ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Starfleet Carrier

andoriangrey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 95

Report this Feb. 11 2011, 12:23 pm

Thanks for the exchange, Matt R. I appreciate it. Yes, ultimately, a good writer/storyteller can make ANY and ALL scenarios believable (fighters, small missile boats with ship-to-ship missiles, midget subs , C-130 Hercules gunships exist also, with awesome firepower).


 Just once, I'd like to see a "big-screen" star trek scenario that's basically a "Leyte gulf/D-day Normandy invasion" scenario , done Star Trek-style. Take a particular battle, say, from the Dominion War, for example (or romulan/Earth war, or Typhon pact story from the books, or a new, made-up one, Abrams-style). Say, for example, re-taking a Federation planet from Dominion occupation. I can see huge fleets of "carrier ships" launching "ground-attack" fighter-bombers, and troop carriers "going in for the landing" (sort of like starship troopers, but done for Star Trek). NOT the whole movie, but just as a major part of the entire, on-screen story. DS9 came close to this, but a TV budget is too small. Just need it done once, right ( with JJ's mega-buck budget), and then move on to all the rest of the "Trekverse" stories to be told.

scottjimenez

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 329

Report this Feb. 11 2011, 5:57 pm

that sounds good...visually like a shock and awe. but i think an invasion fleet would have the air support but using massive transporter bays to deliver thousands of soldiers would be the way to go. on the ground instantly

One damn minute, Admiral.

andoriangrey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 95

Report this Feb. 12 2011, 1:42 am

The Transporter would be signature star trek, scott. I agree. Personally, I've always had a grudge against the transporter (I know it was a budgetary device for the old, low-budget TOS shows). During the "decade of reruns" (when we all thought ST was over, never to return, AND SO was our "plaything", to do with as we pleased). I'd play out, in my imagination, the "fleet/invasion" scenario. I'd pretend an energy weapon existed that would reroute the transporter signal directly into the enemy's POW camp, or simply threaten to "scramble " it, thus destroying the entire army, SO THAT the transporter could never be used in war-time (only a useful peacetime tool). THEN starfleet would HAVE TO use my imagined invasion fleet of carriers and shuttle "landing ships" and fighterbomber wings, etc...I assumed an "energy field" would blanket any battlefield so that sensors, communications, transporter beams, etc... wouldn't function (standard operating procedure for future battlefields).

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Feb. 14 2011, 6:29 am

Quote: andoriangrey @ Feb. 11 2011, 12:23 pm

Thanks for the exchange, Matt R. I appreciate it. Yes, ultimately, a good writer/storyteller can make ANY and ALL scenarios believable (fighters, small missile boats with ship-to-ship missiles, midget subs , C-130 Hercules gunships exist also, with awesome firepower).

 Just once, I'd like to see a "big-screen" star trek scenario that's basically a "Leyte gulf/D-day Normandy invasion" scenario , done Star Trek-style. Take a particular battle, say, from the Dominion War, for example (or romulan/Earth war, or Typhon pact story from the books, or a new, made-up one, Abrams-style). Say, for example, re-taking a Federation planet from Dominion occupation. I can see huge fleets of "carrier ships" launching "ground-attack" fighter-bombers, and troop carriers "going in for the landing" (sort of like starship troopers, but done for Star Trek). NOT the whole movie, but just as a major part of the entire, on-screen story. DS9 came close to this, but a TV budget is too small. Just need it done once, right ( with JJ's mega-buck budget), and then move on to all the rest of the "Trekverse" stories to be told.



It is too bad Abrams didn't render the battle of vulcan or have the rest of the fleet sweep in at the end to assist. Would have been gorgeous to watch.

Another nice thing about fighters is you can send in more than the enemy has weapons to hit. They can also act like bugs annoying the target to take pressure off the big guns. And if you think starfleet isn't militaristic and wouldn't have fighters, why did they build several defiants? There definitely should have been more defiants in line battles and the battle of sector 01. They had a model and the class was easy to build. Of course, they would have confused the main ship somewhat, but that is a minor problem.

SSFPhoenix

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 527

Report this Feb. 14 2011, 9:26 am

I think some one said that they spotted a possible fed carrier in the opening scene of a dominion war episode. I do remember that the fed had ground side "hoppers" that carried around 70-80 people.I think it was DS9: nor battle to the strong? anyways the fed had Tac fighters and runabouts both of which did seem to have some use in the war. Ie. Odo's runabout damaging a dom destroyer, five or less tac fighters taking down a galor with torpedoes.....

Let there be pants.

SSFPhoenix

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 527

Report this Feb. 14 2011, 9:28 am

forget to mention but could the tac fighters design mean that the tac fighter is capable of low warp? i mean runabouts can go to warp....

Let there be pants.

andoriangrey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 95

Report this Feb. 14 2011, 12:50 pm

It's not that I don't think Starfleet is militaristic, Matt. That IS a big part of their organization. /they are much more than the military aspect, and they should ALSO have some general-purpose ships that serve many roles, ALONG with the specialized military ships. I remember the original ideal (from that making of star trek book from the early 70's) where starfleet was modelled on the 18th century navy (ie. Master & Commander), where the ships did EVERYTHING from supplying colonies, transporting personnel, "showing the flag" (like an embassy with soldier/statesmen) to engaging enemy fleets.

staran

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 26

Report this Feb. 15 2011, 4:15 am

Not manned fighters, no.


It doesn't make any sence for a starfleet officer to get into a canoe, to fight amongst galleons.


But have them on the carrier and manuevering the ship (like in the Enterprise episode) would make perfect sence from a ST perspective.

JadenStrikerOVA

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 298

Report this Feb. 15 2011, 4:46 am

For the purpose of practicality and effectiveness, having them carry fighters would be necessary, and more combat and resource efficent.  WW2 showed how much more effective carriers where.  So if StarTrek had the ship keep the guns and add carrier abilities, then that would be ideal.


The warhead in the photon torpedos is 1/4 the size of a basket ball, if you remember an episode of voyager, where Ensine Kim and Tovak where loading a modifed warhead into a torpedo casing, on that Omega partical episode.  Fighters could have smaller torpedos big enough to house the warhead and thruster pack when fired.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum