What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

PST: discuss Star Trek without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

Locked
User avatar
seanrobertson
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2145
Joined: 2002-07-12 05:57pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by seanrobertson »

Patroklos wrote: As I said before, numbers are one thing but tonnage is really what matters.
OK: prove it. If Starfleet ships enjoyed the kind of enormous unit-per-unit superiority you seem to claim, please explain why, in "SOA," the Federation fleet struggled* so mightily when "only" outnumbered 2:1.

*Let's be real here :D The Federation fleet couldn't even open a fuckin' hole in a Dominion-Cardassian formation that, as we've all agreed, is "mostly attack ships." They couldn't get even one ship through until the Klingons sent reinforcements.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world, or despair, or fuckin' beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, ya got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man ... and give some back.
-Al Swearengen

Cry woe, destruction, ruin and decay: The worst is death, and death will have his day.
-Ole' Shakey's "Richard II," Act III, scene ii.
Image
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Darth Wong »

seanrobertson wrote:
Patroklos wrote:As I said before, numbers are one thing but tonnage is really what matters.
OK: prove it. If Starfleet ships enjoyed the kind of enormous unit-per-unit superiority you seem to claim, please explain why, in "SOA," the Federation fleet struggled* so mightily when "only" outnumbered 2:1.

*Let's be real here :D The Federation fleet couldn't even open a fuckin' hole in a Dominion-Cardassian formation that, as we've all agreed, is "mostly attack ships." They couldn't get even one ship through until the Klingons sent reinforcements.
Trying to do an after-action analysis on DS9 fleet battles is an exercise in futility. The entire idea of arranging a fleet of hundreds of spaceships in a tight vertical-wall formation is so mind-bogglingly stupid that any kind of analysis would be completely stymied by the fact that we can't make heads or tails out of their tactics to begin with.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
seanrobertson
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2145
Joined: 2002-07-12 05:57pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by seanrobertson »

Darth Wong wrote:
SancheztheWhaler wrote:Does the 20,000 ship fleet count for the Dominion include their fighters as well, or is that major capital ships only?
I don't see any reason why we should be excluding unarmed vessels such as fuel tankers and repair ships, never mind smaller combat vessels. When people count the ships in a modern naval fleet, they don't exclude all of the support vessels unless they specifically state that they're only referring to combat ships.
Maybe.
When It Rains wrote: ROSS
Well, Gentlemen, it would seem
that the Klingon fleet is the
only thing standing between us
and the Dominion.

ROMULAN
(under his breath)
What have we come to... ?

Martok shoots him a look

MARTOK
By tomorrow, we'll have eleven
hundred Klingon vessels ready for
deployment.

DEEP SPACE NINE: "When it Rains... " - REV. 03/02/99 - TEASER 3.

2 CONTINUED: (2)

ROMULAN
(dismissive)
With the Breen, the Cardassians
and the Jem'Hadar you're still
outnumbered twenty-to-one.
That doesn't preclude the possibility that support ships are included in those totals. I wonder how numerous they are?
Pain, or damage, don't end the world, or despair, or fuckin' beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, ya got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man ... and give some back.
-Al Swearengen

Cry woe, destruction, ruin and decay: The worst is death, and death will have his day.
-Ole' Shakey's "Richard II," Act III, scene ii.
Image
User avatar
seanrobertson
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2145
Joined: 2002-07-12 05:57pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by seanrobertson »

Darth Wong wrote: Trying to do an after-action analysis on DS9 fleet battles is an exercise in futility. The entire idea of arranging a fleet of hundreds of spaceships in a tight vertical-wall formation is so mind-bogglingly stupid that any kind of analysis would be completely stymied by the fact that we can't make heads or tails out of their tactics to begin with.
No doubt of that :lol:

I emphasized that to underscore how the Federation's bigger and apparently superior ships had a real fight on their hands when up against 2:1 odds.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world, or despair, or fuckin' beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, ya got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man ... and give some back.
-Al Swearengen

Cry woe, destruction, ruin and decay: The worst is death, and death will have his day.
-Ole' Shakey's "Richard II," Act III, scene ii.
Image
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Darth Wong »

seanrobertson wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Trying to do an after-action analysis on DS9 fleet battles is an exercise in futility. The entire idea of arranging a fleet of hundreds of spaceships in a tight vertical-wall formation is so mind-bogglingly stupid that any kind of analysis would be completely stymied by the fact that we can't make heads or tails out of their tactics to begin with.
No doubt of that :lol:

