Fed Module Debate

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on October 25th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on October 26th, 2010, 6:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dom EDIT: split from Star Trek Armada II: Fleet Operations - Federation Probes

The Nebula doesn't have a modular pod, that would imply it can be replaced. The sensor/weapon pods are varients on a single design. Which is the original version is unknown, so FO apparently picked the sensor pod.

For probe users, I prefer the Canaveral that originally had it. It suits its purpose as a support ship, and also goes well with its sensor themed specials. The Weapon Nebula doesn't suit this ability; it's a warship version of the Nebula.

Actualy, yes it does, and it can be.

Three varriants have been seen on TV, regular tactical pod, sensor pod, and one with two smaller warp naccels for speed/range, plus the implication is there are more pod types for other science missions.

Nebula class - Memory Alpha, the Star Trek Wiki

It even lists episodes were it is stated.


USS Faragut


Note the triangular pod and the neck structure.


USS Pheonix


And a clear shot of the studio model.


Note that the neck structure is visable in part, but it obviously doesnt continue up all the way.

Also note, the structure of the neck holding the triangular pod changes partway up. The pod disconnecting there would account for how the round pod (FO's sensor varraint) looks. Combine that with the TNG shot of USS Pheonix, as well as the studio model, and I think that pretty much concludes today's lecture. 




So in conclusion: MISTER CRUSHER WARP FACTOR NO U!



But yeah seriously, it makes sense. Mission pods are easier to build/upgrade than ships.

Assets of the Nebula class withheld for tactical use would no doubt largley have the triangular pod and have it fitted with a lot of torpedos, explorers would get the round AWACS type pod with extra sensors/labs. War breaks out, they go to shipyard, and swap pods, and become a tactical asset in just a short amount of time.

[Tyler]

posted on October 25th, 2010, 6:41 pm

Last edited by Tyler on October 25th, 2010, 6:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Not replacable, and MA never implies it is. It only says that different ships are built with different superstructures that have different purposes.

As a member of MA pointed out; Building a fleet of destroyer-sized pods that will only be used by 1 class and sit in storage most of the time is too inefficient, even without considering all the effort needed to remove and attach them:

Likewise, is there any canon reference to that portion of the ship being modular, removeable, etc.? Aside from the fact that we've seen a few different configurations of it, that is. I find it hard to believe that Starfleet would have a stockpile of "pods", which are the size of some starships, specifically for the purpose of fitting to (only) Nebula-class vessels, for specific applications. That would be like the US Navy having a stockpile of "pods" the size of frigates, for attachment to a particular class of aircraft carrier, for specific applications. However appealing it sounds to RPG'ers, it's highly unlikely.

In short; they are Nebula Class ships built with a different superstructure.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 7:10 pm

im with tyler, building one ship, but building several pods is stupidly wasteful.

i think the pods can be changed between ships, say if a ship crashes and the pod is salvaged, that pod could be put on a nebula that took weapons damage to its own pod. but only at a yard and only in rare circumstances.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Nebula class - Star Trek Online Geekipedia


Even the STOoL sample wiki agrees with me (admitedly this isnt the best source :p ).

It's not that they'd build 1 of each pod for a ship, that makes no sense.

What DOES make sense is to have various starbases store several types of pods for use as needed, so a regional/sector depot would have the specialized modules (such as the hospital pod) for use in case of an emergency, but a very small number.

View it like trailers being hauled by a truck on the highway, you just re-hitch the one that does what you need done.

I'd assume that the tactical pod was the most common module, followed by the sensor pod, with the other varriants being less common, mostly sitting pre-positioned at logistics points for cases were they are needed, with the nearest Nebula class vessel called in to grab the pod/personnel incase of an emergency.


I'm not saying switching a pod would be common, but it makes logistical sense to have extras for when the need arises.

Anyway, if we were to simply add more Nebula varriants....... heres my idea

High capacity sensor pod (Seen on TNG as USS Pheonix): Allready ingame (However I'd replace the special energy for the sensor to a on/off switch, and make the phaser not return to full power for 30secs after switching back)

Enhanced weapons pod (The triangular pod): Allready ingame.

Colony transport pod: The Federation is great at dual use ships, I'd say this pod would easily double as a marine transport (IE: a flood of red shirts), Same armament as the Sensor pod varriant, higher capacity transporters, high crew.

Emergency field hospital unit: Slowly recrews nearby ships/stations.

Science laboratory pod: Same as sensor pod, but shorter range, and a tachyon ping.

[Tyler]

posted on October 25th, 2010, 9:25 pm

Last edited by Tyler on October 25th, 2010, 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Doesn't make sense, for the reason mentioned above; resource inefficient, effort inefficient & it doesn't fit Starfleets normal method of modular interiors (meaning insides that get moved around).

