Topic: Treknology: Cargo Bays  (Read 20486 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
Treknology: Cargo Bays
« on: April 02, 2009, 11:07:24 pm »
Just what would be found in a typical Starship's Cargo Bays?  At any time from Pre-TOS to TNG.

Food and Water
Medical Supplies
Probes
Torpedo Casings
Spare Parts
Industrial Replicators
Food Replicators
Replication Material
Industrial Fabricators
Antimatter Storage Pods
Deuterium Storage Pods
Cargo Transporters

Can anyone add more to this list?
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2009, 01:32:57 am »
Just what would be found in a typical Starship's Cargo Bays?  At any time from Pre-TOS to TNG.

Food and Water
Medical Supplies
Probes
Torpedo Casings
Spare Parts
Industrial Replicators
Food Replicators
Replication Material
Industrial Fabricators
Antimatter Storage Pods
Deuterium Storage Pods
Cargo Transporters

Can anyone add more to this list?

Something I have wondered, why with replicators do you have to store food/water or any specific material.  Isn't that what replicators are to do, replicate whatever you need?  At most you would have to store misc matter so you have something to convert from one form to another with the replicators.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2009, 02:11:27 am »
Just what would be found in a typical Starship's Cargo Bays?  At any time from Pre-TOS to TNG.

Food and Water
Medical Supplies
Probes
Torpedo Casings
Spare Parts
Industrial Replicators
Food Replicators
Replication Material
Industrial Fabricators
Antimatter Storage Pods
Deuterium Storage Pods
Cargo Transporters

Can anyone add more to this list?

Something I have wondered, why with replicators do you have to store food/water or any specific material.  Isn't that what replicators are to do, replicate whatever you need?  At most you would have to store misc matter so you have something to convert from one form to another with the replicators.

Simple answer, redundancy - what happens when your replicators are broke or your only have enough power to run essential systems.  You are going to be real grateful that you had those items on hand.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2009, 10:16:32 am »
True, but before the invention of the the Replicator, you do need those essentials.  Also, some items, such as Anti-matter, are difficult, if not impossible to replicate exactly.

Also, some items, such as Fabricators, became obsolete by Replicators
« Last Edit: April 03, 2009, 10:33:49 am by Lieutenant_Q »
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2009, 11:13:06 am »
True, but before the invention of the the Replicator, you do need those essentials.  Also, some items, such as Anti-matter, are difficult, if not impossible to replicate exactly.

Also, some items, such as Fabricators, became obsolete by Replicators

I imagine that in an emergency, the crew would use those general purpose items, while the replicators would be used for more specialized tasks.

Offline Tulwar

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1333
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2009, 12:00:56 pm »
One thing I noticed in the D-7 blueprints is that a lot of the secondary hull was just made up of "bulk matter storage."  At least the Klingons depended a great deal on fabricators and replicators for everyday items.  When reading a book on TOS, Rodenberry had meant that everything they used was replicated.  They noted a slight continuity error in one episode were Kirk ordered the cooks to reshape the meatloaf as turkeys for ThanksGiving.
Cannon (can' nun) n.  An istrument used to rectify national boundries.  Ambrois Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2009, 05:37:20 pm »
Women!

I want my women to have corgo bays. That was the question, right?
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #7 on: April 04, 2009, 07:22:25 am »
One thing I noticed in the D-7 blueprints is that a lot of the secondary hull was just made up of "bulk matter storage."  At least the Klingons depended a great deal on fabricators and replicators for everyday items.  When reading a book on TOS, Rodenberry had meant that everything they used was replicated.  They noted a slight continuity error in one episode were Kirk ordered the cooks to reshape the meatloaf as turkeys for ThanksGiving.

Klingons had replicator technology first (the Federation version is an inferior pirated design) naturally their more advanced version would be used more. 
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2009, 10:14:17 am »
Except that Klingons never used replicators for food, since its real hard to replicate LIVE food.  Replicated Gagh?  Don't be insulting.  Gagh is best when served live.

Klingons would have to have a ranch in their cargo bay. :)
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline KOTH-KieranXC, Ret.

  • Spokesman, Punisher Industries
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1861
  • Gender: Male
  • K-Fo, diehard SFCer and Taldrenite, est. 2000
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2009, 10:32:34 am »
Women!

I want my women to have corgo bays. That was the question, right?

You want your women to have cargo bays, or you want your cargo bays to have women?
"One minute to space doors."

"Are you just going to walk through them?"

"Calm yourself, Doctor."

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #10 on: April 04, 2009, 11:01:49 am »
Except that Klingons never used replicators for food, since its real hard to replicate LIVE food.  Replicated Gagh?  Don't be insulting.  Gagh is best when served live.

Klingons would have to have a ranch in their cargo bay. :)

You're talking about TNG pseudo Klingons not the original TOS Klingons.   TNG Klingons are little more than cannon fodder. 
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #11 on: April 04, 2009, 01:44:00 pm »
Except that Klingons never used replicators for food, since its real hard to replicate LIVE food.  Replicated Gagh?  Don't be insulting.  Gagh is best when served live.

Klingons would have to have a ranch in their cargo bay. :)

You're talking about TNG pseudo Klingons not the original TOS Klingons.   TNG Klingons are little more than cannon fodder.
Klingons probably used a transporter with a large buffer, so they could transport their food items and "store" them in the buffer, until needed to be eaten.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #12 on: April 04, 2009, 08:06:10 pm »
Also known as the Buffer Buffet!
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2009, 04:28:11 am »
Klingons probably used a transporter with a large buffer, so they could transport their food items and "store" them in the buffer, until needed to be eaten.

Which would of course show the superiority of Klingon technology.  The Federation cannot trust their transporter technology for storage of materials.   
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2009, 10:58:07 am »
<Klingon>

Yes, any race that wears spandex and refers to it as a uniform should not be trusted with transport technology any more complicated than a two-wheeled dolly.

</Klingon>
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2009, 06:42:54 pm »
<Klingon>

Yes, any race that wears spandex and refers to it as a uniform should not be trusted with transport technology any more complicated than a two-wheeled dolly.

</Klingon>

Klinks just don't want to wear spandex because it would reveal their shortcomings.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2009, 07:00:04 pm »
Klinks just don't want to wear spandex because it would reveal their shortcomings.

Spandex is not durable enough for battle.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2009, 07:05:02 pm »

Spandex is not durable enough for battle.

It provides greater freedom of movement.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2009, 07:21:31 pm »

Spandex is not durable enough for battle.

It provides greater freedom of movement

I have noticed that it does allow the Feddies to run away quicker.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2009, 07:29:00 pm »

I have noticed that it does allow the Feddies to run away quicker.

Who wouldn't run if a Klingon woman was making eyes at them?

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2009, 07:55:50 pm »

I have noticed that it does allow the Feddies to run away quicker.

Who wouldn't run if a Klingon woman was making eyes at them?

Kirk didn't.  Remember that was TOS Klingon women not the TNG "beast" women.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2009, 08:13:03 pm »

Kirk didn't.  Remember that was TOS Klingon women not the TNG "beast" women.

In which episode did Kirk get it on with a Klingon Woman?  I think the only Klink woman featured in TOS was Kang's wife.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #22 on: April 05, 2009, 08:22:25 pm »
In which episode did Kirk get it on with a Klingon Woman?  I think the only Klink woman featured in TOS was Kang's wife.

Kang's wife.  Kirk didn't run away, much the opposite (Chekov too I think) but Spock stopped him from having his way with her. 

The conventional Trek trivia is that she was the only TOS Klingon woman seen but if you watch the episode (Day of the Dove) there is a 2nd one seen too, but briefly.

If you watch those two TOS Klingon women they reacted repeatedly to avoid fighting, they left it exclusively to the men.  Even under the influence of "the entity" trying to heighten their aggression.  Given that as the only example of TOS Klingon women it appears that they are not violent.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2009, 08:36:43 pm »
No.  Chekov tried to rape her as retaliation for the death of his imaginary brother.  Kirk caught him and was so angry that one of his officers was committing such a crime that he started kicking the &**( out of him until Spock stopped him.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #24 on: April 05, 2009, 09:31:43 pm »
No.  Chekov tried to rape her as retaliation for the death of his imaginary brother.  Kirk caught him and was so angry that one of his officers was committing such a crime that he started kicking the &**( out of him until Spock stopped him.

