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

Why did the Treaty of Algeron only ban UFP having cloak device on there starship that had crew on them

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Feb. 24 2013, 8:09 pm

Both example of the class 3 probe Nog own words vitural undectedable used term Star Terk Deep Space 9: Valiant. And get see cloak mines kept the Dominion at us the worn hole until Cardassion disarmed Worn hole aliens ban them. So why does treaty ban man caft but not unmand craft. 

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Feb. 25 2013, 4:05 am

A few possible explanations (none of which are ever definitively given as the "correct" one):


1. Unmanned craft are less of a threat.


2. A lot takes place between "Pegasus" and "Call to Arms" (the two most relevant episodes for this question -- including (in "The Search") the cloaking device being installed in the Defiant. It may be that the Treaty of Algeron itself is a little less relevant than it once was.


3. The Romulans do not feel that their own interests are threatened by the use of cloaked mines against the Dominion -- a political entity which they do not entirely trust either. Actually, it's entirely conceivable that they would consider a move against more Dominion re-enforcements to be in their interests, and more so because they do not have to take the consequences (yet).


Remember that Romulans, while only too willing to use every bit of political leverage that they can, are 100% concerned (possibly even more so than other Star Trek nations) with furthering their own interests. This is shown in their initial reaction to the Dominion encroachments on their space during the early Dominion War (cf. "In the Pale Moonlight.") No doubt the Romulans would cry foul if they thought there was something to be gained by doing so.


Also remember: Sisko is not as punctillious regarding treaties and diplomacy as Picard is, and so he is a lot more lax with rules. (Including the use of the Defiant's cloak.)


We do not know therefore whether the Treaty really does restrict only the use of manned ships. (A pretty stupid concession on the part of the Federation if you ask me, anyway!) It may be that in the changing political circumstances, with different people involved, certain clauses of the Treaty itself are less relevant to both sides than they might have been previously.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

Mitchz95

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1830

Report this Feb. 25 2013, 5:19 pm

The mines in "Call to Arms" probably used Klingon cloaks.


"The future is in the hands of those who explore... And from all the beauty they discover while crossing perpetually receding frontiers, they develop for nature and for humankind an infinite love." - Jacques Yves Cousteau

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Feb. 26 2013, 12:29 pm

 Nog said  class 3 Probe is virtually undetected. That sounds like a cloak device to me at least. UFP had probe availabe since the TNG at least. 


 

stovokor2000-A

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2001

Report this Mar. 02 2013, 1:12 am

Quote: Goldplanet @ Feb. 26 2013, 12:29 pm

>

> Nog said  class 3 Probe is virtually undetected. That sounds like a cloak device to me at least. UFP had probe availabe since the TNG at least.


 


virtually undetectable does not mean it has a cloaking device.


Photobucket

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Mar. 11 2013, 9:48 pm

A cloak device making something invisable to all know must sensor and the nake eye.


Now without question class 3 probe fit the first term invisable to know sensors in pratice terms unless suggestion that class 3 probe is only visable to normal light be unlikley. That hardly make nearly undectable.


 


Also we having Holo ship that also had a cloak device on it and was basic design operation without a crew which pratice is another example Star Trek: Insurrection. So forgive the treatly of Algeron seem only ban starship that Starfleet require a crew to work.


 


 

stovokor2000-A

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2001

Report this Mar. 12 2013, 3:08 am

Quote: Goldplanet @ Mar. 11 2013, 9:48 pm

>A cloak device making something invisable to all know must sensor and the nake eye.

>Now without question class 3 probe fit the first term invisable to know sensors in pratice terms unless suggestion that class 3 probe is only visable to normal light be unlikley. That hardly make nearly undectable.

> Also we having Holo ship that also had a cloak device on it and was basic design operation without a crew which pratice is another example Star Trek: Insurrection. So forgive the treatly of Algeron seem only ban starship that Starfleet require a crew to work.


sorry friend but there is certinly a question here.


I think the problem here is your understanding of the language.


A class-3 probe is virtually [that means almost] undetectable by sensors.Not completly invisable, but ALMOST invisiable.


