...No, the survival odds would be only 50%.
After all, the other door to that room blew to stardust. (And it was the one that didn't malfunction!)
Timo Saloniemi
Spoilers Starship Design in Star Trek: Picard
- Thread starter pst
- Start date
...No, the survival odds would be only 50%.
After all, the other door to that room blew to stardust. (And it was the one that didn't malfunction!)
Timo Saloniemi
Like that door that used to come down everytime Ent-D had a core breach. It would come down to save engineering and then the whole ship would blow up anyway
G
Gonzo
Guest
Yeah and it looks like they have done that which is why I said to focus on improving their offense and defense as they seem to have the platform and mass production covered, I bet those Battle Cruisers can really shift as it is somewhat implied that they were able to make up the distance to arrive just behind the Romulans, the General certainly seemed surprised to see them so soon, perhaps she thought she could wipe out the colony before they arrived or perhaps Clancy was on to her earlier than we think.
Its hard to tell just how big the ships are but they look longer than Voyager (say 400-500m) but with fewer decks and a lower profile due to the lack of a main Deflector Dish, the way they are grouped together and have a very similar appearance makes me think they are purpose built, mass produced warships, the lack of registry and names would also support this.
That single Starfleet Battle Group we saw is enough to make any enemy think twice, even the Borg or the Dominion, it does look like Starfleet learned some very valuable lessons from the Dominion War and the value of mass produced ships, the bottleneck then becomes training enough crew and officers to command them, no doubt automation and perhaps holograms can help a lot there especially in the areas of Medical, Navigation/Piloting and Hospitality.
Larger platforms will still be needed for deep space exploration due to the advantages a greater internal volume provides, especially at the distances we could be talking about now that Quantum Slipstream and Transwarp is available.
Same goes for using smaller ships like the Defiant for escorting capital ships and scouting.
While a lot has been made about Starfleet being weaker after the Dominion War and attack on Mars I have to disagree, it is events like that which can be very beneficial for military's of any kind, it provides the perfect opportunity to get rid of the dead wood and older designs which are serviceable but not up to scratch as the 25th Century dawns allowing a shift in focus to the future needs of the Federation, in defense and exploration.
It could even trigger a golden age in ship design.
If Starfleet is now full of Defiant class ships, Ep 10 Battle Cruisers and larger Explorer ships then they are in pretty good shape for what is to come.
I think the Defiant class fills the scout/escort role perfectly so no real need to change anything there as it was able to match the Jem'Hadar Attack Ships with no trouble at all.
We just need to see what direction they will go in regards to Explorer ships, will it still be the Galaxy class (doubtful), the Odyssey class (needs a proper 4k model though) or something new.
Personally I am down for whatever.
While that’s a great idea, those ships don’t really seem to be any more or less interchangeable than any other ship design we’ve seen.
Until I see a good still I'm reserving judgement.
Regardless, my point stands. I don't want several different types of ships. I want one or two.
As long as the Enterprise-F doesn’t look like that, I’m happy.
I mean, also look at the Klingon Photon Torpedo in ST6, goes straight through the saucer like a hot knife through butter.
Oh, I highly doubt the Enterprise F will look like that. Hopefully we won't see it for a while but I think it will be a class all of its own because Enterprise.
Apparently after the 2250's, Starfleet went cheap on emergency doors.Like that door that used to come down everytime Ent-D had a core breach. It would come down to save engineering and then the whole ship would blow up anyway
You know that Neutronium Alloy door that the Dominion had, we need to learn the secret formulation to making Neutronium Alloy so things like the "Warp Core" can't explode and kill everybody.
Or, you know, have fail safes that actually work!
The 1 or 2 kind of ship fleet... I don't agree.. Lets take Aircraft, you have an Interceptor, you have air superiority, you have bombers, you have escorts, Etc. Etc. Can 1 plane do everything? Sure.. but some it will do quite badly, and going against say like a dedicated air superiority fighter, it would get its ass handed to them..
So in Starfleet ships, can you do 1 or 2 basic designs? Sure! but you'd also get the same thing.. mediocre at most things..
Having that type (or types) of ships for say a patrol fleet, where there realatively small, patrol a border, or make house (planet) calls, you don't need a large explorer type. but you do need something that is fast, and realitively well armed for its size. Would it make for a good explorer ship? It has sensors, but nothing that is specialized, etc.
Can the same design be outfitted differently? Sure, but your main hull would be generic and not specialized, and you could only go so far on changes.
So just my opinion, different size, shapes, etc for different missions
So in Starfleet ships, can you do 1 or 2 basic designs? Sure! but you'd also get the same thing.. mediocre at most things..
Having that type (or types) of ships for say a patrol fleet, where there realatively small, patrol a border, or make house (planet) calls, you don't need a large explorer type. but you do need something that is fast, and realitively well armed for its size. Would it make for a good explorer ship? It has sensors, but nothing that is specialized, etc.
