What stops Starfleet from building more ships?

[Terralthra]

If I recall correctly, the Lakota was also told that the Defiant was being crewed by Changelings on their way to Earth. The Lakota was ordered to shoot to kill. The Defiant was deliberately holding back.

[Captain Seafort]

The Lakota was holding back as well - she never used QTs, ultimately despite Leyton's order to do so.

[Patrick Degan]

If I recall correctly, the Lakota was also told that the Defiant was being crewed by Changelings on their way to Earth. The Lakota was ordered to shoot to kill. The Defiant was deliberately holding back.

Not by much, apparently. At one point, Kira commented that the Lakota had taken worse damage than the Defiant. "One good hit will probably finish them off," she tells the bridge crew.

[Chris OFarrell]

Yes, but Worf still wasn't shooting to kill and AFIK it didn't fire any Quantum torpedeos either. His orders were in fact to target the Lakotas weapons, though with the Defiants PPC's, I can't see how that would be done very well, which might explain the somewhat more messy results.

I don't think either ship wanted to kill anyone, except Kira who had a somewhat more pragmatic 'them or us' approach. The Defiant at the end of the engagement had some systems damage, but still had minimal shields and was, as a warship, still in fighting shape. The Lakota was at the mercy of the Defiant. I think its safe to say both ships went at it about as hardcore as the other. And the Defiant was the victor. The Lakota was upgraded with the best gear Starfleet had, including the stuff like Quantums which have only been seen on the Defiant and Enterprise and some very powerful phasers. But compared to a custom built modern ship like the Defiant a fraction of the size, it just couldn't compete.

[Stark]

If they refused to use their best weapons (I guess out of some confusion or loyalty), how can you say that they weren't holding back? They 'held back' all right. All it says is that Lakota without QTs is weaker than Defiant with QTs (arguably) and since Lakota doesn't have massively wanked dakka dakka guns that's hardly surprising. Her phasers clearly sucked given how much they tag the shit out of Defiant.

[Chris OFarrell]

If they refused to use their best weapons (I guess out of some confusion or loyalty), how can you say that they weren't holding back? They 'held back' all right. All it says is that Lakota without QTs is weaker than Defiant with QTs (arguably)

Holding back evenly that is. And frankly the energy weapons comparision is the most critical part, the Defiant despite being a fraciton of the volume can clearly delivery more firepower through its energy weapons then the much larger and heavily upgraded Lakota.

Who said the Defiant ever fired Q-Torps at the Lakota? Mostly it was phasers, with a single photon that we saw fired aft. Both ships were trying to disable the other with a minimum of damage, I can't see the Defiant breaking out its most powerful weapons (the single photon in fact was fired at an angle that hit the shields and couldn't have hit the hull if it penetrated). Dito the reason no dobut why the Lakota did not.

and since Lakota doesn't have massively wanked dakka dakka guns that's hardly surprising. Her phasers clearly sucked given how much they tag the shit out of Defiant.

Uh no, the first two phaser blasts from the Lakota took something like 40% off the Defiants port shields. Thats no fucking small amount of Dakka.

[Stark]

Are you stupid? People are saying Lakota wasn't holding back, when she was ordered to fire QTs and didn't. That's pretty fucking obviously holding back, right?

And yes yes genius do I have to post the video of Lakota blasting Defiant about a dozen times as she flies along her length dakkaing a few times? PS, if 12 hits don't even bring shields down your phasers might suck and the QT upgrade might have been the primary offensive upgrade, and since they didn't use them Lakota's combat performance may be very skewed in this example due to their obviuosly holding back.

EDIT - lol for unmarked edit to save your ass. Hilariuosly 'can clearly direct more xyz through energy weapons' IS WHAT I JUST FUCKING SAID, since Lakota's phasers clearly suck comparatively.

[Simon_Jester]

I don't think either ship was holding back much, except for the mutual refusal to use quantum torpedoes. Here's why:
_______

At the end of the engagement, Lakota has taken more damage than Defiant, but not vastly so; both ships are at least significantly damaged. Lakota is on its last legs; it's not clear how much more Defiant could take. Earlier on, the O'Brien remarks on the weapons upgrades Lakota has received after taking only two phaser hits that knocked Defiant to "port shields at sixty percent." It seams reasonable to infer that five or six hits on the same area would burn through Defiant's shields. [At least locally; can Trek ships have localized shield failures?]

