StarDestroyer.Net BBS

i was wondering why the federation and all the other empires (klingons, romulans....) in star trek don´t have fighters. wouldn´t a fleet of fighters be much more effective when defending federation systems than these heavy, bad manuverable enterprise like vessels? i understand that these large ships are needed for exploration of the universe, but why don´t they simply make carriers which always have a bunch of fighters with them for defence?

in case this has already been discussed, could someone point me to that thread?

cya

It has been discussed before but i coyuldn't find it on search.

Star Trek does indeed have fighters. See Sacrifice of Angels.
How ever Feds been pasifistic and wussy in nature they are not mass-porduced or widely used.

EDIT: On further searching of found this thread. Not excalty what you are asking for but probs what i was thinking of.

hey, thank´s, man.

Here's the previous thread on it.

Before the FASA Star Trek RPG stuff was classified 'non-canon', it had designed for Federation, Klingon and Romulan Gunboasts and cutters in it, I'd call them fighters.

(especially the Scorpio Class Corvette)

salm wrote:i was wondering why the federation and all the other empires (klingons, romulans....) in star trek don´t have fighters. wouldn´t a fleet of fighters be much more effective when defending federation systems than these heavy, bad manuverable enterprise like vessels? i understand that these large ships are needed for exploration of the universe, but why don´t they simply make carriers which always have a bunch of fighters with them for defence?

in case this has already been discussed, could someone point me to that thread?

cya

In a nut shell, ST fighters would need large numbers to take down a ship. They can carry micro torpedoes but would need a shit load to be a threat to a capital class ship. There comes a point when you need so many fighters and a carrier big enough to carry them that it is no longer worth it to build all those fighters and instead invest in a small or medium sized warship.

Knife wrote:

salm wrote:i was wondering why the federation and all the other empires (klingons, romulans....) in star trek don´t have fighters. wouldn´t a fleet of fighters be much more effective when defending federation systems than these heavy, bad manuverable enterprise like vessels? i understand that these large ships are needed for exploration of the universe, but why don´t they simply make carriers which always have a bunch of fighters with them for defence?

in case this has already been discussed, could someone point me to that thread?

cya

In a nut shell, ST fighters would need large numbers to take down a ship. They can carry micro torpedoes but would need a shit load to be a threat to a capital class ship. There comes a point when you need so many fighters and a carrier big enough to carry them that it is no longer worth it to build all those fighters and instead invest in a small or medium sized warship.

Of course, that only applies when dealing with non-plot critical craft. Fighter-sized vessels like the Delta Flyer that are a recurring plot device seem to be able to take on their mother ships if needed.

Knife wrote:

salm wrote:i was wondering why the federation and all the other empires (klingons, romulans....) in star trek don´t have fighters. wouldn´t a fleet of fighters be much more effective when defending federation systems than these heavy, bad manuverable enterprise like vessels? i understand that these large ships are needed for exploration of the universe, but why don´t they simply make carriers which always have a bunch of fighters with them for defence?

in case this has already been discussed, could someone point me to that thread?

cya

In a nut shell, ST fighters would need large numbers to take down a ship. They can carry micro torpedoes but would need a shit load to be a threat to a capital class ship. There comes a point when you need so many fighters and a carrier big enough to carry them that it is no longer worth it to build all those fighters and instead invest in a small or medium sized warship.

Incorrect. Four Tactical Fighters are sufficent to take down a Galor class ship. A dozen Tac-Fighters should be suffifent to take down something the size of a D'Deridex Warbird. According to my calculations a single Galaxy class ship could hold up to 18 Tac-Fighters and not suffer any combat degredation nor need any modifications. With 18 Tac-Fighters a GCS captian could concievably take on twice the number of ships it could normaly handle.

There is also a reason why the Federation uses fighters while no one else bothers. The Federation has the best observed beam weapon accuracy in the series. Beam wepons naturaly are the best choice for shooting down enemy fighters. Because of this very few enemies would bother throwing fighters against a Federation ship because of how quickly they would be shot down. By contrast the Federations enemies have a lower beam weapon accuracy rating and this allows the Federation to take advantage of the situation and use f fighters against these enemies.

Incorrect. Four Tactical Fighters are sufficent to take down a Galor class ship. A dozen Tac-Fighters should be suffifent to take down something the size of a D'Deridex Warbird. According to my calculations a single Galaxy class ship could hold up to 18 Tac-Fighters and not suffer any combat degredation nor need any modifications. With 18 Tac-Fighters a GCS captian could concievably take on twice the number of ships it could normaly handle.

The only time we see Tac fighters blowing up captial ships is in huge on screen battles where we have no idea how much damage the ship recieved from other Capital ships in the area.

