• 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!

TMP, TNG starships and torpedo bays

..the Enterprise can rotate within her warp field anyway she needs to, to bring her forward facing weapons to bear.

:)

Exactly. The TOS/TMP Enterprise at warp (or running with warp at sublight speeds) isn't limited to traveling in the direction that she's pointed at.
 
Starboard numbers today (and for some time in the past) are odd, centerline is zero, and port is even.
1) I'm not aware of any sub today that has a centerline tube. 2) If there is, it wouldn't be labeled "zero." In USN parlance, it would be given a number based on how high in the hull and how far forward it is.

Don't know if this might help or not.

This U-boat dialogue doesn't mention tube. Perhaps when Kirk says "torpedo 2, 4 and 6" he is implying the specific tube as well?

Again, you don't refer to individual torpedo projectiles when firing, only the launcher. “Torpedo one ready" means that torpedo tube one is loaded, armed, and ready to fire.

Fact is, the dialog was probably lifted from a wartime sub movie, since most WW2 subs had 6 forward tubes. The reason why you'd only fire half of your tubes at a target is because they take time to reload (10-20 minutes in real life) and you might need the other 3 tubes in case you want to fire within 10 minutes of your last spread.

Why would Kirk only fire half the tubes? Simply because he was thinking about firing the other 3 tubes before they would have been reloaded if he did fire them.

What's wrong with TMP-era Torpedo bays still being located just above the lower saucer dome, much as we saw during TOS?

Nothing. It in fact makes perfect sense. During refit, they re-purposed the former saucer torpedo bays for whatever, and moved the tubes to the connecting dorsal, probably because it is the most structurally reinforced part of the ship allowing them to basically bolt-on the new tubes.

Why reduce the number of tubes? Any number of reasons. Perhaps 6 was too many in the first place. Maybe there was an advance in torpedoes, or a faster more reliable launcher reduced the need for extra tubes.

It could be that even-numbered torpedo tubes on a Connie are in the saucer, while odd-numbered tubes are in the secondary hull.

That would be completely unlike any numbering system ever used in history.

^^Not being that familiar with the E-E, but wouldn't that be the same as the "neck" TMP launcher since the E-E has no neck? Does the E-E have launchers on the side of the engineering hull ala Excelsior?

One forward launcher in the saucer, right above the captain's yacht. You get several close-ups of this tube in First Contact. There are 2 forward facing tubes underneath the deflector, and two more facing aft on roughly the same deck. For Nemesis, they added another tube right above the aft shuttlebay, and two more behind the bridge. This latter installation seems pretty stupid, as there's no way to really provide for a reloading mechanism since they're located above the docking bay.
 
(1: what if the saucer separated? The secondary hull would need its own phasers and torpedo launchers, both fore and aft, as would the saucer

Probably not, as the secondary hull would be space junk instead of a spacecraft. The TOS or TMP ships were never indicated as being capable of operating after parts of them were jettisoned, with the exception of the saucer section (mentioned in "The Apple").

(3: the flagship Connies would have to have at least as many torpedo tubes in the TMP era, since TWOK established that Reliant obviously had at least four tubes, two fore and two aft.

What flagships? For all we know, Constitutions were among the lesser ships in Starfleet arsenal.

OTOH, in recent history, the biggest and baddest ships had considerably fewer torpedo tubes than the humblest and most vulnerable. Very few battleships carried any torpedoes at all, whereas a tiny destroyer might well pack up to sixteen tubes. Perhaps the Constitutions indeed were Starfleet's top vessels, which meant they didn't have to stoop to carrying weakling secondary weapons such as torpedoes, at least not more than the number of tubes needed for the occasional planetary bombardment, probe launch or tactically surprising spread.

(4: It would be unwise for the Connie in any era to have all of its weapons concentrated in one part of the ship with no redundancy

It doesn't seem as if starships in TOS can afford much redundancy: there always appears to be just a single powerplant, for example.

OTOH, concentrating one's assets might make it easier for one to protect them. Many old warships were built on that all-or-nothing principle.

