Lakota question

Deep Space Nine
Post Reply
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Lakota question

Post by Meste17 »

So I have watched the episodes "Homefront"/"Paradise Lost," and I have found the prospect of the refit on the USS Lakota quite interesting. However, if they could do that to the Lakota, isn't it possible that they would be able to do that to other Federation starships? I mean what if they decided to do the exact same refit on the Enterprise-E, as far as giving it even more firepower? I would most definitely like to see a Galaxy or Ambassador class refitted in such a way ....
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Lakota question

Post by Captain Seafort »

The Lakota refit involved giving her modern phasers and QTs to bring her up to spec, effectively a Starfleet equivalent of the rebuilds Italian battleships got in the 1930s. The more modern ships have already got those weapons, obviating the need for such a refit. The fact that we never saw another Ex with Lakota/E-B-type features probably indicates that the refit was a failure in some way, probably by virtue of being prohibitively expensive to apply fleet-wide, given how effective she was against the Defiant.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Lakota question

Post by Meste17 »

Captain Seafort wrote:The Lakota refit involved giving her modern phasers and QTs to bring her up to spec, effectively a Starfleet equivalent of the rebuilds Italian battleships got in the 1930s. The more modern ships have already got those weapons, obviating the need for such a refit. The fact that we never saw another Ex with Lakota/E-B-type features probably indicates that the refit was a failure in some way, probably by virtue of being prohibitively expensive to apply fleet-wide, given how effective she was against the Defiant.
Actually that might be only partially true. What I read on the site was that the Lakota was deemed too ineffective, considering how she fared against the Defiant. To quote the DITL site, "it is also actually easier to build a whole new Defiant class vessel than to upgrade an Excelsior class to Lakota standard." That therefore might have been the reason that they ended the refit process on the Lakota once and for all. However, that is not to say that Starfleet probably would not refit Mirandas in such a manner. Even the Enterprise, in AGT, was heavily modified to sport more strength and firepower (granted that was in an alternate future timeline, but I digress.)
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Lakota question

Post by Captain Seafort »

Meste17 wrote:However, that is not to say that Starfleet probably would not refit Mirandas in such a manner.
Mirandas are obsolete. They're equivalent to the US four-stacker destroyers the Royal Navy operated in the second world war - useful for performing third- and fourth-line duties, but they have absolutely no business going anywhere near a major operation, as the ease with which the Dominion ships swatted them aside whenever they were engaged demonstrated. The consumption of time, money and resources in trying to turn them into something other than a death trap would be an exercise in wasteful futility.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Lakota question

Post by Graham Kennedy »

I'm sure Starfleet does continually refit and upgrade their ships, sometimes in major ways - look at how they refitted the Constitutions, essentially rebuilding them into wholly new ships. That's a far greater upgrade than the Lakota got.

But there is only so much effectiveness you're going to get out of that. Upgrade the Lakota and you have modern weapons - but they're still on a hull that's potentially 60+ years old, and that comes with problems.

Now we can only speculate, but here's a scenario that MIGHT have held true for the Lakota. Think of this as a critical report on the effectiveness of the upgraded ship :

1) The structural support around the newly installed weapons systems was found to be incapable of supporting the additional stresses of firing those systems. This was particularly pronounced with regards to the quantum torpedo tubes, which produce far higher recoil forces than the old photon torpedo tubes the ships mounted. This problem was overcome by selective reinforcement of the structural integrity field system.

2) Reinforcement of the SIF system involved replacement of some 20 SIF generator modules, 12 field flow guidepaths, 240 power relays, 12 junction room management consoles, and all four SIF computer control subprocessor assemblies.

3) The power requirements of the new weapons necessitated replacement of several hundred metres of power transfer conduits and their supporting hardware.

4) In-service testing has found that the warp core of the Excelsior subclass is only marginally capable of supporting the refit. Specifically, when operating under combat conditions the warp core is not able to simultaneously power the shields, phasers and torpedoes. The practice was adopted of briefly reducing the shield strength to 70% when firing either weapon, or 40% when firing both simultaneously. The chief concern of this approach is that the ship is therefore very vulnerable to taking damage if hit whilst firing.

