Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Starship construction times
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Woodside Kid: [QB] Okay, Siegfried, let's look at your back-ups, shall we? [QUOTE] The stardrive has one impulse engine and would need to depend a lot on its thrusters. Add the saucer section into the mix, and you have two additional engines that are in prime positions to add more thrust into turns than thrusters alone would allow. In addition, the saucer would bring its own thruster system which helps balance out the added mass of the saucer. [/QUOTE]1) What other thrusters are we talking about here? Aside from the ones used in "Booby Trap", I don't recall the ship ever using another type of thruster. 2) If the saucer engines were so advantageous in maneuvers, why in 7 years of TNG were they only used when the saucer was separated? As far as I remember, the first time we ever saw the saucer engines used while a Galaxy-class was in one piece was during the Dominion war. [QUOTE] There have already been good ideas presented for carrying the saucer. It has a massive shuttlebay that could carry several fighters. Plus, if we are to believe the DS9 Tech Manual is right about large internal portions of the ship being empty, then the bay could have been temporarily expanded. [/QUOTE]This may surprise you, Siegfried, but I actually don't have much of a problem with this part. Always assuming, of course, that Starfleet doesn't have ships designed for fighter support available at the time. [QUOTE]The many fusion reactors housed in the saucer can greatly augment the ship's power output. Plus, the main phasers of the Galaxy-class starship (based on the sheer number of times we've seen those fired over the other arrays) are on the saucer. The array on the dorsal surface of the stardrive doesn't look like it has the degree of range that the saucer's arrays have. [/QUOTE]1) Would the fusion reactors put out enough power to equal the savings earned by not having to drag around a million or so tons of unnecessary mass? And would those reactors even be there if the hull is largely empty? 2) The phaser array on the head of the secondary hull doesn't [i]need[/i] the degree of range of the saucer array. A large part of that array is there to allow the ship access to areas blocked by its own hull. Get rid of the saucer, and the three arrays on the battle head can cover the area quite nicely. [QUOTE] Other benefit of having the saucer, if I remember the TNG Tech Manual correctly, then the Galaxy-class starship generates its most efficent warp fields while both sections are docked together. [/QUOTE]Granted. And in the long run, on a multi-year mission, the energy savings would add up. However, in the short term, I think it would make more sense to simply produce the stardrive section. Devoid of the need to move the extra mass of the saucer (in either flight mode) and to power the saucer's systems, the stardrive section could devote its entire energy output to combat (which is the whole point of the saucer separation in the first place). Besides, if the whole point of an accelerated production schedule is to churn out ships for the war effort, why waste time and materials on something that's not absolutely necessary? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3