[X] UES Skate
Linked contents
Takareer
Words and feathers
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
After some thought: I believe that we're still stuck in Starfleet's peacetime "high-endurance, low alpha, low response" paradigm when we should be going for a "low endurance, max alpha, high response" paradigm.
Starfleet, normally, has peacetime duties. The two most militarized functions it has are exploration and guard duty, which favour a high-endurance model. You need the ship always ready to fight for long periods of time, and especially for explorers you don't want them to be recall all the way back to base after getting into a scuffle.
We see this in our ships; there are a few phasers, which never run out of ammo; a few photon torpedo tubes, with reloads; a good supply of fuel; acceptable warp speeds. Now that we are creating a combat ship we've stripped out the non-combat parts, but have not really changed the paradigm - the biggest paradigm shift is the consideration that the Selachii will be fighting alongside the Thunderchild, which is a step in the right direction.
However, war is categorized by lots of maneuvering and plotting, decided by the success or failure of a few key strikes. It is also effected by various specialized supporting elements. A modern jet fighter best shows this: it does not have enough power to take off with full fuel and armament, because it can be refuelled in midair; it does not need to carry too much fuel for the same reason. When it arrives on target, it can salvo off all its missiles very quickly, after which point it runs out. Modern destroyers similarly favour vertical launch cells (where all weapons are always ready, and a quick salvo is possible) rather than reloadable missile turrets. They are geared towards waiting and not fighting, and then causing maximum damage in the one battle they have been waiting for.
What we need for war is a ship with a bunch of torpedoes, or even better large armoured missiles, that can fire them off all at once but doesn't waste space on reload capability. Reloads and refuelling should be handling by an armoured but lightly armed replenishment ship that can provide support to a region of operations. This "missile boat" design should allow us to carry more varied munitions as well; for instance, heavy precision missiles for striking surface installations.
Starfleet, normally, has peacetime duties. The two most militarized functions it has are exploration and guard duty, which favour a high-endurance model. You need the ship always ready to fight for long periods of time, and especially for explorers you don't want them to be recall all the way back to base after getting into a scuffle.
We see this in our ships; there are a few phasers, which never run out of ammo; a few photon torpedo tubes, with reloads; a good supply of fuel; acceptable warp speeds. Now that we are creating a combat ship we've stripped out the non-combat parts, but have not really changed the paradigm - the biggest paradigm shift is the consideration that the Selachii will be fighting alongside the Thunderchild, which is a step in the right direction.
However, war is categorized by lots of maneuvering and plotting, decided by the success or failure of a few key strikes. It is also effected by various specialized supporting elements. A modern jet fighter best shows this: it does not have enough power to take off with full fuel and armament, because it can be refuelled in midair; it does not need to carry too much fuel for the same reason. When it arrives on target, it can salvo off all its missiles very quickly, after which point it runs out. Modern destroyers similarly favour vertical launch cells (where all weapons are always ready, and a quick salvo is possible) rather than reloadable missile turrets. They are geared towards waiting and not fighting, and then causing maximum damage in the one battle they have been waiting for.
What we need for war is a ship with a bunch of torpedoes, or even better large armoured missiles, that can fire them off all at once but doesn't waste space on reload capability. Reloads and refuelling should be handling by an armoured but lightly armed replenishment ship that can provide support to a region of operations. This "missile boat" design should allow us to carry more varied munitions as well; for instance, heavy precision missiles for striking surface installations.
Empress_Boog
Grand Empress
This is an interesting thought, and ultimately I understand the underlying message, but I disagree with requiring a paradigm shift in order to fight most effectively. Star Trek has always been a setting with an extremely low proportion of ships to explore/protect space (the only setting worse than ST in this regard is Battletech, and Humanity is actively backsliding technologically there). While I wouldn't be against trying this during some possible Klingon war, I still think the High Endurance model serves best for Starfleet.
Last edited:
Shard
One and Many
- Location
- Malaysia
I think one of the bigger issues with trying to militarize a fleet in Star Trek is probably the rapid pace of technological advancement. Even with refits, within a decade or at most two technological advanced will necessitate a new design - And then old warships will simply be unable to compete in the role of warfare, becoming no more than floating coffins. Remain relevant for a single technological transition, perhaps, but definitely not two.
So you're really best working with multipurpose ships who can do all sorts of things even as they become unable to effectively fight due to technological obsolescence. Realistically actual 'war fleet' would be characterized by active prototyping of a handful of dedicated warship designs and simply relying on vast industrial reserves to crash-build them en-masse if someone actually attacks.
So you're really best working with multipurpose ships who can do all sorts of things even as they become unable to effectively fight due to technological obsolescence. Realistically actual 'war fleet' would be characterized by active prototyping of a handful of dedicated warship designs and simply relying on vast industrial reserves to crash-build them en-masse if someone actually attacks.
