(It's really difficult to type when a cat insists on walking across your hands. )
B.J.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I love that little pod. Thaz cool.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
A shuttle from the Naval Patrol (as mentioned on VOY).
And since I had to come up with a UNP logo anyway: Posted by Kobi (Member # 1360) on :
cool images! what about a shuttle from the Alien crewed vessels (like Intrepid)
Posted by Gav (Member # 1207) on :
Hear, hear!
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
what are the extra parts on the Naval Patrol version?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Well.. I'm sure the USS Intrepid has the same Starfleet livery. So, basically, it's the same as the Kongo's shuttle, except with a different name Posted by japol (Member # 1149) on :
No doubt.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
quote: What are the extra parts on the Naval Patrol version?
You mean the snorkel and the sonar?
Seriously, I have a problem with the nomenclature, since "naval" could just as easily refer to the spacegoing ship-using organizations of Trek, and indeed should. Couldn't they have invented a "wetter" word?
Or perhaps Tom was merely speaking of an organization akin to scouts, one where "naval" in the name refers to the space navies, and where playing around in planetary seas is what the kids do as a substitute to the "real thing"...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
It could be a Coast Guard type of space service, but probably not a boy scouts organization, since Tom really wanted to join the Federation Naval Patrol instead of Starfleet, IIRC.
But to me, 'naval' just sounds too wet to be about spacecraft flying through space. Never has the word navy been used to describe Starfleet or any other space service. Besides, a wet navy service is something different from the usual starship stuff.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Seriously, I have a problem with the nomenclature, since "naval" could just as easily refer to the spacegoing ship-using organizations of Trek, and indeed should
The fact that the FNP was mentioned in an episode with a water world strongly suggests that it is indeed a maritime organization.
Posted by japol (Member # 1149) on :
Also considering that Tom Paris at the time was waxing poetic about books about the sea and sailing ships, I think it is doubtful that the Federation Naval Patrol is anything BUT a maritime service. Probably doing Coast Guard-style duty on the various Federation worlds that have oceans.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Never has the word navy been used to describe Starfleet or any other space service.
Untrue. When arranging quarters on the station for a bunch of officers, Worf tells Kira that the captain of a ship's quarters must be of the same quality as an admiral's because it is "naval tradition", thus including Starfleet under the catagory of naval. At least, that's what it implies to me.
And I too was under the impression that Tom was referring to a maritime organization when speaking of the FNP. Though, given that it's a fairly dumb idea, and that it was spoken of as crappy way to get Tom emotionally involved in the story, and that it was on Voyager... I choose ignore it.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, the only real quirk, at least that occurs to me, is having it be the "Federation" Naval Patrol, as opposed to, say, Earth's, or Betazed's, or what have you. It doesn't seem like something that requires federal attention.
Also, that little shuttle is weird.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Earth naval traditions bleeding across into Starfleet is one thing (of this there are numerous examples, from the rank structure to those funny whistles), pretending that Starfleet is a maritime organisation is something else.
This is part of the reason why I abhor the term "Starfleet Marines". I get a similar shudder whenever I hear yanks mispronounce sub-mariners as "submarine-ers". Grr.
Personally I'd rather think that any future space organisation will have more in common with a modern air force than a modern navy. Which is one thing I really liked about the B5 universe.
As to why Starfleet has such a strong link to Earth's western Navies of the 19th, 20th & 21st centuries...I've often postulated that since the early deep space ships (should have) resembled modern submarines, at least from the crew's point of view, allot of the terminology, traditions and possibly some personnel might have been 'borrowed' out of convenience and it simply stuck.
As for Harry's fixation on the number 12, I almost always used the number 42 in my drawings...but only because I could never get the hang of Thursdays.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Starships in space have FAR more in common with ships at sea (and submarines beneath it) than with aircraft. The Air Force doesn't deal at all with large crews aboard large vessels that float (not fly) through a vast expanse of unexplored territory with little reliable contact with their operating authority. That is the role of mariners. Also, combat in space would be much more akin to naval combat, I should think.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Starfleet has so much in common with modern-day navies because ocean-going military vessels are the closest things we have to ships that operate in space, which would presumably be run in much the same way. Air Forces, on the other hand, do things differently because their hardware is different and doesn't easily lend itself to naval operating structures. Now maybe a future space force would, due to the nature of its environment, differ enough from either to have its own unique structure, but I think navies form a better basis for extrapolation than any other present military branch.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Air Force
At least that's what my brain is telling me.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Naval... akin to Naval Warplanes
At least that's what my brain is telling me.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
Plus there's already so much history and tradition in the Navy. The USN has been around since 1776, the Air Force only 60 years. I don't know how long the Royal Navy has been around, but I'm sure it has more history than the RAF.