Its been quite a long time since I watched the episode (and then only to see if there was more than one Klingon woman shown) that I might misremember it.  I had thought that Kirk was at least "tempted" to take up where Chekov left off, but I could easily be wrong.   But still the point was that Kirk and Chekov didn't run from her, she was seen as attractive.

Maybe I'll see if I can borrow my brother-in-laws TOS DVD set and watch the series again.  ;)
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #25 on: April 05, 2009, 09:32:10 pm »
No.  Chekov tried to rape her as retaliation for the death of his imaginary brother.  Kirk caught him and was so angry that one of his officers was committing such a crime that he started kicking the &**( out of him until Spock stopped him.

Oh you just know Kirk was just mad that someone else was going to "get" the woman.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #26 on: April 05, 2009, 09:39:09 pm »
No.  Chekov tried to rape her as retaliation for the death of his imaginary brother.  Kirk caught him and was so angry that one of his officers was committing such a crime that he started kicking the &**( out of him until Spock stopped him.

Its been quite a long time since I watched the episode (and then only to see if there was more than one Klingon woman shown) that I might misremember it.  I had thought that Kirk was at least "tempted" to take up where Chekov left off, but I could easily be wrong.   But still the point was that Kirk and Chekov didn't run from her, she was seen as attractive.

Maybe I'll see if I can borrow my brother-in-laws TOS DVD set and watch the series again.  ;)

Like I said, Chekov's primary motivation wasn't sexual attraction, it was an entity induced desire for revenge.  The Klingons killed his imaginary brother, now he was going to ^&*(^ them back.  Kirk needed her unharmed to talk some sense into Kang.  There's nothing scarier than a Klingon woman.

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #27 on: April 05, 2009, 11:10:53 pm »
<Klingon>

Yes, any race that wears spandex and refers to it as a uniform should not be trusted with transport technology any more complicated than a two-wheeled dolly.

</Klingon>

Klinks just don't want to wear spandex because it would reveal their shortcomings.

I think it has more to do with the fact that Federation women would stare open mouthed at Klingon warriors...
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #28 on: April 06, 2009, 12:21:05 am »

I think it has more to do with the fact that Federation women would stare open mouthed at Klingon warriors...

Who wouldn't be mystified by the absence of something?  You can tell that the Klingons are overcompensating for something by the shape of their warships.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2009, 01:15:28 am by knightstorm »

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #29 on: April 06, 2009, 07:37:53 am »
Who wouldn't be mystified by the absence of something?  You can tell that the Klingons are overcompensating for something by the shape of their warships.

The sleek, predatory, shark like shape of Klingon warships is purely practical.  It bestows unrivaled firing arcs and maneuverability on them.  How can you call it over compensating when compared to opposing vessels it is smaller?   

Consider the Federation cruiser and what it says about humans. 

Over sized (speaking of over compensating for a lack).  It bulges with luxuries the "warriors" of the Federation are not able to do without (who puts a BOWLING alley on a warship?).  Look down on the saucer from the top, a red center circle surrounded by concentric circles, a target in fact, this shows that the Federation views themselves as victims. 

Now lets consider the competence of our ship designers vs the Federation.

The D7 - a medium cruiser.  Over its life it adds how many new weapon mounts?  1?  (the ADD)

How many did the F-CA add?  2 Ph1.  2 Ph3.  An ADD.  A G-rack.  6 weapons systems added to an already over sized ship. 

The far greater increase in weapons load either shows that the Federation designers were incompetent or the crews inadequate (or both). 
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #30 on: April 06, 2009, 08:53:47 am »

I think it has more to do with the fact that Federation women would stare open mouthed at Klingon warriors...

Who wouldn't be mystified by the absence of something?  You can tell that the Klingons are overcompensating for something by the shape of their warships.

No, Feddie lady, you are not mistaken, it is not a 3rd leg.
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #31 on: April 06, 2009, 10:50:38 am »

The sleek, predatory, shark like shape of Klingon warships is purely practical.  It bestows unrivaled firing arcs and maneuverability on them.  How can you call it over compensating when compared to opposing vessels it is smaller?   

Consider the Federation cruiser and what it says about humans. 

Over sized (speaking of over compensating for a lack).  It bulges with luxuries the "warriors" of the Federation are not able to do without (who puts a BOWLING alley on a warship?).  Look down on the saucer from the top, a red center circle surrounded by concentric circles, a target in fact, this shows that the Federation views themselves as victims. 

Now lets consider the competence of our ship designers vs the Federation.

The D7 - a medium cruiser.  Over its life it adds how many new weapon mounts?  1?  (the ADD)

How many did the F-CA add?  2 Ph1.  2 Ph3.  An ADD.  A G-rack.  6 weapons systems added to an already over sized ship. 

The far greater increase in weapons load either shows that the Federation designers were incompetent or the crews inadequate (or both).
I was referring to the fact that the D-7 is kind of phallic shaped.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2009, 01:03:26 pm by knightstorm »

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #32 on: April 06, 2009, 11:28:29 am »
hmm.....    :police:

How did this get that far off topic...
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #33 on: April 06, 2009, 01:17:17 pm »
hmm.....    :police:

How did this get that far off topic...

The Klingon's saw Austin Powers the Spy Who Shagged Me, and decided to base all of their future warships on Dr. Evil's rocket.

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #34 on: April 06, 2009, 03:06:17 pm »
hmm.....    :police:

How did this get that far off topic...

Happy? :)
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Czar Mohab

  • Faith manages.
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 564
  • Gender: Male
  • Chewie - Go jiggle the handle!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #35 on: April 06, 2009, 04:59:50 pm »
RE: Cargo Bays:

I would think that the further back you go in time, the more crap had to be carried in the bays, while going forward, the crap got thinned down to large, bulky items that would not fit in a replicator to be replicated; and would also contain things that could not or otherwise would be impractical to be replicated, such as Turkey shaped Meatloaf (as mentioned), (probably boxes of instant) mashed potatoes (ST:VI), medical supplies (various episodes, the one in TNG where it turned out they were an addiction and not a cure comes to mind), former Borg drones and associated hardware (Voyager), humpback whales (ST:IV), etc...

RE: Klingons

I will now quote the great Kadh (Note: this doesn't say that Klingons are compensating for anything, just backing up a point of view.):

“It is certain the commodore will get a ship named after him at some point,” Kamarr answered.  “He was a skilled leader.”  He waited a moment before speaking again.  ‘I’ve taken a shuttlecraft.  We can use it to examine our ship more closely and see what she looks like.”

With Kamarr at the controls, the shuttlecraft rose up from Qo’onos toward the spacedock.  They were warned not to approach too closely so Kamarr steered them beneath the enclosed ship where they could study it from the bottom.  “That ship should not be called ‘she’, Kamarr commented.  “Just look at the size of its penis.  That’s a man if I ever saw one.”

“The engines make good-sized balls too,” joked Qoheleth.  Both men laughed “‘He’ it is.”  The two officers then began a more technical examination of the ship before they returned to the planet.
The woman at operations confirmed they were released immediately thereafter.  Qoheleth had been somewhat amused when Kamarr had suggested that two bridge officers be women.  “That way, we can both have an officer.  Besides, neither is a command position.”  He had refused Kamarr’s other suggestion.  “We should piss on the bridge deck somewhere and also have sex with a couple of women before we set off.  A giant penis should smell of urine and sex.”

“Shall we also make sure it has an infection?”  Qoheleth had asked.  He found his first officer’s preoccupation with sex to be amusing, but not to the point of having his ship stink.  It would smell like stale sweat all too soon.  Kamarr had joined him in laughter and the subject never arose again.

“Helm, take him out of spacedock and into orbit.” 