Exactly. The TOS/TMP Enterprise at warp (or running with warp at sublight speeds) isn't limited to traveling in the direction that she's pointed at.

We might have an onscreen confirmation of sorts for that in "Balance of Terror" where Kirk apparently retreats from the plasma weapon by warping backwards. Or at least neither the original or retooled VFX indicates that Sulu would have turned the ship around - the starfield effect on the monitor would probably have reflected that, at least initially, until Sulu had time to reset the cameras to lock to the incoming weapon (and thus point directly aft).

If the ship can reverse at full warp, it sounds pretty likely that she can move in any orientation at full warp. Although of course it might be that only movement along the axis of the nacelles is allowed. But then again, Kirk told Sulu to pivot at warp in "Elaan of Troyius". And the opening credits have the ship warping at what looks like a nose-down orientation...

Again, you don't refer to individual torpedo projectiles when firing, only the launcher.

But the quoted dialogue would indicate otherwise. That is, when you refer to the launcher in the real (if bygone) world, you apparently may indeed use the word "torpedo" rather than "tube", despite the fact that you actually refer to the tube. Which would nicely cover the two times "torpedo numbers" were used in TOS, allowing us to interpret them as tube numbers instead.

One forward launcher in the saucer, right above the captain's yacht.

And only ever seen firing quantum torpedoes at sublight. Might be a dedicated launcher for doing that, because none of the other tubes on that ship ever fired quantums.

For Nemesis, they added another tube right above the aft shuttlebay, and two more behind the bridge.

And apparently also one tube on saucer bow, and one on dorsal superstructure bow.

At least the shuttlebay tube might well "have been there from the beginning", though, since we never saw that part of the ship up close in sufficient detail (indeed, the flashing of a running light obscured the area in ST:FC shots).

This latter installation seems pretty stupid, as there's no way to really provide for a reloading mechanism since they're located above the docking bay.

Might be a defensive turret installed when it became obvious that those small Dominion "battlebug" attack ships didn't yield to standard phasers... A desperation move rather than a well-integrated weapons system.

Timo Saloniemi
 
One more tidbit - just caught "The Bedford Incident" recently and it is something from the mid 60's that Star Trek even used elements from for "The Corbomite Maneuver". The dialogue they used in it for arming their ASROCs was something like:

Captain: "Fire control, arm number one ASROC"
Officer: "Number one ASROC armed sir"

They showed the launcher as a box launcher with 8 cells/ASROCs so it does seem that you could imply the specific launcher/tube was meant when Kirk ordered "photon torpedo 2,4, and 6" without having to add "tube" or "launcher".
 
Regarding the "Kirk never retreats" / 1701-doesn't-need-aft-tubes sentiment, all of this assumes a Federation starship is fighting a single target. What if your starship is in-between two targets, and the captain needs a firing solution for both of them?

This would explain why both the Amar and the Reliant have permanent aft tubes, as well as forward tubes. And it would seem to suggest that Connies would have use for them as well. And, of course, the Galaxy-class Enterprise-D has forward-facing and aft-facing tubes as well... and IIRC, the E-D even has at least one tube in the saucer according to the TNG Technical Manual.
 
What if your starship is in-between two targets, and the captain needs a firing solution for both of them?

I would assume that you split your fire with phasers at Target A and Target B or use photons on the forward target and phasers on the other one. Or some combination of the two or just concentrate fire on one before going to the other target. M-5 when confronted with multiple targets seem to prefer attacking one and then another rather than splitting simultaneous fire at multiple targets in "The Ultimate Computer".

Just for grins I threw together a quick chart of known targets from TOS and included TWOK...

firing-output.png
 
...To be sure, in "The Changeling", our heroes lost warp power only some moments after establishing that the enemy was at 123 mark 18, and then switched to impulse power. The enemy was not said to be tailing them through all this. It was said to be staying put (it did not "change location") - which might mean the heroes were not, and would fire at Nomad from some other position, direction and distance.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Depends on how you interpret "change location" since Spock called out Nomad's location by bearing and range and not by xyz coordinates. Since Nomad's location was "holding steady", I interpreted that it's bearing and range had not changed when the torpedo fired. Otherwise, Spock would've called out a new bearing and range.
 
