What ships SHOULD they have used in the Dominion War?

[evilchumlee]

, which is why I find an Exclesior hull with TMP nacelles so odd: it an older nacelle on a newer hull.

I think that would generally work though... newer hulls should be able to essentially down-tune to work with older engine/power generation. Vice versa probably wouldn't work as well. But also in that specific case, they're... pretty close?

Since that is likely, then what would be the reason for those ships to be laid out the way they are?

Convenience/necessity. I think alot of the kitbash ships are either bespoke and unique or small-run classes. Starfleet just had a bunch of disparate parts, and used them rather than just trashing them or building the rest of whatever class they were originally intended for.

They don't make the best ships, but they make adequate ships.

 

[MikHutch]

to answer the OP: probably the Sovereign class (unless they did and I forgot)

and I wish we saw some Vulcan ships too. i think one only appears once on DS9

 

[Macintosh]

I think that would generally work though... newer hulls should be able to essentially down-tune to work with older engine/power generation. Vice versa probably wouldn't work as well. But also in that specific case, they're... pretty close?

The power generation is in the hull though, not the nacelles. Why shouldn't newer nacelles just as easily down-tune to work with older power generation?

Convenience/necessity. I think alot of the kitbash ships are either bespoke and unique or small-run classes. Starfleet just had a bunch of disparate parts, and used them rather than just trashing them or building the rest of whatever class they were originally intended for.

They don't make the best ships, but they make adequate ships.

The problem with this idea is that almost all the kitbashes we see are just... Excelsior and Constitution mash-ups put together in really odd ways. Just... deconstruct them and put them back together the right way round this time.

to answer the OP: probably the Sovereign class (unless they did and I forgot)

They deliberately didn't use the Sovereign-class in DS9 at all, they were reserving it strictly for the movies. The only time Sovereigns have ever appeared on TV is in PIC and PRO.

 

[MikHutch]

i know, but seeing one in the Dominion war would've been cool. the constant "our flagship can't actually be in the big war" business of Star Trek always bugs me

 

[David cgc]

The problem with this idea is that almost all the kitbashes we see are just... Excelsior and Constitution mash-ups put together in really odd ways. Just... deconstruct them and put them back together the right way round this time.

On the outside, sure, but who knows what they were full of on the inside? In the extreme example, you certainly couldn't swap a Constitution and a Ptolemy saucer and expect both ships to still work well, or at all. You'd have a Constitution with a second, underpowered main reactor and less crew and fewer science labs in exchange for redundant cargo space and consumables, and a Ptolemy with no reactor at all.

 

[Macintosh]

i know, but seeing one in the Dominion war would've been cool. the constant "our flagship can't actually be in the big war" business of Star Trek always bugs me

There is a certain logic for it in-universe:
• You want the flagship still out there exemplifying what the Federation is about – out on the frontier, contacting new races, making allies, and basically being good PR. We see the Enterprise doing exactly this in Star Trek: Insurrection.
• Consider the morale impact the Dominion targeting and destroying the Enterprise might have had at the height of the war when the Federation was really struggling.
• If the Federation is all but beaten and on the brink of collapse, someone's got to lead the final stand. You probably want to keep a few really good ships and a few really good crews in the hole just in case the unthinkable happens.

 

[Macintosh]

On the outside, sure, but who knows what they were full of on the inside? In the extreme example, you certainly couldn't swap a Constitution and a Ptolemy saucer and expect both ships to still work well, or at all. You'd have a Constitution with a second, underpowered main reactor and less crew and fewer science labs in exchange for redundant cargo space and consumables, and a Ptolemy with no reactor at all.

This is tangential, but that's a poor example. Ptolemy-class ships are transports and tugs, their engines would be disproportionately powerful. A ship like this when fitted with multiple fully laden containers could easily outmass a Constitution and have to haul its load halfway across the Federation at warp. Whereas a Constitution is more likely tuned for speed and burst power output, a Ptolemy will be tuned for endurance and range. Think thoroughbred racehorses or sprinters versus draught horses or marathon runners.

If you attached a Ptolemy saucer to a Constitution secondary hull you'd essentially have a ship capable of shifting gears between high-speed/moderate endurance and moderate speed/high endurance with a backup warp core and extra shuttlebays. In fact it almost sounds like a great idea... assuming you could get all that crazy plumbing to work...