Besides, large ships that go out for extended periods of time. What does that sound like? The USN or USAF?
In the real world, I wouldn't be surprised if the USAF would be in charge considering the government gives them more money. Then again, they're not building billion dollar aircraft carriers, amphibs, cruisers, destroyers, subs, and on and on. The Navy does more than just sea, we take the air, subsurface, and land. And considering the Marines are a division more or less of the Department of the Navy we also take ground combat. What does the USAF do? Fly planes? Okay, I know they do more than that. But what can I say, I'm a sailor, so of course I think we're better than the other branches.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
We know.
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
There is a lot of homosexual anal sex in the Navy, I hear.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
It seems to me that the Navy is the "jack of all trades" of the services, as it has aspects of every other service within it: it has an army (the Marines), an air force (Naval aviators), and it also has nuclear-deterent weapons (missile subs) in addition to a powerful fleet.
I like the Navy. It is my favorite of the three services.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
But now they have women on ships, so there's likely heterosexual anal sex as well.
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
But still lots of homosexual anal sex.
And also, aside from, like JAG, the women go into the military because they're piefaces. When is the last time an attractive person was in the military? Not since Antietam when that hot guy got cannoned.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Although, onto another point ...
quote:Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Air Force
...
Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Naval... akin to Naval Warplanes
Well, either one could be correct, depending on whether you're basing this on a view of the US Navy or the British Navy.
IIRC, on a British aircraft carrier, it is actually RAF aviators who fly the planes - not Naval aviators. Therefore, it isn't an out of hand possibility to contemplate that in the event the US decides to incorporate a Space Defense Force (or what-have-you) that ships would be crewed by former Navy blokes, while their fighter complement would be crewed by former Air Force pukes.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Easily destroyed in kamakazie attacks. Starfleet Attack fighters: useless- unless you want to aggrivate the Cardassians.
At least that's what the voices in my brain are telling me.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:IIRC, on a British aircraft carrier, it is actually RAF aviators who fly the planes
Normally this isn't the case. The Fleet Air Arm provides pilots for all RN helicopters and Sea Harriers and they're in the Navy. RAF Harriers can and have flown from RN carriers to support the Sea Harriers, especially since the joint harrier command thingy was set up.
However seeing as how Tony 'this is a war on terrorism and we must all make sacrifices' Blair has decided to sacrifice our armed forces, the RAF will be providing all Harriers for the RN. After all, they've got the same name as the Sea Harrier (well, almost) so they must do the same thing. Or not. RAF Harriers are designed for ground support, not air superiority. Another gloriously fantastic decision bought to you by our Dear Leader and his pack of cretins.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: We know.
Good.
Not all women in the Navy are bad looking. Most enlisted women, yes. Officer women are far better looking though. And the longer you're out to sea, the better looking they get.
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
I am just saying that Catherine Bell has some large breasts.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
They are the property of Ron Hubbard, though.
Posted by japol (Member # 1149) on :
You know, the fighters we saw in DS9, much like the runabouts, could be the Starfleet equivalent of PT Boats of WWII. Small, maneuverable boats with small crews used for close attacks with torpedoes. Essentially the "fighters" of a naval squadron. For an excellent example (and very similar to the way they were used in the DS9 episode when they re-take the station) see the last battle in the movie "In Harm's Way."
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
For some reason, the sound I hear in my head when I think of the little shuttlepod flying is the noise from "The Jetsons".
Alas, that totally kills the pod's credibility in my mind, but otherwise it's a spiffy design.
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: They are the property of Ron Hubbard, though.
F THAT/
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: For some reason, the sound I hear in my head when I think of the little shuttlepod flying is the noise from "The Jetsons".
I take that as a compliment, as it would really fit with Jefferies early "Jetsons"-like auxilliary craft designs Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)