enterprise, your ship is boned. I mean, Federation ships are only good for two main things: deep-space exploration and scientific discovery. Sure they have anti-matter weapons, but their not made for combat.

If you have differing view points, I will counter them.

GR was many things, but he was no "common dude."
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top