So except for not using quantum torpedoes, I don't think Lakota was holding back much. If it was, then we are forced to conclude that Lakota could have easily overwhelmed Defiant's shields in the opening seconds of the battle. Which implies that Lakota was vastly more powerful than Defiant. To me, that seems unlikely; if it were easy to upgrade Excelsiors to be far stronger than Defiants, the Defiant would never have been built in the first place.

Conversely, Defiant might have been holding back, but there's no compelling reason to assume it was. We know that they fired at least one photon torpedo, whereas (apparently) Lakota used only phasers. Since torpedoes are much more powerful than phaser strikes, it seems unlikely that they would be used by a ship that was deliberately holding back to avoid causing excessive damage.

So I don't think Defiant was holding back much either, except for (again) choosing not to use quantum torpedoes.

=======

I'm going to try to do a bit of analysis for the hell of it:

Looking at Defiant's strafing run, it seems as though Lakota's fire was distributed more or less evenly around the entire surface of Defiant's shield bubble. Either this made a difference, in the ability of the shield to absorb damage, or Lakota was putting less power on target during the strafing run. Otherwise, the several seconds' fire Defiant took while strafing should have collapsed its shield and ended the battle right there, based on the effectiveness of Lakota's first two shots.

In which case, why did Defiant win?
_______

The following is all guesswork. I haven't seen much DS9, so there could easily be evidence I don't know about to contradict it:

1) By Federation standards, Defiant is a specialized gunship. Presumably, it is designed to route as much power to shields and weapons as possible. We know it's designed for high-intensity phaser bursts; I infer that it's also designed to route as much power as possible to shields.
1a) Being able to recharge shields in a hurry would work well with Defiant's preferred tactic of making strafing runs rather than loitering at close range. Against an enemy with heavy firepower like the Borg cubes it was designed to fight, the Defiant could make a firing pass, then pull out to quickly restore its shields for another run.
1b) Since Defiant has limited internal volume, its designers may have chosen to sacrifice energy storage for armament or power generation. This would give it little short-term endurance before it exhausts its 'batteries,' but great long-term endurance because it can recharge its batteries quickly.
1c) A larger, less maneuverable ship [like an Excelsior-class] might instead rely on maximizing the amount of energy stored in its shields, rather than concentrating on being able to direct more power to it.

2) Lakota's weapons fit may have been enhanced without corresponding upgrades to its power plant. If so, then while Lakota may have high peak weapons power output and strong shields, its ability to replenish shields and deliver sustained firepower during a long engagement will be limited by its energy storage.
2a) Since Lakota was refitted with an eye to supporting a coup attempt, this would make some sense. In such a scenario, you're likely to be shooting at ships that are ambiguous about shooting back. Having unusually powerful weapons will let you overawe an opponent, possibly knocking it out quickly with a lucky hit or frightening it into a retreat (Defiant's bridge crew discusses retreat during the scene, but rules it out). Being unable to keep using those weapons at full power for long periods is a weakness that can (hopefully) be concealed.

3) Given (1) and (2), I speculate that the Defiant won by using its standard strafing tactics until Lakota's energy storage was depleted, then exploiting its superior power generation to hammer down the enemy's shields while resisting its weapons fire. This may explain the 'poorly aimed' photon torpedo Defiant fires: the torpedo was aimed against the shield itself, with the goal of reducing it as fast as possible.
3a) During the segment we see, Defiant took about as much pounding on its shields as it could stand, assuming that Lakota's phaser power output did not drop between the first shots fired and the end of the (first) strafing run. I infer that it broke off to recharge as described above in (1a).

[Darth Wong]

There is no need to explain why Defiant won, when there is no clear indication that Defiant did in fact win. At the end of the battle, it looked more like two weary punch-drunk fighters, neither of whom wanted to land the final knockout blow.

[Simon_Jester]

There is no need to explain why Defiant won, when there is no clear indication that Defiant did in fact win. At the end of the battle, it looked more like two weary punch-drunk fighters, neither of whom wanted to land the final knockout blow.