"Concertrate all firepower on that Galon Cruiser."

There is also a reason why the Federation uses fighters while no one else bothers. The Federation has the best observed beam weapon accuracy in the series. Beam wepons naturaly are the best choice for shooting down enemy fighters. Because of this very few enemies would bother throwing fighters against a Federation ship because of how quickly they would be shot down. By contrast the Federations enemies have a lower beam weapon accuracy rating and this allows the Federation to take advantage of the situation and use f fighters against these enemies.

We know that Torpedoes>phasers. So you would intentionally give the weaker weapon to the fighters? With phasers, they'd just have to be content on picking apart and finishing off ships that Capships fucked up in the first place.

Knife wrote:

There is also a reason why the Federation uses fighters while no one else bothers. The Federation has the best observed beam weapon accuracy in the series. Beam wepons naturaly are the best choice for shooting down enemy fighters. Because of this very few enemies would bother throwing fighters against a Federation ship because of how quickly they would be shot down. By contrast the Federations enemies have a lower beam weapon accuracy rating and this allows the Federation to take advantage of the situation and use f fighters against these enemies.

We know that Torpedoes>phasers. So you would intentionally give the weaker weapon to the fighters? With phasers, they'd just have to be content on picking apart and finishing off ships that Capships fucked up in the first place.

What he's saying is that the non-feds know that thers no point in fielding fighters because phaser strip equiped capital ships use their high aquarcie to swat them from the sky before they can do any thing

Knife wrote:The only time we see Tac fighters blowing up captial ships is in huge on screen battles where we have no idea how much damage the ship recieved from other Capital ships in the area.

"Concertrate all firepower on that Galo[r] Cruiser."

Incorrect. The very start of Sacrafice Angels has Tac-Fighters taking on Cardassian ships before the two fleets even engage eachother.

We know that Torpedoes>phasers. So you would intentionally give the weaker weapon to the fighters? With phasers, they'd just have to be content on picking apart and finishing off ships that Capships fucked up in the first place.

Did you even bother reading what I said? Beam weapons have the best accuracy and are msot well suited for taking down fighters. Furthermore torpedos are a limited stock heavy weapon. Why the fuck would you waste them on a small fighter when beam weapons can kill them just as easily and have significantly higher accuracy.

Did you even bother reading what I said? Beam weapons have the best accuracy and are msot well suited for taking down fighters. Furthermore torpedos are a limited stock heavy weapon. Why the fuck would you waste them on a small fighter when beam weapons can kill them just as easily and have significantly higher accuracy.

Sorry, misunderstood. I was thinking you said to put the phasers on the tac fighters for their primary weapon.

However, torpedeos would be better for anti fighter defense in that they have a higher yeild. As a point defense weapon, I wouldnt say use torpedoes but for long range anti fighter capablility......

Knife wrote:

Did you even bother reading what I said? Beam weapons have the best accuracy and are msot well suited for taking down fighters. Furthermore torpedos are a limited stock heavy weapon. Why the fuck would you waste them on a small fighter when beam weapons can kill them just as easily and have significantly higher accuracy.

Sorry, misunderstood. I was thinking you said to put the phasers on the tac fighters for their primary weapon.

However, torpedeos would be better for anti fighter defense in that they have a higher yeild. As a point defense weapon, I wouldnt say use torpedoes but for long range anti fighter capablility......

No, torpedoes do not make better anti fighter weapons because of their yeild. The fact that torpedoes have higher firepower, worse accuracy against small objects, and are of limited stock makes it VERY CLEAR that torpedoes are to be saved for use against capitalships ONLY. Beam weapons (specificaly phasers for the Federation) are more then adequate when dealing with enemy fighters. They have a higher rate of fire, their accuracy is better, and their firepower is more then adequate. Ships that can sustain hits aren't likely to be operating at full capacity and will be a diminished threat.

Alyeska wrote:

No, torpedoes do not make better anti fighter weapons because of their yeild. The fact that torpedoes have higher firepower, worse accuracy against small objects, and are of limited stock makes it VERY CLEAR that torpedoes are to be saved for use against capitalships ONLY. Beam weapons (specificaly phasers for the Federation) are more then adequate when dealing with enemy fighters. They have a higher rate of fire, their accuracy is better, and their firepower is more then adequate. Ships that can sustain hits aren't likely to be operating at full capacity and will be a diminished threat.

Sorry. Disagree. The torpedo is an area weapon in that the blast from its detonation can effect targets all around said blast. Its yeilds are significantly higher than a phaser blast at that.

Yes torpedo's are of limited stock but in starships that limited stock still seems pretty high.