I emphasized that to underscore how the Federation's bigger and apparently superior ships had a real fight on their hands when up against 2:1 odds.
Right. I'm just pointing out that you can't really assess how good their forces are from their performance in these battles, since we have no way of knowing how good or awful their tactics were in comparison to their enemies' bizarre tactics.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Patroklos
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2577
Joined: 2009-04-14 11:00am

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Patroklos »

OK: prove it. If Starfleet ships enjoyed the kind of enormous unit-per-unit superiority you seem to claim, please explain why, in "SOA," the Federation fleet struggled* so mightily when "only" outnumbered 2:1.
1.) As noted there is really very little on screen that is useful in determining specifics of fleet battles. It is just a jumble of quick encounter sceens that give us nothing concrete as to fleet numbers, fleet dispositions, tactics, or really anything other than this ship here exploded. What we get is spoon fed to us through campy dialogue, and even that ususally just gives us a conculsion without in any way telling us how that came to be.

2.) There are a thousand things independant of either ship numbers or tonnage that can drastically change a situation. Who is on the defense and who is in the offense? Who has pocession of planetary support and who doesn't? Who had better intelligence? Which ships are better maintained/have less battle damage? What are the skills of the commanders? We can go on forever.

However, since we have very little detail as far as concrete qualitative featuers we really can only rely on quanitative. There is no way to get around the fact that as depicted onscreen the vast bulk of Dominion combatants are 95m attack ships, many times out displaced by the average Federation combatant seen.
*Let's be real here The Federation fleet couldn't even open a fuckin' hole in a Dominion-Cardassian formation that, as we've all agreed, is "mostly attack ships." They couldn't get even one ship through until the Klingons sent reinforcements.
There could be a dozen reasons for this. I fail to see how this refutes that Federation warships are many times larger than their Dominion counterparts. The only ships available to the Dominion in numbers comparable to Federation ships in size are the Cardassian cruisers, and they are seen rather sparingly as well compared to their smaller Dominion allies.

Several people here are basing their belief in Dominion dominance on numbers alone, and then using this to justify the assumption that the Federation can only compensate for this with its own increased numbers. This is folly.

BTW, in that battle in question were the Dominion casualties ever quoted? In fact they are rarely quoted for any enounter. For all we know the Dominion had to sacrifice their entire fleet to achieve the delay of the Federation penetration.
User avatar
seanrobertson
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2145
Joined: 2002-07-12 05:57pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by seanrobertson »

Darth Wong wrote: Right. I'm just pointing out that you can't really assess how good their forces are from their performance in these battles, since we have no way of knowing how good or awful their tactics were in comparison to their enemies' bizarre tactics.
I'm with you.
Pain, or damage, don't end the world, or despair, or fuckin' beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, ya got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man ... and give some back.
-Al Swearengen

Cry woe, destruction, ruin and decay: The worst is death, and death will have his day.
-Ole' Shakey's "Richard II," Act III, scene ii.
Image
User avatar
AirshipFanboy
Youngling
Posts: 94
Joined: 2005-11-06 04:39pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by AirshipFanboy »

Although Federation starships are bigger than Jem'Hadar bugs, Federation fighters are smaller. If the Federation include fighters in their ship counts, then the tonnage per ship in a Federation fleet may not outweigh the tonnage per ship in a Dominion fleet. And that's ignoring the Cardassians entirely, who have both big ships and big fighters.
User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Stark »

Before the writers changed ST combat through magic wand, bugs weren't really that terrible and per-ton were arguably comparable to larger ships. In the later 'we watched B5' scenes they're popped with single hits, Defiant chews through half a dozen etc, and yet they're still a threat to larger ships.
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Alyeska »

The large fleet size indicated by the producers with the smaller stated fleet sizes in the episodes meshes a little better. If you have a fleet of total size being say 10,000, 600 combat ships from two fleets becomes more reasonable. And thats the single largest combat fleet the Federation fielded. So their total fleet size is a combination of factors. And that actually makes a lot of sense. A fleet is more then just its combat assets. Those are just the most visible face of the fleet. The fleet back in TNG likely was fairly large, though smaller then DS9 era, making a loss of just 40 ships not so tragic. But when you consider that these are 40 combat ships of a decent size, that becomes a problem. They didn't loose 40 freighters, 40 transports, or 40 Runabouts. They lost 40 front line warships with a smattering of older ships filling in the ranks. You start losing ships the size of the an Ambassador, Nebula, or even Excelsior, and that has got to hurt. Wolf 359 was close to home. I see no reason why there should be support ships in that fleet, unless they were so desperate that they would send them into battle for their handful of weapons. Anyway, it starts to make a little more sense.

