why no single fighters?
- Thread starter Sephiroth
- Start date
Not "single" fighters, literally speaking: apparently, they required two people to operate properly. Here's an interior view from "Preemptive Strike" (cut and paste):
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s7/7x24/preemptivestrike303.jpg
Here's a competing one from "The Maquis II" (a bit more cramped, apparently created out of a humbler selection of surplus set pieces):
http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/2x21/maquis-pt2_317.jpg
Which is something of a trend today, too. Despite all sorts of computer augmentation, it appears that there's more than plenty to do for one person who flies the craft, and for another who operates the weapons.
We may well assume that Starfleet has had generation after generation of such fightercraft. The design flown by Lieutenant Ro in "Preemptive Strike" might well represent the previous generation, having LCARS-type control panels and all. An interior view or two (again, Trekcore doesn't allow for hotlinks, so cut-and-paste):
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s7/7x24/preemptivestrike294.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s7/7x24/preemptivestrike295.jpg
Obviously, though, such fighters aren't particularly powerful weapons to be wielded against starships. A great swarm of them was barely enough to hurt weakling Cardassian Galors, creating superficial damage in "Preemptive Strike" and DS9 alike. Probably such fighters are best employed against "soft" ground targets, like the Maquis tried to do in "The Maquis II". The official designation for them, "attack" craft, might support such a role as well.
Timo Saloniemi
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s7/7x24/preemptivestrike303.jpg
Here's a competing one from "The Maquis II" (a bit more cramped, apparently created out of a humbler selection of surplus set pieces):
http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/2x21/maquis-pt2_317.jpg
Which is something of a trend today, too. Despite all sorts of computer augmentation, it appears that there's more than plenty to do for one person who flies the craft, and for another who operates the weapons.
We may well assume that Starfleet has had generation after generation of such fightercraft. The design flown by Lieutenant Ro in "Preemptive Strike" might well represent the previous generation, having LCARS-type control panels and all. An interior view or two (again, Trekcore doesn't allow for hotlinks, so cut-and-paste):
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s7/7x24/preemptivestrike294.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s7/7x24/preemptivestrike295.jpg
Obviously, though, such fighters aren't particularly powerful weapons to be wielded against starships. A great swarm of them was barely enough to hurt weakling Cardassian Galors, creating superficial damage in "Preemptive Strike" and DS9 alike. Probably such fighters are best employed against "soft" ground targets, like the Maquis tried to do in "The Maquis II". The official designation for them, "attack" craft, might support such a role as well.
Timo Saloniemi
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
Anything smaller than a Federation Raider type ship (see link below) would probably be blasted to smithereens in a split second by a single phaser/disruptor beam.
Link:http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tactics/Maquis.jpg
Link:http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tactics/Maquis.jpg
Yeah but it'd be more maneuvarable and therefore more able to dodge any phaser fire. The one fighter that I have a liking with is the Valkyrie Class seen here at Bravo Fleet http://bfinfobase.org/index.php?title=Valkyrie_Class. It just looks that cool.
Surely not?
The Imperial blasters have a hit rate of about 5 to 10% against the Falcon, as opposed to the about 100% of Starfleet phasers when firing at similarly sized ships or craft. Against agile fighters, Imperial blaster hit rate is a flat zero. In contrast, the fighters in "Preemptive Strike" and "Sacrifice of Angels" never managed to dodge a single Cardassian phaser beam.
The B5 plasma bolts have good targeting against capital ships, but then again, B5 capital ships move like molasses. It's extremely seldom that a hit would connect with a fightercraft like Starfury, though. Earthforce beam guns are clumsy affairs that again only hit capital ships. Only Minbari beams seem to be effective against fightercraft, and there nowhere near 100% in accuracy.