RE: OT stuff:
hmm.....    :police:

How did this get that far off topic...
Happy? :)

Yes. That sound clip just became my new ringtone for a certain mother-in-law...

Czar "I like quoting quotes," Mohab
US Navy Veteran - Proud to Serve
Submariners Do It Underwater - Nukes Do It Back Aft - Pride Runs Deep
Have you thanked a Vet lately?

Subaru Owners Do It Horizontally Opposed!
Proud Owner - '08 WRX - '03 Baja - '98 Legacy

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #36 on: April 06, 2009, 06:09:43 pm »
I was referring to the fact that the D-7 is kind of phallic shaped.

I'm aware that you are seeing phallic symbols in an efficient warship design.  That does not mean that the designers or the crew see it that way. 

Please don't tell me what you see in Rorschach tests.  I'm quite sure it isn't what I see and I'd prefer not to know.

hmm.....    :police:

How did this get that far off topic...

Practice.  Lots and lots of practice.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #37 on: April 06, 2009, 06:21:02 pm »
I was referring to the fact that the D-7 is kind of phallic shaped.

I'm aware that you are seeing phallic symbols in an efficient warship design.  That does not mean that the designers or the crew see it that way. 

Please don't tell me what you see in Rorschach tests.  I'm quite sure it isn't what I see and I'd prefer not to know.


Where you see efficient warp design, I see a poorly made piece of ^&*(^.  Also, I decided to post the results of my Rorshach test because I thought the other members of the community would be proud to know that they've been a bad influence on me.

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #38 on: April 07, 2009, 12:12:45 am »
Granted now this is just my personal POV, but here's how I feel that Treknology goes.

22nd Century: Galleys and Chefs for Food.  Machine Shops to build parts.

The more prestige the captain has, the better the chef, which means the more varied the food choices, the happier the crew, because the cooking is better.  The Machine Shops create parts at a very slow rate, and the quality of the part is dependent on the Engineer making the part.  Both of these methods have a lot of waste involved in them, raw materials were stored in bulk, but if you had the raw materials, you could build it.  Because Machining the appropriate repair parts took time, some critical components were made in advance and stored in the cargo bays.  You could not machine parts as needed in the middle of combat.

23rd Century: Food Selectors for Food.  Industrial Fabricators for parts.

In an attempt to raise the selection and quality of food around the fleet, the various starfleets all attempted the use of a selector.  In essence a primitive Replicator, it had a limited menu.  Which didn't make the crews all too happy.  Not nearly as much waste as involved with Galleys, but Food left over from a meal was wasted.  Industrial Fabricators could build parts faster than a Machine Shop could, but again, not fast enough for combat purposes.  You had less waste involved in the process, but the parts were still dependent on the skill of the engineer fabricating the parts.

Late 23rd Century: A return to Galleys.  The limited selection of the Replicator brought back Galleys and chefs, with all the same problems as the 22nd Century starships.

24th Century and Beyond:  Replicators

In essence 24th Century Starships carry two types of replicators.  An Industrial Replicator and a Food Replicator.  The difference between the two is almost insignificant.  An Industrial Replicator is larger, and less able to make the fine adjustments that the food replicator can make.  Its great for making Weapons, Parts, etc.  But don't ask it to make anything organic.  The Food Replicator handles the organic compounds along with minor items like plates and flatware.  The use of replicators greatly reduced the amount of waste aboard a starship, as anything that wasn't eaten, or used with the part, could be recycled back into its base component to be used later.  It would be a misconception to say that every stateroom on a starship had a replicator, rather they had special transporter transceivers that the primary replicators would use to send and receive.  Which is why it would be a relatively simply thing to order a 10 oz T-Bone steak, and then five minutes later replicate a Phaser.  The Steak is made in the food replicator and then beamed to the terminal, while the Phaser would be made in the Industrial Replicator and then beamed to the same terminal.

Granted this is the Federation Side of the things, I imagine similar developments were made in the Romulan and Klingon spheres.  Although the emphasis might have been different at times.
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #39 on: April 07, 2009, 06:23:19 am »
Where you see efficient warp design, I see a poorly made piece of ^&*(^.  Also, I decided to post the results of my Rorshach test because I thought the other members of the community would be proud to know that they've been a bad influence on me.

When the undersized ship can and does defeat the larger vessel the undersized one is not the one that is poorly designed. 

Lets consider the Federation propaganda campaign against the Klingon D7.  The Federation published 2 SSDs purporting to show what happens when a F-CA and a K-D7 exchange alpha strikes at range 0.  They neglect to consider several factors.

1/  The K-D7 does not deliver its alpha strike on the forward center line like the F-CA.  It delivers it on the 60o port and starboard angles.  If you revise the damage based on this the damage allocation is far different.  The K-D7 then fires 2 more Ph-2 doing 10-12 more internals.  The Federation damage also is then split between 2 shields reducing the internal damage by 22 points.

2/ If you assume that both ships are using all their power and had competently filled their phaser capacitor before approaching and approached at the same speed the K-D7 would have 3 extra points of power (It says much that the Federation automatically assumed incompetence by their Captains).  This could be used either for ECM or shield reinforcement, either of which would reduce the damage the K-D7 took.

3/ The K-D7 can and does use its superior maneuverability to do as Kahless advised to apply their strength against the opponents weakness and compel the opponent to apply their weakness against Klingon strength.  This would apply the damage to a weaker shield on the Federation ship increasing the damage done while preventing the Federation from firing its Alpha Strike at all let alone at optimum range.  This reduces the damage received by the K-D7 while maximizing that which the F-CA takes.

4/ It doesn't allow for using the full power of the Klingon vessel by using such things as the scatter pack or T-Bombs.  The scatterpack alone would increase the internals by another 72 points.   Effective T-Bombing can add another 50 points.    Each missile and T-Bomb having its damage allocated separately this creates a very effective Mizia attack. 

So you see the K-D7 is capable of dishing out far more damage while not allowing the F-CA to use its full potential.  The fact is that those who command Klingon vessels use finesse (the Sabre Dance) vs the rush in and pound of the drunken bar room fighting of the Federation.  I suppose that the Federation using liquid courage to drive their battle "strategy" is better than if they had no courage at all.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2009, 09:29:21 am »
While reading your post Nem I kept thinking "sabre dance" and then you finally wrote it.

The only manuaver the fed can do effectively against a good sabre dancce is...

Nope, not gonna post it for all to see, but even then, a good Klingon warrior captain will crack that Fed too.
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #41 on: April 07, 2009, 10:39:10 am »
While reading your post Nem I kept thinking "sabre dance" and then you finally wrote it.

The only manuaver the fed can do effectively against a good sabre dancce is...

Every ship has its own style and that style needs to be adapted to the opposing ship (or ships) and how it is being used.  Some know one style and use that regardless of the opponent and regardless of the ship they themselves fly.  This occasionally leads to very strange battles. 

Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #42 on: April 07, 2009, 01:56:22 pm »
Where you see efficient warp design, I see a poorly made piece of ^&*(^.  Also, I decided to post the results of my Rorshach test because I thought the other members of the community would be proud to know that they've been a bad influence on me.

When the undersized ship can and does defeat the larger vessel the undersized one is not the one that is poorly designed. 

Lets consider the Federation propaganda campaign against the Klingon D7.  The Federation published 2 SSDs purporting to show what happens when a F-CA and a K-D7 exchange alpha strikes at range 0.  They neglect to consider several factors.

1/  The K-D7 does not deliver its alpha strike on the forward center line like the F-CA.  It delivers it on the 60o port and starboard angles.  If you revise the damage based on this the damage allocation is far different.  The K-D7 then fires 2 more Ph-2 doing 10-12 more internals.  The Federation damage also is then split between 2 shields reducing the internal damage by 22 points.

2/ If you assume that both ships are using all their power and had competently filled their phaser capacitor before approaching and approached at the same speed the K-D7 would have 3 extra points of power (It says much that the Federation automatically assumed incompetence by their Captains).  This could be used either for ECM or shield reinforcement, either of which would reduce the damage the K-D7 took.