5) Replacement of the warp core has been considered for this design. However, all existing replacement warp core candidates are of significantly larger size, and all require significant secondary systems which the Excelsior design does not have - a transkinetic chamber to break down residual antimatter, radiometric converters to process the theta radiation, tellerium injectors, a level 5 trilithium resin waste stabiliser. The engineering growth space is not available to install such a system, requiring existing compartments and systems in the vicinity of main engineering to be sacrificed. However, both the main structural integrity field generators and the main inertial dampening field generator are located in these compartments. As these are essential to the operation of the ship, they would need to be moved rather than sacrificed.

In addition, no modern candidate for a replacement warp core is compatible with the Excelsior's existing antimatter pods. As with all pods of that era, the Excelsior system delivers antimatter to the core in "pulsed flow packets" at a maximum rate of two packets per second. All replacement candidates are "continuous flow stream" models. This would require replacing the antimatter pods with more modern systems.

Current estimates are that the knock-on effects of these upgrades would require approximately 55-65% of the engineering hull to be completely rebuilt. All growth margin would need to be sacrificed, along with half of the main fabrication units and 60% of the replicator matter storage tanks, one third of the shuttlecraft support areas, and four cargo bays. This would severely curtail the ability of the ship to self-support over long duration missions, increasing the frequency of required spacedock stops from once per two years to once per four months.

6) The existing computer system on board the Lakota was found to be barely adequate to the task of controlling the new systems. It was not uncommon for non-essential systems to suffer service dropouts even during routine operation. During battle, most non-essential systems had to be placed into standby mode. Note that should the warp core replacement proceed, the existing core would be inadequate for even routine use. Replacement of the entire computer system along with the entire data network would likely be the only viable option in this scenario.

And so on. In other words, you've got a ship that has modern guns on it and can fire them. Great! But... it can barely power them. It can barely even run right going from place to place. Fixing those problems would mean rebuilding half the ship. And it STILL wouldn't be much good because it's now so overloaded with stuff it was never designed for that it has to pit stop every few months for supplies. So you've got a heavy hitting ship that's good for defending a fixed point or limping from Starbase to Starbase within the Federation - and if you want it to be anything more, you need to put so much effort into it that you may as well just have the shipyards crank out another Defiant or Intrepid or Akira.

Now like I said, I just made those problems up as examples - though I'll note that all those extra systems I mentioned going with the warp core in point 5? Those are ALL real, actual canonical elements of a modern warp core taken from various episodes. But my point is, there is a REASON why real world navies don't just keep using the exact same hull design and sticking modern weapons onto it all the time. We do not see anybody suggesting that you could take this :

Image

And replace the sails with a nuclear propulsion system, replace the cannon with modern missile launchers, and sail it around the sea as a viable warship design. Because the idea is ultimately ridiculous.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Lakota question

Post by McAvoy »

It does seem like the design of the ships seem to have a plateau. Only with the addition of total new technologies like stealth and the rail guns I could see the ship design change dramatically.

Lakota actually I think would be the equivalent of the upgrade of the Iowa to 1980 standards. Missiles, the Phalanx and improved radar. Just just super expensive for a show piece. I mean sure a battleship would withstand so much more than a destroyer but what would happen if those ships were damaged.

Lakota I think we a combination of time and effort. Not enough time to do the fleet, the amount of effort not worth it. It's not like they take up drydock space. Those docks we see probably can be made within a week.
Last edited by McAvoy on Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Lakota question

Post by Mikey »

Exactly... the ship is defined by the type of ship, not by the individual features. An old ship with bigger guns than it had before is still, in the final analysis, an old ship.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Lakota question

Post by Meste17 »

And therefore .... BOOM! Instant target practice? Nothing more?
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Lakota question

Post by Mikey »

Meste17 wrote:And therefore .... BOOM! Instant target practice? Nothing more?
No, that's not the point. The Lakota upfit didn't prove useless, or unworkable - just less useful and less workable than a new class which was designed from the keel up to utilize the newest tech.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Lakota question

Post by Meste17 »

Mikey wrote:
Meste17 wrote:And therefore .... BOOM! Instant target practice? Nothing more?
No, that's not the point. The Lakota upfit didn't prove useless, or unworkable - just less useful and less workable than a new class which was designed from the keel up to utilize the newest tech.
So while it MAY be possible, with the Lakota being the example, there are limits as to how many times and even HOW you would refit such a ship?
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Lakota question

Post by Mikey »

Of course. When your return on investment is less for an upfit than for a new ship, you go with the new ship.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Post Reply