It may boil down to firing discipline in the end: the Feds only take the sure shots, while the Imperials consider volume of fire more important than actual hits (which it may be, if the objective is to make a fighter abort its attack run). Klingons may strike a happy medium, their "machine gun" BoP disruptors pumping out a lot of fire but only hitting about 50% of the time. But the occasion where the mirror Defiant evades the mirror Klingon disruptor bolts is an isolated one: in "our" universe, nothing comparable ever happened. Starfleet guns and torps scored perfect hits in the similar battle between "our" Defiant and the Lakota in "Paradise Lost".
Timo Saloniemi
The Imperial blasters have a hit rate of about 5 to 10% against the Falcon, as opposed to the about 100% of Starfleet phasers when firing at similarly sized ships or craft. Against agile fighters, Imperial blaster hit rate is a flat zero. In contrast, the fighters in "Preemptive Strike" and "Sacrifice of Angels" never managed to dodge a single Cardassian phaser beam.
The B5 plasma bolts have good targeting against capital ships, but then again, B5 capital ships move like molasses. It's extremely seldom that a hit would connect with a fightercraft like Starfury, though. Earthforce beam guns are clumsy affairs that again only hit capital ships. Only Minbari beams seem to be effective against fightercraft, and there nowhere near 100% in accuracy.
It may boil down to firing discipline in the end: the Feds only take the sure shots, while the Imperials consider volume of fire more important than actual hits (which it may be, if the objective is to make a fighter abort its attack run). Klingons may strike a happy medium, their "machine gun" BoP disruptors pumping out a lot of fire but only hitting about 50% of the time. But the occasion where the mirror Defiant evades the mirror Klingon disruptor bolts is an isolated one: in "our" universe, nothing comparable ever happened. Starfleet guns and torps scored perfect hits in the similar battle between "our" Defiant and the Lakota in "Paradise Lost".
Timo Saloniemi
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
The defiant was flying so close they couldnt get a disrupter lock on it, thats why they managed to dodge the Negh'Var weapons. Any ship that is capable of establishing a phaser lock will always hit its target, especially a small fighter craft that will no doubt get blasted before it can even enter weapons range.
Plecostomus
Commodore
Dodging is a combination of signal-spoofing, out-right jamming and clever evasive action. No mere person is going to be able to dodge a bolt coming in at near light-speed. The Defiant has some impressive ECM equipment one would wager. The fighters also.
Two or three people in a Federation fighter makes sense. Remember: Backups on backups on backups. All three are trained pilots. The other two are specialists.
Two or three people in a Federation fighter makes sense. Remember: Backups on backups on backups. All three are trained pilots. The other two are specialists.
Personally, I think that fighters are only good for close-quarters combat against other fighter craft. Against larger starships, fighters may be at a disadvantage as others have mentioned here.
I always imagined that Starfleet fighter squadrons are deployed from specialized carrier starships or from strategically-placed starbases.
I hate to kind of reference to a video game, because I'm not that knowledgeable about 'em, but Star Trek: Invasion video game from the Playstation-1--which includes the aforementioned Valkyrie-Class fighter--was a good example of how fighters might be used within the context of the Star Trek Universe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Invasion
I always imagined that Starfleet fighter squadrons are deployed from specialized carrier starships or from strategically-placed starbases.
I hate to kind of reference to a video game, because I'm not that knowledgeable about 'em, but Star Trek: Invasion video game from the Playstation-1--which includes the aforementioned Valkyrie-Class fighter--was a good example of how fighters might be used within the context of the Star Trek Universe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Invasion
Realistically speaking the only chance a group of such fighters against a capital ship have is to land a killing blow in the first volley.
If they don't and we assume Star Trek is realistic capital ship phasers will blow them out of space with each hit and i believe their targeting and aiming the actual emitters is fast enough so those fighters won't be able to dodge them.
In TV show reality it just looks cool to have fighters pouring out of a carrier and to see some fast paced dogfighting.
If they don't and we assume Star Trek is realistic capital ship phasers will blow them out of space with each hit and i believe their targeting and aiming the actual emitters is fast enough so those fighters won't be able to dodge them.