3/ The K-D7 can and does use its superior maneuverability to do as Kahless advised to apply their strength against the opponents weakness and compel the opponent to apply their weakness against Klingon strength.  This would apply the damage to a weaker shield on the Federation ship increasing the damage done while preventing the Federation from firing its Alpha Strike at all let alone at optimum range.  This reduces the damage received by the K-D7 while maximizing that which the F-CA takes.

4/ It doesn't allow for using the full power of the Klingon vessel by using such things as the scatter pack or T-Bombs.  The scatterpack alone would increase the internals by another 72 points.   Effective T-Bombing can add another 50 points.    Each missile and T-Bomb having its damage allocated separately this creates a very effective Mizia attack. 

So you see the K-D7 is capable of dishing out far more damage while not allowing the F-CA to use its full potential.  The fact is that those who command Klingon vessels use finesse (the Sabre Dance) vs the rush in and pound of the drunken bar room fighting of the Federation.  I suppose that the Federation using liquid courage to drive their battle "strategy" is better than if they had no courage at all.

1. The Klingons are based on the Soviet Union, are you going to argue that Soviet tech is good?
2. It requires a lot more training to be able to handle Klingon ships competently in battle.  This should not be necessary for a purpose built warship.
3. The fact that fed ships which are built primarily as explorers can fight against Klingon purpose built warships demonstrates the inferiority of Klingon tech.
4. Efficient warp design and Efficient combat design are two different things.

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #43 on: April 07, 2009, 02:23:51 pm »
On Klingon starshups, cargo should be relablled "Beer / Bloodwine / Booze" or just "Booze" to simplify things.

On Lyran and Kzinti ships, most probally a large supply of "Kitty Litters" as in space one can't take a dump in a neighbour's flower bed or kid's sand pit.

If you read some of the technical manuials, and even pay attention to the TV shows, some things have defied replicator technology. Alcoholic beverages are another thing mentioned.

Dylithium Crystals, radio isotopes, certain metals and composites, etc. are notalble, by plot lines, as being impossible to replicate, so need cargo storage space.

Latinum is one thing mentioned in DS9 that is impossible to replicate. Also replicators need bulk raw material to replicate certain large components.

Then there is all the survival rations that need to be stored for those moments when there is no power available for use.

Another use for Cargo Bays is to have somewhere to place the replicated parts prior to assembly of some large assembly.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #44 on: April 07, 2009, 02:24:50 pm »
Where you see efficient warp design, I see a poorly made piece of ^&*(^.  Also, I decided to post the results of my Rorshach test because I thought the other members of the community would be proud to know that they've been a bad influence on me.

When the undersized ship can and does defeat the larger vessel the undersized one is not the one that is poorly designed. 

Lets consider the Federation propaganda campaign against the Klingon D7.  The Federation published 2 SSDs purporting to show what happens when a F-CA and a K-D7 exchange alpha strikes at range 0.  They neglect to consider several factors.

1/  The K-D7 does not deliver its alpha strike on the forward center line like the F-CA.  It delivers it on the 60o port and starboard angles.  If you revise the damage based on this the damage allocation is far different.  The K-D7 then fires 2 more Ph-2 doing 10-12 more internals.  The Federation damage also is then split between 2 shields reducing the internal damage by 22 points.

2/ If you assume that both ships are using all their power and had competently filled their phaser capacitor before approaching and approached at the same speed the K-D7 would have 3 extra points of power (It says much that the Federation automatically assumed incompetence by their Captains).  This could be used either for ECM or shield reinforcement, either of which would reduce the damage the K-D7 took.

3/ The K-D7 can and does use its superior maneuverability to do as Kahless advised to apply their strength against the opponents weakness and compel the opponent to apply their weakness against Klingon strength.  This would apply the damage to a weaker shield on the Federation ship increasing the damage done while preventing the Federation from firing its Alpha Strike at all let alone at optimum range.  This reduces the damage received by the K-D7 while maximizing that which the F-CA takes.

4/ It doesn't allow for using the full power of the Klingon vessel by using such things as the scatter pack or T-Bombs.  The scatterpack alone would increase the internals by another 72 points.   Effective T-Bombing can add another 50 points.    Each missile and T-Bomb having its damage allocated separately this creates a very effective Mizia attack. 

So you see the K-D7 is capable of dishing out far more damage while not allowing the F-CA to use its full potential.  The fact is that those who command Klingon vessels use finesse (the Sabre Dance) vs the rush in and pound of the drunken bar room fighting of the Federation.  I suppose that the Federation using liquid courage to drive their battle "strategy" is better than if they had no courage at all.

1. The Klingons are based on the Soviet Union, are you going to argue that Soviet tech is good?

Ha! Maybe in the tv, but in SFC and SFB Klingon ships ruled the space from here to there.
Quote
2. It requires a lot more training to be able to handle Klingon ships competently in battle.  This should not be necessary for a purpose built warship.

I can understand your misconception not being a real warrior of a real warrior race.

Quote
3. The fact that fed ships which are built primarily as explorers can fight against Klingon purpose built warships demonstrates the inferiority of Klingon tech.

Another Freddie myth...oh, who us...we come in peace they claim as they enslave thousands with their lies.
Quote
4. Efficient warp design and Efficient combat design are two different things.

And you would do well to learn both from Klingons.
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #45 on: April 07, 2009, 02:32:48 pm »
1. The Klingons are based on the Soviet Union, are you going to argue that Soviet tech is good?

I've seen all sorts of claims of what the Klingons are based on. 

Consider the Klingon Empire was clearly from the begining a warrior culture.  Were the Soviets a warrior culture?  There is very little of the Soviet Russian in them. 

At most I see the U.S. - Russia cold war on the verge of flaring up to full scale war being emulated by the Federation - Klingon relationship. 

I understand that at least some of the Russian tanks were excellent, but not handled well vs the Germans in WWII - the Germans had the training the Russians had the quality. 

Quote
2. It requires a lot more training to be able to handle Klingon ships competently in battle.  This should not be necessary for a purpose built warship.

Refer to above - warrior culture.  Train early, train hard lose fewer in battle.  The incompetent don't survive training or get demoted to infantry.

Don't forget Kor beat Kirk.  The Organians had to rewrite the rules to give Kirk a draw.

Quote
3. The fact that fed ships which are built primarily as explorers can fight against Klingon purpose built warships demonstrates the inferiority of Klingon tech.

The Fed ships are multi purpose but the F-GCS is the TRUE explorer design.  The F-CA while capable of surveying is not primarily an explorer.  It lacks long range probes and scout sensors.  It is a warship that can perform exploration roles, but so can the D7.

Quote
4. Efficient warp design and Efficient combat design are two different things.

Its survival without a major over haul proves it to be well designed.  As listed earlier the evolution from K-D7 to K-D7K upgraded weapons but only added 1 new weapons mount.  The F-CA to F-CAR+ added 6 which show its design inadequacies, it didn't even have real rear defenses.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #46 on: April 07, 2009, 02:54:08 pm »
Just like the WW2 Douglas Devestator was painted bright orange and yellow to give Japanese AA gunners a clearer target, the concentric red rings are in fact aiming and targetting aids for Klingon gunners.

A more interesting questio to raise is whay are Kzinti starships brown and why are Lyran starships yellow??

Klingon D7 hulls have more than enough weapons already and so don't need improving.

If a even more weapons are required there are always the C7 or L7 battlecruisers to dominate the battle with.

As for Federation starships, the phrase, "We Come In Peace...." sums up the weapons strategy in place with them.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #47 on: April 07, 2009, 03:04:41 pm »
As for Federation starships, the phrase, "We Come In Peace...." sums up the weapons strategy in place with them.

Federation diplomacy as described by the wanted Federation eco-terrorist Commander Montgomery Scott.

Quote
Diplomats! The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank.

Klingon D7 hulls have more than enough weapons already and so don't need improving.

Translation the K-D7 was designed competently so when the resources were available they could be enhanced at minimal cost and with minimal changes.

The F-CA on the other hand was poorly designed and had to be remodeled.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #48 on: April 07, 2009, 03:12:20 pm »
With the C7 and later L7, the Klingons began to explore the possibility of "Overkill" when it came to firepower.

