What ships SHOULD they have used in the Dominion War?

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by Arpy, Jun 11, 2021.

  1. Tim Walker

    Tim Walker Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Looking at the maps, it looks like the Federation is being hemmed in/encircled by other powers. Some of which are not friendly.

    Which may partly explained the Starfleet emphasis on exploration. To bring territory into the Federation before borders Harden and opportunity is lost.

    Which suggests which types of ships Starfleet will deploy:

    1. Exploration craft.

    2. Long range/fast patrol vessels.

    Possibly a third type of ship, to create a presence in newly explored areas-the Very Large Cruiser. Designs such as Nebula/Galaxy, which are so large and so capable that they could be described as mobile star bases, or at least as mobile outposts. Particularly with auxiliary craft that are warp capable.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2024
  2. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    If you look at all the various types of StarFleet StarShips, we have ships that fit every single definition you have listed.

    Some that fill multiple roles.
     
  3. evilchumlee

    evilchumlee Fleet Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2023
    Yes and no. They were likely fewer Nebula's than Miranda's, and they were off doing other things.

    It might not ever be explicitly stated, but it's apparent through context... Voyager was ill-prepared for a long duration mission, and it wasn't just because they didn't have a full load of torpedoes. The ship just really didn't have the facilities for extended missions. They made it work, but it was clearly a struggle and an unintended role for the ship.

    Yeah, that much is solidly clear. They're not "just" super old ships. They seem to have received fairly regular upgrades.

    This all ties into my Khitomer Accords theory too... that we see so many old, pre-Khitomer Accords type ships was that as part of the arms limitation, the number of ships allowed to be built was reduced. So to keep up the fleet, they couldn't just spam new ships. They could keep what they already had, so they HAD to make them work for as long as possible. I also think there was some provision that in-progress or currently planned ships could still be built for x duration, rather than a hard stop immediately. The probably ramped down production, but still had things rolling out.

    I also think the Accords put some limitations on R&D and what not, so you end with things like the Stargazer being commissioned fairly late. At the time, they may not have had access to much in the way of new designs, or it could have been something along the lines of new designs needing to go through a review process or some such, which no side would be particularly willing to fast track and it probably took ages to get something approved. So... they just kept building what they had while modifying them as much as possible. I just came up with that part on the fly, but I really like it... Starfleet wants to roll out a new class of vessel. By treaty, they need to submit (limited) specifications to a multi-national review board, who then need to approve the design as being Accords-compliant. Obviously, the Klingons and Romulans would be in no rush to let the Federation build new ships, so the whole process gets held up for along as possible.

    We tend to forget about the Khitomer Accords, but they offer a potential answer for ALOT of issues during this period. There's certainly some odd things that happen, but they can all make sense, given that there was a massive arms limitation treaty recently signed... we also know there was a "Second Khitomer Accords" which may have altered some things and perhaps made it easier to roll out new vessels.
     
    Praetor likes this.
  4. Macintosh

    Macintosh Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2022
    Location:
    Ireland
    In TNG we're given specific crew sizes for two Miranda-class ships – 26 for the Lantree and 35 for the Brattain. Given that the Miranda is around the same volume as the Constitution – slightly larger than the TOS configuration, slightly smaller than the refit – this seems VERY low, less than a tenth the size of the crew we might have expected a Miranda to have in the 23rd century. This also aligns with the Enterprise-D and Voyager having only around a tenth the crew density of the TOS Enterprise given their stated respective crew sizes and comparative volumes. Ships by the 2360s century are clearly MUCH more highly automated than they were in the 2280s, which SIGNIFICANTLY more capable computer systems.
     
    Dukhat likes this.
  5. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Well, that goes without saying. ;)

    It’s also possible that most of the internal volume of the Lantree was converted to storage space for supplies, and only about 20 or so crew quarters were retained. Honestly, I think the Lantree was originally envisioned as being much smaller, but they reused the Reliant movie model instead.

    As for the Brattain, it was probably envisioned as being a much smaller ship too. I’m not sure why they decided to use the larger Reliant model rather than the smaller Grissom considering that Oberths were routinely used as science vessels.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2024
    Shamrock Holmes and Macintosh like this.
  6. Macintosh

    Macintosh Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2022
    Location:
    Ireland
    True, but a Watsonian explanation might be that Starfleet clearly had a lot of Mirandas spare by the 2360s. Hollowing them out into bulk carriers shuttling between colonies and core worlds seems like a sensible way to retire an ageing ship that's no longer up to front-line duty. Also ties in to my headcanon that all the Mirandas we see in Dominion War fleets are completely automated drones slaved to other ships, because extra targets and some spare torpedo launchers are always helpful but it seems remarkably cruel to put an actual crew on ancient ships that could be taken out with a single hit.
     
