• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Wouldn't you expect more Defiants in the current timeline?

And I don't follow the assumption in Relayer1's post that Defiants are quick and cheap to make. They're overpowered, heavily armored, excessively beweaponed. That probably makes them harder and costlier (in resources, time, and energy) to make than a standard ship. A tank is probably harder to make than an ATV or a Humvee.
There are other resources to consider, Christopher. A Defiant only costs 40 lives if lost, while a Galaxy class will cost it a thousand. Replacing the trained and highly skilled personnel isn't as easy or as quick as building a new starship.

In my opinion, Starfleet bled itself white between the Dominion War and the Borg invasion, and had the Dominion War gone longer Starfleet would have had the strategic breakthrough that big capital ships are not always better. Hopefully after the Borg invasion, Starfleet has realized that it needs to build smaller, faster, and more automated. :)
 
Allyn, the US Navy today hasn't even learnt that lesson, it's currently building the largest ever aircraft carrier in human history, why should Starfleet know any better?

The Sovereign-class and Galaxy-class starships are the largest that Starfleet has, at 685m and 642m respectively. Pretty much everything else is smaller in scale, at under 450m with correspondingly smaller crews.

Starfleet Ship Size Comparison Chart
 
Yes, the US Navy does build big capitol ships, but it doesn't have the big battleship centric mentality it had going into ww2. The Navy is mostly smaller vessel centric now with the missile cruisers being the major workhorses.

In starfleet, their newest capitol ship is the Vesta which is smaller than a Sovereign which is smaller than a Galaxy. Starfleet IS going to smaller ships.

Yes, Christopher, trek isn't about war. As my signature shows, exploration is the best part of trek and what it is REALLY about. You sir have yourself written some fine exploration stories I might add. However, Ds9 was largely about war and had a warship. The ufp is now amidst a cold war. War is an element of life and the universe; it is here and pretending that weapons are unnecessary is to invite destruction. I think both Bacco and Akaar understand that.
 
The Defiant-class is not built for exploration. Starfleet may officially classify it as an escort vessel but as Sisko said, it's a warship, built to fend off the Borg. It was effective against the Dominion and when the Borg came back prior to Destiny, it's a safe bet that Starfleet built a bunch more. True, a great number of them could have been destroyed during the events of Destiny, but post-Destiny there is no need for a ship designed to fight an enemy that no longer exists.

I would speculate that the Defiant-class starships would be used, as previously suggested, as border patrol vessels or key facility protection vessels, like Memory Alpha or classified research stations.

Also they they would make nice support vessels for starbases like the Defiant is with DS9.

And I don't follow the assumption in Relayer1's post that Defiants are quick and cheap to make. They're overpowered, heavily armored, excessively beweaponed. That probably makes them harder and costlier (in resources, time, and energy) to make than a standard ship. A tank is probably harder to make than an ATV or a Humvee.
There are other resources to consider, Christopher. A Defiant only costs 40 lives if lost, while a Galaxy class will cost it a thousand. Replacing the trained and highly skilled personnel isn't as easy or as quick as building a new starship.

In my opinion, Starfleet bled itself white between the Dominion War and the Borg invasion, and had the Dominion War gone longer Starfleet would have had the strategic breakthrough that big capital ships are not always better. Hopefully after the Borg invasion, Starfleet has realized that it needs to build smaller, faster, and more automated. :)

Not to mention that with slipstream you can't build as big anymore or it doesn't work.
 
However, Ds9 was largely about war and had a warship.

Only a few seasons of DS9 involved a state of warfare. And yes, it had A warship, one that it made a point of establishing as something that was so far outside Starfleet's normal parameters that they weren't even willing to officially label it as a warship. Starfleet is able to defend itself, but it doesn't embrace war as a way of life.


The ufp is now amidst a cold war.

No, it's involved in a disagreement with another civilization that sees it as more of a threat than it actually is. The stupidest thing to do in that situation is to actually act like the threat the Typhon Pact believes the Federation to be. Why is that so hard to understand?


War is an element of life and the universe; it is here and pretending that weapons are unnecessary is to invite destruction. I think both Bacco and Akaar understand that.

Leave the straw men out of it. Nobody's saying defense is unnecessary, just that it's foolish to act provocative toward the Typhon Pact. The Pact is defensive, not aggressive. They're not eeeevil cartoon monsters out to destroy happiness and apple pie. They're civilizations that have a legitimate desire for autonomy and feel threatened by the Federation's dominance. The intelligent way to respond to that is to reassure them that the Federation is not a threat. And embracing a "cold war" mentality toward them, turning the Federation into an armed camp bristling with so-called "defensive" weapons, would be just as stupid and self-destructive as that same policy was in our history. It would just provoke and escalate things. And it would take Star Trek fiction in a direction it should not go.