In TV show reality it just looks cool to have fighters pouring out of a carrier and to see some fast paced dogfighting.
I remember this topic coming up before in the past, so I'll just reiterate two episodes from TNG that pretty much proved why fighters aren't that common: Conundrum and Pre-Emptive Strike.
Connundrum had the Enterprise blasting a squadron of a half dozen fighters in literally two seconds (if that). And the Maquis fighters in Preemptive Strike were tossed around like ragdolls in a storm by a couple of torpedo explosions in close proximity. If Picard wanted those Maquis fighters destroyed, Worf would have no problem.
Heck, Voyager did pretty darn well against fighter craft. The only thing that sent them running was the firepower of those fighters (Vaaduar, I believe), and I don't think Starfleet has any ship of that size with that sort of firepower.
Connundrum had the Enterprise blasting a squadron of a half dozen fighters in literally two seconds (if that). And the Maquis fighters in Preemptive Strike were tossed around like ragdolls in a storm by a couple of torpedo explosions in close proximity. If Picard wanted those Maquis fighters destroyed, Worf would have no problem.
Heck, Voyager did pretty darn well against fighter craft. The only thing that sent them running was the firepower of those fighters (Vaaduar, I believe), and I don't think Starfleet has any ship of that size with that sort of firepower.
If anything, it does show that the phaser arrays can hit at almost any angle, as well as firing multiple shots over a two second span. Either feature would be great against fighter craft.
but still, even with targeting computers and magically accurate phasers remember that the fightrs will be backed by a capital ship of it's own, if a ship targets JUST swarming fighters the capital ship will shread the enemy ship, and if the enemy ship ignores the fighters the fighters will tea the enemy ship down
Ah, been a while since I've been here. New forum software too. But to the topic at hand...
Right, go ahead and devote space, manpower, etc. to fighters.
On the other side of the field are the guys going for missile spam, and who believe in the whole "build the maximum number of the smallest viable interstellar warship", and to whom fighters show up on their sensor screens as nothing more than largish missiles to be dealt with like any other sort of missile: with counter-missiles and (if necessary) direct fire point defence.
For the same tonnage, there's going to be enough missiles/counter-missiles to go right through a so-called "fighter swarm" with a true swarm left over to cause enemy warships a Real Bad Day (tm). Especially if this is ST, where your standard anti-starship missile is pretty darn small.
Right, go ahead and devote space, manpower, etc. to fighters.
On the other side of the field are the guys going for missile spam, and who believe in the whole "build the maximum number of the smallest viable interstellar warship", and to whom fighters show up on their sensor screens as nothing more than largish missiles to be dealt with like any other sort of missile: with counter-missiles and (if necessary) direct fire point defence.
For the same tonnage, there's going to be enough missiles/counter-missiles to go right through a so-called "fighter swarm" with a true swarm left over to cause enemy warships a Real Bad Day (tm). Especially if this is ST, where your standard anti-starship missile is pretty darn small.
I still don't buy the whole missile argument. You do raise some valid points, but one could easily argue against building capital ships that way. Why bother building a ship vs a giant missile? The answer is that ships, large and small, can accomplish things a missile cannot. So can sentient pilots.
Unless a warhead has a magically accurate guiding system, it's never going to have the same mobility or inventiveness as a piloted ship does. And it won't necessarily be able to take advantage of whatever point-defense systems its owner has in the same way.
Unless a warhead has a magically accurate guiding system, it's never going to have the same mobility or inventiveness as a piloted ship does. And it won't necessarily be able to take advantage of whatever point-defense systems its owner has in the same way.
While my jury is out on the strategic interstellar missile in ST, the way ST fights tactically I see nothing but disadvantages to tactical strike fighters compared to tactical space missiles. DS9 shows what the guys in ST can do with a strike fighter. What did those poor souls do that a swarm of missiles couldn't have done?