That's a bit unlikely from the tactical point of view, though: Kirk was trying to evade an enemy that was firing at him, so the relative positions of the two should be constantly changing. Even if Nomad considered it optimal to always attack from bearing 123/18 (very plausible machine behavior, that!), the smallest of attitude changes by Sulu would mean a massive positional change for Nomad. It should be easy for Sulu to point the ship towards Nomad before the enemy could react and perform the vast, sweeping maneuver that would restore the 123/18 position.

Timo Saloniemi
 
But how easy would it be for Nomad to maintain exactly that position alongside the Enterprise? Remember that Nomad's warp capability is much faster than the Enterprise's (especially one that got reduced to impulse) and we saw how a warp ship like a Klingon battlecruiser could easily dictate the direction it attacked from in "Elaan of Troyius".

I'd agree that Nomad would have a very hard time maintaining it's location along the Enterprise if she still had warp maneuvering but by the time the Enterprise fired all she had left was impulse power for maneuvering making it easy for Nomad to stay exactly where it was relative to Enterprise :)
 
Perhaps so - but it would still be relatively easy for Sulu to point the bow tubes more or less directly at the enemy, perhaps with a "feint left, turn right, fire" series. It's not as if a target 90,000 klicks away would be able to tease the ship like EP-607 teased the E-D at point blank range in "Arsenal of Freedom".

So we could use the episode to argue that forward-fired torpedoes can hit targets aft - or then argue that the ship never really demonstrated a situation where it couldn't turn, point and then fire...

Timo Saloniemi
 
I'm more inclined to say the forward-fired torpedoes can hit targets aft in this particular episode due to the inability of Sulu preventing the warp-drive Klingons from hitting Shield 4 repeatedly in "Elaan of Troyius" when stuck at impulse power. Nomad being much faster and a machine probably wouldn't break an electronic sweat holding it's position.

But if the Enterprise had warp maneuvering in "The Changeling" for that torpedo shot...
 
There's also "In A Mirror, Darkly..." to consider. The escaping U.S.S. Defiant fires at least one photon torpedo from its secondary hull. IIRC, it actually fires two...
 
If you're referring to the scene where the Defiant leaves the asteroid base, it's more like five or six torpedoes from the secondary hull, and a few more that come from off screen, possibly from the forward launchers.
 
Only one of the torps comes from the secondary hull on screen. A second one fires just after the ship has left the frame, but the direction it comes from makes it almost certain it came from the same launcher. And the five additional torps that then slam to the exterior of the asteroid base all come from more or less the same direction and originating location (even if they fan out a bit) - it would be quite, dunno, amazing if they really looped from forward tubes.

Timo Saloniemi
 
The dome above the shuttlebay was intepreted as the lower dome of the primary hull, a multi energy-weapon only blister, with physical torpedoes coming in TMP. I would call the twin tubes main torpedoes, with perhaps a surprise package (very limited) under the hatches below the bridge or under the shuttlebay with covers that flip open. Not true main tubes but something that could be rigged up.
 
The dome above the shuttlebay was intepreted as the lower dome of the primary hull, a multi energy-weapon only blister

...TOS-R and "In a Mirror, Darkly" might in turn prompt us to interpret all three domes (saucer dorsal and ventral, shuttlebay) as weapon targeting sensors, with the actual weapons clustered nearby. In "IaMD" we see pop-up phaser turrets flanking the aft dome; in TOS-R, phasers are more sharply drawn than in TOS, and can be seen originating some distance away from the dome (and even some distance away from the rim of the dome, which otherwise would have some very attractive features for potential phaser emitters).

Later technological developments might make it unnecessary to have every weapon cluster accompanied by such a domed sensor.

Timo Saloniemi
 
But the quoted dialogue would indicate otherwise. That is, when you refer to the launcher in the real (if bygone) world, you apparently may indeed use the word "torpedo" rather than "tube", despite the fact that you actually refer to the tube. Which would nicely cover the two times "torpedo numbers" were used in TOS, allowing us to interpret them as tube numbers instead.

