Author Topic: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)  (Read 2619 times)

Offline deadthunder2_0

  • Posts: 1181
  • Cookies: 39
  • Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel
    • Modders of Steel Home page
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #20 on: December 07, 2009, 08:18:43 PM »
Well it seems the sleeker the ship the faster they go(excluding NX01) look at this, the ncc-1701 went Warp 7, the 1701a went warp 7.5 the 1701b went warp 8 the ncc1701d, warp 9.5, and the 1707e went warp 9.95
Support the Post TNG Ship Pack

Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel,
We are the Modders that take everything to the next level, We are the Modders of Steel

Offline hobbs

  • Posts: 1373
  • Cookies: 77
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #21 on: December 08, 2009, 05:48:15 AM »
hmmm so may be look at it as being the sleeker ie: narrower a ships warp field = faster warp speed?
"We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers..." Michael Ansara, "Elric" Babylon 5 "The Geometry of Shadows,"


Offline Bren

  • DS9FX Team
  • Posts: 750
  • Cookies: 33
  • 6EQUJ5
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #22 on: December 09, 2009, 01:50:29 PM »
Well it seems the sleeker the ship the faster they go(excluding NX01) look at this, the ncc-1701 went Warp 7, the 1701a went warp 7.5 the 1701b went warp 8 the ncc1701d, warp 9.5, and the 1707e went warp 9.95

Aye, but the 1701, a, and b all used the old scale of warp speed measurement. Some time in the lost era they hit engines capable of warp 9.9999992123 and so on, so it became necessary to simplify and re-scale the speed scale to ease the giving of orders. Must have been like the transition from Miles Per Hour speed signs to Kilometers Per Hour that took place here in Ireland a few years back.
"The sky calls to us, if we do not destroy ourselves, we will, one day, venture to the stars." - Carl Sagan

Klingon Academy now works on XP/Vista/Win 7 thanks to one dude's patches, click here for details. I highly recommend it!

Offline Dalek

  • Posts: 1529
  • Cookies: 206
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #23 on: December 09, 2009, 01:53:40 PM »
Using the Enterprise's is a bad example. They were all built with the latest tech of there era.
"To live on as we have is to leave behind joy, and love, and companionship, because we know it to be transitory, of the moment. We know it will turn to ash. Only those whose lives are brief can imagine that love is eternal. You should embrace that remarkable illusion. It may be the greatest gift your race has ever received."

 - Lorien

Offline deadthunder2_0

  • Posts: 1181
  • Cookies: 39
  • Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel
    • Modders of Steel Home page
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2009, 10:31:27 PM »
True, but if you look at it the Prometheus' top speed is warp 9.975 while a galaxy class venture variant has a top speed of warp9.95
Support the Post TNG Ship Pack

Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel,
We are the Modders that take everything to the next level, We are the Modders of Steel

Offline Hellsgate

  • Administrator, "Star Trek: New Worlds"
  • Posts: 195
  • Cookies: 2
  • Administrator, "Star Trek: New Worlds"
    • =^=Star Trek: New Worlds=^=
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #25 on: September 09, 2010, 10:37:05 PM »
To be more believable for fanfic purposes, I'd trim that number by half to one third. Three hundred ships just for that one borg attack? Starfleet would be rendered virtually defenseless between Wolf 359 & the signing of the Treaty of Bajor. Between mainstream Starfleet's losses, losses after repairing and launching the museum fleet and the frankenstein fleet in the meantime. Daystar: love your icon. got a full size version? *snix*



 
If At First You Don't Succeed, So Much For Skydiving.

Offline Daystar70

  • Posts: 543
  • Cookies: 10
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #26 on: September 15, 2010, 04:10:41 PM »
Yep i do and this is the ahem censored version :) BTW this can drag oiut a large debate but a lot of people including myself conform to the belief starfleet has MILLIONS of starships (yes you heard right-MILLIONS) Its impossible for less than one million ships to cover an entire 4th of a galaxy and defend it- having only seen x amount thousand in the dominion war and the lines about being outnumbered by a few thousand dominion ships, has to be taken in by perspective, Starfleet would never be able to pull more than the amount used in the Dominion front because it would leave the other borders vulnerable to Tholians, and countless minor turf hungry races being kept in check by the starfleet ships all around the various space of the alpha quadrent. I will never in a million years believe otherwise- I don't care what was said on tv they NEVER stated the "total" number of ships in starfleet only made reference3s to xx losses= we are weakened terribly..again this can be interpreted as "in that area of the federation space". Space is far to large to be a Galactic super power with only a few hundred thousand ships, The Dominion with a few thousand ships, could still win because they would face " so many " maximum starships at any one time in battle, and the losses that starfleet DID take reflected re consolodation from cherry picking what they could spare from other fronts.