Starfleet ramps up ship production. They start reactivating older ships. They take what parts are available and start mashing them together into barely working but usable ships. They likely take disabled or otherwise nearly destroyed ships and strip them to pieces and build whole new designs out of them. And a large bulk of their fleet is also the support base to keep it running. Of course the 8,000-12,000 figure is itself not canon, but does fit the ballpark of the Dominion fleet size. It would also make sense why the Klingons could hold the line with 1,500 ships. I suspect they were counting actual warships, but listed the total Dominion fleet size for dramatic affect.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Alyeska »

AirshipFanboy wrote:Although Federation starships are bigger than Jem'Hadar bugs, Federation fighters are smaller. If the Federation include fighters in their ship counts, then the tonnage per ship in a Federation fleet may not outweigh the tonnage per ship in a Dominion fleet. And that's ignoring the Cardassians entirely, who have both big ships and big fighters.
We know they count Runabouts as separate ships, but I highly doubt the Fighter is counted. That thing is quite small. Just like shuttles don't get counted (no individual registries), I do not consider the fighters into that count. If you do, it just makes the situation worse on realism. How can Starfleet with such a small relative mainline fleet take on such a larger enemy?
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Samuel
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4750
Joined: 2008-10-23 11:36am

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Samuel »

I see no reason why there should be support ships in that fleet, unless they were so desperate that they would send them into battle for their handful of weapons.
They sent the ships in with so little time they were carrying children. They were so desperate they were thinking of asking the Romulans for aid. They were throwing everything they could at the Borg Cube.
We know they count Runabouts as separate ships, but I highly doubt the Fighter is counted. That thing is quite small. Just like shuttles don't get counted (no individual registries), I do not consider the fighters into that count. If you do, it just makes the situation worse on realism. How can Starfleet with such a small relative mainline fleet take on such a larger enemy?
Dominion power plugs are not compatable with the sockets in the Alpha Quadrent? :P

More on topic this is mentioned in the main pages

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tac ... uver1.html
Federation fighters have been rarely sighted and rarely used. Their most notable appearance was in the DS9 episode "Sacrifice of Angels", in a diversionary role. A Federation fleet consisting of 600 ships (combined count of capital ships and fighters) went into battle against a numerically superior force of more than 1200 Jem'Hadar and Cardassian ships (again, combined count of capital ships and fighters).
I'll have to check Sacrifice of the Angels, but this suggests they do the opposite- count fighters and not shuttles.
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Alyeska »

Samuel wrote:I'll have to check Sacrifice of the Angels, but this suggests they do the opposite- count fighters and not shuttles.
You do realize what that does to the battle, right? The Jem'Hadar Attackship is most definitely not a fighter. That means the Dominion and allies have 1,200 ships to Starfleet having likely fewer then 400 ships. At this point it becomes what is more plausible in my book. Did they count the fighters and expect to fight a 3-1 battle? Or did they not count the fighters and expect to win a 2-1 battle?
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Samuel
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4750
Joined: 2008-10-23 11:36am

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Samuel »

Alyeska wrote:
Samuel wrote:I'll have to check Sacrifice of the Angels, but this suggests they do the opposite- count fighters and not shuttles.
You do realize what that does to the battle, right? The Jem'Hadar Attackship is most definitely not a fighter. That means the Dominion and allies have 1,200 ships to Starfleet having likely fewer then 400 ships. At this point it becomes what is more plausible in my book. Did they count the fighters and expect to fight a 3-1 battle? Or did they not count the fighters and expect to win a 2-1 battle?
They counted all Dominion spacecraft 1254. And they weren't fighting to win the battle- they wanted to break through and reach DS9. Also no other ships made it.

