Why the Movement Toward Smaller Starfleet Hero Ships?

[The Wormhole]

Why is that?

The D is already pretty large, anything bigger risks being a fanboy ubership.

That is something I've never understood.

What is "fanboyish" about a big starship? Or why do some critics label really large starships as "portable starbases" when they are not remotely as large as a starbase.

Why are the huge Romulan ships. From the Warbirds to the Scimitar not called "fanboyish" or "mobile starbases"?

What about the huge Dominion battleships or the huge Klingon Neghvar class vessels?

The Scimitar has always been criticized as being fanboyish.

But really, it all stems from the fact that fanboys have a fetish for insanely large and way too powerful starships so that anything particularly is by extension fanboyish. Maybe it's not fair, but that seems to be the way of things.

And yes, I am well aware that Trek starships are generally smaller than ships from other sc-fi franchises.

 

[Knight Templar]

The D is already pretty large, anything bigger risks being a fanboy ubership.

That is something I've never understood.

What is "fanboyish" about a big starship? Or why do some critics label really large starships as "portable starbases" when they are not remotely as large as a starbase.

Why are the huge Romulan ships. From the Warbirds to the Scimitar not called "fanboyish" or "mobile starbases"?

What about the huge Dominion battleships or the huge Klingon Neghvar class vessels?

The Scimitar has always been criticized as being fanboyish.

But really, it all stems from the fact that fanboys have a fetish for insanely large and way too powerful starships so that anything particularly is by extension fanboyish. Maybe it's not fair, but that seems to be the way of things.

And yes, I am well aware that Trek starships are generally smaller than ships from other sc-fi franchises.

I don't have a problem with that. After all, to each franchise his own.

What I do have a problem with is Starfleet ships being consistently significantly smaller than their counterparts in the Trek franchise.

It makes no sense.

In reality, you have American, German, British, Israeli, and various other tanks that are built to fight Russian tanks and they are fairly close in size. Only something like a difference of 20% in mass.

Similar closeness in various warships types.

The Romulans in the 24th century (until the Dominion arrived) were the primary adversary of the Federation.

It makes no sense that Starfleet would take on 4,400 ft. long Romulan Warbirds with 2,000 ft. long Galaxy class ships.

 

[Pavonis]

I don't think size matters as much as power plants do. The warbirds were bigger, but didnt necessarily have more power.

The problem with fanboy ships is that they're all advantage, with no disadvantages. Size and power have to come at some cost. Fanboys forget that.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

I don't think size matters as much as power plants do. The warbirds were bigger, but didnt necessarily have more power.

The problem with fanboy ships is that they're all advantage, with no disadvantages. Size and power have to come at some cost. Fanboys forget that.

Warbirds are powered by an artificial black hole, so I'm pretty sure it out-power all other ships.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I don't think size matters as much as power plants do. The warbirds were bigger, but didnt necessarily have more power.

The problem with fanboy ships is that they're all advantage, with no disadvantages. Size and power have to come at some cost. Fanboys forget that.

Warbirds are powered by an artificial black hole, so I'm pretty sure it out-power all other ships.

It's actually a micro-singularity. The energy output could really be the same as a dilithium-sustained matter/antimatter reaction.

 

[The Wormhole]

The Romulans in the 24th century (until the Dominion arrived) were the primary adversary of the Federation.

It makes no sense that Starfleet would take on 4,400 ft. long Romulan Warbirds with 2,000 ft. long Galaxy class ships.

The Romulans may have been the Federation's biggest adversary, but in the 24th century there weren't any real hostilities between the two. After the Tomed Incident, the Federation had no contact with the Romulans for 50 years, the only exception being Narendra III. And even that was the Romulans attacking the Klingons which the Enterprise C got involved in.

And even after contact was re-established between the Federation and the Romulans nothing really went more serious than sabre rattling, with the possible exception of the Romulans hijacking USS Prometheus. And even that was swept under the rug pretty quickly in the interests of an alliance against the Dominion.

Besides, the Galaxy class may be smaller than a D'deridex class warbird, but the Romulans still consider it a threat. Tomalak needed two warbirds before he felt confident enough to threaten the Enterprise.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

It's actually a micro-singularity. The energy output could really be the same as a dilithium-sustained matter/antimatter reaction.

I hate to disagree with others, but according to Memory Alpha, in "Face of the Enemy", "Timescape" and "Visionary" it was referred to as a forced quantum singularity, nothing micro about it (but one should never worry about the size of ones quantum signularity) .

Though it is strange that even with a singularity of whatever size at its core, the Warbird was always slower than the Galaxy-Class. She was a bigger ship to move around, plus the added energy drain of a cloaking device, and maybe the Romulans focused more on longevity of their propulsion systems and not the maximum output. All that being said, the ship never seemed to perform all that well in combat situations. It seems like a lot of wasted power.

 

[Sci]

It makes no sense that Starfleet would take on 4,400 ft. long Romulan Warbirds with 2,000 ft. long Galaxy class ships.

