Page 10 of 16
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 10:14am
by Tribble
yeah the Cardie Dreadnaught didn't work and it was quite big compared to the Voyager so most likely for a single use item quite expensive since we got remember that starships last long enough that benefits you gain from them "pay" for the initial cost.
Also the Dreadnaught was big enough to be intercepted by starships and while the Voyager couldn't bring it down in time the Intrepid-class isn't the most powerful starship the alpha quadrant powers have, not mention Klingons, Romulans and hell even UFP-captains might get in the way of the dreadnaught if that was the only way to stop it (basically ram it).
IIRC why Cruise missiles work so well in modern real life earth is that they're too small and fast to be consistantly intrecepted so they can reach their targets unmolested more easily.
Another reason why cruise missiles work is because their payload is powerful enough to take out their targets. In ST the Federation seems to have hit the limits of photon torpedo tech, and although quantum torpedoes are still relatively new and might be improved down the line, IIRC they only have 2x the max yield of a regular torpedo. At the very least I've always thought that dreadnought-sized missiles could be used as an anti-Borg weapon. IIRC they are an order of magnitude more powerful than regular torpedoes, which makes sense given their size. Borg vessels are fast but not very maneuverable, and we've seen that there are limits to what they can adapt to. Enough regular weapons fire can bring down a Cube, so I figure dozens of dreadnought-sized missiles slamming into the shields / hull
can't be good for it. You could even increase the payload significantly by stripping out all the extra crap the Cardassians threw in like quantum torpedoes and disruptors. Oh, and make sure you have a detonator that actually works. For extra effect have it accelerate to warp right before detonation so the Borg has to withstand both the explosion itself
and a significant chunk of mass accelerating to FTL speeds at the same time. It should be fairly cheap to build since all you'd need is a hull, warp / impulse engines, a big chunk of matter/ anti-matter, a couple of sensors, and a computer that knows "Borg = bad".
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 02:31pm
by EnterpriseSovereign
Tribble wrote:yeah the Cardie Dreadnaught didn't work and it was quite big compared to the Voyager so most likely for a single use item quite expensive since we got remember that starships last long enough that benefits you gain from them "pay" for the initial cost.
Also the Dreadnaught was big enough to be intercepted by starships and while the Voyager couldn't bring it down in time the Intrepid-class isn't the most powerful starship the alpha quadrant powers have, not mention Klingons, Romulans and hell even UFP-captains might get in the way of the dreadnaught if that was the only way to stop it (basically ram it).
IIRC why Cruise missiles work so well in modern real life earth is that they're too small and fast to be consistantly intrecepted so they can reach their targets unmolested more easily.
Another reason why cruise missiles work is because their payload is powerful enough to take out their targets. In ST the Federation seems to have hit the limits of photon torpedo tech, and although quantum torpedoes are still relatively new and might be improved down the line, IIRC they only have 2x the max yield of a regular torpedo. At the very least I've always thought that dreadnought-sized missiles could be used as an anti-Borg weapon. IIRC they are an order of magnitude more powerful than regular torpedoes, which makes sense given their size. Borg vessels are fast but not very maneuverable, and we've seen that there are limits to what they can adapt to. Enough regular weapons fire can bring down a Cube, so I figure dozens of dreadnought-sized missiles slamming into the shields / hull
can't be good for it. You could even increase the payload significantly by stripping out all the extra crap the Cardassians threw in like quantum torpedoes and disruptors. Oh, and make sure you have a detonator that actually works. For extra effect have it accelerate to warp right before detonation so the Borg has to withstand both the explosion itself
and a significant chunk of mass accelerating to FTL speeds at the same time. It should be fairly cheap to build since all you'd need is a hull, warp / impulse engines, a big chunk of matter/ anti-matter, a couple of sensors, and a computer that knows "Borg = bad".
The problem with FTL-ramming is the whole 'mass lightening' effect of the warp drive, which would actually
reduce the kinetic energy going into the target.
If anything the Dreadnought missile is more like an ICBM than an anti-ship cruise missile, judging by both the yield and usage against high-value targets. Presumably the "kinetic detonator" that it was originally equipped with would only be triggered if it actually
hit something.
The Druoda sentient missiles are like (very small) cruise missiles, with a range of 80LY but an unknown yield, which would seemingly lend itself for an anti-ship role as much as for taking out surface targets on enemy worlds.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 02:44pm
by Simon_Jester
As noted, autonomous weapons platforms have a pretty rough history in the eyes of the Federation, stretching back to Nomad (armed by aliens, wandered off and killed an innocent world), the Planet Killer (likewise), or the aforementioned M5 incident (computer became paranoid and began attacking all shipping in 'self defense').