*Edited multiple times for spelling, grammar, and the odd duplication of a line because apparently I can't even copy-paste properly when it's after my bedtime.

 

[David cgc]

This is tangential, but that's a poor example. Ptolemy-class ships are transports and tugs, their engines would be disproportionately powerful.

I used the wrong name, I was thinking of the Hermes/Saladin (so you could theoretically swap both saucers at the separation line at the top of the neck and have a superficial exterior match, give or take a deflector dish). Still, though, a Constitution-class saucer would be even worse on a Ptolemy neck, without even a warp nacelle, while the Ptolemy-tution would have four nacelles, two main reactors, all attached to a ship that couldn't actually do anything except go in a straight line.

 

[Macintosh]

I used the wrong name, I was thinking of the Hermes/Saladin (so you could theoretically swap both saucers at the separation line at the top of the neck and have a superficial exterior match, give or take a deflector dish). Still, though, a Constitution-class saucer would be even worse on a Ptolemy neck, without even a warp nacelle, while the Ptolemy-tution would have four nacelles, two main reactors, all attached to a ship that couldn't actually do anything except go in a straight line.

So you're agreeing that kitbashes are actually kind of stupid?

 

[David cgc]

So you're agreeing that kitbashes are actually kind of stupid?

In-universe, sure, the idea that these are actually just chunks of ships rearranged as-is (as they were described in the DS9TM) is wacky, but the idea that the exterior hulls might be modular and can be fitted out any number of ways internally.

And, now, rereading the thread, I see the perils of leaping into a conversation mid-stream, I only saw the part about small-run and bespoke designs before, not the suggestion that they were built from stock components destined for other ship types. I have no problem imagining the Centaur or the Raging Queen (with rescaled nacelles) were legitimate turn-of-the-century designs that just weren't built in the same numbers as plain old Excelsiors (but, then, was anything?).

 

[Ithekro]

The question with the Curry and like like would be, "what starship had nacelles that large in the TMP style"? If the ship is built from parts, where did the parts come from?

Hence the idea that maybe the Curry design was older than the commissioning of USS Excelsior, and they just used scaled but Miranda nacelles as the Excelsior's were not finalized yet. That would mean that the Curry herself is part of an older class that Starfleet kept building until the time of the 2330s or 40s, when USS Curry would probably be built.

 

[evilchumlee]

The power generation is in the hull though, not the nacelles. Why shouldn't newer nacelles just as easily down-tune to work with older power generation?

What i'm thinking is that power generation/warp drive tend to go hand in hand, and warp drive would be the most complex system of anything. I'm generally thinking that a warp core/nacelles are a single system and that is something that can't (easily) be adjusted.

And even if you could hot-swap nacelles, I feel like an older warp core would just flat out of be incompatible with newer nacelles, while a newer warp core could still have backwards compatability.

The problem with this idea is that almost all the kitbashes we see are just... Excelsior and Constitution mash-ups put together in really odd ways. Just... deconstruct them and put them back together the right way round this time.

Yes and no. Constitution-style nacelles seem to the nacelle of choice for the later-23rd/early 24th century generation of starships, and seem to be damn near ubiquitous for the era. There's probably just... ALOT of them out there. So we see them most often.

If my web of theories is correct, there's a few reasons that make that make sense... if the Khitomer Accords put a limit on the creation of new warp cores, if the Federation was on a somewhat cold war footing and producing a ton of ships/parts pre-Khitomer... it makes sense Constitution and Excelsior parts would be common, even a century later. If there's a limit imposed on new warp cores, it's in their best interest to keep the pre-treaty ones they have active, even if that means jury-rigging into them a new ship.

From an in-universe perspective, they did not just put them together in the normal way so there's a reason WHY... I go with the easiest possible answer of they just didn't have ALL of the parts needed when building these ships, and they were trying to build them quickly. They had like, 50% of an Excelsior, 30% of a Constitution, and 20% of newer parts that they cobbled together to make a new ship. If they had all the parts for one of them, they would just slap them together.

And, now, rereading the thread, I see the perils of leaping into a conversation mid-stream, I only saw the part about small-run and bespoke designs before, not the suggestion that they were built from stock components destined for other ship types. I have no problem imagining the Centaur or the Raging Queen (with rescaled nacelles) were legitimate turn-of-the-century designs that just weren't built in the same numbers as plain old Excelsiors (but, then, was anything?).