The Federation never encountered a D'deridex-class warbird (or, at least, never encountered one and lived to tell about it) until late 2364 ("The Neutral Zone"), well after the Galaxy class had already been designed and launched.

 

[C.E. Evans]

It's actually a micro-singularity. The energy output could really be the same as a dilithium-sustained matter/antimatter reaction.

I hate to disagree with others, but according to Memory Alpha, in "Face of the Enemy", "Timescape" and "Visionary" it was referred to as a forced quantum singularity, nothing micro about it (but one should never worry about the size of ones quantum signularity) .

Anything that is small enough to fit within the confined space of a starship's reactor is micro, mini, or whatever term for small that suits you. But it's not exactly the same thing as a black hole as you said, however, since it's used as a power source.

Though it is strange that even with a singularity of whatever size at its core, the Warbird was always slower than the Galaxy-Class. She was a bigger ship to move around, plus the added energy drain of a cloaking device, and maybe the Romulans focused more on longevity of their propulsion systems and not the maximum output. All that being said, the ship never seemed to perform all that well in combat situations. It seems like a lot of wasted power.

Is it? D'deridex-class warbirds may be slower than a Galaxy-class ship, but they otherwise seemed to be able warships in their own right with powerful disruptors and torpedoes. But it's also conceivable that the D'deridex-class is older than the Galaxy-class and was first pressed into service within the Empire a few decades earlier during its 50-year period of isolation from the Federation.

 

[Sindatur]

It's actually a micro-singularity. The energy output could really be the same as a dilithium-sustained matter/antimatter reaction.

I hate to disagree with others, but according to Memory Alpha, in "Face of the Enemy", "Timescape" and "Visionary" it was referred to as a forced quantum singularity, nothing micro about it (but one should never worry about the size of ones quantum signularity) .

Though it is strange that even with a singularity of whatever size at its core, the Warbird was always slower than the Galaxy-Class. She was a bigger ship to move around, plus the added energy drain of a cloaking device, and maybe the Romulans focused more on longevity of their propulsion systems and not the maximum output. All that being said, the ship never seemed to perform all that well in combat situations. It seems like a lot of wasted power.

pssssttt...It's not the size of your Singularity, it's how you use it

 

[horatio83]

Though it is strange that even with a singularity of whatever size at its core, the Warbird was always slower than the Galaxy-Class. She was a bigger ship to move around, plus the added energy drain of a cloaking device, and maybe the Romulans focused more on longevity of their propulsion systems and not the maximum output. All that being said, the ship never seemed to perform all that well in combat situations. It seems like a lot of wasted power.

The problem of the D'deridex was not the ship but how it was presented. The shots never made the warbird seem larger than the D and the scripts, perhaps partly due to the cold war nature of the Federation-Romulan relations, rarely made it appear as powerful and frightening as it is.

 

[Smellincoffee]

It seems to me the smaller ships were mandated by the premise. Voyager was supposed to be about a ship that was unprepared for long-range missions; it needed to be small to demonstrate that it's not supposed to be out in deep space alone. The NX-01 was small to reflect its primitiveness, just as Skylab was small compared to ISS and will be tiny compared to stations we build in the future.

 

[T'Girl]

It makes no sense that Starfleet would take on 4,400 ft. long Romulan Warbirds with 2,000 ft. long Galaxy class ships.

There might be the factor of relative capacities to consider. A WWII Iowa class battleship was 45,000 tons and 887 feet. A modern Arleigh Burke class destroyer is 10,000 tons, 509 ft, and would carve that battleship into little pieces.

The Romulan ship might HAVE to be twice the size of it Starfleet opponent, just to stand toe to toes with it.

 

[Knight Templar]

It makes no sense that Starfleet would take on 4,400 ft. long Romulan Warbirds with 2,000 ft. long Galaxy class ships.

There might be the factor of relative capacities to consider. A WWII Iowa class battleship was 45,000 tons and 887 feet. A modern Arleigh Burke class destroyer is 10,000 tons, 509 ft, and would carve that battleship into little pieces.

How?

The US Navy does not deploy its ships with anti-ship Tomahawk cruise missiles anymore.

All the Burke class ship would have to use against the Iowa class battleship would be 8 Harpoon antiship missiles and its 5 inch gun. Harpoon missiles would be lucky to scratch the armor of an Iowa class battleship.

And a single hit by three of the nine main guns from an Iowa would destroy the Burke hands down.

 

[T'Girl]

How?

The US Navy does not deploy its ships with anti-ship Tomahawk cruise missiles anymore.

Oh Knight Templar, the Arleigh Burkes are more than capable of pulling into base, and being loaded up with lots and lots of Tomahawks, we fired a whole shit load of them from Arleigh Burkes into Libya just fourteen months ago. The US Navy has oodles of Tomahawk anti ship missiles in storage. Pump ninety-six of those babys (each with a half ton warhead) into a battleship from a few hundred miles away and I willing to bet that the battleship would be just a little more than "scratched."

