www.ditl.org

Graham made several mentions of kitbashes being a speculative part of a "Frankestien Fleet" of ships. I'm curious as to what you all think that the actual potential of these ships could be?

Very poor.

Slapping together bits that were not designed to go together will never give great results.

About what we saw: canon fodder.

Assuming any of them actually survived the war, realistically (for Trek that is) do you imagine any of them might remain in service? To me it seems that if a ship has been in stressful combat situations and didn't tear itself apart, it's not a complete loss, and I could most likely find some kind of use for it. What about you guys?

Might be worth it to use them for patrols, or low-priority convoy escorts. That's assuming they aren't manpower-intensive. In that case, it'd be better to scrap 'em, and re-use the materials.

I always felt kind of sorry for the nameless crew that would be posted aboard one of those cobbeled together ships. I imagine it would be hell. First, they wouldn't be the best of the best, or even the best. Most likely I see them as the average to below average officers of the fleet, with a Captain that, had there never been a war, most likely would never have even Captained a freighter. They would be thrown together on this hybrid ship, where I'm assuming nothing really works right, and keeps breaking down. Moral would REALLY be crappy on board. Tell me if you all get a different read.

There are ways around that - "You guys are the ones we need to get some decent mileage out of this monstrosity" or some such motivational nonsense. As far as the ships themselves, I'd scrap 'em and recycle the parts. Even if one survived the war, the stresses from cobbling together pieces that weren't designed as part of a whole would make them untrustworthy for regular usage, and only really (marginally) useful as ships who didn't have to go too far for too long and whose main mission objective was to provide an alternate target instead of a really useful ship.

I'd tear 'em up and turn them into spare parts.

I'd keep them until normal replacement ships are commissioned, then I'd salvage what I could and get rid of the rest.

does anyone know why so many kitbashes seem to have Intrepid-class saucer sections?

I'd guess because it is the easiest to chop up into bits and add other bits onto. Cant really do that with the Akira or others.

I'd class the Frankensteins as desperation ships. I can see them kept in service throughout the war, but I can't seriously imagine them staying in service long after. Modern components may be used to complete those ships - Intrepid saucers used to complete full Intrepids and such. But I tend to think that the modifications to kitbash them were probably severe enough that you'd be lucky to use them even for that. I imagine most would be flat out scrapped.

As for crews, at least at first I tend to think again it would be a bit of a desperation thing; assigning whomever was to hand at first. I can see a lot of them being crewed out of Starbase crews, for instance, or by pulling whatever crew could be spared off real ships. I can just see some first officer on a Nebula being very POed to suddenly be pulled off and stuck as captain of a Frankenstein! Once the first six months or so of the war were over and Starfleet got a little time to breathe, I would think they would rearrange the fleets to crew the Frankensteins out of those more, erm, suited to their capabilities, shall we say. I can also see them being pulled back to less frontline roles - guarding planets and such rather than battling on the front lines.

Agree with the ships being scrapped. I can't imagine that such ships would be very functional anyway, and their technology is likely outdated to boot.

The one kitbash that makes sense, to wit, was the Nebula - ironically considered by many here to be one of the most sensible SF ships in existence (fictional existence?).

The problem with the Frankensteins is that they're usually bits of several different classes, badly scaled, slapped together as a literal kitbash (at least according to the TM).

The Nebula, on the other hand, was entirely comprised of either rearranged GCS parts or new stuff, and was designed and built like that from the keel up. This means that the technology inside was designed to work together, and any internal rearrangement can be done on the drawing board rather than in drydock. The end result is a ship that, in its weapons-pod configuration, could probably outfight a GCS - it's got the same powerplant, a better torpedo armament, and a smaller shield area.

Captain Seafort wrote:The problem with the Frankensteins is that they're usually bits of several different classes, badly scaled, slapped together as a literal kitbash (at least according to the TM).

The Nebula, on the other hand, was entirely comprised of either rearranged GCS parts or new stuff, and was designed and built like that from the keel up. This means that the technology inside was designed to work together, and any internal rearrangement can be done on the drawing board rather than in drydock. The end result is a ship that, in its weapons-pod configuration, could probably outfight a GCS - it's got the same powerplant, a better torpedo armament, and a smaller shield area.

Naturally. It's rather amusing to think that the Trek artists could have rearranged parts of the "hero ship" and come up with something better, actually.

There's also the engineering question of whether it's even possible to slap together two (or more) pieces from completely different ships, sort of like trying to attach the head of an SSBN to body of an Aegis destroyer. Alternately, if it is possible, would it be worth the cost, or easier just to build a completely new ship?

Captain Picard's Hair wrote:There's also the engineering question of whether it's even possible to slap together two (or more) pieces from completely different ships, sort of like trying to attach the head of an SSBN to body of an Aegis destroyer. Alternately, if it is possible, would it be worth the cost, or easier just to build a completely new ship?

Given that the pieces are usually roughly the right size and shape to be attached, I don't think destroyers and subs are quite the right analogy. The things remind me more of a cut and shut job - they'll probably hold together initially, but they'll have very short hull lives, and if you try and make them do anything resembling serious work you're in trouble.