Typhon class carrier for feds

posted on June 27th, 2012, 2:20 pm

Hello dear community.

Lately I`ve been through the completed tasks section an I saw that typhon class ship

Is this ship planned as a buildable ship class or some kind of map object???

If it is going to be buildable what will happen to the phalanx class risner currently has ?

Will it be equiped with this new federation fighters is saw as ive googled the typhon I think they are called valkyrie class fighters.

Maybe one more thing would it be possible to make the current phalanx clas fighters fly in some kind of arrowhead formation nearby the mothership rather than just flying around ridiculously fast like aimless bugs when they are not involved in any battle.
That would add a more realistic feeling to the carriers.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 3:10 pm

You know, I thought someone said the devs planned to have it in the game as a map object, but I"m not sure. I sure would like to see her in the game.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 3:51 pm

If it is buildable, I doubt the Phalanx would be affected at all. The Avalon might be affected, but not the Phalanx.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 4:03 pm

Ohh sorry that was my mistake

The carrier risner deploys is called the Avalon class.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 4:05 pm

the typhon would also be nice as some kind of "special offense feature"
where you can choose that big carrier as reinforcements....

posted on June 27th, 2012, 5:02 pm

I'd rather see carriers removed altogether.

Add something like this to the FO storyline:

Carrier class warships such as the Avalon and B-5 were tested during the course of the conflict, but proved to be too resource demanding while the damage dealt was often negligible Some of these space hulks can be found in remote sectors, reserves or scrapyards but the majority have been removed from active service.

The only way i would consider carriers is if they would have a fixed total amount of fighters. Once those fighters are destroyed the carrier needs to return to the home world or major ship yards (of the map) to restock.

Seriously Star Trek =/= noobish Star Wars.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 6:00 pm

I'd agree with a limit to the number of fighters, though not the removal of carriers. Nothing is wrong with them, though I'll admit that they seem stange in a show that never used them.

Not sure how Carrier = Star Wars, though... they're one of the staples of space Sci-Fi, I'm pretty sure they predate Star Wars. Not nitpicking, it's just odd to equate carriers to SW when other shows used them a lot more.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 6:39 pm

I'd agree with a limit to the number of fighters, though not the removal of carriers. Nothing is wrong with them, though I'll admit that they seem stange in a show that never used them.

Well, admittedly, fighters are kind of superfluous in the universe since the copious amounts of directed energy weapons and decent targetting computers pretty much reduce them to a single hitpoint target but even then, they still have their uses.
Though, I'm guessing given where the tech is now, their crews might be a bit...superfluous in the 25th century.
And with the exception of DS9, you don't spend a whole lot of time looking at ships other than the titular vessel.
At least, I think it doesn't. DS9, however, does show fighters in fleet engagements. Repeatedly, from what I remember.

Though, yes, having to resupply carriers every now and then does sound like a rather good idea.
Of course, the same logic could be applied to torpedoes and the occasional projectile weapon.


And do we really have to descend to the whole ST/SW thing over this?

posted on June 27th, 2012, 6:43 pm

DS9, however, does show fighters in fleet engagements. Repeatedly, from what I remember.

They use fighters, but never carriers. Small ships in Trek have warp drive just like big ones, so carriers were never shown.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 6:57 pm

DS9, however, does show fighters in fleet engagements. Repeatedly, from what I remember.

in those battles all the ships seem to not bother raising shields either (apart from any ship with main characters on it)
they charge in and each ship gets ripped apart in 1 hit with not even a glimmer of shield contact..

fighters and no shields only in big battles? a courtesy on both sides to make the figher pilots seem like they have some value?

posted on June 27th, 2012, 7:12 pm

Rule of cool and editing so the half the battle isn't wasted on blooming shields?

They use fighters, but never carriers. Small ships in Trek have warp drive just like big ones, so carriers were never shown.

Warp drive, yes, but we don't really know how fast a fighter would go with one.
And, I doubt anyone wants to be stuck in a combat craft that small for a longer voyage even if it's capable of one.
I do seem to remember the runabouts needing larger ships to carry them to DS9. While I can't really find a reliable comparison to a fighter, I doubt they could manage to get anywhere without a larger ship carrying them.
A dedicated carrier is just a logical conclusion. Pops in, drops off the fighters and returns to the rear untill it's time to pick up the pieces.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 8:05 pm

Carriers in Star Trek does seem to be one of those contentious topics that come up every now and then. Here's my take on the subject.