And given the Tomahawks range, I don't think the destroyer would have much to worry about from guns that can lob a shell less than twenty-four miles.

Hey, did you know that modern torpedoes (the Arleigh Burkes carry six I believe) can hit a ship from below where a battleship has almost no armor at all?

 

[Knight Templar]

How?

The US Navy does not deploy its ships with anti-ship Tomahawk cruise missiles anymore.

Oh Knight Templar, the Arleigh Burkes are more than capable of pulling into base, and being loaded up with lots and lots of Tomahawks, we fired a whole shit load of them from Arleigh Burkes into Libya just fourteen months ago. The US Navy has oodles of Tomahawk anti ship missiles in storage. Pump ninety-six of those babys (each with a half ton warhead) into a battleship from a few hundred miles away and I willing to bet that the battleship would be just a little more than "scratched."

And given the Tomahawks range, I don't think the destroyer would have much to worry about from guns that can lob a shell less than twenty-four miles.

Hey, did you know that modern torpedoes (the Arleigh Burkes carry six I believe) can hit a ship from below where a battleship has almost no armor at all?

The U.S. Navy hasn't deployed anti surface ship torpedoes aboard its ships for generations. The ones a Burke carries are designed to attack submarines.

And without an aircraft to assist the Burke, you could not fire Tomahawks at a target "hundreds of miles" away because it would be out of the targeted area before the missles arrived.

At any rate, you're still comparing a 1990s technology Burke class destroyer with a 1940s technology battleship. Given the 50 year difference, the smaller ship should do better than expected.

At any rate, it isn't an argument in favor of the Federation consistently deploying smaller starships than its adversaries.

 

[Star Wolf]

How?

The US Navy does not deploy its ships with anti-ship Tomahawk cruise missiles anymore.

Oh Knight Templar, the Arleigh Burkes are more than capable of pulling into base, and being loaded up with lots and lots of Tomahawks, we fired a whole shit load of them from Arleigh Burkes into Libya just fourteen months ago. The US Navy has oodles of Tomahawk anti ship missiles in storage. Pump ninety-six of those babys (each with a half ton warhead) into a battleship from a few hundred miles away and I willing to bet that the battleship would be just a little more than "scratched."

And given the Tomahawks range, I don't think the destroyer would have much to worry about from guns that can lob a shell less than twenty-four miles.

Hey, did you know that modern torpedoes (the Arleigh Burkes carry six I believe) can hit a ship from below where a battleship has almost no armor at all?

The U.S. Navy hasn't deployed anti surface ship torpedoes aboard its ships for generations. The ones a Burke carries are designed to attack submarines.

And without an aircraft to assist the Burke, you could not fire Tomahawks at a target "hundreds of miles" away because it would be out of the targeted area before the missles arrived.

At any rate, you're still comparing a 1990s technology Burke class destroyer with a 1940s technology battleship. Given the 50 year difference, the smaller ship should do better than expected.

At any rate, it isn't an argument in favor of the Federation consistently deploying smaller starships than its adversaries.

Actually 50 years between line of battleships being the big gun of the fleet to any warship being able to slug it out with one because of technology improvements follows the Starfleet example of Voyager or Defiant with newer technology being able to hold their own with Enterprise. Just because the Soviet fleet is no longer a treat and the US Navy has chosen a different mix of weapons for its ships in 2012 means little.

I"m asking here instead of Trek Tech because I'm not asking for an "in universe" answer.

I'm asking for a Star Trek writers and producers standpoint.


So, why the overall preference of producers after The Next Generation for smaller ships?

From a production standpoint Star Trek was not Wagon Train in space but Hornblower in space. As the Officer got increasingly bigger ships and more responsibilities. To placate us Trekkers, Kirk was not just a Captain and Enterprise was not just a ship. The entire fleet took on Enterprise's unique insignia and Captain Picard became the commander of "the flagship". There was no more room to go up, so they went down. Trek tech prohibited playing fighter planes or PT/MTB Boats so we got a banking and yanking "escort ship", which I read as corvette, Defiant instead of a gliding cruiser with a relatively junior officer as commander.

Also real world captains were only getting one command, there simply being no big gun cruiser or battleship being around for follow up commands

 

[T'Girl]

And without an aircraft to assist the Burke, you could not fire Tomahawks at a target "hundreds of miles" away because it would be out of the targeted area before the missles arrived.

So here is a picture I downloaded from defensetech.org, it's a image of a warship taken from a satellite. Now I know what you're going to say, "T'Girl that's a Chinese aircraft carrier, and not a American battleship." Well you have me there, but the point is, a warship can be spotted without using a aircraft.

If you absolutely insist upon aircraft though, the flight IIA destroyers do carry two seahawks, with over 500 miles of range.

Tomahawks travel at 550 mph (477 knots), the battleship's maximum speed is 32.5 knots (37 mph). It would take a tomahawk 22 minute to travel 200 miles, in which time the battleship will have moved at most 13 miles.