From Defiant's report, it sounds like they could go another round or two, while (if Defiant is to be believed) Lakota is going to get blown out of space if they keep fighting:

Jadzia: "Shields are almost gone, we have major systems failures on decks 1, 3, and 4"
Worf: "What about the Lakota?"
Kira: "They're in worse shape: one good hit will probably finish them."
O'Brien: "And kill everyone on board!"

So they're both weary and punch-drunk, but Defiant is at least marginally less so. If the bridge crew isn't reading their instruments wrong, they're at least somewhat better off than the Lakota. And yet the Lakota managed to make a serious dent in Defiant's shields with just two phaser shots in the opening seconds of the engagement. I thought that was peculiar enough to warrant a little speculation, but I don't expect anyone else to take it seriously if they don't care.

[Darth Wong]

I think it's worth pointing out that the first few shots usually do far too much damage in a typical Star Trek battle for the ship to last anywhere near as long as it does. It's always been a weak spot in terms of their writing: the damage to the ship always goes from zero to severe, then ... a bit more severe ... and ... a bit more severe ... and we're almost done for ... but not quite ... oops, another hit ... whoa, we're in trouble now ... etc.

[Serafina]

I think it's worth pointing out that the first few shots usually do far too much damage in a typical Star Trek battle for the ship to last anywhere near as long as it does. It's always been a weak spot in terms of their writing: the damage to the ship always goes from zero to severe, then ... a bit more severe ... and ... a bit more severe ... and we're almost done for ... but not quite ... oops, another hit ... whoa, we're in trouble now ... etc.

You know, it actually may make some kind of sense. If we look at the flimsy engineering of Star Trek ships, any hit that penetrates the shields and is strong enough to do hull damage (anyhting but peashooters) may cripple the ship or blow it to pieces. If the warp core is hit, it will blow up. If the structural integrity field collapses, it will crumble under its own weight. If the main computer frame fails, nothing will work. And so on.

Under such conditions, any hit may cause serious damage. Thus, if you take any noticable hull damage, you are in severe danger.

[Batman]

Does not follow. While Starfleet ships ARE for some reason prone to hull hits doing damage to systems that ought to be unaffected thanks to being located a good ways off that DOESN'T mean their engineering is flimsy WRT hull strength. It's just stupid (like them NOT having a circuit breaker equivalent for whaterver powers those consoles).
The Warp core blowing up if it is hit is sort of inevitable, what with it being a M/AM reactor. I suspect you're thinking of the first flight Galaxies Warp core tendency to blow up WITHOUT being hit when basically ANY part of the ship was damaged or somebody looked at it crossly.
A ship crumbling under it's own weight is a nonconcern out in space where ship doesn't HAVE weight and I don't recall that ever actually happening?
The problem isn't flimsy Starfleet hull designs, it's the writers needing critical systems damaged while not thinking about how to actually ACHIEVE that, which results in Starfleet ships being crippled by hits that SHOULD be moderately inconsequential.

[Simon_Jester]

I think it's worth pointing out that the first few shots usually do far too much damage in a typical Star Trek battle for the ship to last anywhere near as long as it does. It's always been a weak spot in terms of their writing: the damage to the ship always goes from zero to severe, then ... a bit more severe ... and ... a bit more severe ... and we're almost done for ... but not quite ... oops, another hit ... whoa, we're in trouble now ... etc.

It's a weak spot in the writing, yes.

In your opinion, could such an effect reasonably be explained by an energy storage vs. power generation problem, assuming the desire to give it an answer beyond "stupid writers?" I'd think that if the phaser banks are running off some kind of capacitors or storage rings, the first shots of the engagement would generally be more energetic than subsequent shots, unless the ship takes an unusually long time between shots to replenish the batteries.

Or is there something fundamentally wrong with that approach?
________

A ship crumbling under it's own weight is a nonconcern out in space where ship doesn't HAVE weight and I don't recall that ever actually happening?

Ships maneuvering under power need structural integrity, whether that comes from a field generator on the ship or from having a strong hull. So hull damage (or reductions in SI field strength) would still be bad for the ship during combat even if they're not a problem if the ship is in free fall.

The problem would be even worse for ships that have already suffered hull weakening due to structural damage or old age. A phaser that carves a trench in a new hull might shatter an old one riddled with microfractures.