So any 'missile' type weapon smart enough to locate targets over interstellar distances would be... contraindicated.
Over merely interplanetary distances, photon torpedoes fired from ships traveling at high warp should have quite respectable range- we know they can sustain warp flight when fired from warp, and we know that they can have endurance measured in seconds if not minutes even at Warp 8 or 9. That corresponds to being able to travel for a distance of light-hours or possibly even light-days, from the right launching platform.
As to other Alpha Quadrant powers... for the Klingons, building a drone and sending it into combat from outside your own fighting range would be the act of a low-down cowardly petaQ.
The Romulans might very well experiment with such technology since they are more pragmatic... but they may have their own history with autonomous weapons that discourages them. Certainly their society's constant concern with treachery, subversion, and misdirection might lead them to doubt the wisdom of creating deniable, autonomous, risk-free weapons that might be used in internal conflict.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 02:46pm
by Crazedwraith
EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
The problem with FTL-ramming is the whole 'mass lightening' effect of the warp drive, which would actually reduce the kinetic energy going into the target.
I don't think it's nearly as clear cut as that. Is the connection between mass lightening and the warp drive even canon?
Riker was going to warp-ram the Cube in Best Of Both Worlds so it is considered an effective tactic. Plus if you're warping space time around you as the name implies, that's going to do bad things to ships caught in your field regardless of kinetic energy.
And finally KE, doesn't matter if you introducing a large amount of antimatter to the matter structure of a ship.(KAKABOOM)
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 03:57pm
by Formless
Crazedwraith wrote:Likewise the Warhead from Voyager's Warhead was rogue as well.
Yes, but more importantly I think is the fact that those weapons were made by an unknown race in the Delta Quadrant. Their capabilities, including the miniature warp drive, aren't a good indicator of what Alpha Quadrant powers could make.
Furthermore, the AI in those missiles were sentient and were based on the same neural network as a humanoid brain. At one point, the missile the Voyager crew picked up even claimed to have arms and legs despite the fact that... well, this was obviously not true. This indicates that the missile was so closely based on a humanoid brain that it could suffer from phantom limb syndrome. Creating such an AI violates all sorts of ethics the Federation holds themselves to.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 06:43pm
by Tribble
The problem with FTL-ramming is the whole 'mass lightening' effect of the warp drive, which would actually reduce the kinetic energy going into the target.
Off the top of my head I don't know how powerful the mass-lightening effect is for the warp drive. We know it doesn't reduce the mass to zero, and that ramming still remains an effective tactic while at warp (such as the Borg Cube ramming the S8472 ship in "Scorpion Part 2"). Both RIker and Worf are prepared to use ramming tactics against the Borg, and we see numerous examples of ramming being successful in DS9. IMO a purpose-built starship-sized missile slamming into a Borg Cube could cause a lot more damage than regular weapons, and as the payload isn't frequency based it's not something the Borg would be able to adapt to easily.
If anything the Dreadnought missile is more like an ICBM than an anti-ship cruise missile, judging by both the yield and usage against high-value targets.
Which is why I'm suggesting such a thing could be used against the Borg since a Borg Cube pretty much
is a high-value strategic target given its size and difficulty given to destroy via regular weapons.
Presumably the "kinetic detonator" that it was originally equipped with would only be triggered if it actually hit something.
Which Torres saw as a design flaw given that the Dreadnought missed its target and she was able to capture it. Btw, I'm not suggesting that they
literally use the Dreadnought, just a missile in the same size range. My version wouldn't be much more than a ship-sized photon torpedo.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 06:55pm
by Batman
I fail to see why AMRE figures into Warp ramming even if it exists (while the ability to use Warp fields to reduce an object's mass is canon, I don't think this being a routine part of Trek Warp drive is) because FTL travel means yeah, sorry, our ideas about kinetic energy and momentum sort of went out the window.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 08:34pm
by Tribble
Batman wrote:I fail to see why AMRE figures into Warp ramming even if it exists (while the ability to use Warp fields to reduce an object's mass is canon, I don't think this being a routine part of Trek Warp drive is) because FTL travel means yeah, sorry, our ideas about kinetic energy and momentum sort of went out the window.