Amongst the Alpha quadrant races, Klingon cruisers are in the place they deserve.... FIRST PLACE!! ;D

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Roychipoqua_Mace

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #49 on: April 07, 2009, 03:23:12 pm »
With the C7 and later L7, the Klingons began to explore the possibility of "Overkill" when it came to firepower.

Amongst the Alpha quadrant races, Klingon cruisers are in the place they deserve.... FIRST PLACE!! ;D
Do you know of any online SSD for the L7? I looked and it is not on the SFB list of ships, but it sounds interesting... I never liked the FD7.

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #50 on: April 07, 2009, 03:40:57 pm »
The L7 is basically the C7 with two more engines and 4 more Disrupters added, giving a total of 8 x Dis3 in the forward firng arc.

Their role is as a fast battlecruiser, using the Federation concept of engine switching to enable maximum velocity for extended periods.

By diagonally pairing engines and switching between idle and flat out running, as nachelle tempertures rise to critical, an L7 can crusie at maximum velocity for several days, if required.

The L7 fulfills the same roles as the Federation TMP Constellation, Chetah, TOS Hamilton and Hamilcar Classes using identical methods.

An L7 is basically a 4 engined C7, unlike the SFB D7 "Bullet Cruiser" experiment, which was a 4 engined D7 hull.

I posted a SFC 1 L7 model on Battleclinic last year.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Czar Mohab

  • Faith manages.
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 564
  • Gender: Male
  • Chewie - Go jiggle the handle!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #51 on: April 07, 2009, 03:59:18 pm »
If you read some of the technical manuials, and even pay attention to the TV shows, some things have defied replicator technology. Alcoholic beverages are another thing mentioned.

Alcohol can be replicated. See the episode of Voyager where Tom and that alien switch bodies - "Tom" gets drunk, Janeway calls him on it saying he'd replicated ALCOHOLIC beverages while still on duty. There are other examples, too.

Syntehol (synthetic alcohol) is what you're thinking of... a Ferengi invention that simulates alcohol... the goal was they'd drink the fake while their "prey" would drink the real deal...

Also, SOME alcohols can't be replicated. But, overall, it can be. Assuming replicator tech existed at all.

Czar Mohab
US Navy Veteran - Proud to Serve
Submariners Do It Underwater - Nukes Do It Back Aft - Pride Runs Deep
Have you thanked a Vet lately?

Subaru Owners Do It Horizontally Opposed!
Proud Owner - '08 WRX - '03 Baja - '98 Legacy

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #52 on: April 07, 2009, 04:09:29 pm »
Quark sells American Root Beer, which has a pretty feebly weak alcohol content compared to UK and European Beers. Over here it would be regarded as a soft drink and is sold as such, where found.

It seems Ales are something that seem to defy replicators, as Romulan Ale and Brandy are popular smuggled items in the Federation and a parody of the pointless joke US ban on Cuban Cigars in the US.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #53 on: April 07, 2009, 04:18:07 pm »
Quark sells American Root Beer, which has a pretty feebly weak alcohol content compared to UK and European Beers. Over here it would be regarded as a soft drink and is sold as such, where found.

It seems Ales are something that seem to defy replicators, as Romulan Ale and Brandy are popular smuggled items in the Federation and a parody of the pointless joke US ban on Cuban Cigars in the US.

Hmmmm, American Root Beer is non alcholic unless you get naturally carbinated version, then it only has a touch from the fermintation to carbinate the soda.  It is a soft drink.

Cuban Cigar ban here in the US.  Started by J.F.K. is basicly just a punitive enbargo on their major output.  Symbolic not truely pointless.  But then J.F.K still had Cuban cigars sent in diplomatic pouches back so he could smoke them.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #54 on: April 07, 2009, 04:23:26 pm »

Alcohol can be replicated. See the episode of Voyager where Tom and that alien switch bodies - "Tom" gets drunk, Janeway calls him on it saying he'd replicated ALCOHOLIC beverages while still on duty. There are other examples, too.

Syntehol (synthetic alcohol) is what you're thinking of... a Ferengi invention that simulates alcohol... the goal was they'd drink the fake while their "prey" would drink the real deal...

Also, SOME alcohols can't be replicated. But, overall, it can be. Assuming replicator tech existed at all.

Czar Mohab[/color]

No.  Synthehol is used because the effects can be dismissed more quickly.  In case the officer in question is suddenly called to duty.

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #55 on: April 07, 2009, 04:42:38 pm »
They also replicate flatuence free Beans, Swede, etc. thus taking the only remaining fun aspect out of healthy eating.

In the 23rd Century, the Nanny State is in full effect.... Picard does describe the Federation as being "Socialist" in its principles, and if you look closely, it is.

This isn't that bad though, as health care is free for all, food is free for all, etc. and private small enterprise flourishes without the all powerful giant corporation smothering them out of existance from birth.

The Federation seems devoid of money exchange, unless trading with outside races, such as the Ferengi. Janeway remarks that she finds the concept of having to use money to pay for things strange and alien, in one episode of Voyager.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #56 on: April 07, 2009, 04:46:22 pm »

I've seen all sorts of claims of what the Klingons are based on. 

Consider the Klingon Empire was clearly from the begining a warrior culture.  Were the Soviets a warrior culture?  There is very little of the Soviet Russian in them. 

At most I see the U.S. - Russia cold war on the verge of flaring up to full scale war being emulated by the Federation - Klingon relationship. 

I understand that at least some of the Russian tanks were excellent, but not handled well vs the Germans in WWII - the Germans had the training the Russians had the quality. 

I'll concede that WWII Russian tanks were good, but they tended to be behind in everything else.  Also, while their postwar assault rifles did have excellent reputations for reliability, they often had to cut corners to keep up with the US.  I remember reading somewhere that most of their cold war era nulcear submariners ended up dying from cancer.


Refer to above - warrior culture.  Train early, train hard lose fewer in battle.  The incompetent don't survive training or get demoted to infantry.

Don't forget Kor beat Kirk.  The Organians had to rewrite the rules to give Kirk a draw.
.

build ships that are simpler to use, focus on more advanced tactics.  Also, if I remember correctly, Kor had Kirk badly outnumbered.

The Fed ships are multi purpose but the F-GCS is the TRUE explorer design.  The F-CA while capable of surveying is not primarily an explorer.  It lacks long range probes and scout sensors.  It is a warship that can perform exploration roles, but so can the D7.

F-CA is built for long term survey cruises.  It has more labs, and its engines are designed for operating for extended periods of time at relatively high speeds.  It also requires greater habitability.  Hence the greater size that you keep harping on.  The D7 could avoid adding new mounts because increasing its fire power was merely a matter of upgrading some of the inferior phaser mountings that it was built with.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2009, 04:57:49 pm by knightstorm »

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #57 on: April 07, 2009, 04:49:59 pm »
They also replicate flatuence free Beans, Swede, etc. thus taking the only remaining fun aspect out of healthy eating.


So its a nanny state principle to not want your crew to be keeled over drunk if your ship should suddenly come under fire.

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #58 on: April 08, 2009, 11:02:35 am »
Klingons go into battle drunk, more often than not, and still come out on top. ;D

It's probally because the Federation crews cannot hold their liquour than alcohol is banned on warships.

Another reason is that "Politically Correct" training and tact takes a back burner when a crewman is full of alcohol.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #59 on: April 08, 2009, 11:16:30 am »
Klingons are never drunk...they're just less tense.
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #60 on: April 08, 2009, 11:37:42 am »
The other use of Cargo Bays is to store the heavy weapons, vehicles and equipment for troops for SFB planetside missions.

In SFC, the elaboration of the full use of Cargo Space useage or the tables of troop equipment versus space.

Another use of Cargo is to transport spare fighters or shuttles in CKD (Completely Knocked Down) state for resuplimenting of carriers and the like.