[Chris OFarrell]

It would make a great deal of sense in the terms of the Lakota. They might have been able to slap the phasers from a Sovereign or something onto it, but even with the best powerplant they could shoehorn into the spaceframe, they just can't power them like a real BB could. So the first couple of shots did a lot of damage to the Defiants shields because the weapons were fully charged, but then they were firing much lower powered shots...

[Patroklos]

It very well could be that the legendary crew of the Defiant simply out fought the Lakota.

[Simon_Jester]

It very well could be that the legendary crew of the Defiant simply out fought the Lakota.

Yes, but I think the best "legendary crew saves the day" stories are the ones in which the legendary crew is able to use good tactics to make the most of their equipment, rather than just winning because they're so damn legendary.

[Alyeska]

It would make a great deal of sense in the terms of the Lakota. They might have been able to slap the phasers from a Sovereign or something onto it, but even with the best powerplant they could shoehorn into the spaceframe, they just can't power them like a real BB could. So the first couple of shots did a lot of damage to the Defiants shields because the weapons were fully charged, but then they were firing much lower powered shots...

Phaser capacitors. I still like that concept. The phasers are capable of putting forth more energy then the reactor is capable of fullfiling. So they use capacitors. That would explain why in most battles in Trek, the ships tend to fire a lot of phasers early in the battle but shortly after that they trickle down to one or two beams at a time in extended engagements with reduced rates of fire.

[Serafina]

Does not follow. While Starfleet ships ARE for some reason prone to hull hits doing damage to systems that ought to be unaffected thanks to being located a good ways off that DOESN'T mean their engineering is flimsy WRT hull strength. It's just stupid (like them NOT having a circuit breaker equivalent for whaterver powers those consoles).
The Warp core blowing up if it is hit is sort of inevitable, what with it being a M/AM reactor. I suspect you're thinking of the first flight Galaxies Warp core tendency to blow up WITHOUT being hit when basically ANY part of the ship was damaged or somebody looked at it crossly.
A ship crumbling under it's own weight is a nonconcern out in space where ship doesn't HAVE weight and I don't recall that ever actually happening?
The problem isn't flimsy Starfleet hull designs, it's the writers needing critical systems damaged while not thinking about how to actually ACHIEVE that, which results in Starfleet ships being crippled by hits that SHOULD be moderately inconsequential.

This does not really refute my point. Why i admit that "crumbling under its own weight" was bad semantics, a starship without its structural integrity field will be crushed by its own mass if it accelerates/deccelerates.

We saw numerous starships blowing up after a single shield-penetrating hit. Whatever the reason, this makes every hit potentally fatal and every damage severe. The first Galaxies are excellent examples for this effect. But we saw numerous other starships being blown apart from single hits.

My point is that the damage reports do not need tgo be accurate descriptions of the actual damage, but rather desctiptions of the danger to the ship. A "severe" damage does not have to translate to "40% of all systems damaged or lost", it may indicate "another hit may blow us apart if we are unlucky". After all, it is ridiculously easy to breach a warpcore with a lucky hit.

[RedImperator]

This does not really refute my point. Why i admit that "crumbling under its own weight" was bad semantics, a starship without its structural integrity field will be crushed by its own mass if it accelerates/deccelerates.

That didn't happen to Voyager in "Year of Hell". The ship went to warp without a SIF and suffered severe hull damage, but the underlying frame remained intact.

[Ted C]

It would make a great deal of sense in the terms of the Lakota. They might have been able to slap the phasers from a Sovereign or something onto it, but even with the best powerplant they could shoehorn into the spaceframe, they just can't power them like a real BB could. So the first couple of shots did a lot of damage to the Defiants shields because the weapons were fully charged, but then they were firing much lower powered shots...

Phaser capacitors. I still like that concept. The phasers are capable of putting forth more energy then the reactor is capable of fullfiling. So they use capacitors. That would explain why in most battles in Trek, the ships tend to fire a lot of phasers early in the battle but shortly after that they trickle down to one or two beams at a time in extended engagements with reduced rates of fire.

Would these capacitors be the "EPS taps" mentioned in TNG "A Matter of Time", in which they had to rapidly discharge all of the "EPS taps" through the phasers to affect the polluted atmosphere of the planet?