    Tim Walker likes this.
  7. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    From The Search for Spock we know it is entirely possible to heavily automate a Constitution-class starship so it can be operated by a handful of people. Add the concept of crew shifts and a few specialists for cargo or troubleshooting and you have a crew of a few dozen easily.
     
    Macintosh likes this.
  8. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    In the future, having Holographic Assistant Crew Members, AI within the core of the ship to help function along with lots of little simpler helper bots to be functional automatons, and Mass Produced Soong type Androids.

    You have a ship full of helpers on tope of your organic crew.
     
  9. Deks

    Deks Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    But again, we go back to the original mission profile for VOY when it was launched... and that was to find and retrieve Tuvok and a small Maqui Raider (with the Maqui onboard) in the Badlands.
    Given the Maqui were not a 'huge' threat at the time and DS9 was near the Badlands, its likely that VOY just didn't require the resources to do an extended mission beyond those 2 weeks... and it also explains why they only launched with 38 photon torpedoes (though if you ask me I would have launched VOY with a full arsenal).

    Any other ship assigned the same mission would have likely been launched with similar parameters as VOY was.

    This doesn't say anything really about what mission profiles suited Intrepid classes better, as some crewmembers DID also mention the ship was intended for deep space exploration.... only that the original mission profile for VOY was not deep space exploration (which we know it wasn't) - but this by itself doesn't say the class was never intended for deep space missions (just that the original mission the ship was supposed to last 2 weeks at most).

    But given that Intrepid class (or VOY specifically) was able to withstand the conditions in the Badlands better than other ships, it stands to reason this was partially influential in assisting the crew from getting out of hairy situations (like the quantum singularity which trapped the ship, and other stellar phenomena).

    Plus, VOY did launch with metaphasic shielding which allowed it to enter a stat's corona and remain there for a while. But this was mostly software based modification to the shields which even the ENT-D was able to implement in TNG before VOY was launched (although perhaps SF integrated this modification on a hw level on the Intrepid class which may have been more efficient?).

    I don't think the Khitomer Accords would have negatively impacted SF in that regard.
    There was some concern in ST:VI (after Praxis exploded) about SF having to scale down their fleet operations (more like paranoia), but in reality, all that would have meant that SF would have likely repurposed existing ships like the Miranda's which may have been used for border patrols, etc. to do more deep space assignments.
    Plus, there were talks about giving Klingons access to a few systems from Federation space.

    I don't think the limitations on R&D would have happened. What more likely happened was a shift in priorities.
    Following the Khitomer Accords, there was no need to be on high alert because UFP and the Klingons were actively cooperating with each other. This may have pushed back the launch of the Stargazer because SF may have decided to modify it AFTER it was mostly finalized to adjust to the new mission profile (which would likely be exploration, relief efforts, etc.).

    As I mentioned, the K.A. mostly seem to address a shift in priorities. Not necessarily scaling back R&D.
    I doubt SF would have discarded new ship designs which may have been more combat oriented and finalized to the point where they don't use them.
    Like the 25th century showed us, SF had a number of 23rd century designs which underwent refits to keep them up to date and on par with modern vessels.
    Its more likely that SF just delayed their original launch dates and modified them initially while still on the drawing board to make them more suitable for exploration while keeping their combat capabilities?

    SF has a point in keeping ships in service for as long as possible - aka if they were originally designed to last 200 years, well, with the eventual invention of energy to matter replicators, construction of various things would have become a lot easier, as would upgrades, maintenance, etc.

    In this sense,SF could easily keep a starship which was initially built in the 23rd century, to still be in service in the 31st and beyond... just by that point it would be completely unrecognizeable (and of course assuming it survived for centuries in active service).
    Every decade or so, all ships would likely undergo large overhauls and upgrades/refits which would likely include replacing strained frame itself with state of the art one - same material (if SF hadn't changed the underlying material it uses for starship frames) or brand new material and just put it back in the same design - or the design would be adjusted to accommodate newer tech - along with elimination of 'wear and tear' - in essence every large overhaul/refit every 7 to 10 years would have 'refreshed' the ship to basically be 'brand new' - smaller upgrades would follow in between depending on if the ship needs it or not (the Ent-D certainly did after the events of BoBw, along with the Cerritos after its bad experience with the Pakleds - the ship got upgrades which made it able to stand up to the Pakleds a lot better in combat after all).
     