Are there any examples of something accelerating into warp to hit an object that was not at warp? We've seen examples of ramming when both ships are out of warp and when both ships are in warp but I can't recall any instance of a ship accelerating into warp to ram a target that's not (Riker considered the tactic in BOBW, but we'll never know if it would have worked.)
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 09:09pm
by Batman
Riker did no such thing. For the umpteenth time, he ordered a collision course and Warp power. For all we know he just wanted the Warp core to be as explodey as possible.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 10:35pm
by Tribble
Batman wrote:Riker did no such thing. For the umpteenth time, he ordered a collision course and Warp power. For all we know he just wanted the Warp core to be as explodey as possible.
Seeing as there was no indication that the warp core was offline during the final attack, and it was likely already running at full capacity given the fact that they were, you know, fighting a Borg Cube, why would he bother to give such an order? "Btw Geordi, make sure that the warp engines are on just incase you turned them off during the middle of the battle and forgot to tell me, because I like things explodey as possible"?
The E-D was caught in a tractor/cutting beam that it could not apparently escape from via impulse, IMO it's more likely that when Riker ordered "Warp power", he was going to try to take the E-D to warp to break the tractor lock and the ram the Cube.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 10:43pm
by Batman
And your opinion is irrelevant. All that canonically happens is Riker ordering Warp power and equally canonically a Warp core going boom is bad mojo so Riker wanting to magnify the boom as much as possible makes sense. But by all means present me with the evidence that shows Riker actually wanted to go to Warp.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 10:48pm
by Solauren
I always assumed he was going to initiate a short-range warp speed collision/ramming of the Borg Cube.
I mean, the sheer velocity and kinetic energy of such an impact would be staggering.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 10:55pm
by Batman
No it wouldn't because Warp is a non-Newtonian maneuver. We have no fucking clue what if any kinetic energy it would impart.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-29 11:17pm
by Tribble
Batman wrote:And your opinion is irrelevant. All that canonically happens is Riker ordering Warp power and equally canonically a Warp core going boom is bad mojo so Riker wanting to magnify the boom as much as possible makes sense. But by all means present me with the evidence that shows Riker actually wanted to go to Warp.
To be specific, here is the teleplay (I can't find the televised scene online atm):
RIKER
Mister Crusher, ready a collision
course with the Borg ship...
Wesley reacts, turns and looks for confirmation...
Repeating --
RIKER
You heard me. A collision
course.
WESLEY
Yessir.
RIKER
Mister La Forge, prepare to go
to warp power...
IMO Riker's statement is vague enough that it's just as easy to interpret it (especially when combined with the previous order) as meaning that he wants the E-D to go to warp (or at least try to use the warp field to break the Borg's tractor beam) as it is Riker reminding Geordi to turn on the engines on just incase he had turned them off for some reason without telling anyone. Note he did not say something like "prepare to go to
maximum warp power" which would at least indicate that the warp engines were already on and he wanted them throttled up.
No it wouldn't because Warp is a non-Newtonian maneuver. We have no fucking clue what if any kinetic energy it would impart.
You're forgetting the Borg's tractor beam lock. I'm sure "warp-core going boom" was part of RIker's plan. But how was that plan going to work
without trying to do something like go to warp (or at least generate a warp field) given that previous encounters had shown that the impulse engines were not strong enough to break free of the Borg tractor beam and the E-D couldn't disable the emitter?
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 04:31am
by Prometheus Unbound
The tractor beam couldn't be broken by impulse or warp (they tried warp 8 in Q who and couldnt break it).
Whatever his plan was, the Enterprise wouldn't have moved in any event. Not sure what the collision course was for - the ship couldnt even turn in place.
That said, I always assumed it was to ram them at warp, yes. Just my interpretation of it. Maybe it was an impulse ram with an overloading warp core as a "grenade" so to speak, but... I don't know how he expected to do that at impulse. He knew they couldn't move.
Bad writing?
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 06:17am
by Crazedwraith
Batman wrote:And your opinion is irrelevant. All that canonically happens is Riker ordering Warp power and equally canonically a Warp core going boom is bad mojo so Riker wanting to magnify the boom as much as possible makes sense. But by all means present me with the evidence that shows Riker actually wanted to go to Warp.
Your opinion is equally irrelevant. All that
canonically happens is Riker ordering Warp
power. Nothing more. Actually he orders La Forge to prepare to go to warp power.
It is a really ambiguous command because a command for warp speed is usually 'go to warp zxy [5,9,maximum]' and a command for power is usually 'warp power to xyz [shields,phasers]'. Riker's is a little of both.