As for your example in Insurrection, you have a point but the film also proves you wrong.Remember, they had a cloaked base asnd a cloaked crew in that film watching thd Baku


Photobucket

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Mar. 12 2013, 3:53 pm

The base it self had a duck blind cloak which seen used many times. Those suits back the claim UFP far specail force allow us cloaking devices. It possible Treaty of Algeron only ban starship require crew operation that it. It means pratice terms base, crew member or  any starship that does not need a crew to operation it can having cloak device on it.

stovokor2000-A

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2001

Report this Mar. 12 2013, 4:46 pm

the holo ship ewould have needed ast least a small crew to maintain opperations.


if anything, starfleet militery ships can not use cloaks.


 

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Mar. 13 2013, 7:30 pm

Wrong remember the Prometheus class and the Federation cargo drone both those class starship operation entire unmanned other maintence. No reason Holo ship could not do the same. This might also explain why Romulus so interest in the Prometheus class starship since operation without a crew.

stovokor2000-A

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2001

Report this Mar. 13 2013, 8:58 pm

Quote: Goldplanet @ Mar. 13 2013, 7:30 pm

>Wrong remember the Prometheus class and the Federation cargo drone both those class starship operation entire unmanned other maintence. No reason Holo ship could not do the same. This might also explain why Romulus so interest in the Prometheus class starship since operation without a crew.


I'm not wrong.


A cargo drone is not a starship, nor is it a holo ship.The systems on a cargo drone ship are far more simple and would not need a regular crew.


The Holo ship on the other had needs to maintain a full holo recreation so well that it cant be detected by those inside.And we know full well how easily damnaged holo decks get.So it would need a few crew mnembers to maintasin the programs.


And you are Wrong about the Prometheus class shgip.It had a crew, the Romulans killed them asll.


If the ship had no crew why would they put holo emiters on every deck for their EMH to get around?


Yes, the ship was designed to opperate with a minimal crew complement, and even less in asn enmergancy but she was intended to have a crew.


Photobucket

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Mar. 15 2013, 2:23 pm

No one on the ship when Wolf made the changes. It logic for this misson unmmaned other wise expect at least smell crew to be there stop Commander Worf.


More importantly when had problem holodecks in both on USS Voyager and USS ENterpise D nothing engeering crew member other turn it off and try make fixs. Worst yet normal people who on holodeck notice problem first. In village every know thing should like top head even smallest problem villagers notice way before anyone else ship notice it. It kind like holodeck works all the way or cover is blow. Nothing crew likley do come misson successful or a failer.


Other important factor is mobile holodeck ship design only for that job. So all other complex system must starships and space station having mean less could or would go wrong.

stovokor2000-A

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2001

Report this Mar. 15 2013, 9:14 pm

Quote: Goldplanet @ Mar. 15 2013, 2:23 pm

>No one on the ship when Wolf made the changes. It logic for this misson unmmaned other wise expect at least smell crew to be there stop Commander Worf.


that ship wasnt on its mission yet.The crew was Admiral Doraty,the observation team and the Sonar that Data took hostage early in the film.


More importantly when had problem holodecks in both on USS Voyager and USS ENterpise D nothing engeering crew member other turn it off and try make fixs.


Incorrect.


Watch the TNG episode "Homeward", the one with Worfs HUMAN brother.LaForge and his team had to make repairs to the program while it was still running.


 


Photobucket

Goldplanet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 41

Report this Mar. 21 2013, 8:25 pm

TNG Homeward. Also far as I can tell Laforge using a control pannel to do fixing not engeering crew even that job Laforge did could done another starship right next to it.


 


Beside riker openly stated treat Treaty of Algeron ban all Starfleet vessil from having cloak device.  in Star Terk Ent these are the Voyages.

stovokor2000-A

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2001

Report this Mar. 22 2013, 10:01 am

Quote: Goldplanet @ Mar. 21 2013, 8:25 pm

>TNG Homeward. Also far as I can tell Laforge using a control pannel to do fixing not engeering crew even that job Laforge did could done another starship right next to it.

> Beside riker openly stated treat Treaty of Algeron ban all Starfleet vessil from having cloak device.  in Star Terk Ent these are the Voyages.

>
Pe


Laforge is part of the engeering crew, and I do recall his saying others were working on the issues.


and the holo ship might not be a starfleet ship


Photobucket

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