Page 7 of 7

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:42 pm
by Mark
Well, we KNOW that one can multiply. At least by a factor of 4.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:00 pm
by RK_Striker_JK_5
Monroe wrote:Then we will put both Sparticles inside a particle accelerator. May the best subatomic molecule win.
That's madness!

No. This is Sparticles!

:happydevil:

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:04 pm
by Lazar
Tonight, we dine in :Q

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:34 am
by Bryan Moore
Based on the whole "You're the only ship close enough" lines in ST:TMP and STV, and the fact that they had to intercept Reliant/couldn't wait for another ship to do it, we can assume it's a pretty small fleet. Notice, even, on the maps in Star Trek VI for Operation Retrieve, it was only a handful of ships available. Plus, no more than a couple dozen on that large map in Star Trek IV.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:38 am
by Mark
Space is big, and that was at the height of Federation exploration. Not hard to believe that MOST of the fleet was to far out discovering strange new worlds and all that.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:02 am
by Coalition
Mark wrote:Space is big, and that was at the height of Federation exploration. Not hard to believe that MOST of the fleet was to far out discovering strange new worlds and all that.
Discovering strange new worlds, patrolling the Klingon and Romulan borders, watching out for other threats, or simply too small to handle the issue. Put 500 ships on the Klngion border, 500 on the Romulan border, another 100 for internal exploration and border patrolling, and the Enterprise can be the only ship available in its size. Figure the Klingon and Romulan borders have their own schedules of repairs/patrols/duties, so we don't have to mess with that.

My numbers:
~1100 ships Enterprise sized (representing 25% of Starfleet's mobile firepower)
~11,000 smaller ships, maybe half the length (or less) of Enterprise), whose main job is to patrol the spacelanes, watching out for pirates, responding to small distress calls, keeping an eye on smaller civilizations that the big guys have cleared, etc (figure each has 10% of an Enterprise's firepower)(another 25% of Starfleet's mobile firepower)
~10,000 Fast strike vessels, useful for sending in sabotage teams, stealing tech, scouting territory, etc (what submarines do these days) (each is ~10% the strength of an Enterprise) (another 25% of mobile)
~10,000 ship Support fleet, basically tenders, supply ships, refuelers, etc
~25,000 ship Coast Guard for planetary patrol, interdiction, dealing with pirates. Short-range, but tough, cheap, and everywhere (4% of an Enterprise's strength per ship). (popped like a balloon if an enemy warship attacks though) (another 25%)

This is to protect 30 Homeworlds and ~30 colonies per.

For TOS, how many episodes have featured problems that would have destroyed a smaller ship? There would be ~10 times as many stories that could be told about smaller ships that handled the details so the larger ships didn't have to.

I.e. Enterprise has to protect a planet against pirate attacks. The pirates attack in smaller ships that are about half the length of a nacelle, but use several of them. If the Enterprise chases, the pirates scatter, and by Act Of Plot, they choose the right one that has the base's coordinates.

For the smaller ships, the Coast Guard units would protect the planet, the smaller Ships would chase down a few to capture and get data, but the pirate base is too well-armed for them to engage. So they interdict the base to keep any pirates from getting away, and call in the nearest Enterprise-sized ship who handles the base itself.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:30 pm
by Mikey
Agreed 100% that simple plot device and TV-worthiness mean that there is a number of frigates/destroyers/patrol boats/whatever that is an order of magnitude greater than the number of "heavy cruisers" (as the Connie was styled.) However, based on the canon comment that there are only twelve or thirteen Connies, I find it hard to believe that there are 1087 or 1088 other types of similar role and tonnage in the fleet.

To make matters worse, Kirk's comment can be more strictly interpreted to mean that there are only twelve or thirteen comparable vessels, not just referring to the Connie-class itself.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:54 pm
by Sionnach Glic
I think that'd be stretching it, though. His comment was probably in reference to the Connie class.
Personaly I'm of the opinion that Starfleet as of TOS was composed of about a thousand ships, most of which were small patrol ships or system defence ships. The Connies were the big battleships of the fleet at that time, and roamed the borders of the UFP.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:07 pm
by Mikey
Like I said, it could be interpreted that way. I agree that it's more plausible to think that he meant Connie-classes specifically. I still maintain that it stretches credibility to think that there were 12 or 13 Connies, but a thousand ships of similar tonnage.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:01 pm
by Mark
Well, the Connies were the next great breakthrough in tech. They were unique in the scientific abilities they had. Maybe smaller ships with SLIGHTLY less firepower were in greater abundance (ie Galaxy to Nebula)

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:18 pm
by Captain Seafort
Mikey wrote:Like I said, it could be interpreted that way. I agree that it's more plausible to think that he meant Connie-classes specifically. I still maintain that it stretches credibility to think that there were 12 or 13 Connies, but a thousand ships of similar tonnage.
I don't think it stretches credibility at all. In WW1 it would be entirely reasonable for the commander of a QE to state that "there are only four other like her in the fleet", despite the RN having over thirty dreadnoughts.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:13 pm
by Mikey
Captain Seafort wrote:
Mikey wrote:Like I said, it could be interpreted that way. I agree that it's more plausible to think that he meant Connie-classes specifically. I still maintain that it stretches credibility to think that there were 12 or 13 Connies, but a thousand ships of similar tonnage.
I don't think it stretches credibility at all. In WW1 it would be entirely reasonable for the commander of a QE to state that "there are only four other like her in the fleet", despite the RN having over thirty dreadnoughts.
7.5x the stated number isn't the same as 100x, even colloquially.

Re: TOS Federation Battlefleet and size

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:23 pm
by RK_Striker_JK_5
Bryan Moore wrote:Based on the whole "You're the only ship close enough" lines in ST:TMP and STV, and the fact that they had to intercept Reliant/couldn't wait for another ship to do it, we can assume it's a pretty small fleet. Notice, even, on the maps in Star Trek VI for Operation Retrieve, it was only a handful of ships available. Plus, no more than a couple dozen on that large map in Star Trek IV.
Small nitpick, but there were closer ships in STV. Just none with captains that had Kirk's experience.