They didn't know what to expect. About 2:00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwKnvRPI ... re=related

The Feds have at least 8 wings of their own fighters. I don't know the exact composition of each fleet though.
User avatar
Isolder74
Official SD.Net Ace of Cakes
Posts: 6762
Joined: 2002-07-10 01:16am
Location: Weber State of Construction University
Contact:

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Isolder74 »

8 wings. Well that really narrows it down. That really doesn't help numbers-wise much.
Hapan Battle Dragons Rule!
When you want peace prepare for war! --Confusious
That was disapointing ..Should we show this Federation how to build a ship so we may have worthy foes? Typhonis 1
The Prince of The Writer's Guild|HAB Spacewolf Tank General| God Bless America!
Samuel
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4750
Joined: 2008-10-23 11:36am

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Samuel »

Isolder74 wrote:8 wings. Well that really narrows it down. That really doesn't help numbers-wise much.
Opps- terminology my bad. He mentions 4 waves and ighter squadrens 6,7 and 8. I have no idea what the sizes are for either of those or if that is all they have.
User avatar
Isolder74
Official SD.Net Ace of Cakes
Posts: 6762
Joined: 2002-07-10 01:16am
Location: Weber State of Construction University
Contact:

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Isolder74 »

Samuel wrote:
Isolder74 wrote:8 wings. Well that really narrows it down. That really doesn't help numbers-wise much.
Opps- terminology my bad. He mentions 4 waves and ighter squadrens 6,7 and 8. I have no idea what the sizes are for either of those or if that is all they have.
Bear in mind the term wave isn't much better. A wave could be dozens of squadrons, or only just one. A wing in fact could, depending on the mission be as few as 10 units or as many as 100. Squadrons in fact can even represent a varied number of craft.
Hapan Battle Dragons Rule!
When you want peace prepare for war! --Confusious
That was disapointing ..Should we show this Federation how to build a ship so we may have worthy foes? Typhonis 1
The Prince of The Writer's Guild|HAB Spacewolf Tank General| God Bless America!
User avatar
dragon
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4151
Joined: 2004-09-23 04:42pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by dragon »

One thing to consider is that the mirror verse was able to build a semi working copy of the Defiant in 6 months with a limited resource base that they had avaible on the alternate DS9. So if a non space dock limited resources can build a Defiant class vessel in 6 months than something like ship yards that Alexska (I think) analyzed. Speaking of which what happen to it. It used to be sticked.

Also we know from the size of the federation that many of there ships were spread out and on the other side of the terriority. So even during the War alot of the vessel would have been left on normal deployments to keep the peace. Especially since we know they have pirates that raid federation space occasionly so some ships will have to deal with that and others. Plus you'll have convoy protections wihich will use up alot of the ships.

Kind of like during WWII we had several big fleets in the Pacific, in the Atlantic plus we had the convoy fleets, but even with all that we still had ships operating alone or in small groups else where to continue there normal operations.


People wise might be a bottle neck when you consider the academy is 4 years and the one ship was full of cadets and got behind enemy lines.
But we know that others than officers serve such as Obrien but they don't mention anything his school. And during a time of War such as that you might have a draft but the majority of them wouldn't be nothing more than grunts.

Granted alot of that 4 years is devoted to leadership, tatics and such so a drafted person could be given a a basic 6 month course on one section of the ship and that would be their duty.
"There are very few problems that cannot be solved by the suitable application of photon torpedoes
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Alyeska »

I unstickied that old Ship Production and Utopia Planitia thread because it is not a fair representation. I am proud of the work I did at that time, but it is fundamentally flawed. I speculated like crazy and just assumed one thing after another. There are a few facts we can pull for Federation production capabilities.

The Mirror Universe rebels with limited resources were capable of building a Defiant class ship from start to finish in a span of no more then 4 months. We know their resources were limited because they were forced to bring the unfinished ship from the Badlands to Terok Nor for final work and fittings. So it would seem that they didn't actually have dedicated ship building capabilities, though they might have had an abundance of labor. We can use this to make some assumptions, but grounded on established facts. I find it reasonable to assume that the Federation is capable of building a Defiant class ship in a shorter period of time than the Mirror Universe rebels were. I assumed a period of 2 months. That is balls to the walls full speed war time construction here. Not peace time "milk it as long as we can for a job" construction rates.

Anyway, this translates into some useful information for us. We know they can build ships of similar size to the Defiant in a fairly short period of time. If they were in full on war footing at a shipyard, I could see a single ship birth being capable of producing 6 ships of Defiant size in a single year. Bigger ships will naturally take longer to construct. At what speed, I have no idea.


Anyway, for anyone interested, this is my old (and flawed) Utopia Planitia analysis. Take it for what you will. It has some useful information, and a lot of speculation.
Observational Analysis of Utopia Planitia Shipyards and shipbuilding assessment.