  10. Macintosh

    Macintosh Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2022
    Location:
    Ireland
    It's not that heavily automated; Scotty's jury-rigging works fine for basic functions but the moment they take fire the automation breaks down leaving them dead in space. But yes, it shows it's possible in principle.
     
  11. Tim Walker

    Tim Walker Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Regarding the Centaur. I do indeed think that there were two different designs. The larger being derived from the Excelsior. The smaller, having a superficial resemblance.

    I imagine the smaller as a scout ship, quick and nimble, and decently armed for a ship its size. Probably designed during the Border Wars.
     
  12. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Despite both the physical model and the CGI model having the same registry, I agree with you. I see it as no different than the various BoP sizes, only that in this instance, there are definite scaling factors which differentiate one ship from the other.

    BTW, your link doesn't work.
     
  13. Macintosh

    Macintosh Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2022
    Location:
    Ireland
    It does if you refresh the page once the 403 error has loaded. Though the Raging Queen is a Curry-type, not a Centaur-type... :shrug:
     
  14. Tim Walker

    Tim Walker Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    What I was trying to link to had an analysis of the Centaur model. Based on the model, the analysis indicated a ship that was 210 meters long-smaller than a Miranda. Which, if the Miranda had been (unofficially) designed as a destroyer, would suggest that the Centaur is a scout.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2024
    Macintosh likes this.
  15. farragut79

    farragut79 Ensign Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2024
    Location:
    Duluth, MN
    Wouldn't the Centaur be more in line with a frigate designation? Mirandas in the mid-late 24th Century redesignated as destroyers makes sense. The Antares variants could be picket destroyers?
     
  16. Shamrock Holmes

    Shamrock Holmes Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    I dislike the classification "destroyer" because what that means as there are two or even three different things that you could be talking about there:

    Cruiser/Destroyer: The generally accepted modern definition, typically a medium-sized, multiple-role warship (for example the US Arleigh Burke-class or the UK Type-42 & 45s). The Constitution-class was essentially an example of this during the mid to late 23rd and arguably the NX-class during the mid-22nd.

    Light Cruiser/Destroyer/Frigate: Typically smaller than the first type and often at least somewhat more specialised for a particular function than the above. The Miranda-class was originally in this space, and it would appear that some hulls were upgraded to continue in this role through the 24th Century. Of the hero ships, I'd be most inclined to put the Intrepid-class here.

    Torpedo Boat Destroyer/Destroyer/Escort: Small, fast, manoeuvrable vessels, typically used for short to medium range applications (littoral operations, convoy protection). The Defiant-class sits (badly) here, though it's rather stronger defensively than is the norm at this level.
     
    Praetor and Macintosh like this.
  17. Macintosh

    Macintosh Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2022
    Location:
    Ireland
    Adam Buckner, who designed and built the original Centaur model, had an article on his website about it. He confirms that it's not supposed to be an "Excelsior-fied Miranda", but is a much smaller ship.

    I suppose it depends on whether the Miranda has the torpedo launcher roll bar or not... I'm reminded of the Franz Joseph Hermes- and Saladin-classes, essentially the same ships but being kitted out for different mission profiles. The roll bar would make them torpedo destroyers, the twin sensor pods that Sisko's Saratoga had would make it a long-range surveyor or heavy scout perhaps? The versions like the Lantree with neither could be some sort of tender.
     
  18. Macintosh

    Macintosh Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2022
    Location:
    Ireland
    This also flared up as an issue in Babylon 5 fandom too. The EarthForce Omega-class ships are officially "destroyers", which the production team have admitted is just because they thought it sounded tough and intimidating and they knew nothing of traditional naval designations; it's really more of a dreadnought. The White Star would be a better fit for destroyer as the term is usually meant.
     
  19. Tim Walker

    Tim Walker Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Have to wonder if something like this appeared in the war.
     
  20. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    The thing is, Star Trek shied away from using naval designations not long after TNG started. Ships were initially described as cruisers, light cruisers, frigates, etc. in the first season, but then that all disappeared. I think that was because the ships' missions were not dictated by its class. One Excelsior might be on an exploration mission, and another one might be on border patrol. One Miranda might be a science vessel, and another might be a supply ship. One Oberth might be a research vessel, and another might be a transport. Conversely, either a Galaxy class, Miranda class, Oberth class or Nova class could have all been science vessels. It got to the point where ships performed the same duties regardless of what type of ship it was, so the naval designations became meaningless.

    I'm pretty sure the Hutzel-type was never seen on screen. Whether it saw wartime off-screen is debatable too, as the ships we did see in all those Dominion war fleets seemed to represent the bulk of what Starfleet had available at the time.
     
    Macintosh likes this.