New Enterprise Look - Part XIX: Capabilities

[Meste17]

I've noticed that Star Trek has no aircraft carriers per say, however I believe in having something that would be a first on Star Trek. That being the case, this question I want to see become relevant.

P.S. Options AND opinions ARE welcome.

[Tinadrin Chelnor]

I feel that having option 1 & 2 would be irrelevant, as Multi-Vector Assault Mode would likely incorporate a Saucer Separation.

Fighters were utilized during the Dominion War (see Peregrine class), but I'm not sure about a dedicated carrier, especially for Starfleet. IMO, of course.

[Meste17]

I feel that having option 1 & 2 would be irrelevant, as Multi-Vector Assault Mode would likely incorporate a Saucer Separation.

Fighters were utilized during the Dominion War (see Peregrine class), but I'm not sure about a dedicated carrier, especially for Starfleet. IMO, of course.

So you don't think that the Enterprise should be a carrier then? Be honest.

[Tinadrin Chelnor]

So you don't think that the Enterprise should be a carrier then? Be honest.

I am always honest. As I said, it doesn't feel right to me.

[Teaos]

The tech in trek shows bigger usually is better and fighter just don't have enough power to count. Also thru would have a high mortality rate, which starfleet wouldn't stand for.

[Tsukiyumi]

Considering that the Prometheus could operate MVAM independently, drone fighters aren't out of the question.

[McAvoy]

The tech in trek shows bigger usually is better and fighter just don't have enough power to count. Also thru would have a high mortality rate, which starfleet wouldn't stand for.

Considering how automated Starfleet ships are, it wouldn't surprise me if they have drone fighters. Maybe those fighters we saw in DS9 were automated.

Anyway, the Enterprise should always be a ship of peace and exploration but with teeth. Not a carrier like BSG.

[Captain Seafort]

Considering how automated Starfleet ships are, it wouldn't surprise me if they have drone fighters. Maybe those fighters we saw in DS9 were automated.

Unlikely. They were the same design as the fighters Hudson's ASU was using in The Maquis, so they've probably got the same two-man crew.

[McAvoy]

Possibly. But we have seen shuttles, runabouts and even starships do maneuvers without being manned. Nothing so far as combat with the exception of the Prometheus.

We have drones that can do similar things today. Practically all of commerical planes has some form of auto pilot.

It wouldn't be a stretch to think Starfleet could use their small fighter ships as an unmanned diversion tactic perhaps brought up by the Marquis and the Dominion War. To harass enemy ships.

[Captain Seafort]

Possibly. But we have seen shuttles, runabouts and even starships do maneuvers without being manned. Nothing so far as combat with the exception of the Prometheus.

Precisely my point - their standard AI is good enough to fly a preprogrammed course or execute standard manoeuvres, but not good enough to really fight. Given that both Data and more importantly the Doctor (after what must have been a pretty simple upgrade) are pretty good tacticians, it's probably a deliberate limitation imposed after Starfleet got its fingers burnt by the M-5 fiasco.

[Meste17]

The tech in trek shows bigger usually is better and fighter just don't have enough power to count. Also thru would have a high mortality rate, which starfleet wouldn't stand for.

Considering how automated Starfleet ships are, it wouldn't surprise me if they have drone fighters. Maybe those fighters we saw in DS9 were automated.

Anyway, the Enterprise should always be a ship of peace and exploration but with teeth. Not a carrier like BSG.

You're forgetting 2 things though:

1. The REAL LIFE USS Enterprise (or at the very least the latest 3) WERE aircraft carriers. The Enterprise is Star Trek is SUPPOSED to be a continuation of that line of ships with that name (INCLUDING those aircraft carriers).

2. Even if not, EVERY science fiction (look at Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica and Babylon 5 for example) has ALWAYS had fighters to supplement their mother ships. Star Trek has had shuttles. Why not fighters? Besides, why should Star Trek not have fighters JUST to protect their mother ships?

I'm not saying that Star Trek should MIMIC ships from other series. I'm just saying why should Star Trek be the ONLY sci-fi series at a disadvantage? Just because the Enterprise-D managed to take out sentry pods the size of fighters? That may be true, but what if aliens (say the Klingons or the Romulans OR EVEN THE CARDASSIANS FOR THAT MATTER!) decided to take matters into their own hands and build starfighters to help their mother ships take out Federation starships?

[Captain Seafort]

1. The REAL LIFE USS Enterprise (or at the very least the latest 3) WERE aircraft carriers. The Enterprise is Star Trek is SUPPOSED to be a continuation of that line of ships with that name (INCLUDING those aircraft carriers).

So what? Sure, the last two USS Enterprises have been carriers, but that's simply due to the nature of naval warfare over the last 70 years.

2. Even if not, EVERY science fiction (look at Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica and Babylon 5 for example) has ALWAYS had fighters to supplement their mother ships. Star Trek has had shuttles. Why not fighters? Besides, why should Star Trek not have fighters JUST to protect their mother ships?

Simple - the nature of warfare in those universes is such that fighters can be effective in sufficiently common circumstances as to make their deployment worthwhile. This is not the case in Trek.

[Tinadrin Chelnor]

I'm not saying that Star Trek should MIMIC ships from other series. I'm just saying why should Star Trek be the ONLY sci-fi series at a disadvantage?

The lack of fighters in Star Trek does not equate to a disadvantage, it is merely that the technology or some other situation in that particular universe doesn't warrant the use of fighters.

Also, just because several of the ships named Enterprise during the 20th and 21st centuries happened to be aircraft carriers, doesn't mean a thing. The NX-01 wasn't an aircraft carrier, nor were the NCC-1701, A, B, C, D, or E. The name is simply reserved for a high-profile or flag ship.

[Captain Seafort]

The name is simply reserved for a high-profile or flag ship.

I wouldn't even go that far - the E-nil was only one deep-range explorer among many, and the E-A was verging on obsolescence when she was commissioned.

[Tinadrin Chelnor]

The name is simply reserved for a high-profile or flag ship.

I wouldn't even go that far - the E-nil was only one deep-range explorer among many, and the E-A was verging on obsolescence when she was commissioned.

Well, to be fair, the E-Nil was original supposedly one of 12 vessels of the class, and they were considered frontline vessels.

From what I recall of the E-A, I believe I read somewhere that she was supposed to be the Yorktown, but was commissioned as Enterprise after the previous ship was lost. Obviously they could have simply kept the name for a newer ship, but guess they wanted Kirk back in command asap or something.