DS9 in Abrams verse

Deep Space Nine
Sonic Glitch
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6026
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 2:11 am
Location: Any ol' place here on Earth or in space. You pick the century and I'll pick the spot

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Sonic Glitch »

Tsukiyumi wrote:Nah, 2389 - 2258 = 131 years.
129 as given by Spock, "129 years from now, a star will explode and threaten to destroy the galaxy."
"All this has happened before --"
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
User avatar
Jim
Captain
Captain
Posts: 1907
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:32 pm
Location: Pittsburgh
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Jim »

Tsukiyumi wrote:My bad, I guess it would be like a modern cargo ship vs a ship of the line from 1880. Still a one-sided affair with modern weapons.
Does a modern cargo cargo ship have anything more than small arms?
Ugh... do not thump the Book of G'Quan...
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tsukiyumi »

That's why I said "outfitted with modern naval guns". Just a pair of Mark 45s would toast anything from the 1800's. The Narada, even discounting the comics, was obviously up-gunned at some point, unless the Romulans like to arm their mining ships to the teeth.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Sonic Glitch wrote:
Tsukiyumi wrote:Nah, 2389 - 2258 = 131 years.
129 as given by Spock, "129 years from now, a star will explode and threaten to destroy the galaxy."
Ah, okay. So 2387 - 2258.

2013 - 1884. Analogy stands.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tyyr »

I think in the prelude comic it's said the Narada had some Borg enhancements. The only weapons we ever saw the Narada use were those barbed torpedo/missiles. Given how they are containerized it would be child's play to strap a dozens of Harpoon missile canisters to the deck of a cargo ship. A little more work and you could install rapid fire 3" guns pretty simply as there are several varieties of those that are modular. It'd just be structurally supporting the gun module and installing and aiming console in the bridge. For a really low tech but effective short range weapon a mount to support and fire 2.75" and 5" rocket pods would be easy to cobble together. Really though, containerized Harpoon's and Exocets would be your best bet. They'd be able to hit anything in 1884 from so far away they wouldn't even know you were there. Each 4 pack of Harpoons only weighs about 3 tons and has a relatively small footprint. You could use the upper deck to launch drones from to help you spot for the Harpoons or maybe even use a radar equipped blimp UAV for long range radar coverage. You could carry a few dozen launchers on the upper deck easily and stash a couple hundred reloads in the cargo hold. Maybe 4 to 6 of those 3" guns to help discourage small torpedo boats, and you'd be hard for anything but a truly massed fleet to have any chance against.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Tyyr wrote:I think in the prelude comic it's said the Narada had some Borg enhancements. The only weapons we ever saw the Narada use were those barbed torpedo/missiles. Given how they are containerized it would be child's play to strap a dozens of Harpoon missile canisters to the deck of a cargo ship. A little more work and you could install rapid fire 3" guns pretty simply as there are several varieties of those that are modular. It'd just be structurally supporting the gun module and installing and aiming console in the bridge. For a really low tech but effective short range weapon a mount to support and fire 2.75" and 5" rocket pods would be easy to cobble together. Really though, containerized Harpoon's and Exocets would be your best bet. They'd be able to hit anything in 1884 from so far away they wouldn't even know you were there. Each 4 pack of Harpoons only weighs about 3 tons and has a relatively small footprint. You could use the upper deck to launch drones from to help you spot for the Harpoons or maybe even use a radar equipped blimp UAV for long range radar coverage. You could carry a few dozen launchers on the upper deck easily and stash a couple hundred reloads in the cargo hold. Maybe 4 to 6 of those 3" guns to help discourage small torpedo boats, and you'd be hard for anything but a truly massed fleet to have any chance against.
Exactly. A modern cargo container ship using modern weapons could take on an entire fleet of warships from 1884, and probably decimate them.

Slight point of disagreement, though: if you go slowly through the battle sequences, it seems the Narada is also firing some kind of rapid-fire pulse disruptors on several occasions.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tyyr »

I could be wrong, been a while since I've seen the movie and the barbed missiles are what stuck in my head. Still, the effect is easily replicated with containerized Harpoons and modular 3" guns.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Agreed. The analogy works. What sort of guns did warships from 1884 use? Seafort?

I'm wondering how much damage they could even do to a modern container ship's hull.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tyyr »

A lot.

Ok, Colossus class, British Ironclads of 1882 vintage. 325 ft long, ~9,400 tons. Main guns were 4 12" rifles backed up by 5 6" guns. The 12" had an effective range of 8,000 yards or about 4 and a half miles. Yeah, those guns would shoot right through a container ship's hull no problem. The problem is that a Colossus would be strictly line of sight. They have to visually spot the containership. Meanwhile the containership could use radar to locate them much farther away and it's main weapons have 50+ miles of range. So if a Colossus could get close enough it could start shooting holes in the container ship. I don't see how it could actually close with the container ship though.

Oh, and the Colossus topped out at 16.5 knots. Modern containerships can usually hit 20+ knots and our hypothetical one is probably running mostly empty.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Yeah, a container ship like the Edith Maersk has a top speed 10 knots faster than the Colossus.

Still fits the analogy; the Narada took a pounding once the neo-E was able to open up on it. Sheer size and firepower seemed to be their main advantage, just like the hypothetical battle here between the Edith Maersk and a Colossus.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tyyr »

The big thing is that most of the container ship's bulk has no bearing on it's ability to float or fight. You put a 12" shell amidship's and all it's doing is blasting containers. You'd have to nail the conning tower, the missiles themselves, or the engines to have any quick effect. On the other side the container ship gets off a single salvo of 4 to 8 missiles and blows the Colossus apart. You'd want to have the Harpoons programmed for pop up instead of slamming them into the Colossus' armor belt. These older ships pre aircraft and pre long range plunging fire had thin decks. If you could get some ships in close to the container ship, 2 miles or less so they have some hope of accuracy, you might manage to do some damage but even then the containership could inflict ruinous casualties very quickly.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tsukiyumi »

This is a fun hypothetical battle. :)

Basically, the only hope the 1884 ships have is if they can corner the container ship somewhere, close in to short range (by modern standards), and hammer it with an entire fleet's worth of firepower. Otherwise, it blows the entire British Navy away from 30-50 times their maximum range, ship after ship, before they even see it.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
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: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Teaos »

Sensors and targeting would be massivly improved as well, it would be able to fight much sooner than older ships. Computer tech would be unimaginably better.
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.
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Tyyr »

And the problem is that you have to somehow corner a ship that has a significant speed advantage (5 to 10 knots) and can see you ten times farther away than you can see it. About the only realistic chance you have is to run and hide and hope it runs out of fuel.

Honestly the gigantic container ships are just wasteful. All you really need is a few thousand tons of capacity for your weaponry. If I got to pick what I'd use I'd go for something like the Maersk B Class. Smaller, but have a top speed of 36 knots and can cruise at 29.
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: DS9 in Abrams verse

Post by Teaos »

You will never beat it in a fist fight. You have to out smart it. Have it chase down a small fleet, fill one of the ships to the brim with Antimatter, fly it close and boom.

Same thing with the modern day cargo ship back in the 1800's. Fill a few old fashioned ships up with all the explosives you can and charge it. One will get through if you send enough especially if the terrain is with you, like the English channel or straights of Gebralta.
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.
Post Reply