A lot of the usefulness and essentiality of Cargo Boxes is not apparent in SFC, other than as a hit location.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #61 on: April 08, 2009, 11:51:56 am »
build ships that are simpler to use, focus on more advanced tactics.  Also, if I remember correctly, Kor had Kirk badly outnumbered.

Outnumbered yes with garrison troops equipped to pacify people with medieval technology.  He also was unaware of there being Federation officers on the planet.   Kirks disguise and actions make him both a spy and a terrorist.  Kor with Garrison troops not knowing who or what he faced beat Kirk while maintaining his control of the planet.  Kirk at least knew who and what he was fighting and still lost.

F-CA is built for long term survey cruises.  It has more labs, and its engines are designed for operating for extended periods of time at relatively high speeds.  It also requires greater habitability.  Hence the greater size that you keep harping on.  The D7 could avoid adding new mounts because increasing its fire power was merely a matter of upgrading some of the inferior phaser mountings that it was built with.

Compare the F-CA to the actual F-GCS survey cruiser. 

You will notice the CA is deficient in several areas:

special sensors
transporters
shuttles
drones for probes
defensive weapons.

The actual survey ship on the other hand though it can function as a CVL is lacking in offensive firepower. 

Now consider the Klingon survey ship.  Like the F-GCS it has special sensors.  It doesn't gain transporters, or drones because the Klingon ships are better equipped that way to start.  It does however take a big hit in offensive firepower being traded for defensive.  The same applies to the Romulan Survey ship.

Now answer the question why would the Federation keep making CA class ships during the Galactic War instead of making actual specialized warships?  The Vulcans would surely explain the illogic in not making specialized CAs.  Why also does this supposed exploration ship lack the common components of those explicitly exploration ships while having the full OFFENSIVE armaments of the CA it is named as? 

Is the Federation "We come in peace" real or is it a lie?  This as you call it survey ship is far heavier armed than the Klingon survey ship which of us is the eonquerer?

As to the high speed long range ability with few exceptions (Tholian and Wyn) all the CAs should have that ability = deep strikes are only possible if you have them.  Just consider how far Klingon ships sold to the Romulans had to travel to get to Romulus for refitting to Romulan weapons and control systems.  Not possible without that high speed and long range ability and those were versions we were willing to sell.

The F-CA needs the greater habitability because the crew is soft, it is not warrior trained and is unable to endure without luxury.  The Klingon ship and crew constitute a lean mean fighting machine.  The Federation ships reflect their crews - fat and lazy.

Klingons go into battle drunk, more often than not, and still come out on top. ;D

I for one don't drink. 

I do insist on the same rules for drinking of the old French Foreign Legion.  Namely there are none.  However there are harch punishments for rendering yourself unfit for duty.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #62 on: April 08, 2009, 12:45:04 pm »
The Klingons only have 1 x D6E and 1 x D7E Exploration Ships, though their mission is more of locating and securing rescouces and territory for the Empire.

The "special" D7 sleeper ship, in the TNG episode, that was described as having been on a 76 year deep exploration mission, may have been a or the D7E "Inquisator".

The D6E has both Disrupters replaced by Special Sensors, where as the D7E only loses 1 x Disrupter on each engine nachelle.

Compared to a F-CA, the D7E is more than well armed, able to subdue and conquer weaker worlds all alone.

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #63 on: April 08, 2009, 04:03:01 pm »
1. You can still get drunk on synthohol.  The difference is that you can reverse its effects with a simple injection if the officer is needed for duty.  This is a lot faster than the klingon method of having the officer's subordinate challenge him to a fight to the death if he believes him unfit for duty, which may leave the officer's post unfilled while the fight is going on.
2. Why continue to build CAs, after the war starts.  There are several reasons.  While the CA series are not purpose built warships they don't suck in the role either.  Wars eventually end, and the CAs at least have a peace time use.  Also, the federation did build purpose built warships to supplement the CAs in the form of the NCL, NCA, and BCH lines.
3. If the F-CA wasn't built to function as an exploration ship, WTF was Kirk doing for five years, besides getting laid?  As far as range and habitability, most wartime missions can be completed in weeks, but a F-CA is meant to be away from port for months.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2009, 05:09:28 pm by knightstorm »

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #64 on: April 08, 2009, 05:12:08 pm »
1. You can still get drunk on synthohol.  The difference is that you can reverse its effects with a simple injection if the officer is needed for duty.  This is a lot faster than the klingon method of having the officer's subbordinate challenge him to a fight to the death if he believes him unfit for duty, which may leave the officer's post unfilled while the fight is going on.
2. Why continue to build CAs, after the war starts.  There are several reasons.  While the CA series are not purpose built warships they don't suck in the role either.  Wars eventually end, and the CAs at least have a peace time use.  Also, the federation did build purpose built warships to supplement the CAs in the form of the NCL, and BCH lines.
3. If the F-CA wasn't built to function as an exploration ship, WTF was Kirk doing for five years, besides getting laid?  As far as range and habitability, most wartime missions can be completed in weeks, but a F-CA is meant to be away from port for months.

Kirk spent 5 years avoiding Bone's jealousies and trying not come out of the transporter over Spock. Ever notice how he kept tugging at his tunic like a school girl ajusting her bra starp?

Chang would never have done that!
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #65 on: April 09, 2009, 07:16:11 am »
2. Why continue to build CAs, after the war starts.  There are several reasons.  While the CA series are not purpose built warships they don't suck in the role either.  Wars eventually end, and the CAs at least have a peace time use.  Also, the federation did build purpose built warships to supplement the CAs in the form of the NCL, NCA, and BCH lines.

Not convincing.  The CA is the backbone of the fleet.  Not having a military optimized version when you could would be foolishly crippling  your forces.

Why also build an optimized F-GCS if the F-CA was already an optimized GCS?

3. If the F-CA wasn't built to function as an exploration ship, WTF was Kirk doing for five years, besides getting laid?  As far as range and habitability, most wartime missions can be completed in weeks, but a F-CA is meant to be away from port for months.

Consider real history.  Many early exploration ships were warships.  Even the Beagle that Darwin sailed on was a small warship.

Note what I said about the F-CA:

Quote
The F-CA while capable of surveying is not primarily an explorer.  It lacks long range probes and scout sensors.  It is a warship that can perform exploration roles, but so can the D7.

Exploration is a secondary issue with it. 

In spite of the so called "5 year mission" Kirk was almost always far closer to port than months away.  Check the number of times they are the closest ship to deal with an issue WITHIN the Federation. 
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #66 on: April 09, 2009, 07:26:47 am »
The Klingons only have 1 x D6E and 1 x D7E Exploration Ships, though their mission is more of locating and securing rescouces and territory for the Empire.

Consider the F&E map.  The Klingon Empire has no direct frontier.  Those pure exploration ships operate beyond Lyran space.  It is one of the reasons the Empire needs to conquer the Kzinti and Hydrans, access to unclaimed space.

The "special" D7 sleeper ship, in the TNG episode, that was described as having been on a 76 year deep exploration mission, may have been a or the D7E "Inquisator".

That episode was STUPID.  Consider how effective a WWII sleeper ship would be if it were to attack today.  Why would the Klingons think that a single ship obsolete by decades attacking targets equally obsolete would be of any use?   

The D6E has both Disrupters replaced by Special Sensors, where as the D7E only loses 1 x Disrupter on each engine nachelle.

Compared to a F-CA, the D7E is more than well armed, able to subdue and conquer weaker worlds all alone.

ANY armed SFB ship (even the sublight ones) could devastate the Earth of today.

Consider the damage capability of a single admin shuttle if it were to attack Earth today.  We have nothing with which to counterstrike it.  Replace it with a police ship of any race and the situation is far worse as the shuttle at least has limited life support.  A minesweeper would be devastating with the transporting of T-Bombs into a city.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #67 on: April 10, 2009, 02:47:33 am »

Not convincing.  The CA is the backbone of the fleet.  Not having a military optimized version when you could would be foolishly crippling  your forces.

Why also build an optimized F-GCS if the F-CA was already an optimized GCS?
Like I said, its not optimized, but it still performs the role satisfactorily.  As for why would they continue to build the GCS, its to perform roles that are still necessary, but less of a priority.   