Offline King Class Scout

  • Posts: 1775
  • Cookies: 893
  • the other half of SFRD
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #27 on: September 15, 2010, 05:16:06 PM »
millons?  bah, that's horse hockey.  even a replicator has to have rescources to work from.  besides, could you imagine the size of the dang thing that'd be required to make hull plates?  starships aren't exactly TINY (the refit enterprise is said to mass 195 thousand tons).  no, i bet they recycle older ships to make new ones.

btw, I know where there's a whole passel of those babes daystar has censored for an icon...all the way to a ferengi chick!
OS novel fan

Coming Soon: King's Mod Tuning Shop

best line I've ever read
Me: mine [my bridges] would probably be simple to get the characters to use.  the only person that sits is the captian.
Baz: space is vast there[sic] legs will be tired by the time they get to the next planet

Offline Daystar70

  • Posts: 543
  • Cookies: 10
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #28 on: September 15, 2010, 05:57:50 PM »
LOL! and no i dont agree its horse puckey. The federation has so many colonies spread out with each its own millions and millions of citizens, you can easily man that many starships and create building facilities.

No one will convince me otherwise notbecause i am unwilling to facvtor in sources of canon that may dispute it (which there isn't) but because its just mathematically and logically impossible to have so few ships as a "galactic level" super power. It simply is impossible, unless tyhey had instant galactica style jump engines, space is simply TO BIG! you'd have another end of the Roman empire situation spread to thin not enough manpower to support it.

Offline ACES_HIGH

  • BCC Roleplay Game Narrator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 1678
  • Cookies: 54
  • while(!(succeed=try()));
    • BCC Roleplay Games
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #29 on: September 15, 2010, 11:14:14 PM »
Nah, when you consider the area ships like the Enterprise-D can cover on the show, I think a number in the hundreds of thousands is more reasonable, besides they don't need ships in every single sector of explored space.  Think of how often the Enterprise is the only ship in range, Starfleet would have to be spread pretty thin for that to happen so much.  Besides Explored space is much less then the area of an entire quadrant.  IIRC by TNG they'd only explored about 10-15% of the galaxy.  Even when you factor in Civilian ships, I think the fleet strength is probably in the 4-6 hundred thousand range.  If it were higher than that, losses like the Battle of Wolf 359 and the 7th fleet at the Tyra system wouldn't be as significant as they were portrayed to be. 

Offline Daystar70

  • Posts: 543
  • Cookies: 10
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2010, 06:36:45 AM »
Well that's true about the explored space thing hundreds of thousands yes, but at the very minimal upper on that equation near a million. Star trek would be a little more buyable on that area if warp speed covered more distance IMO.

Offline King Class Scout

  • Posts: 1775
  • Cookies: 893
  • the other half of SFRD
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2010, 07:28:20 AM »
fed space doesn't cover as many cubic light years as you think.  I think the Federation has a grand total of 300 member worlds (and all of which appear to be "single Biome " planets).  it's the fact that no world should have that many rescources free to make hundreds of thousands of Capital Ships.  especially if, as seems to be coming out, every other sentient species is tens or hundreds of thousands of years OLDER than the human race (and that's just at the civilization generating level).  the human species is between 5-7 million years old.  every other species appears to be 50-70 million years old.
OS novel fan

Coming Soon: King's Mod Tuning Shop

best line I've ever read
Me: mine [my bridges] would probably be simple to get the characters to use.  the only person that sits is the captian.
Baz: space is vast there[sic] legs will be tired by the time they get to the next planet

Offline Daystar70

  • Posts: 543
  • Cookies: 10
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2010, 01:02:26 PM »
You do make a valid point. I guess the thinking was based on an assumption that you have to police every square inch of controlled space, which would be a lot of empty areas.

sidenote-- here is a larger version of my avatar as asked about earlier. and a censored vsersion of the base picture after angelina jolies head was applied. I think i will edit and fix her communicator.

Offline Lionus

  • Posts: 1561
  • Cookies: 79
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #33 on: September 16, 2010, 02:16:13 PM »
you need to work with light and shadow effects too to bring her ample forms out better.  :P
Star Trek Quad-nacelle fanboy Extraordinaire

StarFleet Research and Development Crash Test Dummie/Test pilot

"Beyond the rim of the star-light
My love
Is wand'ring in star-flight
I know
He'll find in star-clustered reaches
Love,
Strange love a star woman teaches.
I know
His journey ends never
His star trek
Will go on forever.
But tell him
While he wanders his starry sea
Remember, remember me."

Offline Daystar70

  • Posts: 543
  • Cookies: 10
Re: hobbs' startrek questions (all trek universes even ones not everyone likes)
« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2010, 02:19:16 PM »
There a billion things i could do. The intention was a simple avatar. Had i been going for some big wallpaper or something i would and still may do, a more blended jumpsuit with texture vs a brush painted body. And light and shadows wouldn't be the key to that..blending mode is.