But a few points in favour of ramming. 1) He ordered a collision course and then prepare for warp power suggesting the two are linked. 2) the collision course and warp are prepare to do orders no do. If he just wanted to be boomy he could order it right away. 3) He's stuck in a tractor beam. He can't escape at impulse. He might not be able to escape at max warp but there's at least a chance there.
ETA: Also Riker never finishes his orders, He's interrupted by the whole 'sleep bit' so the warp power could be for something else entirely. Warp power to shields to block the tractor, warp power to the phasers to punch out the emitter. No shame in saying we just don't know.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 06:50am
by Tribble
Hmmm, IIRC the tractor beam was locked onto the saucer section and as Prometheus pointed out even warp 8+ would not be sufficient to break it. The only way a collision course might have worked is if they had performed a saucer separation and rammed the Cube with the drive section before the Cube switched targets. No evidence to suggest Riker was going to do that... so ya, his final commands were pretty much useless.
EDIT: Now that I think of it, Picard had ordered something like "engines full reverse" in BOBW Part 1 and the E-D remained in place until they managed to damage the emitter, if we were to assume the command included the warp drive, the E-D using max warp power couldn't break the Cube's beam.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 09:24am
by Prometheus Unbound
Tribble wrote:
EDIT: Now that I think of it, Picard had ordered something like "engines full reverse" in BOBW Part 1 and the E-D remained in place until they managed to damage the emitter, if we were to assume the command included the warp drive, the E-D using max warp power couldn't break the Cube's beam.
It's Riker - he orders "Reverse Engines".
We hear Geordi on comms saying "Full Reverse!" (as in aye aye)
It cuts to him, he goes over to the warp core computer area and pushes buttons. The warp reactor starts pulsing faster and faster. He then says "We're not movin'."
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 10:23am
by Lord Revan
it's possible that they were redirecting warp power to the impulse drive to give it a boost, however we cannot know for sure with evidence we got avaible.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 10:42pm
by Rhadamantus
Lord Revan wrote:it's possible that they were redirecting warp power to the impulse drive to give it a boost, however we cannot know for sure with evidence we got avaible.
That would be a rather tortured interpretation.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-04-30 10:58pm
by Lord Revan
Rhadamantus wrote:Lord Revan wrote:it's possible that they were redirecting warp power to the impulse drive to give it a boost, however we cannot know for sure with evidence we got avaible.
That would be a rather tortured interpretation.
well that power from the Warp Core has to go somewhere and in the end the Warp Core is just a matter/anti-matter reactor that produces "x" watts of power (where x is the power generation of the core), there's nothing that says that power needs to be used in the Warp Engines. I don't see why boosting the Impulse engines is so such an odd thing again there's nothing that says that cannot be done nor are the Impulse engines nothing exotic that demand a special powerplants unique to them.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-05-01 12:00am
by U.P. Cinnabar
Perhaps he wanted to use that warp power to boost the strength of the Love Boat-D's structural integrity field, to give the old girl a little more oomph, when she slammed into the Borg cube.
Maybe he wanted to do a one-second warp jump, like he did with the Hathaway in "Peak Performance," in hopes of being able to drop out of warp inside the cube, and somehow damage it that way, though, amongst other issues, there's no way he'd be able to time it to get the desired result.
He may have even wanted that warp power to supercharge/overload the phasers, in hopes the boosted phasers could, through sheer brute force, knock out the tractor beam long enough for the Love Boat-D to execute the time-honored "run like hell" maneuver.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-05-01 06:44am
by Prometheus Unbound
Maybe he was desperate and thought "ahh fuck it".
My interpretation was, considering the warp core was about to get cut in half, he was attempting to engage maximum warp with a view to ramming the Cube, if possible. This was literally a last ditch attempt. It probably wouldn't have worked.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-05-01 07:15am
by U.P. Cinnabar
Prometheus Unbound wrote:Maybe he was desperate and thought "ahh fuck it".
My interpretation was, considering the warp core was about to get cut in half, he was attempting to engage maximum warp with a view to ramming the Cube, if possible. This was literally a last ditch attempt. It probably wouldn't have worked.
Given his utter and complete incompetence at the conn in
Generations, it's entirely possible that Riker simply
was desperate, and thought "ahh, fuck it," as you suggested.
Re: Carriers in Star Trek
Posted: 2016-05-01 07:41am
by Crazedwraith
You know pointlessly slagging off the show i nevery post is no longer required even if this is a vs forum.