Takareer
Words and feathers
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
But this is true for the real world, as well, and nonetheless it follows the lines of design that I mentioned.
Even if the ships must be standalone (they already aren't; the Selachii must co-operate with the Thunderchild or NX), their armament should in most cases tend toward high alpha. Wars will not be decided by a slow grind of minor engagements; rather an opportunity will open up which we must seize, or an attack will materialize which we must defend. And in that moment, each ship punching for three will carry the day and (after successive such incidents) the war.
- Location
- Lake Wobegon
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Even if this was the case (which it isn't, Excelsiors and Mirandas continue in frontline combat roles right through the end of the Dominion War), the actual production and maintenance of a war fleet requires the dedication of much of society's resources to the active and continuous use and buildup of a military-industrial complex, not simply the turning of peacetime production to warlike purposes should the moment require it. Such a complex in the Federation will be very much in evidence by the time of The Undiscovered Country, where it engages in domestic and foreign politics as an actor independent of and threatening to the civilian government for the purpose of perpetuating its own existence and continual growth.
ClawClawBite
Mad Engineering!
- Location
- Seattle, WA
Unless we are tapping into the StarFleetBattles EU of Star Trek, we have no reason to think that armored missiles would be useful in combat. Space is big, ranges are long, and adding mass makes the energy requirements of projectiles high.
In StarFleetBattles, there was still a quantity tactical limitation on drone missiles of command channels for control and guidence.
In the more general argument, of alpha strike vs. sustained combat ability, the two questions are how much extra strike we get vs. how much sustained combat ability we loose, and what types of missions are we doing and what is the ratio where we can alpha strike.
Or the quick question, how many torpedos fired does it take to disable a Romulan ship, and it is practical to build that?
Takareer
Words and feathers
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
I suggested armoured missiles because what I really want is a super fat photon torpedo, but presumably without its launch system it will be slow and, due to its size, easier to hit. Thus the obvious counterargument is "it could be shot down". Some polarized hull plating on the front should allow it to take a hit before reaching its target, thus my suggestion.
- Location
- Buskerud, Norway
The more spent on armouring a missile the less space there is to place the warhead furthermore it would require an entirely different infrastructure line than our current standardised torpedo tubes as the heavy torpedoes would require far more volum which neccesitates bigger tubes and less space to fit torpedoes
- Location
- Lake Wobegon
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Dreadnought (from the Voyager episode of the same name) featured none of these flaws and indeed could hardly be hindered from without.
Empress_Boog
Grand Empress
[
] UES Gawr GuraI would feel an immense amount of shame if I lost to a ship named that.
Takareer
Words and feathers
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
Very true! Slapping 2-4 "light dreadnoughts" onto a ship should probably be an extremely effective addition to our military capability, and generally a more optimal use of military resources.
Last edited:
- Location
- Lake Wobegon
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Of course, what Dreadnought was for was not ship or fleet combat, but terror-bombing civilian population centers. Its defenses were oriented toward making sure it survived to that point. It is not fundamentally different, in doctrine, to the Romulan suicide fleet which attacked Earth.
- Location
- The internet
[ ] UES William D. Porter
What could possibly go wrong?
] UES William D. PorterWhat could possibly go wrong?
Empress_Boog
Grand Empress
So when does it almost Photonic torpedo the President? During Romulan peace negotiations?[
What could possibly go wrong?
Takareer
Words and feathers
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
Well, that's why I said "light dreadnought". It only needs enough defences to get from one ship to the next, not be a self-contained bombship.
NavySeel
"I don't know what I'm doing."
- Location
- Places
[[
What could possibly go wrong?
] UES KamchatkaHave to be vigilant of those Romulan torpedo boats.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Romulan torpedo boats have to be vigilant of the occasional set of Starfleet binoculars. Admiral Rozhestvensky has a hell of a throwing arm.[] UES Kamchatka
Have to be vigilant of those Romulan torpedo boats.
- Location
- Bremen, Germany
Mattress? What Mattress? You refer to the bed sheet stuffed with emergency rations?
no the mattress acts as a lid and a protective cover for the compartment filled with emergency rationsMattress? What Mattress? You refer to the bed sheet stuffed with emergency rations?
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
We aren't building jet fighters because we don't have carriers or airbases in strike range of our enemies. Space is big, you can't do strikes from earth with a minimalist ship.
We can borrow some facilities from bigger ships to minimize the internal space needs of smaller ships, but they're not carrier launched fighters. For example, they can't use external hull affixed single shot missile launchers, they would have to reload those in space. It's also of course incompatible with our torpedo design, which is based on filling the torpedo with antimatter just before firing it.
It's also worth remembering this is a light cruiser, not a 1 or 2 pilots fighter. Look at navies rather than airforces and you'll see that minimalist torpedo boats basically only see use as coastal defense for obvious range reasons.