One of the defining features of Star Trek is that it has rarely portrayed force of arms as a solution to a problem. Usually the ultimate solution to any crisis is an act of compassion, a willingness to set aside weapons and take a chance on peace. Kirk refused to kill the Gorn, and thus we've had a century of peace with the Gorn instead of a century of war. Odo gave the cure to the Founders, and that act of mercy ended a war that the Federation would've surely lost if it had been left to force and weapons alone. By the same token, the solution to the Typhon Pact problem will not be found in guns and battleships. Weapons never make things better. They can be useful at keeping things from getting worse (though if misused they cause things to get worse), but that's just a stopgap. Actual solutions have to come from elsewhere, from diplomacy and commerce and mutual understanding.
 
The Pact IS aggressive. They attacked Utopia Planitia to steal slipstream plans. Bacco responded by sending in operatives to destroy their prototype. In that skirmish, the Aventine had to fight TP ships. Blood has already been spilled.

Based on the actions of the Tholians and Tzenkethi, I'd say the Pact has further aggressive plans but is first putting their strategy in place to weaken the Federation. Although I can't back up this particular claim with evidence, I hypothesize the Tholian actions with the Andorians was an attempt to weaken the ufp politically and militarily. Though blood wasn't spilled, it was an aggressive act.

I'm also not advocating further Defiant production, I'm just saying that I suspect they were mss produced in the war, it would be unwise to retire/scrap them since they exist and not have them on the ready. As TR said, "Speak softly AND carry a big stick." Starfleet exploration cruiser design philosophy follows TR's words, why shouldn't Starfleet policy itself?

I also expected to see a ship built with the borg in mind used during the various borg-related books.
 
The Pact IS aggressive. They attacked Utopia Planitia to steal slipstream plans. Bacco responded by sending in operatives to destroy their prototype. In that skirmish, the Aventine had to fight TP ships. Blood has already been spilled.

Based on the actions of the Tholians and Tzenkethi, I'd say the Pact has further aggressive plans but is first putting their strategy in place to weaken the Federation. Although I can't back up this particular claim with evidence, I hypothesize the Tholian actions with the Andorians was an attempt to weaken the ufp politically and militarily. Though blood wasn't spilled, it was an aggressive act.

I'm also not advocating further Defiant production, I'm just saying that I suspect they were mss produced in the war, it would be unwise to retire/scrap them since they exist and not have them on the ready. As TR said, "Speak softly AND carry a big stick." Starfleet exploration cruiser design philosophy follows TR's words, why shouldn't Starfleet policy itself?

I also expected to see a ship built with the borg in mind used during the various borg-related books.
The Breen stole the slipstream designs, and there is no evidence to suggest it was anything other than the Breen and Romulans trying to even the playing field as regards to speed. Bacco did the right thing by sending in covert operatives. She could have sent a nice Sovereign-class ship to glass the planet but she chose to do it the quiet way. It wasn't as covert as they hoped, things went wrong, shit happens. However, since open war did not break out after that incident, I would say that's fairly conclusive evidence that war is not what either side wants.

As for the Tzenkethi manipulating Romulan politics, they did it for a more stable TP, one that was not advocating war with the Federation. The Pact is comprised of cultures who have never worked well together and so they will be in-fighting until they figure things out. The best thing the Federation can do is leave well enough alone.

As for the Tholians, they may well be looking to destabilize the Federation, but then again they might have just wanted to prove to the galaxy that they are trying to change and be nice like the rest of the Pact by offering the Andorians the means to discover a cure for their reproductive crisis.
 
The Pact IS aggressive. They attacked Utopia Planitia to steal slipstream plans.

No, the Breen did. I've said a million times, it's a mistake to assume the Pact is a single culture with a single policy. It's six fiercely independent civilizations that are still only just beginning to try to work together. And it's clear that while there are aggressive voices within it, there are also more moderate or neutral ones. Just because a couple of its members have taken aggressive action against the UFP, it doesn't follow that the rest would agree with their priorities or goals. And it's not clear yet whether the militants or moderates will end up having the guiding role in the Pact's foreign policy.

This will be explored in more detail in my upcoming novella The Struggle Within.