Can the same design be outfitted differently? Sure, but your main hull would be generic and not specialized, and you could only go so far on changes.
So just my opinion, different size, shapes, etc for different missions
That's more my point. Having a modular hull that can be redone for different mission profiles.
I guess I would have a couple of different types with maybe two types within it.
The Enterprise-F could have been in that fleet...lost in the crowd...
It depends on the technology advancements and what design guidelines we have made along with Budget Constraints and capabilities.The 1 or 2 kind of ship fleet... I don't agree.. Lets take Aircraft, you have an Interceptor, you have air superiority, you have bombers, you have escorts, Etc. Etc. Can 1 plane do everything? Sure.. but some it will do quite badly, and going against say like a dedicated air superiority fighter, it would get its ass handed to them..
So in Starfleet ships, can you do 1 or 2 basic designs? Sure! but you'd also get the same thing.. mediocre at most things..
Having that type (or types) of ships for say a patrol fleet, where there realatively small, patrol a border, or make house (planet) calls, you don't need a large explorer type. but you do need something that is fast, and realitively well armed for its size. Would it make for a good explorer ship? It has sensors, but nothing that is specialized, etc.
Can the same design be outfitted differently? Sure, but your main hull would be generic and not specialized, and you could only go so far on changes.
So just my opinion, different size, shapes, etc for different missions
The advantage of converging multi-role aircraft is simplified logistics for manufacture, training, and repair.
That's the path modern military have been going, converging as much as feasible into one platform.
F-22 = Air Superiority First, Multi-Role Second.
F-35 = Air-Ground First, Air Superiority (2nd Best in the world), Multi-Role Third.
Three variants of the F-35 will replace the A-10 and F-16 for the U.S. Air Force, the F/A-18 for the U.S. Navy, the F/A-18 and AV-8B Harrier for the U.S. Marine Corps, and a variety of fighters for at least ten other countries.
EA-18G Growler = Dedicated Electronic Warfare platform, this will stay around for the foreseeable future.
F-18 Super Hornets = Current Multi-Role platform that also doubles as a tanker and is about to be put out to pasture.
F-16 Falcon = Current Multi-Role platform that will also get replaced.
AV-8B Harriers = Current Marine Close Air Superiority platform, will also get replaced.
As much as I wanted it to be there, it wasn't there.
The ships that were there seem slightly larger than Voyager's Intrepid class, but cloned about 200+ times.
Well, that works for me.
F-35 is a lesson in what can go wrong with that thinking. F-15s and F-16s will continue for many years to come. The F-35 can only use it's internal bay in a high threat environment. If it uses it's pylons for weapons and fuel that compromises it's stealth. But that reduces it's payload dramatically, from 18,000ibs to less than 6,000ibs. That is about 1/4th of what the F-15E can carry.
Hard to make a Jack of all trades single platform. Small enough to do fighter roles makes the internal bay small, stealth is a big part of the appeal, but it loses that if it uses it's outside pylons. It carries far less than legit strike platforms and does it an enormously higher cost per hour. Meanwhile, the F-22 would tear it up air to air. It cant replace the strike fighter anymore than it can replace the F22 for air superiority. It does neither role well enough to do that. It's a Master of None.
Actually the F-35 is doing just fine by the pilots who are supposed to be on the front line.
https://theaviationist.com/2019/02/...ggressors-at-red-flag-are-starting-to-emerge/
During that iteration, designated RF 17-1, the U.S. Air Force F-35A Lightning II, who had just been declared IOC (Initial Operational Capable) achieved a resounding score in mock aerial engagements against Aggressors: while early reports suggested a 15-1 kill ratio a subsequent Air Force testimony by Lt. Gen. Jerry D. Harris, Vice Commander of Air Combat Command characterized the kill ratio as “20-1” meaning that, for one F-35A “lost” in simulated combat in a high threat environment that the aircraft destroyed 20 simulated enemy aircraft.
According to the airmen of the 388th FW, during the first week of RF 19-1, the F-35 pilots flew in a larger force of Blue Air in a counter-air mission. More than 60 aggressor aircraft were flying against them, blinding many of the fourth-generation aircraft with “robust” electronic attack capabilities.
And the F-35 needs the stealth to perform it's SEAD missions and take out sensors and Anti-Air units on the ground.
And while in Stealth configuration, it'll carry all the weapons it'll need to take out the advisory's on the ground while the F-22's are watching their back in the sky.
Then when all of that is done, it'll load up it's pylons with more bombs to carry it's full load once enemy Ground Radar and Anti-Air is eradicated.
Should the F-22 fail, the F-35 is the 2nd best DogFighter in the world should it get to that point. But realistically, it'll see the enemy long before then and take them down.
And it's designed to be able to DogFight and manuever at full Stealth Loadout, something 4th gen aircraft can't do or manuever as well with a similar payload.
You design the aircraft, tactics, and strategy around it's capabilities. The US has more than planned for every scenario including some of the worst case scenarios for Peer 2 Peer or Superior adversaries.