Consider real history.  Many early exploration ships were warships.  Even the Beagle that Darwin sailed on was a small warship.

Note what I said about the F-CA:
The F-CA while capable of surveying is not primarily an explorer.  It lacks long range probes and scout sensors.  It is a warship that can perform exploration roles, but so can the D7.

Exploration is a secondary issue with it. 

In spite of the so called "5 year mission" Kirk was almost always far closer to port than months away.  Check the number of times they are the closest ship to deal with an issue WITHIN the Federation.

Exploration is the CA's primary concern, although defense is also an issue.  Its an exploration ship that can fight if necessary.  The kind of incidents that Kirk responded to were ones that tend to happen at the edge of the empire, where a ship on an exploration mission could very well be the closest ship to respond.

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #68 on: April 10, 2009, 09:03:00 am »
The fact that Federation controled space it referred to as an emprire is telling and the Feddy's true intent.

But we Klingons, true warriors of honor, are here to protect space from the spandex horde.  :knuppel2:
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Roychipoqua_Mace

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #69 on: April 10, 2009, 10:04:32 am »
But we Klingons, true warriors of honor, are here to protect space from the spandex horde.  :knuppel2:
Bubble wrap belts are definitely better, if you have to choose between the two!

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #70 on: April 10, 2009, 01:13:27 pm »

Not convincing.  The CA is the backbone of the fleet.  Not having a military optimized version when you could would be foolishly crippling  your forces.

Why also build an optimized F-GCS if the F-CA was already an optimized GCS?
Like I said, its not optimized, but it still performs the role satisfactorily.  As for why would they continue to build the GCS, its to perform roles that are still necessary, but less of a priority.   

Consider real history.  Many early exploration ships were warships.  Even the Beagle that Darwin sailed on was a small warship.

Note what I said about the F-CA:
The F-CA while capable of surveying is not primarily an explorer.  It lacks long range probes and scout sensors.  It is a warship that can perform exploration roles, but so can the D7.

Exploration is a secondary issue with it. 

In spite of the so called "5 year mission" Kirk was almost always far closer to port than months away.  Check the number of times they are the closest ship to deal with an issue WITHIN the Federation.

Exploration is the CA's primary concern, although defense is also an issue.  Its an exploration ship that can fight if necessary.  The kind of incidents that Kirk responded to were ones that tend to happen at the edge of the empire, where a ship on an exploration mission could very well be the closest ship to respond.

The Fed CA from what I know from SFB is a warship that has as a role exploration.  It isn't a purpose built survey ship, it does have extra lab spaces that are nothing more then extra padding in SFB but serve a purpose for exploring and analysis.  Compare to a D7 who has barely anough labs to analyse a piece of toast (a true warship).

The F-CA was to find the new stuff, see what was up.  Then a dedicated survey ship would finish the job (safer for the survey ship to come in after the area was checked by the CA).

Thus IMHO the F-CA is a hybrid, built to cover two missions, does both well, but doesn't excell at either, but is a better warship.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #71 on: April 10, 2009, 01:29:54 pm »

Not convincing.  The CA is the backbone of the fleet.  Not having a military optimized version when you could would be foolishly crippling  your forces.

Why also build an optimized F-GCS if the F-CA was already an optimized GCS?
Like I said, its not optimized, but it still performs the role satisfactorily.  As for why would they continue to build the GCS, its to perform roles that are still necessary, but less of a priority.   

Consider real history.  Many early exploration ships were warships.  Even the Beagle that Darwin sailed on was a small warship.

Note what I said about the F-CA:
The F-CA while capable of surveying is not primarily an explorer.  It lacks long range probes and scout sensors.  It is a warship that can perform exploration roles, but so can the D7.

Exploration is a secondary issue with it. 

In spite of the so called "5 year mission" Kirk was almost always far closer to port than months away.  Check the number of times they are the closest ship to deal with an issue WITHIN the Federation.

Exploration is the CA's primary concern, although defense is also an issue.  Its an exploration ship that can fight if necessary.  The kind of incidents that Kirk responded to were ones that tend to happen at the edge of the empire, where a ship on an exploration mission could very well be the closest ship to respond.

The Fed CA from what I know from SFB is a warship that has as a role exploration.  It isn't a purpose built survey ship, it does have extra lab spaces that are nothing more then extra padding in SFB but serve a purpose for exploring and analysis.  Compare to a D7 who has barely anough labs to analyse a piece of toast (a true warship).

The F-CA was to find the new stuff, see what was up.  Then a dedicated survey ship would finish the job (safer for the survey ship to come in after the area was checked by the CA).

Of course. Now that the military forces have softened up any resistance, the occupation forces arrive to survey the damge. Typical Federation tactic.

Quote
Thus IMHO the F-CA is a hybrid, built to cover two missions, does both well, but doesn't excell at either, but is a better warship.
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #72 on: April 10, 2009, 02:21:41 pm »
The Fed CA from what I know from SFB is a warship that has as a role exploration.  It isn't a purpose built survey ship, it does have extra lab spaces that are nothing more then extra padding in SFB but serve a purpose for exploring and analysis.  Compare to a D7 who has barely anough labs to analyse a piece of toast (a true warship).

The F-CA has one adjustment for purposes of surveying the the extra labs.  That one adjustment improves its survey ability but it lacks the other enhancements of a proper survey ship.

The K-D7 has half as many labs but can use probe drones to supplement them (which the base F-CA cannot do).  Given being equipped with probe drones a K-D7 can do as much surveying as a F-CA.

The F-CA was to find the new stuff, see what was up.  Then a dedicated survey ship would finish the job (safer for the survey ship to come in after the area was checked by the CA).

Based on a quick over view of the episodes of TOS in most of them the Enterprise would have been patrolling previously explored territory "exploration" merely confined to confirming past exploration.  In Charley X for example they picked him up after he was dropped off by a real science ship.  Most of the rest of the series they were near the borders of the Klingon/Romulan/Tholian borders, far from unoccupied space.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #73 on: April 10, 2009, 03:36:01 pm »
I was under the impression that the GSA was geared towards locating resources, while the CA was meant for general scientific exploration.  Also, civilian science vessels that the Enterprise encountered were chartered by private entities as opposed to Starfleet.

Offline knightstorm

  • His Imperial Highness, Norton II, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2107
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #74 on: April 10, 2009, 03:38:30 pm »

But we Klingons, true warriors of honor, are here to protect space from the spandex horde.  :knuppel2:

Sort of like a greater galactic co-prosperity sphere?

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #75 on: April 10, 2009, 03:41:24 pm »
I was under the impression that the GSA was geared towards locating resources, while the CA was meant for general scientific exploration.  Also, civilian science vessels that the Enterprise encountered were chartered by private entities as opposed to Starfleet.

Yes, that is what I meant by saying that labs do lots of things that SFB doesn't have in the game.  But the CA has 8 labs so they can do more (more in depth actually) then a ship with only 2 to 4 labs can.

In most of what I have seen is, the CA can find a planet and say, hey it can probably support life (class M planet).  But it takes the GSC to find the resource level the planet could supply and see if it would be worth colonizing.

Also, probe drones don't give more information, just lets you take a look from farther away.  But tell me what average Klingon would take a few probe drones over a combat drones.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #76 on: April 10, 2009, 06:27:49 pm »
I was under the impression that the GSA was geared towards locating resources, while the CA was meant for general scientific exploration.  Also, civilian science vessels that the Enterprise encountered were chartered by private entities as opposed to Starfleet.


R2.16 Galactic Survey Cruiser:  The Galactic Survey Cruiser is intended for long range research and reconnaissance missions into uncharted space.  Note the larger number of lab and shuttle boxes and the addition of cargo spaces.

Also, probe drones don't give more information, just lets you take a look from farther away.  But tell me what average Klingon would take a few probe drones over a combat drones.


FD 6.31 Scientific:  The probe drone is considered to be a lab box for purposes of gathering information points only.

