posted
Not officialy, anyway.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
the DS9TM ain't exactly the most correcto mungo book ever written. i would take the statements about the cloak with a big fat non-canon grain of salt.
IP: Logged
posted
Well it would seem pretty logical that only the Defiant be cloak capable for reasons other than going by what the DS9TM says.
It doesn't appear that the Defiant class ships were designed to use a cloaking system to begin with because the Federation used a ROMULAN cloaking system. Why would you design a warship that relied on obtaining a critical piece of equipment that only a defacto enemy possessed? (begs another question, why not use a Klingon cloak? Maybe not compatible for some technobabble reason?) Other onscreen evidence suggests it was a hassle to get the thing from the Romulans and use it, first only in the Gamma quadrant, and then limited use in the Alpha quadrant during the Dominion war. Even though TPTB quickly phased out the Romulan officer to look after the cloaking system, it proves that the Federation had to make some concessions to obtain and use it. All of this suggests a very "one time" agreement and it looks doubtful that any Romulan would agree to mass produce cloaks for a Federation vessel.
What about a Federation cloak for each new Defiant? Maybe, but we would be violating a treaty and that doesn't seem very Federation-esque, and besides the fact that we have never seen any proof of another cloak being used on a Defiant class ship.
I think the DS9TM got this one right.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The reason the Federation didn't use a Klingon cloaking device needn't be technobabble. Just political. It's the treaty with the Romulans that bans some specific group of technologies that can collectively be called a "cloaking device," not the Klingons.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Good point Sol, I should have pushed that note down into the paragraph about the treaty. Could've answered my own question. My mistake.
That just shows that the Federation firmly intended to abide by the Treaty of Algeron and we saw no obvious proof that the Romulans agreed to inclusion of cloaking systems into further Defiant class ships.
I have another question though, did we ever see the Defiant II (Sao Paulo) using a cloaking device? That might throw a wrench into the works, but it could be explained that the "Defiant" was still the only ship with a cloak.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
No, it didn't ever use one, and I don't recall any implication it ever had one.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, gee... since the "Insurrection" example was the result of a conspiracy -- that is, people who were breaking the rules -- then they wouldn't necessarily care about breaking the Treaty of Algeron in order to achieve their goals.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Besides, I would suspect that the Son'a wouldn't have a problem with getting a cloaking device from the Romulans. After all, if a Romulan cloaking device can be installed in a Federation Defiant Class starship, it wouldn't be hard to install another cloaking device onboard another Federation vessel.
-------------------- "It speaks to some basic human needs: that there is a tomorrow, it's not all going to be over with a big splash and a bomb, that the human race is improving, that we have things to be proud of as humans." -Gene Roddenberry about Star Trek
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Considering the widely varying sizes and performances of cloaking devices we've seen, especially in DS9, you can probably take a cloaking device off a Vor'Cha, hook it up to your toaster, and render your street block invisible.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
One of the bigger questions ot that question is what if Starfleet really did have a large fleet of Defiant class ships? Remember we only seen part of Starfleet. Perhaps most of the Defiant class ships could have been on the front lines. I mean think about it, would you put all or most of your heavy hitters on the front lines? I wouldn't send all the Miranda class ships to defend the borders while keeping all the Defiant class ships inside the territory. But that's just me.
Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Exactly. The war was fought along a huge front, the Defiants would have been spread all over the place. I've always felt that (for instance) in WYLB there would have been multiple taskforces hitting the Cardies from every direction, not just the 9th fleet.
In addition, there may be another reason there weren't heaps of these vessel: A lack of officers to command them. Say you can produce 6 defiant class ships to every galaxy. (Using the same resources). And that each defiant class ship has 50% of the overall firepower of a galaxy class vessel. It would be logical in terms of bang for bucks to have 6 defiants to one galaxy as you'd be putting 3 times the effective firepower on the frontline. And barring the really big battlecruisers the defiant seems to be able to take on almost anything. However where are you going to find the 6 captains to command these ships. And 6 CMO's chief engineers etc. It may simply be a manpower shortage.
Another possibility is that there isn't the industrial infrastructure in place to maintain a fleet of Defiant class ships, afterall having a handful of prototypes (or whatever) is a long way from having the production lines created to mass produce and maintain the ships, even if we do assume that many Federation componenets are modular.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Federation technology does seem modular from what the TNG and DS9 Tech Mans say. But it just might be a shortage of officers that could be the problem.
-------------------- "It speaks to some basic human needs: that there is a tomorrow, it's not all going to be over with a big splash and a bomb, that the human race is improving, that we have things to be proud of as humans." -Gene Roddenberry about Star Trek
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Not really. It has been shown that you can have a Lt.Com. in command of a Nebula class ship. Even Sisko was a Commander when he first got the Defiant.
Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
