posted
Following on from a thread in General Discussion, I pose this issue for debate. The Dominion War is over. The Federation and Starfleet are rebuilt to the point that it can once again concentrate on exploring the galaxy. Assuming that during the war most exploration and scientific missions were put on hold (as was seen to be true in "One Little Ship", "The Sound of Her Voice" et. al.), how would Starfleet go about getting back to business? And what would change in Federation exploration policy?
Obviously, the "norm" as presented in TNG and the early seasons of DS9 would probably never be restored. But what would change? Is the notion of "one ship, alone out there" still tenable? Would there, or should there, be multiple ships on a single mission? Shorter duration (and range) missions? Why or why not?
The point is, in all the talk we've had on the post-War period, rarely do we seriously speculate about the whole exploration thing that defines Trek in the first place - it's all about beefing up the territory we know and have won back, to ensure it doesn't happen again. So, what would you do?
posted
I don't see a major change in policies. They were at war with the Romulans, Klingons, Cardassians and so forth through the years and that never really made a noticable change in how exploration was done. Being that this is Roddenberry's Universe...and peaceful exploration is the "norm", then I think that that can be safely continued from this point on. So do explorer ships need warship escorts? no, I dont see why the Federation would all of the sudden need to get paranoid about how it goes about exploration. All of its previous threats have been nullified, lullibied or pacified in newly changed regimes, so the galaxy is really the safest it has been since the days of invading space probes. I think SF will quietly go back to exploring once it recovers from the war and Skipper Bob of the SS Minnow won't need to incessively worry about who is lurking in the shadows as he is out trying to score with the alien babes today anymore than Picard did in the early TNG era...
-------------------- Hey, it only took 13 years for me to figure out my password...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
In one way, I'm thinking that sending out lone ships for the five-year exploration missions was extraordinarily ambitious and possibly overconfident. After all, Christopher Columbus sailed to America with three ships.
The concept of an all-in-one explorer is definitely a workable concept, considering that it was quite obviously a success in TOS and TNG. A large starship that has the ability to perform long-range surveys of entire sectors, make contact with new civilizations, and explore new uncharted regions of space. I could be wrong about this, but it seems to me that the majority of the Starfleet ships lost have been in exceptional circumstances, and the majority of exploration missions are relatively safe. Many people call the Galaxy Class project a failure; but considering that the Yamato was destroyed by an extraordinarily advanced computer virus and the Odyssey was destroyed by a vastly more prepared and aggressive alien race, I don't think that there's a major problem with the technology in Starfleet.
My major policy change, IMO, should be the division of Starfleet into two sections -- the Tactical Division and Exploratory Division. Each would be overall separate, but fall under the umbrella of the upper echelon of Starfleet Command itself. I think this would help establish clear priorities for each of the purposes, with the main goal of enhancing Starfleet's defensive capabilities.
Not to say that there was something specifically wrong with how Starfleet managed itself in the TNG era, but it seems to me that it was overall unprepared for the extreme aggression that some races presented -- the Borg, the Dominion, and so forth. These are foreign forces from distant parts of the galaxy, that have little or no stake in local politics and diplomacy and are pursuing specific agendas without regard for local influences. As the Federation expands with ever-faster starships and more advanced technology, the probability of encountering more of these kinds of forces increases.
A dedicated Tactical Division would enable Starfleet to create specific defense capabilities; mention was made in DS9 of Betazed's planetary defenses, which were obviously outdated and then completely swept away. There are numerous instances of poor monitoring of border regions, gaps in the patrol patterns, and the lack of resources for defense in depth.
Having a Starfleet that is supposed to be both explorer and defender simultaneously means that it will end of doing neither to the best of its ability. The Galaxy Class was built to be the best exploration platform ever conceived -- and within a few years, the Enterprise-D was doing nothing but cruising around Federation space stamping out political brushfires, because it was also one of the best defensive platforms of its time. Because of that, the exploration programs obviously suffered. Without dedicated defensive forces, the exploration programs can't devote their entire mission to exploration, and are innately hindered by their need to split their focus.
This will probably sound very fanboyish, but I think it's true regardless -- launching a large fleet of Defiant-class warships (or other ships of similar capabilities) would be a good idea for Starfleet. The Defiant has proven itself a very capable defender and patrol vessel; it rarely needs to be very far from port, and so provisions for longer duration cruises are unnecessary. The elimination of most scientific gear lets it pack in more defensive and offensive power. A super-high warp speed isn't necessary because the ship doesn't go too far from home. And when concentrated in numbers, it's a good bet that they can pack a huge punch. Having a dedicated patrol fleet of Defiants would give Starfleet the kind of security it needs -- not just against the Borg, but against any kind of conventional or moderately unconventional threat.