The idea that you're calling out individual munitions is so incredibly clunky, it's borderline asinine. Think about it, with all of the chaos of combat around you, with all the tactics that have to be remembered and executed, you're going to take time to track whether or not we're on torpedo #13 or #15?

And apparently also one tube on saucer bow, and one on dorsal superstructure bow.

According to the production notes they did, but the CG model, as well as the physical model built for the ramming scene were unchanged from the FC filming miniature.

Side note, I also pretend the shuttlebay tube was there from the beginning. That makes for a nice symmetrical armament, two rapid-fire quantum-torpedo tubes (1 fore, 1 aft), and four photon tubes (2 fore, 2 aft).

Might be a defensive turret installed when it became obvious that those small Dominion "battlebug" attack ships didn't yield to standard phasers... A desperation move rather than a well-integrated weapons system.

While not used in American ships (mostly because the USN uses single-hull designs rather than double hull-within-a-hull design), Russians build external torpedo tubes into the outer hull which are not reloadable in combat. In fact, it would be a challenge to reload them outside of port, since you'd have to haul a torpedo out of the hull, then insert it into the external tube, without falling off the front of the ship.

So I'm entirely willing to entertain the idea that the docking bay tubes are either one-shot (or even cluster shot, like a MLRS) external tubes, or some kind of prototype weapon that just happened to be field testing onboard Enterprise that really wasn't a conventional torpedo.


One more tidbit - just caught "The Bedford Incident" recently and it is something from the mid 60's that Star Trek even used elements from for "The Corbomite Maneuver". The dialogue they used in it for arming their ASROCs was something like:

Captain: "Fire control, arm number one ASROC"
Officer: "Number one ASROC armed sir"

They showed the launcher as a box launcher with 8 cells/ASROCs so it does seem that you could imply the specific launcher/tube was meant when Kirk ordered "photon torpedo 2,4, and 6" without having to add "tube" or "launcher".

Of course they number everything. On battleships, the USN numbered turrets from fore to aft (On the USS Missouri, #1 up front, #2 just behind, #3 behind the superstructure). If you had more than one type, you went by calibre, then number (16-inch #1, 5-inch #7) The Royal Navy tended to use letters. A & B turrets up front, Y, X aft, no Z since it sounded too much like B.

On a modern destroyer/cruiser, each of the 100+ cells in a vertical launcher is numbered (Fire tomahawk 54! etc.), but since you can't reload them, it's generally not important in what order they are emptied. Plus, the firing computer can take over the specific order and timing to launch, the captain just gives the clear to fire at will.
 
Last edited:
Might be a defensive turret installed when it became obvious that those small Dominion "battlebug" attack ships didn't yield to standard phasers... A desperation move rather than a well-integrated weapons system.

While not used in American ships (mostly because the USN uses single-hull designs rather than double hull-within-a-hull design), Russians build external torpedo tubes into the outer hull which are not reloadable in combat. In fact, it would be a challenge to reload them outside of port, since you'd have to haul a torpedo out of the hull, then insert it into the external tube, without falling off the front of the ship.

So I'm entirely willing to entertain the idea that the docking bay tubes are either one-shot (or even cluster shot, like a MLRS) external tubes, or some kind of prototype weapon that just happened to be field testing onboard Enterprise that really wasn't a conventional torpedo.
AFAIK, no Russian boats have torpedo tubes in the configuration that you've described. They all go into the inner hull, usually at the top of the bow, with the exception of the Severodvinsk class, which uses the same torpedo tube configuration as our boats (at least according to the published publicly released diagrams).
 
Of course they number everything. On battleships, the USN numbered turrets from fore to aft (On the USS Missouri, #1 up front, #2 just behind, #3 behind the superstructure). If you had more than one type, you went by calibre, then number (16-inch #1, 5-inch #7) The Royal Navy tended to use letters. A & B turrets up front, Y, X aft, no Z since it sounded too much like B.

Which is odd since the British would pronounce Z as Zed rather than Zee.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top