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Dat ... mit=Submit

[Batman]

Phaser capacitors. I still like that concept. The phasers are capable of putting forth more energy then the reactor is capable of fullfiling. So they use capacitors.

Doesn't TWOK sort of cement that they DO (or at least DID) use something like that? The Big E was pretty much dead in the water, they were on batteries according to Scotty, yet when Kirk asked for phasers the answers wasn't 'yeah but they'll be piss-ant weak' but 'a few shots', which when subsequently fired didn't seem to do noticeably less damage to the unshielded Reliant then the battle-ready Reliants did to the Big E. So phasers can apparently fire full-power shots (if not all that many of them) even when BOTH Impulse and Warp power are down, which in turn strongly suggests capacitors SOMEWHERE in the system.

SNIPPY for length

This does not really refute my point. Why i admit that "crumbling under its own weight" was bad semantics, a starship without its structural integrity field will be crushed by its own mass if it accelerates/deccelerates.

As evidenced by what? And how does that translate into any hull hit being potentially fatal?

We saw numerous starships blowing up after a single shield-penetrating hit. Whatever the reason, this makes every hit potentally fatal

True, as any hit on a modern day ship is potentially fatal. It's called a lucky hit. Doesn't say beans about their hull strength or how any hit is LIKELY to be fatal.

and every damage severe.

Wrong. Voyager got pounded into scrap on several (I'm inclined to say numerous) occasions and survived and remained largely intact after crashing in 'Timeless', and the E-D's primary hull survived reentry and a controlled crash in 'Generations (though if that was or without SIF is uncertain).

The first Galaxies are excellent examples for this effect. But we saw numerous other starships being blown apart from single hits.

And we've seen numerous starships NOT do it. Reliant and E-nil in TWOK (where E-nil at least was NOT at Battle Stations to deal with battle damage), numerous ships in DS9, both the Big E and Excelsior in TUC...

My point is that the damage reports do not need tgo be accurate descriptions of the actual damage, but rather desctiptions of the danger to the ship. A "severe" damage does not have to translate to "40% of all systems damaged or lost", it may indicate "another hit may blow us apart if we are unlucky"

Or it may mean 'there's one hell of a hole in the hull and I hope you had no personal effects in cargo because the cargo bays are GONE but otherwise, she's holding together. For now.'

After all, it is ridiculously easy to breach a warpcore with a lucky hit.

Of course it is. It's a Valendamned WARP CORE. It's ridiculously easy to set off the magazines of a modern day warship with a lucky hit too. Happened often enough in the real world. My problem is you seem to assume EVERY hull hit either WILL be or has a damn high CHANCE of being that lucky hit, either on the Warp core itself or some other vital system that will blow the ship apart, and that's simply not the case.

[Isolder74]

We saw numerous starships blowing up after a single shield-penetrating hit. Whatever the reason, this makes every hit potentally fatal and every damage severe. The first Galaxies are excellent examples for this effect. But we saw numerous other starships being blown apart from single hits.

A real world example of this is the HMS Hood. The Bismark scored a lucky hit on the forward magazine blowing the ship in half. It does not follow that we can assume that every British Battleship will die with a single hit when facing a German Battleship or any other battleship.

Remember in The Wrath of Kahn both ships pound each other to scrap and both still managed to stay in one piece.

[Simon_Jester]

Would these capacitors be the "EPS taps" mentioned in TNG "A Matter of Time", in which they had to rapidly discharge all of the "EPS taps" through the phasers to affect the polluted atmosphere of the planet?

Maybe. On the other hand, if I had to guess from context, I'd figure that "EPS" meant "Emergency Power System" or some such, and that "taps" were outlets (in the sense of the 'tap' on a keg of beer).

[Bounty]

Would these capacitors be the "EPS taps" mentioned in TNG "A Matter of Time", in which they had to rapidly discharge all of the "EPS taps" through the phasers to affect the polluted atmosphere of the planet?

Maybe. On the other hand, if I had to guess from context, I'd figure that "EPS" meant "Emergency Power System" or some such, and that "taps" were outlets (in the sense of the 'tap' on a keg of beer).

It usually stands for Electro-Plasma System, the one used to distribute energy through the ship.