Intrepid Class

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:33 am

The star of Voyager. The Class makes logical sense, it is a decent size for its roll.

Granted we have really only seen Voyager which has been gone through so much stuff we can't really judge the class of it. But from what we've seen it is a pretty solid ship able to hold it's own against ships larger than it.

The only real problem I have with it apart from the swinging nacelles which require a lot of explanation to justifie is the ability to land.

For a ship of that size 343m long the amount of space needed to keep 3 retractable legs is rather large. The fact that it is almost never used and when it is used another option could do makes it rather pointless.

Thoughts?

MetalHead · Post by **MetalHead** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:37 am

I'll agree with you that the landing thing DID seem rather pointless. Otherwise I think the Intrepid was a revelation in starfleet design - high speed and reactor endurance, excellent armament for its size, with a good diplomatic and exploration ability.

I reckon that the Intrepid was designed as some sort of research ship, similar to the Nova, though with the Dominion war fresh in the designers minds - with the landing struts, she can act as a base for troops...a well defended base!

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:51 am

Hmm the troop landing thing is a good idea. Although I can only ever see that being used in war and it is kind of wasteful to add it as a feature to all the ships. Just modify them as needed.

I also think the ship has a nice look. I never really like the form of the Galaxy and the Defiant was just ugly. I nice change to have a good looking ship be the star of the show.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:34 pm

Teaos wrote:Hmm the troop landing thing is a good idea. Although I can only ever see that being used in war and it is kind of wasteful to add it as a feature to all the ships. Just modify them as needed.

It's useful to have generally, for rapid loading and unloading from a planet's surface. Take "Ensigns of Command" - if a landable ship had been available with sufficient space, problem of evacuating the colonists before the Shelak (sp?) showed up wouldn't have been a problem.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:28 pm

It was alright. It would serve as a nice scout ship due to its speed. It has many of the same problems as many other Federation ships have, but then that says more about Starfleet than the Intrepid class.

One problem. The legs we see Voyager using are far to small and thin to possibly hold the weight of the ship normally. The only way I see this working is if some sort of anti-gravity system is used to lessen the weight. This causes the problem that you would need to keep these systems turned on constantly to simply stop the ship crushing itself. Which isn't a great idea.

with the landing struts, she can act as a base for troops...a well defended base!

But the only way for troops to get in and out of the ship is via the transporters, so there would be no advantage over having the ship in orbit. Thus the only advantage you would get is heavy weapon support (which the Federation has no ground based versions of). Even then, having the vessel on the ground negates its support abilities as it can no longer fire over the horrizon, as well as leaving it vulnerable to enemy heavy weapons. Having the ship in orbit would allow it to strike all over the planet with little threat from enemy ground fire.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:33 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:
It's useful to have generally, for rapid loading and unloading from a planet's surface. Take "Ensigns of Command" - if a landable ship had been available with sufficient space, problem of evacuating the colonists before the Shelak (sp?) showed up wouldn't have been a problem.

Too bad they couldn't have landed the saucer and loaded it up and then just took off when they were done.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:47 pm

Regarding the moving warp nacelles, I thought about it for a while and it seems pretty simple to me - during warp the nacelles move in tiny amounts - maybe one degree at the most. It may not seem like much, but when you're going over a billion kph and having to manipulate space time so precisely, it could be a huge amount.

And the landing struts been too small? I find that a bit hard to believe, these are not modern day materials they are made of, and the hull (and presumably the landing struts) are made of things far, far stronger than anything we could get close to nowadays.
Think of it this way - a nuclear warhead of 50 megaton power (ie a photon torpedo), would only create a hull breach through maybe 1 metre of this metal over an area of maybe 10 square metres.
Bunkers that are underneath 100m of solid rock would be obliterated by this, but just a metre of hull can withstand this.

I'm not sure on this part, but was it not possible for the crew of Voyager to leave the ship via the struts? Like a little stairwell and a door at the bottom? Sounds slightly crude but it would do the job

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:55 pm

And the landing struts been too small? I find that a bit hard to believe, these are not modern day materials they are made of, and the hull (and presumably the landing struts) are made of things far, far stronger than anything we could get close to nowadays.

The materials they use to make them would have to be magnatudes of times stronger than anything we use today. And we have no evidence of these materials being this strong.

Think of it this way - a nuclear warhead of 50 megaton power (ie a photon torpedo), would only create a hull breach through maybe 1 metre of this metal over an area of maybe 10 square metres.

Where, exactly, do we hear this?