Knife wrote:Sorry. Disagree. The torpedo is an area weapon in that the blast from its detonation can effect targets all around said blast. Its yeilds are significantly higher than a phaser blast at that.

Yes torpedo's are of limited stock but in starships that limited stock still seems pretty high.

Can you prove they have enough range to be of any pratcial use against fighters? They already have a lower refire rate and if your detonate them they become less powerful because each fighter is only hit by a small part of the total explossion. And who says the fighters will be flying close enough together for your idea to be of any use?

Stock seems high? Try watching Nemesis again. In large scale fleet actions torpedoes get used up very quickly. So fast that they are used sparingly in fleet combat. Which would you use your torpedoes against? A powerful ship that requires singificant firepower to take down, or some fighters moving about that are harassing you?

Remember, you have to think what combat will be like on a larger scale.

Knife wrote: Sorry. Disagree. The torpedo is an area weapon in that the blast from its detonation can effect targets all around said blast.

May be true in atmosphere, but not in deep space. The shock wave would be limited to the gas and energy produced by the torpedo casing going off. Against a ship target, it would only be valid if it hit fairly combustable material.

Yes torpedo's are of limited stock but in starships that limited stock still seems pretty high.

Remember, it's not what can be carried on the cap-ship, but what the fighter can carry before re-loading.

Can you prove they have enough range to be of any pratcial use against fighters? They already have a lower refire rate and if your detonate them they become less powerful because each fighter is only hit by a small part of the total explossion. And who says the fighters will be flying close enough together for your idea to be of any use?

Torpedoes are supposed to be the longest ranged weapon on a Fed starship. Plus they are guided weapons so dodging torpedoes is not an easy task. Torpedoes would be devastating against fighters if properly used.

Torpedoes are guided, but how well? Alyeska has a point. Beam phasers almost never miss. Torpedoes do upon occasion. And why waste a high-yield nuke on a fighter? Phasers would do just as well.

evilcat4000 wrote:

Can you prove they have enough range to be of any pratcial use against fighters? They already have a lower refire rate and if your detonate them they become less powerful because each fighter is only hit by a small part of the total explossion. And who says the fighters will be flying close enough together for your idea to be of any use?

Torpedoes are supposed to be the longest ranged weapon on a Fed starship. Plus they are guided weapons so dodging torpedoes is not an easy task. Torpedoes would be devastating against fighters if properly used.

Torpedo guidance is insufficent to hit capital ships more then 75% of the time. How well do you think torpedoes will do against smaller more manueverable targets like fighters?

On the subject of ST fighters, anybody remember that Voyager episode where the USS Voyager was attacked by "The Swarm", an alien species which didn't use any other ships above shuttlecraft size but nonetheless managed to pose a serious threat to the Voyager??

Well, if you get enough of them. I never watched Voyager much, but not because I thought it sucked. I never saw it much at all. I just don't have that much TV time, and I'd rather spend it on other things.

Peregrin Toker wrote:On the subject of ST fighters, anybody remember that Voyager episode where the USS Voyager was attacked by "The Swarm", an alien species which didn't use any other ships above shuttlecraft size but nonetheless managed to pose a serious threat to the Voyager??

It took hundreds of those small fighter ships to overwhelm Voyger. A better example would be another battle where a single squadron of fighters almost destroyed Voyger.

I'm glad that the Federation used fighters in DS9. There are some advantages that some of you might not have thought of before. The use of fighters cuts down on the need for capital ships. It takes fewer resources to build fighters so with a good infrastructure of fighter support, the Federation had a huge advantage over other allies and the Dominion. Also, the use of fighters also lowers casualties. In "Sacrifice of Angels", four fighters took down a Galor class starship and lost only one fighter. That means that instead of sending a Miranda to go up against a Galor and either get toasted or get severely damaged and losing at least a dozen or so people at least, the Federation lost only one or two people when that fighter was destroyed. And we later see another Galor get taken down by fighters, and no fighters were lost.

Furthermore, fighters are a force multiplier. If they loaded up a GCS with tactical fighters it could conceivably take on forces far superior to what it could hope to defeat currently. Getting the same effect with capital ships would require sending two or three starships together on a patrol.

Rogue 9 wrote:Furthermore, fighters are a force multiplier. If they loaded up a GCS with tactical fighters it could conceivably take on forces far superior to what it could hope to defeat currently. Getting the same effect with capital ships would require sending two or three starships together on a patrol.

Exactly. Load up the Galaxy with just 18 Peregrine Tactical Fighters and the GCS can effectively double or tripple the number of enemy ships it can take on. Tactical fighter squadrons should be equiped on all larger ships.