I'm also not advocating further Defiant production, I'm just saying that I suspect they were mss produced in the war

And I don't think the evidence bears that out. We never saw more than three of them at a time, and whenever we saw them in combined fleets ("The Changing Face of Evil," "Endgame") they were greatly outnumbered by more familiar classes of ship.


it would be unwise to retire/scrap them since they exist and not have them on the ready.

Yes, they exist, and they do have postwar uses, as Mission Gamma made crystal-clear. I just think the assumption that they are numerous is completely unsupported by the evidence.
 
It would be unwise to retire/scrap them since they exist and not have them on the ready.
Yes, they exist, and they do have postwar uses, as Mission Gamma made crystal-clear. I just think the assumption that they are numerous is completely unsupported by the evidence.
Though as Spock would point out, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. On the question of the population of Defiants within the fleet, the only reasonable viewpoint is to be agnostic; we simply don't know. :)

As to your argument about the resources that go into producing Defiants, that's unsupported by any evidence anywhere, and I would suggest (or rather, outright state) that you're inventing that argument wholecloth. The fact is, we don't know anything about the resource-intensiveness (or lack thereof) of the class.
 
However, Ds9 was largely about war and had a warship.

Only a few seasons of DS9 involved a state of warfare. And yes, it had A warship, one that it made a point of establishing as something that was so far outside Starfleet's normal parameters that they weren't even willing to officially label it as a warship. Starfleet is able to defend itself, but it doesn't embrace war as a way of life.

Neither does the U.S. Navy, which sees itself as a primarily defensive and humanitarian organization (slightly better than you describe the Pact). See the Navy's current ad campaign.

The ufp is now amidst a cold war.
No, it's involved in a disagreement with another civilization that sees it as more of a threat than it actually is. The stupidest thing to do in that situation is to actually act like the threat the Typhon Pact believes the Federation to be. Why is that so hard to understand?
Because it's a straw man argument. The choices are not between militaristic expansion (what the Pact believes the Federation represents) and peaceful disarmament. Why not peaceful expansion, a well-armed defensive posture, or both?

Consider this: if members of the Pact believe that the Federation represents an existential threat, what would happen if Starfleet disarmed? The actions of at least one member of the Pact suggest that the outcome would not be pleasant for the Federation. Even if all of the other members of the Pact have purely peaceful intentions (the actions of the Romulans in Zero Sum Game suggest otherwise), they have shown that they are not willing to prevent or even condemn offensive action by the Breen.

Disarmament is possible after detente, but it is foolish until both sides have come to understand that the other is not purposefully threatening. A well-armed defensive posture does not imply aggression. It represents only the capability for defense in the event of war.

A good historical example of this is U.S. policy immediately after World War I. We initiated a naval buildup intended to defeat either of the next two largest naval forces in the world, despite both of them being our allies; they remain our allies 90 years later. We aimed to be prepared for the highly unlikely event of war, rather than run the risk of being unprepared if even an unlikely war came. (Fleets cannot be built quickly the way armies can. The late-war U.S. carriers and battleships of World War II were actually ordered before the war began; they simply took a very long time to build, even at full industrial capacity.) Martial superiority is not necessarily aggressive. It may simply be prudent.

By the same token, the solution to the Typhon Pact problem will not be found in guns and battleships. Weapons never make things better. They can be useful at keeping things from getting worse (though if misused they cause things to get worse), but that's just a stopgap. Actual solutions have to come from elsewhere, from diplomacy and commerce and mutual understanding.
I would argue that weapons do sometimes make things better (see Kosovo, World War II, etc. - cases in which weapons are used to inhibit violence against innocent people), but I agree that they aren't usually the right or best solution. However, the primary aim of weapons is not to effect positive change, but to prevent negative change. Weapons are a deterrent - and a last resort in case efforts to seek understanding and cooperation fail (i.e. a defense).

A powerful Starfleet would give the Federation a chance to explain itself to and seek detente with the Pact - a chance that it might not have if it unilaterally disarmed or (equivalently) armed itself less than those it hopes to seek understanding with. (Of course, there is no reason to deploy the battle fleet near the Federation's borders with the Pact without good reason for thinking a Pact attack imminent; that would be aggressive action, and utterly counterproductive and pointless.)

As to your argument about the resources that go into producing Defiants, that's unsupported by any evidence anywhere, and I would suggest (or rather, outright state) that you're inventing that argument wholecloth. The fact is, we don't know anything about the resource-intensiveness (or lack thereof) of the class.