In the Voyager episode “Relativity” we are shown a fairly good view of the Utopia Planitia Shipyards (UPS) and the various aspects if consists of. On screen we see approximately 2 dozen skeletal and spider frame type ship berths as well as 3 large space stations in the background. The size of these space stations is not directly discernable from the screen shots.

Image
You can see in the back ground three oddly shaped space stations with dome like elements to them. For the purpose of this essay they will be referred to as the primary shipyards.

Image

Image

Image

Reference shots for Spider and Skeletal frame ship berths.

In order to first determine the ship building capabilities of UPS we must first determine how many ship berths they have. This will give us the start of a capability to determine total ship building capacity in a single year. As part of the reference we know that early Galaxy class construction and design work was done at UPS and that Leah Brahms worked on the project from an office at UPS. A holodeck recreation of her office shows that it has a window looking over ship construction capabilities within an enclosed space station.

Image

This is either the USS Galaxy prototype under construction or the USS Enterprise. This is from approximately the mid point of Galaxy design and construction. The primary frame appears to have been decided upon but the warp core and M/AM reactors had not been fully designed and installed at this point.

Thanks to “Relativity” we know that UPS has three large space stations that could possibly enclose a ship the size of the Galaxy class. Looking at CGI shots of this very same space station as shown in the Star Trek Magazine and the Ships of the Line 2004 calendar we see that these stations have 8 primary doors in the frame. When you consider that a known Galaxy class starship has been inside of one of these stations you can begin to estimate the size of the station.

Image
Star Trek Magazine CGI shot of station for reference.

This station appears to be split into several elements that can be designated.

Image

The station is separated into 4 primary sections.

Section 1: Half Spheres
This section appears to be the primary ship building section of the station. It has 4 obvious space doors on each half sphere along with 4 other possible space doors for possible resource transfer or movement of oddly shaped starships.

Section 2: Domes
This section appears to be similar in design to Section 1, but on a smaller scale. Given its general size and appearance I would hazard a guess that it is primarily for construction of shuttle and utility craft size vehicles. Such as Shuttles, Runabouts, Tac-Fighters, and work bees.

Section 3: Central Core
This section connects the whole station together. Its possible that habitat areas are in here, but it would be more appropriate as an onsite manufacturing location of raw materials into needed finish products to be built as part of a starship. This is possibly were assembly of starship sections is connected. It would also be the storage area of various raw and finished materials.

Section 4: Habitat Area
Judging by the design of these sections it would appear to be the primary habitat on the station. Administration, housing, and recreation most likely occur in these sections.

Now that we have defined the sections of the station we need to get a general feel for its size to properly estimate its ship building capability.

For the sake of simplicity I am assuming the station is directly facing me with its doors. I know there is going to be an error rate, but it will be close enough for our purposes.

One of the main doors comes out to 20 pixels wide. This is a shipyards so its logical to assume the doors are made fairly large in case of bigger ships that might some day be produced. For arguments sake we will assume the doors are 50% wider then the saucer section of a GCS class ship. This puts a GCS saucer at being 2/3 the width of this door. Call it 13 pixels to the width of a GCS saucer. That works out to 470 meters (saucer width) divided by 13 pixels. Thats 36.15 meters per pixel.

The station from very top to very bottom is 469 pixels. That works out to 16,954 meters tall.

Now lets look at this station from a very conservative perspective. The station can just barely fit in a Galaxy class ship. 19 pixels to 470 meters. Thats 24.74 meters per pixel and the station works to be 11,603 meters tall.

Lets get some more dimensions. Going by 37.15 meters per pixel we get the following.

Image

Now that we have established a size for the station we can begin to estimate its internal capacity.

Given the size of the station and the internal volume I would estimate a limit of no more then 32 Galaxy class size ships being built at one time. 16 per half, 4 per door section (provided each section is isolated). With 3 of these stations we have a total capacity of 96 large frame ships. Knowing how large the Galaxy class is, we can safely assume that these stations have the capacity to work on several smaller ships in the same area. So if UPS wanted to churn out Sabre class destroyers, they could probably do 3 times as many, 3 small frames per large frame. Call it 288 small frame ships.

So what of the skeleton and spider frames? Do we assume they can handle ships from the very start? I am inclined to say no. I think the main stations build the basic frame and from there they can be sent to one of the exterior stations if they wish. This clears up another berth and effectively increases the shipbuilding capacity. If you have an equal number of exterior births to interior births, you have double the capacity almost with a fraction of the materials expense because you don’t need 6 massive stations, just 3. Judging by the size of the stations I would say they easily produce more manufacturing then they can use.