They do not have replacable pods on canon Nebula Class, and no amount of fanon is going to force it into canon.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 9:37 pm

Were in cannon does it say it doesn't ?


As far as I can tell, by the way they appear all the time in TNG/DS9, Nebulas are a more numerous little sister to the Galaxy, and quite large in their own right, with those numbers, it'd make sense that each area of operations that has a number of them would maintain a depot with extra pods of a few types.

It's disaster relief pre-planing and nothing more.

The same as the US military maintaining logistics ships loaded with tanks and HMMWVs world wide, if theres a war you just call your nearest tanker and have them go to the nearest freindly port and offload (as happend in Iraq).

posted on October 25th, 2010, 9:45 pm

Where in canon does it say they do? Not even so much as a shred of dialogue implies they are capable, therefore it is not a canon feature. This 'ability' is fanon, nothing more.

As I keep saying, it is too inefficient to be a viable option. Their size is one of the reasons; leaving a ship out of use with supplies in it is not the same as taking a large starship apart and adding new (very large) parts to it.

[Tok`ra]

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:12 pm

Last edited by Tok`ra on October 25th, 2010, 10:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

And the pod is simply........... a large part.

And it basically brings the nebula about up to par with the Galaxy

And once again, how is it inefficient ?

You take a seldom used mission pod (a hospital pod for example), build a few, and leave them sitting at various bases.

There is a big emergency, the nearest  Nebula class vessel comes and switches pods, and responds.

It is MUCH more efficent to have good logistics, things sitting there when you need them ahead of time, than to build a pod that is the only difference between ship types onto a ship for a mission type that will not be needed that often.


Or to put it in ingame mechanics ....... (and no I wouldnt advocate doing this ingame, it'd be a real hassle due to game mechanics) ... you build a Nebula class (whatever the origonal pod type is doesnt matter). You also build a hospital pod incase you get ships that have a lot of wounded and are not near a base (IE: low on crew, cant recrew easy).

Rather than building a new hospital ship, you seperate the pod (same as saucer sep, but I'd imagine that moving on RCS alone the pods would be dead slow, as they should be) and re-intergrate with the needed module.


Now putting game terms into realistic trek terms.


The 13th fleet is based at starbase 123. Starbase 123 is the central hub for a large sector with dozens of worlds. The fleet has, among other ships, 15 nebula class starships, and 23 Nebula class pods. 5 of the ships have science pods and are exploring and doing routine patrols , the other ten have the tactical pod and are doing routine security patrols. Of the eight unused pods sitting at Starbase 123, five are tactical pods for the ships preforming science missions incase hostilities break out somewere, one is a pod for large numbers of passangers (troops, colonists, evacuees, etc etc) and one is a hospital vessel. Suddenly, the planet Yaren Three reports that pirates attacked, and the colony took heavy damage and needs medical attention.

While sending other vessels to respond right away, you could then have the option to have two of your nebula's report to the starbase, drop their pods, and grab the hospital and transport pod, suddenly you go from responding with what is avalible, to responding with massive medical capability, and have the ability to house all of the colony as well as the wounded that just need rest, all from ships that a few days prior were unable to preform the tasks they suddenly find themselves preforming.

This isnt fannon any more than your saying they dont, I'm simply taking IRL examples, and applying them to trek, which is to say that pre-staging material isnt exactly uncommon nor inefficient.

[Anonymous]

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:16 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on October 25th, 2010, 10:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Even the STOoL sample wiki agrees with me (admitedly this isnt the best source :p ).

why bring it up if u admit its a crap source? the only source i care about is canon. and it was never shown to be able to do it in canon. end of, we cannot assume it can do this.

also it is plain ridiculous to build a ship, then build expensive addons for it. and have these modules just sit rusting in a starbase. even starfleet isnt that dumb.

i suggested that its possible to change a nebula module for another. but they would have built the nebula whole, with the superstructure present. maybe a module could be salvaged from a wrecked nebula and used to put on a nebula which lost its module. but only in very specific circumstances. this would probably require days if not weeks of work at a yard to change the module.

so starfleet would have built the same number of modules as nebula classes total. building extras to lay around waiting for missions is just too wasteful. all of this is conjecture though. there is no evidence in canon that these modules are even detachable.