The mirror universe Defiant-class construction program would seem to imply the opposite of Christopher's argument. The resource-strapped Terran rebellion was able to supply the construction of a dozen at once in Saturn's Children.
 
Last edited:
This has turned out to be an interesting discussion ! Also rather comforting - it is reassuring to find Americans with a grasp of world affairs and their own foreign policy that goes beyond 'they're all jealous of / threatened by our freedom'.

And no, I'm not being sarcastic or patronising, that is how a lot of US opinion plays in the rest of the world...

The Typhon Pact shows promise - not so far completely realised, but an equivalent to the Federation could generate dramatic scenarios for the forseeable future. Especially if they are not necessarily going to be portrayed as villains !
 
The Typhon Pact shows promise - not so far completely realised, but an equivalent to the Federation could generate dramatic scenarios for the forseeable future. Especially if they are not necessarily going to be portrayed as villains !

Quite right. The Typhon Pact were never intended to be simply the new Big Bad, the new Evil Empire. They were intended to be an analogy to the early Federation itself, a group of formerly fractious and independent civilizations recognizing the benefits of cooperation and taking the first tentative steps toward a partnership. Naturally the fact that most of them had turbulent histories with the Federation was a source of complication, and yes, they were intended to be competing with the Federation in a sense, but not in a white hats/black hats way, but a more nuanced and morally ambiguous way. The idea wasn't to make them simply villains, but to make them complex and interesting enough to generate a lot of stories. And that means there are a lot of competing voices within them, a lot of forces and factions with different agendas. There could be agendas which could hurt the Federation or help it, and there could be agendas which could hurt the Pact itself or help it. Its different factions could be at odds with one another as well as with the Federation. There are countless different ways things could unfold.

Which is why it's so sad and frustrating to me when I see readers trying to dumb the Pact down to "the enemy," to see only the potential for aggression and overlook all the other rich, competing potentials that exist within this scenario. The Pact is still trying to discover what it will be. It's a turbulent, dynamic birthing process. Within that dynamism, there's the potential for war with the Federation, for peace with the Federation, for uneasy coexistence with the Federation, for conflict and intrigue between different members of the Pact, for instability in the Pact that threatens galactic peace and the Federation trying to prevent the worst from happening, you name it. There are so very, very many possibilities here. And that is so much more interesting than just another bunch of evil aliens out to destroy the Federation.
 
No, the Breen did.

When they became members of the Pact, so they could show their worth to it. Just like the Kinshaya, once members of the Pact, attacked and occupied for a small time a Klingon planet, just like other members used that Ferengi intermediary to disrupt Federation/Klingon mining, and just like they tried to disrupt the Federation planet that then threatened to seceed from the Federation, begins with a Z, dont remember it's name off hand.

It has been shown more than once that when individual states got the backing of the Pact they went about trying to cause trouble. Not the same as outright war sure, but certainly not a misunderstood innocent group.
 
And the Breen did not act alone amongst the Pact. They had help from the Romulans and I believe from at least one other member.

We are also not labeling the Pact as a Snydley Whiplash or the next big villain to replace the Borg. We are saying Starfleet would be ignorant and imprudent to not plan for a potential threat. Also, what united the Typhon Pact, a common fear and dislike for the UFP. That foundation doesn't give high hopes for its future. The UFP was founded on loftier and more peaceful intentions and ambitions.
 
No, the Breen did.

When they became members of the Pact, so they could show their worth to it.

That's not how I remember Zero Sum Game. There, the Breen seemed rather contemptuous of the rest of the Pact and reluctant to share the fruits of their slipstream research with the other members.


Just like the Kinshaya, once members of the Pact, attacked and occupied for a small time a Klingon planet...

The enmity between the Kinshaya and the Klingons goes back generations. The Klingons had recently destroyed the Kinshaya homeworld, so it's completely counterfactual to suggest that the Pact somehow provoked the conflict. The conflict already existed, and the Kinshaya acted on their own to occupy that planet in retaliation. And once that happened, the Pact sent ships to defend its Kinshaya allies from the Klingons.

And of course, what the fans who insist on this myth of the Black Hat Typhon Pact consistently ignore is that the first official act of the Typhon Pact was to withdraw the Kinshaya forces from the Klingon planet and apologize for the aggression. The Kinshaya acted on their own; the Pact as a group pulled them back.


And the Breen did not act alone amongst the Pact. They had help from the Romulans and I believe from at least one other member.