Now given what we did see of Utopia Planitia and that we saw some spider and skeleton frames near some stations in some frames and not others we can conclude we have seen parts of the base. We have seen a minimum of two dozen exterior facilities in just one shot, but we can easily conclude more exist. For the sake of making an estimation of ship building capacity I am going to assume a total of 4 dozen exist. Judging by the size of these frames it would appear that roughly 1/3 of the spider and skeletal frames can handle large frames. All frames can work on small and medium frame ships.

UPS has a total estimated capacity of 96 large frame ships in the stations and another 16 in exterior frames. A total of 112 large ships can be constructed all at once. However, this is unlikely to occur because it would use up all station berths and prevent small and medium frame ship construction. Total small frame construction is going to be 288 from the stations and another 48 from the frame stations. This totals out at 336 small frame ships being constructed at any one time. Medium frame ships while significantly smaller then large frame ships still have rather large external volume and will not be able to fit into large frame berths as freely as small frame ships do. To simplify things I will estimate that the interior capability of 96 large frame ships will be multiplied by 1 2/3. This gives us a total medium frame capacity of 160 ships in the stations and another 48 in exterior stations. A total medium frame capacity of 208 ships at one time.

Now that we’ve determined ship berth capacity, lets look at ship construction times.

Well we have some information that might shed light on this. The Alternate Universe was able to build a Defiant class ship in no more then 4 months time without use of proper ship building facilities. Conservative estimates put it at 3 months construction in a very limited base in the bad lands with using DS9 for another month of final fitting. DS9 was critical to finishing the Defiant because it had facilities the rebels needed to build the ship. This means for whatever they did for the previous 3 months it was limited. Even still DS9 is not a proper ship building asset. Assuming proper ship building assets can cut the construction time by ½ that gives us a build time of just 2 months for a small frame ship.

With a small frame capacity of 336 frames and a 2 month construction time UPS can build 2016 small frame ships in a single year. Going for a more conservative estimate of 4 months construction time based on the AU incident with the Defiant gives us a total of 1008 small frames. A mid ranged estimate of 3 months nets us a total capacity of 1344 small frames.

What about large frame ships?

The time frame between Generations and First Contact is just 2 years. Several months after the destruction of the Enterprise-D Worf did not see or know of another Enterprise being built. By the time of First Contact the Enterprise-E was a year out of construction and finished with shakedown. Also after the loss of 39 ships at Wolf 359 it was said it would only take a year to replace the lost ships. Some of those ships were large frame ships (Ambassador and Nebula).

Assuming a 12 month build time on a large frame ship we get a total capacity of 112 large frame ships in a single year. However to use a more conservative estimate scaling up from a small frame ship being built we can use a 24 month build time. Assuming staggered construction UPS would be able to complete 56 large frames in a single year.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Patroklos
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2577
Joined: 2009-04-14 11:00am

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Patroklos »

Although Federation starships are bigger than Jem'Hadar bugs, Federation fighters are smaller. If the Federation include fighters in their ship counts, then the tonnage per ship in a Federation fleet may not outweigh the tonnage per ship in a Dominion fleet. And that's ignoring the Cardassians entirely, who have both big ships and big fighters.
They may be including their "fighters" as well, but as any DS9 fleet battle will clearly show they are pretty much an insignificant portion of the Federation order of battle. If you have some other source that suggest other wise I would be very interested in seeing it. Even vessels of the Defiant's type are insignificant as far as numbers go. The bulk of the fleed seems to be omposed of 200m+ vessels.
Before the writers changed ST combat through magic wand, bugs weren't really that terrible and per-ton were arguably comparable to larger ships. In the later 'we watched B5' scenes they're popped with single hits, Defiant chews through half a dozen etc, and yet they're still a threat to larger ships.
The Defiant has never had a problem shredding them by the half dozen. We barely see a thing about the destuction of the fleet around the changeling homeworld and given the scales of the Dominion fleets we see in the AQ the dominion fleets in the DQ most have outnumbered that fleet by a far greater degree. Even events like the Odessey were not wartime circumstances. Face it, the bugs/fighters/attack ships have always been throw away plot divises sacrificed by the dozens to all pretty explosions and "we are awesome" moments for the DS9 cast. Honestly, how many hundreds of those ships have the DS9 cast destroyed just by themselves?
You do realize what that does to the battle, right? The Jem'Hadar Attackship is most definitely not a fighter. That means the Dominion and allies have 1,200 ships to Starfleet having likely fewer then 400 ships. At this point it becomes what is more plausible in my book. Did they count the fighters and expect to fight a 3-1 battle? Or did they not count the fighters and expect to win a 2-1 battle?
Either way they had several times the superiority in tonage. It was obviously not considered a suicide mission, they expected to be able to not only hold their own in a slugging match but also to break through, they had to consider their force at least equal in power for any of that episode to make sense.
Patroklos
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2577
Joined: 2009-04-14 11:00am