Sounds slightly crude but it would do the job

One of the problems with Trek is that they never use any simple sollutions. Even though simple sollutions are, by far, the best. Its just pure stupidity on behalf of Stafleet. When was the last time you saw anyone with a hammer in that show?

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:14 pm

E=MC^2. A photon torpedo carried 3kg of reactant.
That gives 2.8*10^17 joules of energy, which is (admittedly), slightly over my 50 megaton approximation, at about 60 megatons (though it does reinforce my fact more).

The largest ever nuclear bomb let off, the Tsar bomb, at 50 megatons (thus roughly equivelent to a photon torpedo), create a fireball which created an absolute destruction and incineration for everything with a 5km radius. The blast carried several times further than this, which created very nearly absolute desctruction.

So, that is what would happen if a photon torpedo hit the ground (around that anyway, the same order of magnitude at the very least).
As we see often on screen, when this 60 megaton explosive gives a direct hull impact, there is of couse a hull breach, but the size is really around 10 square metres; we see this in Generations, and especially so in Nemesis, where the view screen is blown out by a photon torpedo - which is about this 10 square metres.

And regarding stupidity of Starfleet, I couldn't agree more. How often did we see the transporters go down, and everyone seems to forget the 20 or so shuttlecraft in the shuttlebays each with transporters? Especially gets me in Nemesis.

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:00 pm

One problem. The legs we see Voyager using are far to small and thin to possibly hold the weight of the ship normally.

The SIF could handle that. It can increase material strengh by a lot it would seem.

Thorin there is a rather long thread on the swinging Nacelles in this forum with all our thoughts on that if you wanna check it out.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:11 pm

I read that a while back, but I decided not to post there as I didn't to bump an old thread. I also saw someone posted my same idea (that there are only miniscule changes in the nacelles at warp), however it was completely ignored.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:22 pm

As we see often on screen, when this 60 megaton explosive gives a direct hull impact, there is of couse a hull breach, but the size is really around 10 square metres; we see this in Generations, and especially so in Nemesis, where the view screen is blown out by a photon torpedo - which is about this 10 square metres.

There is one major problem with this. A lot of the time the hit penetrates the shield and then causes damage. This means that a lot of the explosive power would be used on the shield. Furthermore, the blast is omni-directional. This means that the entire force of the weapon would not be imparted on the target, best case scenario would have the ship being hit with 30 MT, probably a lot less.

The SIF could handle that. It can increase material strengh by a lot it would seem.

But the you are rellying on an active system to stop your ship being crushed under its own weight! Do you see the problem with this?

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:44 pm

If you think there is any risk to the SIF going down don't land.

Seems to be a pretty simple solution.

I can't recal anytime we the SIF has dropped on a ship exept when its destroyed.

Thorin · Post by **Thorin** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:59 pm

Admittedly Rochey 60 megaton is an absolute upperlimit. However as I said, it is at least on that order of magnitude.

But your point about it hitting the shields - that is impossible. The torpedo either explodes or it does not. It cannot explode "a little" on the shields, break through, then explode the rest on the hull. It is either all on one or the other. If anti matter is released it will annhiliate the matter, and thus it may only explode or give off energy once, as the anti matter cannot be retained if a little has already exploded - as the reaction has already started.
Even if this were not the case, which it has to be, then we have seen quite a few times up close that the torpedo has not hit any shields and hit the hull straight off - seen a good few times in Voyager episodes (with the Borg), Generations, and Nemesis.

So we can see that this metal hull plating is extremely strong and resistant for it to withstand (at least relatively) such a huge blast.

And regarding the SIF, things like that are always being relied on to stop destruction (or death). Life support - an active system that if disabled would lead to everyones death. Inertial dampers - they counteract acceleration or deceleration. Any acceleration above 200m/s/s would kill humans - as these ships seem to reach the speed of light in a second (even 1000c in another second), it is a million times more than the human body can withstand. The inertial dampers use gravitons (gravity acts on the same principle as acceleration and inertia) to counteract the acceleration. While you are accelerating, you are pushed backwards. The inertial dampers use "gravity" to then push you back forwards. If these were to fail or overload at absolutely any time of speeds over that which manoeuvreing thrusters can reach, then everyone would be crushed instantly to death.
So in this case, you are quite literally relying on an active system to stop the ship being crushed under its own weight.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:00 pm

If you think there is any risk to the SIF going down don't land.

If you designed your ship inteligently you wouldn't need this precaution.

I can't recal anytime we the SIF has dropped on a ship exept when its destroyed.

Its an active system, ergo, it can fail. Whether we see it often or not is beside the point, it can fail.