At the same time, perhaps sending more than one ship on a five-year exploratory cruise would be a workable idea. The Galaxy Class is certainly more than capable of defending itself, but in some ways it's always struck me as slightly limited by its inability to divert its attention to more than one place. What if a Galaxy were accompanied by two smaller ships -- a small dedicated survey ship, and a small dedicated defensive combat ship. Take Lewis and Clark's expedition of 1804-1806 as an example: there were plenty of instances where they would split up into two or more parties to cover more ground, to explore tributary rivers, or to scout for potential attackers. Having more than one ship in an explorer mission would increase the resources needed to supply it, but I have no doubt that it could also increase its effectiveness. The loner do-it-all is not necessarily the most effective method all the time.
Obviously, Starfleet needs to carefully practice moderation in these changes. Certainly, a dedicated combat division would create the danger of a more military-like organization that is contrary to the values of the Federation. Likewise, the need to defend those values of the Federation do require action. I think that Starfleet of the TNG era, while overall adequate for the military necessities of the time, was still focused too much on the exploration aspects of its mission and thus lost valuable time when it needed to convert to military focuses in the late 2360's and early 2370's. Hopefully, Starfleet can avoid becoming a more overtly military force with such blatantly aggressive ships like the "Renaissance" Rapid Reaction Force, too.
I think I've rambled on long enough, don't you?
-------------------- “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
Valles
Ex-Member
posted
So, for the traditional supership model we have: Pros: Powerful ship Flexible ship Impressive ship Combination of the first two makes an -extremely- survivable ship
Cons: Point failure source Expensive Can only be one place at a time Jack of all trades, master of none
Solution: Expand extant small craft designs (Peregrine, Runabouts, et al.) up to small starships in the 80-100 meter range. These corvettes will be short range specialist designs essentially along the Defiant's mold (although not neccessarily for combat), only cheaper.
Design the next iteration of the Constitution/Excelsior/Galaxy tradition to act as tender/mothership for a small (or large, if you feel like being expansive) fleet of corvettes.
That way, instead of spending the time to run off and put out a brushfire instead of finishing a delicate set of negotiations or running a system survey or monitoring a dangerous ion storm or -whatever-, you can just dispatch a specialist parasite or that'll do the job on its own. And if it's something that needs to be dealt with -now-, well, the mothership won't be far away
And, if there's some big major disaster problem type thing - a war, for instance, the parasites are quick, cheap, and easy to build and replace. Those Defiant squadrons that got mentioned would be available, along with heavy-duty support from their motherships.
posted
Before pitching in, I wanna pitch this entire thing in the general direction of the Creative forum. It's very Starship, yes, but I only promised to keep Sector Gamma here, for reasons of historical continuity - new semi-related threads ought to be Creative (and this one seems to be shaping all right!).
But for the record, this *isn't* supposed to be a "You're the" sort of thing... I meant it to be mostly just a specualtive thread like most of the ones in the Tech forum. The title is just a humourous play on the theme.
posted
The problem with the GCS, IMO, wasn't with the ratio of science equipment to defensive armament. In fact, we don't even know if this problem extended farther than the Enterprise.
It seemed to me that the misuse of the Enterprise in particular had more to do with Starfleet Command, and may have had a great deal to do with the ship being the Flagship of the Fleet ... I mean, what better to send on a diplomatic crisis? "Hey, look, we're involved, we care, we sent our FLAGSHIP, what MORE do you want?!"
I don't know if we ever saw a GCS doing what it was meant to do. The closest we saw was in TNG's "Pen Pals", an episode which took place over a period of months (might've been weeks), as the Enterprise was involved in detailed research of a star system. In the same vein, at the beginning of "Tin Man" ... however, in that case, the ship is merely doing more detailed research on a system already charted.
I always imagined the typical, long-range mission of the Galaxy-Class as star-charting. Fly around, locate a system, do a detailed research assignment -- maybe a month or so, fly off, find another system, repeat for a period of years.
posted
As for the balance between exploration and defense, I think Starfleet prior to TNG might have been counting on having both done by pretty much the same fleet. The key would be to have the fleet deployed so that it could be summoned to "man the ramparts" quickly enough to stop an invasion. Slower ships would have to stay closer to home if they were to be used for defense. The faster ones would have a longer leash.
This works fine as long as you know the speed at which the enemy will invade. If that speed increases significantly, you are screwed: every single mission is disrupted if you redeploy your forces closer to home.
