New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

The Next Generation
Post Reply

Number of crew members? (this is standard not maximum)

-<700
1
25%
-700-1000
1
25%
-1000-1500
1
25%
-1500>
1
25%
 
Total votes: 4
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 581
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Meste17 »

As we know, Starfleet vessels tend to try to pack them in as much as possible, though that is not ALWAYS the case with the Enterprise. Still, the fact remains that a starship (sometimes) can not function without a crew, and this Enterprise is no exception. So my question for you is.....up above.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6243
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by McAvoy »

Actually they do not pack them in that much. A Galaxy class ship carries a thousand people including civilians. Which means the actual crew size is much less. The GCS is a far larger ship than a Nimitz class or any other modern naval ship. Yet those ships carry more.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Teaos »

Yeah starfleet vessels have a very small crew.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 581
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Meste17 »

Okay, with that in mind, how many Marines do you see on this starship? I think 300 sounds about right, do you agree?
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Teaos »

Ummm...

1) Star Fleet doesnt have Marines in the latter years. See Seige of AR159 (or something like that).

2) 300 is fucking tiny.

3) Either its a troop ship or it isnt. From what you said, it isnt, so 0 would be your answer.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 581
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Meste17 »

Teaos wrote:Ummm...

1) Star Fleet doesnt have Marines in the latter years. See Seige of AR159 (or something like that).

2) 300 is fucking tiny.

3) Either its a troop ship or it isnt. From what you said, it isnt, so 0 would be your answer.

Ummm...

1) Starfleet DID use to. PLUS there WERE references to Ground Forces. See the First Battle of Chintoka, most specifically the aftermath.

2) How many would you see if it is a troop ship.

3) Okay then I guess I DO have my answer then.
User avatar
Tinadrin Chelnor
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 3:11 am
Location: Pendroca IV

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Tinadrin Chelnor »

Meste17 wrote:Ummm...

1) Starfleet DID use to. PLUS there WERE references to Ground Forces. See the First Battle of Chintoka, most specifically the aftermath.

2) How many would you see if it is a troop ship.

3) Okay then I guess I DO have my answer then.
Aye, but Teaos' point was that they didn't in the latter years (Post-Enterprise).

For all we know, the Klingon Empire could have provided the troops for the Chin'toka landings, although if I recall there was mention of Federation troop ships in DS9. I don't think most Starfleet troops would have troops/marines as standard.
"No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against that power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand."
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Teaos »

A "troop ship" in DS9 would most likely just be referencing a normal starfleet troop carrying additional reinforcements.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6243
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by McAvoy »

There is no need to carry Marines. What would they do for majority of the time spent on board researching and exploring?
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Atekimogus
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1193
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:10 pm
Location: Vienna

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Atekimogus »

McAvoy wrote:There is no need to carry Marines. What would they do for majority of the time spent on board researching and exploring?
Training I suppose......the same basically as they'd do planetside when not in a war.

That being said, I too see no need for them to carry Marines. Considering their modus operandi I hardly see any use for them during peace-time and if they are even worried that their ships might "look" threatening, then I guess carrying a few companies of Marines is out of the question.

Marines are purley an offensive weapon, wheras the ships security should be able to handle the defensive of the ship itself in case of boarding actions. (Let's be honest, realistically, considering force fields and transporters, in a semi-realistic setting you won't even need security guards, just a guy pressing a few buttons raising force fields and/or beam boarders back into space or brig).
I'm Commander Shepard and this is my favorite store on the Citadel.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6243
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by McAvoy »

Technically if a group of bad guys were to beam aboard or whatever onto a Federation ship I expect them to come prepared. I expect them to have body armor, gizmos that prevent them from beaming out, more gizmos for situations like forcefields and detecting them, and heavier weapons than a hand phaser. Hell this is the future so maybe ego skeletons with that body armor to increase strength.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by Teaos »

I'd send over holograms with mobile emmiters. Almost indestructible, killing machines.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6243
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: New Enterprise Look - Part IV: Crew accommodations

Post by McAvoy »

Or that.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Post Reply