Ever play the monster scenario in SFB where you have to gather the information to determine how to destroy it?  My friends and I did, the Fed thought I couldn't succeed and was shocked when I took less damage than his F-CA did (unlike him no internals).  He had to close in to get the data, I just needed to take time.

A Klingon will take probe drones for the tactical advantage he can get.  Is there another ship hiding behind the planet?  What systems does that unknown ship have and how many.  Nice to know before they get to attack you. 

Variant drones can be quite useful in SFB and they can hand you the game when used properly. You can even put probe drones on ballistic courses (not counting for purposes of drone control) if you know for sure where it has to go.

The GSC can get sensor readings from places too dangerous for a ship to go.

A probe drone can go to at least some of those places and get the same information.  Alternately a barrage of probe drones supplementing the ships on board labs can allow it to gather information more rapidly to allow it to leave the dangerous zone more quickly.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #77 on: April 10, 2009, 06:42:35 pm »
I will agree on the varient drones can shift a battle.  I would love to see more added to SFC but I haven't thought of a good way to switch between drones without adding alot of complexity in controlling the drones. 
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline marstone

  • Because I can
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3014
  • Gender: Male
  • G.E.C.K. - The best kit to have
    • Ramblings on the Q3, blog
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #78 on: April 10, 2009, 06:44:15 pm »
oh and yes, if going into a monster mission, I would always carry some probe drones. (if I had racks)  As you stated, just launch, and roll your die.
The smell of printer ink in the morning,
Tis the smell of programming.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13068
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #79 on: April 11, 2009, 10:22:49 am »
Way back in the dark mists of time a friend and I were challenged to a SFB battle (rules set by our opponents).  The battle never occurred because my ally and I became too confident of success after planning our side and the opposition lost confidence and refused to do the battle.

We had numerous things planned one was telling the Kzin to leave the building until called (the Fed would be informed the Kzin was in stasis).  (Note: the Fed would have been captured during the time the Kzin was in stasis).  When the Kzin came out of stasis our plan included having him facing large numbers of drones coming in with a demand for surrender.  The drones were going to be 1/2 space dogfight drones (useless against a ship) on ballistic courses backed up by controlled type IVs (for after his defenses were shot) with the Romulan controlling some of them to boost my control rating.

Custom drones really do have their uses.  ;)
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #80 on: April 17, 2009, 03:21:04 pm »
All of the Royal Navy's exploration ships were frigates.... so why does the Federation insist on weakly armed heavy cruisers.

Sure the NX-01 SS Enterprise is a frigate, but that is pre-Federation.

So the Feds state that they're not imperialists and don't intend to hem in the various neighbours who resist political correctness and refuse to join their "Club".

Ironically, Gene Roddenberry said that he based Starfleet on the old British Royal Navy of the 1700's and 1800's and the long 5 uear voyages of exploration.

 
The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #81 on: April 25, 2009, 08:09:55 pm »
All of the Royal Navy's exploration ships were frigates.... so why does the Federation insist on weakly armed heavy cruisers.


 
They didn't have Cruisers back then only Frigates and Ship of the Line aka Battleship.Frigates were good enough to exploration as they have good firepower very manuerable and could handle heavy seas.It is not worth using a Ship of the Line to explore in.I guess in Star Trek they wanted to use the name Enterprise although being an aircraft carrier.

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #82 on: April 25, 2009, 09:38:37 pm »
There have been six Enterprise's in the US navy.  Only the last two have been Carriers.  There has also been at least one Enterprize in the Royal Navy of Britain.

Two Enterprise's were in service before the US Navy was formed.  Bringing the total to eight ships.  Of those, the first Five were Sloops or Schooners.  The last two have been carriers.  Another one, ironically, was a yacht, that was in charge of the waters off of Rhode Island during the First World War... she was never officially commissioned, but her name remains on the registrar.
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #83 on: April 26, 2009, 10:41:15 am »
The classes of ships used by navies worldwide, in order of size, firepower, etc., were as follows:

Gunwhale (RN) (Literally a gunboat with a 6 or 8 Pdr. Gun mounted on the front of a Dory rowboat).
Skiff (RN) (As above but with a mast and sail).
Corvette (France)
Caravelle (Spain)
Galley (France and Spain)
Sloop (RN)
Frigate (RN)
Ship Of The Line (All)
Man'O'War (RN)
The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!

Offline Calexandre

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #84 on: May 07, 2009, 09:20:39 am »
This debate of F-CA vs K-D7 is part of the reason why I adore Trek after all these years exploring the boundaries of Earthly imagination.

One can draw out so much logic from mere basic visuals and demonstrated intentions. The D7 is to me the specialised attack ship and the F-CA a balanced combination of explorer and combat vessel meant to be self-sufficient.

Logic does dictate that instead of producing these balanced ships in wartime, they should instead focus on attack ships such as the Defiant whist using the CA's superior endurance and avionics as a command ship or tender for long range missions. I'm not claiming the Federation should use the Enterprise as a PF tender but it does make sense if the Feds want to keep their big white ships in the line of battle.

Klingon vessels are to me like Russian attack submarines. Very fast, very powerful but wholly geared towards the offensive.  As demonstrated in The Search for Spock, the compact size and crew complement of a Bird of Prey did limit the Klingon commander's options,  crew comfort notwithstanding - humans and Klingons have different crew support requirements due to society and physiology thus even if the Federation crew does require a lot more creature comforts resulting in a larger, heavier and clumsier combat ship due to the kind of missions their capital ships are sent into (5 year patrols do insist they care for the people well), it does not mean the Federation crew is weaker than their Klingon counterparts.

If anything, the Federation crews would not be under constant threat of death on board the ships, and will be more open to innovation and individual initiative in handling crisis situations. That can mean the difference between life and death in deep space. The Federation ship designs do seem to reflect this trait of versatility.

Sure, the F-CA could be designed better, but Trek was conceived in the 60s and that was the golden age of imagination without bounds. The Federation ship designs became an icon of Trek and the featured characters, thus we have to make do with supposedly impractical warship designs.

But with the opening of the franchise to new ideas we do see that ship designs become more robust and arguably, more tactically logical - see Data's starship-mauling PF/attack shuttle, the Defiant, and Chakotay's tiny little attack boat that was obviously inspired by Klingon designs. Even the Voyager and Sovereign somehow "make sense" in their balance of long range endurance, maximum durability from modular systems infrastructure, and technologically superior offensive and defensive systems making up for the lack of agility and specialisation present in a classic Klingon attack ship which I agree, is the first example of a "proper" multi-role warship.

In the end both Klingon and Federation vessels are beautiful work of art - it's just that the minds behind their designs are different, approaching similar problems with different means.

And were there a wholly Klingon based Star Trek series we would definitely see the same sort of evolution as evident in the Federation order of battle. Of course, with the Klingons mounting multiple-barrel distruptor arrays and massive mixed phaser batteries to counter the threat of quantum torpedoes until new weapons technology came into play, and that constant evolution of warship design based on strategic requirements can lead anywhere!

Offline toasty0

  • Application.Quit();
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 8045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #85 on: May 07, 2009, 09:22:50 am »
Quote
it does not mean the Federation crew is weaker than their Klingon counterparts.

Bah!
MCTS: SQL Server 2005 | MCP: Windows Server 2003 | MCTS: Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist | MCT: Microsoft Certified Trainer | MOS: Microsoft Office Specialist 2003 | VSP: VMware Sales Professional | MCTS: Vista

Offline Panzergranate

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • Aw!! Da big nasty Klingon L7 killed da kitty kat!!
Re: Treknology: Cargo Bays
« Reply #86 on: May 17, 2009, 01:11:34 pm »
In the "The Klingon Sleeper Ship" episode, the Klingon High Council and Star Fleet were concerned that the awakening Klingons, still believeing that a state of war still existed between the Feds and Klingons, would strike at all the unprotected colonies in the area.

Just tractor beaming a small asteroid about a few hundred feet across to a planet and dropping it into the atmosphere would be enough to cause a mass extinction event.... who needs Phasers for mass anialation??

The Klingons have many ways to fry a cat. I prefer to use an L7 Fast Battlecruiser!!