I guess the idea of "mobile defenses", of your best combatants roaming out exploring, of watching out for the enemy trying to "steal to the base", worked just fine during the Cardassian war, and lulled the fleet to false security. Then the Borg struck faster than the Cardassians. The Dominion struck harder than the Cardassians. And the only way for the "flexible" defenses to adapt was to either rebuild the entire fleet, or to abandon all current missions and reassign everybody.
In this sense, I could see major postwar changes. Either in the direction of creating a new "mobile defense force" that suits the current parameters of enemy speed and strength - or then in the direction of abandoning the whole idea and going for heavier fixed "siege mentality" defenses and lesser emphasis on the recall-warship-on-demand doctrine.
Interestingly enough, the various dedication plaques do seem to mention these "exploration command/division" and "defense/tactical command/division" things. Perhaps they are now-on, now-off features of Starfleet, sometimes abandoned for political convenience ("See, all our ships are under a single exploration-oriented Command. We aren't a warfighting force. Don't fear us."), sometimes reinstated ("See, we have a mighty part of the fleet solely dedicated to war. Fear us."), while the actual fighting ships stay the same.
The early TNG era might have been one of those times when there wasn't a separate Defense Command, perhaps as a counterreaction to the "Border Wars". This caused lots of schizophrenia within the fleet, and made Picard sprout strange platitudes in "Peak Performance" et al.
After the Dominion war, I could see Defense Command reinstated and given possession of the newest multipurpose ships, while Exploration Command has to build new explorers for its missions. Older types would now finally be scrapped as a cost-cutting measure. A big fleet of Defiants doesn't appeal to me - those aren't much of a strategic deterrent, and tactically I'd rather build ships big enough that you can permanently assign just one per each star system and expect her to put up a meaningful defense.
In time, Starfleet would again move the ships out of their fixed defense positions, especially if the constant military presence became politically unacceptable (and of course, it would be dramatically unacceptable were Trek as entertainment to continue beyond the "Endgame" timepoint). And introduction of transwarp would again make it realistic to send all the fleet out to explore, since the ships could return at a speed comparable or superior to that of the enemy once again.
posted
The Dominion War ended in 2375, and Endgame is set in 2377 (we can ignore Nemesis as it is useless for this purpose). When Voyager arrives back, and Starfleet meets it, they have 27 ships ready to fight what they think is a Borg invasion. These ships have had no notice, and so must be in the vicinity of Earth. They include at least 2 Galaxies, a Nebula, and a Prometheus, plus numerous smaller vessels like Excelsiors and Mirandas. This would suggest that after the Dominion war, Starfleet is taking a much more defensive outlook, with at least 2 of its main explorers defending Earth, and not out exploring.
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
You have to keep in mind that not everything we see on screen cannot necessarily be expected to be "the way it is" because that is the state the Federation may be in. There has to be a bit of artistic liberty here with the writers and SFX ppl who want to give certain scenes more 'shock value' then what otherwise would be considered practical.
I mean, you could look at it another way and use "Nemesis" as an example. We see that SF could only muster like 6 ships between the NZ and Earth to help the Enterprise posthaste, in a situation some 2 years after "Endgame", where SF is no longer at a heightened state of alert. This might lead one to believe that SF doesnt have any sort of emergency-fleet-mobilization-capability in effect, especially on the border with the Romulans, the only remaining potential enemy in this corner of the galaxy. Indicating that things may be 'getting back to normal', because again, all former threats seem to be quite neutralized. Afterall, why waste resources on a "cold war state" when, really, no visible enemies exist?
SF is an exploratory service and I cannot believe that it would be good on morale to continue to treat the Federation as if it was still at a "state of alert" (to use modern terms) when there is no one to sitting on their back porch breathing down thier neck like the Cardassians, Dominion, Romulans and Klingons were.
If there wasnt 'practible' defenses between Earth and Romulus, then I think SF isn't as concerned with threats as it has been, and that it is getting back to its "exploratory roots". Maybe it still has some defenses at key locations, like Earth or at the Wormhole, but if it isnt defending the only threatened border, then it certainly isnt as mobilized as the picture everyone here is trying to paint.
As for the case of "Endgame", I cannot see that that is necessarily the "norm" (at least for the future) because 1) they have simply been in for repairs or training new crew and thus 'in the neighborhood' or possibly, yes, Earth may continue to be a bit skiddish considering it is the head and the heart of the Federation.