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Patroklos »

People wise might be a bottle neck when you consider the academy is 4 years and the one ship was full of cadets and got behind enemy lines.
But we know that others than officers serve such as Obrien but they don't mention anything his school. And during a time of War such as that you might have a draft but the majority of them wouldn't be nothing more than grunts.
The people bottleneck will be there but it is not insurmountable. The bulk of US naval officers pre WWII were from the USNA yet they were able to more than quadruple the fleet size by the end of the war in just four years. You can do this through reactivating retired of resigned officers, but mostly through ROTC/OCS programs that bring college educated civilians up to speed and into the fleet in three months to a year. Several academy classes were commissioned early en masse (as well as private military academies like the Citadel and VMI). Non government military corps were very instrumental is supplying officers, Texas A&M provided more than any other source during WWII (including any individual academy). It should be remembered that the majority of the curriculum of a service academy is degree oriented like any other college/university. If you simply take out the stictly military training you can easily knock it out in one year's time. It will certainly not have the same effect of spreading it out nore do the recurits benefit from the emersion into the military life for four years prior to hitting the fleet, but it is possible.

The real bottleneck is when you run out of people to recruit/draft in that education level.
User avatar
AirshipFanboy
Youngling
Posts: 94
Joined: 2005-11-06 04:39pm

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by AirshipFanboy »

Alyeska wrote:We know they count Runabouts as separate ships, but I highly doubt the Fighter is counted. That thing is quite small. Just like shuttles don't get counted (no individual registries), I do not consider the fighters into that count. If you do, it just makes the situation worse on realism. How can Starfleet with such a small relative mainline fleet take on such a larger enemy?
Well, we don't know the size of Starfleet, or the proportion of its total tonnage made up by fighters. It could be like Patroklos says, and the fighters make up only a small portion of the fleet.
Patroklos wrote: They may be including their "fighters" as well, but as any DS9 fleet battle will clearly show they are pretty much an insignificant portion of the Federation order of battle. If you have some other source that suggest other wise I would be very interested in seeing it.
I don't have a source, it was just speculation intended to bridge the gap between DS9 and TNG fleets. TNG fleets have low ship counts and no observed fighters, whereas DS9 fleets have high ship counts and fighters.

I am perfectly willing to entertain the idea that they don't count fighters.
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Alyeska »

Patroklos wrote:They may be including their "fighters" as well, but as any DS9 fleet battle will clearly show they are pretty much an insignificant portion of the Federation order of battle. If you have some other source that suggest other wise I would be very interested in seeing it. Even vessels of the Defiant's type are insignificant as far as numbers go. The bulk of the fleed seems to be omposed of 200m+ vessels.
Size wise, they are insignificant. But their contributions less so. We have seen that a flight of the fighters are sufficent to cripple a Galor class ship. But when you trade actual ship numbers for fighters, it no longer becomes a fair trade.
Either way they had several times the superiority in tonage. It was obviously not considered a suicide mission, they expected to be able to not only hold their own in a slugging match but also to break through, they had to consider their force at least equal in power for any of that episode to make sense.
They thought they had a chance to stop DS9 from disabling the minefield. They didn't expect to survive But I find 3-1 odds to be even more insane then 2-1 odds in large scale fleet combat. That goes outside the realm of believability.

We know they count Runabouts as ships, but not shuttles. Runabouts are fairly infrequent. Typically just encountered on space stations or starbases. Shuttles are everywhere. The number of fighters seen indicate large dispersal amongst the fleet. Why assume they are counted towards the actual fleet size when making such assumptions means throwing the numbers game out of balance? If the Federation was outnumbered by the Dominion to a significant degree, how could survival ever have been expected? You see the battles. Federation ships die just as easily as Dominion ships. You don't seem to understand what counting the fighters does to the math with direct comparisons and how lopsided things become. This stretches believability to a significant degree.