As I said, there are both aggressive and moderate factions within the Pact. Yes, there is the potential for danger. But what's dead wrong is to assume that the Pact only has aggressive intentions, or that it speaks with anything remotely resembling a unified voice. Even within a single member there can be conflicting agendas, as we saw with the Breen government and dissidents in Zero Sum Game and with the competing Romulan and Gorn factions in Rough Beasts of Empire and Seize the Fire, and as we'll see with the Kinshaya in The Struggle Within.


We are also not labeling the Pact as a Snydley Whiplash or the next big villain to replace the Borg. We are saying Starfleet would be ignorant and imprudent to not plan for a potential threat.

Of course they should. But in this case, the way to plan for the threat is to find ways to promote the more moderate voices within the Pact, the ones that don't want conflict and are able to hold the militants in check. And building more weapons is not the way to do that. Remember, most of the people in the Pact think the Federation is the bad guy, the aggressor that wants to absorb them and wipe out their way of life. Try looking at it from their side. They also think they need to prepare against a potential threat, so if the Federation makes itself look threatening by building more weapons and warships, that will provoke the Pact to do the same, and it'll start a cycle of escalation. It'll play right into the militants' hands, and thus will increase the threat, not diminish it.

Also, what united the Typhon Pact, a common fear and dislike for the UFP.

Mostly, but the Gorn have historically had good to neutral relations with the Federation. Remember, in The Gorn Crisis, Picard and Data saved the Gorn ruling caste from a coup. The sitting Gorn government owes its existence to the Federation.

And yes, most of them fear the Federation. Their goal is not aggression but self-defense. We convince them that we're not a threat to them, and they'll be less likely to start a fight.

That foundation doesn't give high hopes for its future. The UFP was founded on loftier and more peaceful intentions and ambitions.

The problem is that you're only seeing them from the Federation's perspective. You can't truly understand a society until you learn to see things from their own perspective. Imagine you're, say, a Klingon looking at the formation of the Federation in 2161. Would you see the lofty and peaceful intentions, or would you just see that four species you've clashed with in the past have just formed a powerful alliance that you need to be worried about? Whatever lofty intentions the UFP's founders may have had, they were also surely concerned about being militarily strong enough to hold off Romulans, Klingons, and the like. So the way the Klingons or Romulans would see the union from the outside would be very different from how the people on the inside would see it. By the same token, you can't assume that the way the Pact's formation looks from the Federation's perspective is the same way it looks from the perspective of the Gorn or the Kinshaya.

Yes, concern for the threat posed by the Federation is part of why the Pact formed, but it's ethnocentric to assume it's the only reason, that their entire mentality revolves exclusively around the Federation. They united because they learned from the Federation's example that they're stronger together than apart. They united because they see benefits for themselves in cooperation. It's true that the Tholians are there mainly out of their enmity toward the UFP, but that's not the only reason the others joined, because these are six very different civilizations with multiple different factions within each and every one of them. They all have internal concerns of their own that have little or nothing to do with the Federation. Every nation has domestic policies as well as foreign policies, which is why it's naive to think of an alien state's motivations solely in terms of its foreign policy toward the Federation. Part of the goal behind founding the Pact is to let its members improve things for themselves, for their population. The Romulans wanted to end their civil war and reunify their state. The Kinshaya wanted aid rebuilding their civilization after the Klingons went Vogon Constructor Fleet on their home planet. The Gorn probably just figured they'd be better off as part of a strong alliance than standing alone. There are a ton of motivations behind the Typhon Pact, and while some of them involve hostility toward the Federation, that's just one small part of the tapestry.
 
It would be interesting to see the Pact clash with the UFP over an issue where the Pact are acting magnanimously / for the general good, but still contrary to the wishes of the UFP.

There's a lot of shades of grey to be painted...
 
Christopher, you make excellent points as to why the Pact formed. We will not completely agree for now but my interest in your new TP book is piqued.
 
I believe that some reader's interpretation of the Typhon Pact is being colored by the historical Warsaw Pact.
 
The Defiants in service would also be ideal in defending Borg ravaged worlds and relief ships from raiders and grave robbers. I'm sure their presence in orbit would hearten the people below that they are at least secure.
 
I believe that some reader's interpretation of the Typhon Pact is being colored by the historical Warsaw Pact.

Mine is colored by what I've read in the novels coupled with the mentality of "hope for the best but plan for the worst." History in this case is just a tool for potential scenarios. We must judge the Romulans and Breen by their standards and history (which doesn't give too much hope) not human ones. The human history is for weighing how we should be prepared.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top