EDIT:

And once again, how is it inefficient ?

this is completely obvious. building modules with the sole purpose of sitting around waiting for missions is plain wasteful. these resources go into stuff that sits around doing nothing. you're assuming a nebula can swap pods like removing a lego piece. this is plain barmy. no evidence has ever been shown of this. maybe if we saw a nebula pod separate (like galaxy saucer sep). even if we assume its quick to swap pods, the nebula still has to travel back to where the pod is. which takes time too. its much better value for money to have more ships, rather than 1 ship that can switch pods. its inefficient because resources are sitting around in pods doing nothing, when these resources could have made ships which actually do stuff. starfleet never had loads of ships around to respond. they only made 12 galaxy class. lets say they made 30-50 nebula class. thats still not a huge amount, and most areas wont have such large illustrious ships nearby. starfleet always seemed to be spread pretty thin during peace time, with ships all out exploring deep space, away from any base where pods could be stored. nebula classes were shown to be used as explorers (a ds9 ep springs to mind, with that woman who beat bashir in medical school was on the nebula class ship exploring deep space) building these pods and leaving them laying around gathering dust is wasting money.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:21 pm

It makes great sense to make them modular. It's like the Nebula is a truck, and the pod is the cargo.

And pre-positioning material has IRL parallels Military Sealift Command - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


What that, IRL, means, is there are merchant ships full of tanks and stuff, so they can be were they are needed.

Now, if IRL there are ships full of freaking abrams tanks sitting arround waiting on a war......... it makes sense that a few extra pods would be build here and there for lesser used mission roles.

That, plus the fact that in every visable model of the Nebula class, the only differnce starts were the pod would connect.

[Tyler]

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:23 pm

Last edited by Tyler on October 25th, 2010, 10:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Considering each one is fully fitted with relevent tech and is the same size as many starships, you have an entire fleet of useless 'ships' lounging around doing nothing other than sucking up space and resources to build and store that could be used on actual ships, on the off chance that a ship from a single class that makes up only a fraction of the several thousand Starfleet ships uses it. Inefficient use of resources.

To attach, you have to rip off roughly a third/quarter of the ship then go to great lengths to attach it perfectly to ensure not even a slight missalignment of the ship or its systems. Which also wastes a dock that could be better used to refit or build another ship. Inefficient use of space.

The Nebula is a sister ship of the Galaxy without the more wasteful aspects, meaning it can fit more stuff into the frame and likely even has the empty space for refits a Galaxy has with the superstructure giving each varient a specialty. Detachable pods would be useless from the start.

This is a massive, multipurpose, extremly expensive (though less than a Galaxy) Starship, not Thunderbird 2.

leaving a ship out of use with supplies in it is not the same as taking a large starship apart and adding new (very large) parts to it.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:25 pm

That, plus the fact that in every visable model of the Nebula class, the only differnce starts were the pod would connect.

actually thats wrong too, the stardrive section changed when they made the jump to cgi. making the waters even murkier.

irl examples are not valid here, irl isnt in star trek canon. u can only argue canon from canon. no nebula was ever hinted at being modular, so we cannot assume they are. if u want to write a novel where they are feel free to do so, people will just wonder why starfleet can spend so much money on paper weights.

thunderbirds are GO!

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:44 pm

actually thats wrong too, the stardrive section changed when they made the jump to cgi. making the waters even murkier.

As I recall reading, when making the CGI model, ILM was unable to get the studio model to use when making the CGI, so they just kitbashed the Galaxy, and never changed it.

irl examples are not valid here, irl isnt in star trek canon. u can only argue canon from canon. no nebula was ever hinted at being modular, so we cannot assume they are. if u want to write a novel where they are feel free to do so, people will just wonder why starfleet can spend so much money on paper weights.

Shooting someone in the head IRL usualy kills them so I assume the same is the case in trek, but b ut you say IRL isnt star trek cannon, so you cant assume. Same thing, differnt assumption.


All I'm doing is taking IRL logistical practices that are proven to work quite well, namely the pre-positioning of assets, and applying them to star trek.

As for paper weights........ the Federation, as said in canon multiple times from TNG thru DS9, is a moneyless econemy, with the use of Latnum mostly being on worlds on the edge out outside of Federation space.

thunderbirds are GO!

Tyler, I suggest you bother reading the links provided.

Simply put, pre-positioning material works. It's proven to work.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:50 pm

The links are irrelevant here, especially considering you're comparing storage of small supplies to storing what amounts to full fleets of starships. The time, storage and resourse waste stands. Along with the extreme unlikelyhood of them even being used.

As for the Federation being moneyless, that's actually quite debatable. However, their resources (what they make ships from) are limited.

posted on October 25th, 2010, 10:57 pm

No, actually they're not, as shown by the fact that you referred the goods stored there 'small'.

And if its a waste to produce a few pods, it would be even MORE of a waste to produce a ship for that purpose, which is why the pod theory makes sense.

Yes the modules are large, but building an entire ship for a specefic purpose is even larger, if instead you can build the ship, and have the mission related hull space all be modular, then with less resources than new ship expended, the same ship can do double duty.