There is no direct evidence that the fighters are counted as ships like Runabouts. Counting fighters as ships creates problems into itself. Finish the train of thought.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Darth Wong »

IIRC, they never bothered counting the fighters separately as an asset when they compared their fleet sizes. There are two explanations for this:
  1. They count them as "ships", and they are more effective against the smaller Dominion bugships than you think.
  2. They do not count them as "ships", nor do they bother counting them as an asset at all, thus it was not worth even mentioning them when comparing their assets to those of the enemy.
Seriously, does #2 actually sound more reasonable to you?
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

Post by Alyeska »

Darth Wong wrote:IIRC, they never bothered counting the fighters separately as an asset when they compared their fleet sizes. There are two explanations for this:
  1. They count them as "ships", and they are more effective against the smaller Dominion bugships than you think.
  2. They do not count them as "ships", nor do they bother counting them as an asset at all, thus it was not worth even mentioning them when comparing their assets to those of the enemy.
Seriously, does #2 actually sound more reasonable to you?
When it takes 4 of them working in unison to damage a single Galor, and two of them get blown into pieces, their usefulness only occurs in large numbers. Except even if the entire fleet was made up of them, they are still outnumbered by the Dominion 2-1. Those things would have to be insanely effective.

Watching the Sacrafice of Angles clips I have, here is what I gathered.

In the very first pass we see a group of 6 fighters pass a Galor causing minimal damage. The Galor returns fire destroying one fighter which crashes into the Galor with an explosion that looks comparable to a torpedo.

In the next scene with fighters we see 10 Fighters around a Galor (others are also present) and it appears that at least 7 of them are attacking this specific Galor. In the scene the Galor blows away two fighters while a Jem'Hadar cruiser takes down a third.

In the finale scene involving the fighters we see what looks like 6 different groups of 4 fighter flights. Three of these flights appear to be flying in a larger formation attacking a ship off screen. One of these flights of 4 is the primary focus as it makes a bombing run on a Galor. The damage is sufficient to cause the ship to start listing forward, so to speak. No fighters appear to be destroyed this time through.

While useful, they require large numbers to take on an enemy ship, and even then are often ganked in return. The enemy ship might be damaged or crippled, but the fighters are getting blown to pieces in a single shot.

The episode indicates a fair number of fighters. They utilize fighters solely for an extended period of time early in the battle. So the fighters have to fight on their own with no support from the larger starfleet ships. If the fighters are counted against the ship count, this is where I believe it causes problems. They are not effective even on a one-to-one basis. They require large numbers. And even the largest possible number of them if part of the ship count is only half of what the Dominion has fielded.

Another thing that comes to mind. Sisko calls these Fighters. Never anything else. They say their fleet is 600 ships strong. A fighter and a ship are two separate things in my book. The smallest Starfleet ship in the battle was either a Saber or the Defiant, at 120 meters. I find it a wild leap to consider the fighter also a ship. They specifically called them fighters, and they are drastically different from the ship, even in purpose.

Why would they count the fighters as a ship? Inflate their own apparent size for no good reason? And when already shown that they aren't even effective on a one-to-one basis, doesn't counting the fighters towards the ship total make the battle even more absurd that Starfleet even considered they could win with such small craft?

It does not make any sense. The fighter is an asset, but not a ship asset. When comparing fleet sizes, counting your 10 meter fighters against the enemy 80 meter corvettes as a straight numbers comparison just doesn't work. At this point you might as well count their shuttles towards the ship size. They have some weapons and are in the same size range. Why not? If we count fighters as an actual ship to inflate the size of the fleet compared to the Dominion, lets also count the shuttles. 3 shuttles per ship, and lets say 200 ships capable of carrying them. Thats another 600 "ships" to add to the fleet count.
  1. They count them as "ships", and they are more effective against the smaller Dominion bugships than you think.
  2. They do not count them as "ships", nor do they bother counting them as an asset at all, thus it was not worth even mentioning them when comparing their assets to those of the enemy.
Counting fighters as a ship asset doesn't make sense. They should have counted the number of wings available. But counting individual fighters towards the total ship count does not make an iota of sense in a direct force on force comparison. Especially when the fighters require numerical superiority to even be remotely effective, but face an enemy who has the superior numbers. Not counting the fighter wings available was a mistake. But in turn claiming that the fighters are part of the ship count makes things worse, not better.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Locked