I just refuse to believe that "Roddenberry's Universe" in a post-war era needs to be set in the state of "Cold War" against no specific threat. It is a waste the resources for a GCS or NCS to defend Earth, pursing the cost of explorer ships at Earth to defend no foreseeable threat does not seem to be the "norm" or necessarily logical, for a exploratory service like SF.
I think "Endgame", was done more for "the effect" from the writers and SFX guys than the "state of the Federation", Voyager sucks and made no sense 99% of the time, remember?? What is more cool?...a bunch of excelsiors and mirandas at Earth when the Borg appear, or some eyecandy for the fanboys, with a collection of ass kicking ships that really shouldnt have been there considering their designations. Anything we saw on Voyager really shoudnt be taken at face value.
-------------------- Hey, it only took 13 years for me to figure out my password...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
So basically you say we should ignore Endgame because it doesn't fit in with your view of the Federation?
Surely if it contradicts your view that would indicate your view is wrong, and not the other way around?
The fact is that the ships: a) were there b) were powerful c) were ready at a minute's notice, and therefore not under repair
So you have lots of powerful ships operational in the vicinity of Earth. It certainly seems that they are there to defend it.
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
Valles
Ex-Member
posted
quote: So you have lots of powerful ships operational in the vicinity of Earth.
This, I don't dispute.
quote: It certainly seems that they are there to defend it.
This, I do. First, it is known that the Sol System is a major Federation shipbuilding and repair nexus. One or two ships in states of workup/shakedown isn't unexpected, although I'll grant that the Endgame case has heavier hulls than would be typical.
Second, not only is that true of Sol, it is presumably true of the other Charter worlds as well, one of which (Alpha Centauri) is only four-odd light years away. I think it's reasonable to assume that there are other major hubs within quick-response range.
Third, an alternate possibility: those ships had been pulled together for a training exercise in combined fleet operations, and it was quite literally the luck of the draw that they were in the right place at the right time.
All of the above with the caveat that I don't watch much TV and haven't seen Endgame.
As to Fed. policy, a more militant stance over the five to ten years following the Dominion War is a likely, but ultimately temporary phenomenon. Starfleet and the cultural assumptions that back it are too well established, IMHO, to be changed by what centuries of experience have shown to be an abberrant case.
posted
The list of possible explanations is endless, of course. Coincidence is possible. The ships could have been passing through on their way to pacify the big rebellion on Risa, protecting a big meeting on Earth, gathering for a parade, or reinforcing defenses around all major planets because of the galactic-crisis-of-the-week, only to be dispersed the next week. Or then they were waiting around Mars for new assignments as the leadership hemmed and hawed in indecision.
Alternately, such heavy starship presence was really the norm at the time. But the assembled fleet wasn't that much bigger than the Wolf 359 one - and for all we know, most of the Wolf 359 ships were already pre-gathered, too, waiting near Earth. The dialogue certainly allows for that, and no TNG or DS9 episode really requires Earth to be devoid of a defensive fleet.
"Endgame", "BoBW", "Paradise Lost", "Conspiracy"... All these peacetime glimpses to the defenses of the Sol system could have allowed for the permanent presence of a fleet of 30-40 ships as a standard measure. In the first, we saw it working like expected. In the second, it was called to perform in a neighboring system, and failed. In the third and fourth, it was idled as there seemingly was no threat that would have required starship intervention. Or intervention by more than one starship, anyway, in the "Paradise Lost" case.
posted
(Timo, don't mean to sound insulting here, but it seems pretty boneheaded to move this starship-deployment thread out of the Starships forum. )
How many times have we complained about the Enterprise being "the only ship in the sector"? And how many times has that sector been Earth itself? TMP, TWOK, TFF, Generations...
Special effects problems aside, I think it's perfectly reasonable to see so many of the bigger ships in "Endgame." Remember how many Galaxy-class ships we saw during DS9? The ones that are supposedly little more than hollow flying hulls packed with weaponry? I think it makes lots of sense that several of these were sitting at Utopia Planitia getting "filled out" when the emergency call came through.
Going back to the Cardassian Wars, Timo makes an interesting point there. I've always gotten the impression that the Cardassians were always a second-rate power anyway and were little more than a minor distraction to the Federation. The only reason the conflict was called a "war" was because there was hardly any other conflict going on at the same time in the years leading up to TNG.
I know this is an alternate timeline, but you could also consider "Yesterday's Enterprise" as an example of Starfleet's unpreparedness. Obviously they were in serious trouble and losing badly to the Klingons -- part of that probably had something to do with the explorer/military dichotomy. (Yeah yeah, I know they were at war for 20+ years, so we didn't get much hint of their attitudes at the start of the war.)
-------------------- “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
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
