To be, or yacht to be

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:44 pm

I think that's kind of the wrong end to approach it from. They carry sufficient torps for the tubes they have, just no where near the number of tubes they could. If they had more tubes they'd likely carry more torps.

Post by **Mikey** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:44 pm

Tyyr wrote:I think that's kind of the wrong end to approach it from. They carry sufficient torps for the tubes they have, just no where near the number of tubes they could. If they had more tubes they'd likely carry more torps.

I see what you're saying, but based on the available space and length of missions, by that logic they would carry far more torps even for the current number of tubes.

Tyyr · Post by **Tyyr** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:50 am

Well unless you can think up some reason why they simply can't carry more torps I think it either has to be chocked up to either:
1) They just didn't figure their ships would be involved in that much combat between stops at starbases or...
2) It's just another figure in Trek that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:56 am

Stick with option two and you'll be ok 90% of the time with Trek.

steamrunner · Post by **steamrunner** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:39 pm

You would think that the replicators could produce a large majority of torpedo parts, saving storage space for more warheads and propulsion systems...

Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:25 pm

steamrunner wrote:You would think that the replicators could produce a large majority of torpedo parts, saving storage space for more warheads and propulsion systems...

Not really, considering the fact that they can't replicate a manhole cover...

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:30 pm

Mikey wrote:
steamrunner wrote:You would think that the replicators could produce a large majority of torpedo parts, saving storage space for more warheads and propulsion systems...
Not really, considering the fact that they can't replicate a manhole cover...

Manhole cover?

Post by **Mikey** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:31 pm

Yeah, the E-D couldn't replicate a hatch.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:32 pm

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:01 pm

Yeah, IIRC they had to go to a starbase to pick up a circular chunk of metal.

Although we have seen them replicate metal objects before. So perhaps the hatch needed some weird element that couldn't be replicated, or the ship in general was running low on replicator stock.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:02 pm

Or it was simply too big.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:03 pm

Aye, they may not have large replicators to create such things.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:06 pm

Rochey wrote:Aye, they may not have large replicators to create such things.

kostmayer · Post by **kostmayer** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:23 pm

Do we have any numbers on the size / power requirements of an industrial replicator?

A room, possibly the size of a cargo bay given over to replicating could be well worth the space - I can't imagine the energy requirements would outway the energy needed to warp a Starship back to Starbase to pick up a hatch.

Or they could have just sent a Runabout.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:41 pm

They should atleast have a machine shop on board each capital ship.

To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be

Re: To be, or yacht to be