What Are 24th Century Aircraft Carriers Like?

[Konundrum]

You're thinking of the contemporary use of a carrier. That wasn't their role in the beginning.

Roles of military equipment change over time.

And just seeing SF Security on the streets during martial law can be chalked up to nothing more than budget limitations and the fact that they had a lot of spare uniforms in the closet. It really shouldn't be taken as any kind of proof of the reality of that situation - not even the Trek reality.

 

[Solariabsg25]

You're thinking of the contemporary use of a carrier. That wasn't their role in the beginning.

Roles of military equipment change over time.

And just seeing SF Security on the streets during martial law can be chalked up to nothing more than budget limitations and the fact that they had a lot of spare uniforms in the closet. It really shouldn't be taken as any kind of proof of the reality of that situation - not even the Trek reality.

Yeah, but we have to take what we see onscreen.

In "Homefront", they talk of putting the Founder Defences in both Starfleet and Federation facilities, no mention of others. I'm not saying they don't exist, but there is no on-screen evidence anywhere, save my aforementioned Malcolm Reed's mention of the Royal Navy, of any non-Starfleet military forces existing.

As you say, it is of course just the budget. I personally except the existence of Starfleet Marines, yet I also can't remember any mention of them onscreen.

 

[JuanBolio]

Ultimately, if you're only interested in destroying a planet, the smartest thing to do would be to siege it from a distance. If you bother coming to their doorstep to fight them, that means you want to come in. The radiation becomes a problem again.

Actually, antimatter weapons would create no lasting radioactivity. The radiation levels within line-of-sight to the explosion would be immense, but only for a split second until the gamma rays are all absorbed by the air and ground and converted to heat, or sail out into space. That's one of the great things about antimatter weapons - no radioactive isotopes and fallout, like with nukes.

Troops could start landing prettymuch as soon as the ground cooled off, and could stay as long as they liked with no ill effects.

Further - antimatter weapons are not truly 100% efficient in terms of their effects. For one thing, it would be near impossible to get 100% of the fuel to react at the same instant before getting blown away, but more importantly the energy released by a matter antimatter reaction is about 60% neutrinos, which don't affect solid matter. They can pass through a mile of solid lead without slowing down. So while 100% of the weapon's energy is indeed released, only around 40% of it is in destructive form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapons

 

[Konundrum]

Well I'm not a nuclear physicist so I won't attempt to debate the science, but these things are always nice and cleancut in theory but practical application invariably proves them wrong.

There's a crapload of stuff in any planetary environment, and that much radiation going off at once has got to have tertiary effects.

 

[Solariabsg25]

Well I'm not a nuclear physicist so I won't attempt to debate the science, but these things are always nice and cleancut in theory but practical application invariably proves them wrong.

There's a crapload of stuff in any planetary environment, and that much radiation going off at once has got to have tertiary effects.

But that's always gonna be the problem with fictional settings - the weapons they use will do exactly what is required by the plot. In "The Changeling", the Enterprise resisted damage put out by Nomad that was equal to "hundreds" of photon torpedoes - Star Trek VI, we see little more than a dozen photons from a Bird of Prey overwhelm the Enterprise's shields.

On-screen we have never seen any mention of radiation put out by photon or quantum torps, certainly Kirk seemed none the worse for wear from close-ranged photon impacts in Star Trek V. Being metres away, if radiation was a factor, then he'd have got a fatal dose (I know, using a movie that expands the Enterprise by a few dozen decks in support of Trek physics ).

However, even if there was radiation effects, Trek tech seems pretty effective at "cleaning up", the Enterprise-D on at least one occassion came within seconds of having fatal radiation doses, but the ships was easily decontaminated and everyone "cured".

 

[JuanBolio]

In ST V, Kirk might have ordered the torpedo's warhead deactivated and programmed for a simple kinetic energy strike. He did say "Listen carefully..."

There's a crapload of stuff in any planetary environment, and that much radiation going off at once has got to have tertiary effects.

Oh, sure. If you're exposed to the initial gamma ray blast you'll die pretty horribly of radiation poisoning, if you're not close enough to get hit with the heat or the blast effects. But once that initial pulse of gamma rays is over - nothing. No radioactive isotopes.

 

[Unicron]

For what it's worth, the novelization of TUC does suggest that the Ent-A's torpedo system generated a surge of neutrinos when it's active. It's too bad this particular line is not in the film, because it suggests to the reader that the assassins could have somehow activated the torpedo system. It also better clarifies Chekov's line later when they're discussing the BOP, and he says that only a ship could produce a neutrino burst "that large."

Aside from that, I don't know if there are other references to Trek torpedo systems generating any form of radiation.

 

[JuanBolio]

I thought TUC made reference to neutron radiation, not neutrinos?