I think there's certainly room for both. Sure some designs work just fine as their own thing, like the Centaur. No reason that can't be a purpose designed ship.

 

[MikHutch]

There is a certain logic for it in-universe:
• You want the flagship still out there exemplifying what the Federation is about – out on the frontier, contacting new races, making allies, and basically being good PR. We see the Enterprise doing exactly this in Star Trek: Insurrection.
• Consider the morale impact the Dominion targeting and destroying the Enterprise might have had at the height of the war when the Federation was really struggling.
• If the Federation is all but beaten and on the brink of collapse, someone's got to lead the final stand. You probably want to keep a few really good ships and a few really good crews in the hole just in case the unthinkable happens.

i can definitely understand that

at the same time, i'd want the supposedly best or most capable crew to participate

 

[evilchumlee]

i can definitely understand that

at the same time, i'd want the supposedly best or most capable crew to participate

"Best" is somewhat of a subjective term though. Is the Enterprise crew really the best crew in wartime? The Enterprise crew is great at science, exploration and diplomacy... but I wouldn't place them high on the list for combat.

I like the explanation from Discovery about why 1701 wasn't in the Klingon War, basically that in case they lost... "the best of us" would survive to carry on the idea of the Federation.

Enterprise-E probably was better off in the role it had in the war. It was a big ol' propaganda piece, scooping up allies and making the Federation look good to potential non-aligned powers. As one ship it probably wouldn't make much difference in battle, and in reality would be a huge target. It's much more dangerous as a symbol.

 

[Arpy]

It’s the flagship. There’s a war going on. In my head canon it was leading the First Fleet on the main front or defending the Federation core.

 

[evilchumlee]

It’s the flagship. There’s a war going on. In my head canon it was leading the First Fleet on the main front or defending the Federation core.

"Flagship" doesn't really mean the same thing in Starfleet as it would in a modern day Navy. It's really used in a more civilian fashion, the Enterprise is the premier ship of the fleet, the ship that exemplifies the Federation and represents what they stand for...

1. : the ship that carries the commander of a fleet or subdivision of a fleet and flies the commander's flag. 2. : the finest, largest, or most important one of a group of things (such as products, stores, etc.) often used before another noun.

It's the #2 definition, not the #1.

 

[Dukhat]

All we know is that at some point during the war it was hosting some alien ambassadors, and little else.

 

[Arpy]

"Flagship" doesn't really mean the same thing in Starfleet as it would in a modern day Navy. It's really used in a more civilian fashion, the Enterprise is the premier ship of the fleet, the ship that exemplifies the Federation and represents what they stand for...

1. : the ship that carries the commander of a fleet or subdivision of a fleet and flies the commander's flag. 2. : the finest, largest, or most important one of a group of things (such as products, stores, etc.) often used before another noun.

It's the #2 definition, not the #1.

It’s the #1 definition.

All we know is that at some point during the war it was hosting some alien ambassadors, and little else.

Adding an entire people under the aegis of the Federation is a not a small matter.

 

[MikHutch]

but if it weren't the best, why build this new massive design to replace the previous new mega powerful ship only 7 years old?

 

[evilchumlee]

It’s the #1 definition.

It's clearly not, though. It's been referred to as the flagship of the Federation. And yet, Picard definitely does not command the forces of the Federation from the bridge of the Enterprise. Picard is not an admiral and does not command a fleet, or a subdivision of a fleet save for one or two rare occurrences where he shows up and just kind of declares himself in command.

If the Enterprise-D or E were "definition 1" flagship, there should be an admiral on board coordinating his fleet from the vessel. This never happens, even in the rare circumstances that an admiral is on board and in charge of a mission. It also wouldn't be out on the fringes of space, by itself, doing random missions... it would be... leading fleets.

Starfleet doesn't work the same way that a modern surface navy works, and there's no reason why it should.

but if it weren't the best, why build this new massive design to replace the previous new mega powerful ship only 7 years old?

Best at what? What does "best" mean? What criteria are we applying to determine "best"?

On that thought though, I don't believe the Sovereign's were designed to replace the Galaxy-Class, which were still in operation. Starfleet routinely develops new ship designs, and this happened to coincide with an Enterprise being destroyed. It's not like the E-D was destroyed, and then all the Galaxy-Class was retired, and then they developed the Sovereign. Galaxy-Class ships are still in operation at the very least through the 2370's and almost certainly well beyond.