Firstly, the small craft. We know that they can pack a punch in Star Trek, and the Peregrines seen in the various DS9 battles are no exception. The usual disadvantages to ships that size are slow strategic speed (Runabouts are generally shown as being relatively slow in terms of maximum warp factor attainable, and I doubt there's much scope for a more capable warp drive on the fighters; even the Defiant is relatively slow compared to larger contemporary vessels), relatively low range (again, not much room for fuel and other consumables), and poor crew conditions (this is more of an issue than many of you might think).

It could be argued that during the Dominion War Starfleet wouldn't have time to develop a dedicated carrier vessel*, although I would suspect that they would come up with some makeshift arrangement using the shuttle bays of the larger vessels for the reasons I've stated. Post war, if the Federation decided to keep Starfleet on a more military footing then I can see they would be more interested in building a dedicated carrier class.

As for their use in Fleet Ops, it would be good if there was some way to represent some sort of maximum overall limit to the number of fighters that can be launched from a carrier before it requires resupply at a shipyard, but there are presumably technical reasons why that can't be done at the moment. For the moment I think this is reflected in the supply costs of the B5 and Avalon, which have the highest supply costs for a ship of their respective races (50 supplies is a big deal for the Fed, as their current free supply mechanism doesn't actually increase their supply value).

Edit: As for the Typhon class, I hadn't heard of it until recently. Not keen on the pictures I've seen.

* However, these notes on the Akira class by the original designer are an interesting read on that matter.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 8:38 pm

The idea of the Akira holding fighters is ofen ignored by most people, often because of size issues. On an unrelated note; a commenter on the blog claims to have counted 17 torp launchers instead of the normal 15.

Warp drive, yes, but we don't really know how fast a fighter would go with one.
And, I doubt anyone wants to be stuck in a combat craft that small for a longer voyage even if it's capable of one.
I do seem to remember the runabouts needing larger ships to carry them to DS9. While I can't really find a reliable comparison to a fighter, I doubt they could manage to get anywhere without a larger ship carrying them.
A dedicated carrier is just a logical conclusion. Pops in, drops off the fighters and returns to the rear untill it's time to pick up the pieces.

Runabouts can keep up with a Galaxy, a fighters engine shouldn't be much slower than those ones so speed shouldn't be a problem. They probably keep them on larger ships, non-dedicated ships for longer trips but left to fly on their own for shorter ones (and a Starbase/planet when not in use).

I'm kinda curious why the Runabouts were delivered by ship really, since they're capable of fairly long-range scout and patrol missions and getting from point A to point B under their own power. Apparently fuel isn't a problem for small ships.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 9:01 pm

The idea of the Akira holding fighters is ofen ignored by most people, often because of size issues. On an unrelated note; a commenter on the blog claims to have counted 17 torp launchers instead of the normal 15.

Peregrines are about the size of a current Naval fighter, and the Akira class starship is larger than the Nimitz class naval vessel. The only thing that might be an issue is the size of the doors, and that's due to the model being scaled down from the original design size without there being time to correct details like that.

Runabouts can keep up with a Galaxy

A 2CV at 40 mph will keep up with a Porsche at 40 mph. Danubes have been explicitly depicted on screen as slower than warp 5, and various unofficial resources (include some which cite the DS9 writer's guide) back that figure up.

I'm kinda curious why the Runabouts were delivered by ship really, since they're capable of fairly long-range scout and patrol missions and getting from point A to point B under their own power. Apparently fuel isn't a problem for small ships.

Multiple Danubes could be dropped off as part of a supply run. If you only need one delivered then it could be sent on its own, perhaps crewed by officers being newly assigned to the home base.

posted on June 27th, 2012, 9:08 pm

I'm kinda curious why the Runabouts were delivered by ship really, since they're capable of fairly long-range scout and patrol missions and getting from point A to point B under their own power. Apparently fuel isn't a problem for small ships.

'Long' range is relative. Painfully so. For all we know, they could be just running around just beyond their local solar system.
And Memory Alpha tags their speed at warp 5 and a Galaxy cruising at 6. And from what I remember, the difference between 5 and 6 isn't like the one between 1 and 2.
I suspect it's mostly a power requirement issue.