test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Strike Fighter Squadrons/CAGs in Starfleet
megasilver
Member Posts: 61 Arc User
With everything we've seen in the Star Trek universe as a whole, it seems to be a united military, though it more resembles a "space navy," compared to all the other branches of the military. With the MACOs being the only thing that resembles any kind of special forces or infantry, there doesn't seem to be many forms of MOS's that pertain to any other type of branch. We do recognize them in the form of rank and recognition(petty officer, specialist, master sergeant, etc.).
Though, my deal is, why doesn't Starfleet, in times of war, more emulate the navy of old? Have something similar to a carrier group or a destroyer squadron of certain types of Starfleet vessels, not to mention strike fighter squadrons of various types. Whether it be from shuttlecrafts of danube and yellowstone class, or the more aerodynamic peregrine fighters, or the delta flyers, it would be nice to actually have an "air support" style of combat within Starfleet. STO has introduced the concept of aircraft carriers in space, so strike fighter squadrons would be very interesting to see.
Though I'm sure it would have a lot of disadvantages since the galaxy is still very vast and largely unexplored. As a former US Sailor with 7 years of experience, I can't help but wonder if these concepts would be introduced to the Star Trek media to make things more interesting. Whether it gets put in a movie, or even a new Star Trek TV show, it could once again pique the interest of a dying pop culture juggernaut that needs something fresh to keep it going, rather than just relying on remakes.
Now, what say the players? I want to hear from you.
Though, my deal is, why doesn't Starfleet, in times of war, more emulate the navy of old? Have something similar to a carrier group or a destroyer squadron of certain types of Starfleet vessels, not to mention strike fighter squadrons of various types. Whether it be from shuttlecrafts of danube and yellowstone class, or the more aerodynamic peregrine fighters, or the delta flyers, it would be nice to actually have an "air support" style of combat within Starfleet. STO has introduced the concept of aircraft carriers in space, so strike fighter squadrons would be very interesting to see.
Though I'm sure it would have a lot of disadvantages since the galaxy is still very vast and largely unexplored. As a former US Sailor with 7 years of experience, I can't help but wonder if these concepts would be introduced to the Star Trek media to make things more interesting. Whether it gets put in a movie, or even a new Star Trek TV show, it could once again pique the interest of a dying pop culture juggernaut that needs something fresh to keep it going, rather than just relying on remakes.
Now, what say the players? I want to hear from you.
Post edited by megasilver on
0
Comments
That scene contains several shots of wings of peregrine fighters as well as mentioning different organizational battle groups of starships. (My favourite being the "Galaxy wing" which I assume features the Galaxy class as the command ship with smaller ships following its orders)
Not bad. It's actually pretty darned interesting. Now that I'm thinking onto the Atrox carriers and the like, you figure there's already a crapload of personnel for each squadron. Engineers performing maintenance on the fighters, enlisted members serving the pilots. Though in the 25th century(and in the middle of space), 'plane captains' would be pretty impractical.
I like what you've shown me. It's given me a lot of things to think about in regards to this fandom.
many of the commissioned and enlistment titles would be long gone..... like the concept of a sail rigger is today.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
I dunno. I always saw some degree of divisions in a squadron like that working on the finer details of the shuttles/fighters. The equivalent of power plants, Quality Assurance, AIMD and a slew of others I could name off the top of my head. Not everything could just simply be automated, although a lot of it can be replicated. Even though it can be replicated, it would still require a pair of steady hands to work on components, big and small. Where on an Atrox carrier would you be able to hold all those shops, I wonder?
it's possible today to be self sufficient in the navy..... I'm sure it's even easier in the future.
.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Ok, NOW, I really envy you. You made one hell of a career for yourself. Yet I wound up stuck on a crummy carrier(CVN-70. Damn Chuckie-V). But that's another story for another day.
I guess that's all that can really be discussed on this thread. Unless someone else has some further insight on comparing Starfleet to the Navy of old, I think this thread might wind up closed in a couple of hours; we've covered the meat and potatoes of the thread.
Short answer: Trek writers stayed away from large scale conflicts, so the opportunity for any kind of strategic brainery to be shown was exceedingly small
The Dominion War and the Borg incursions were effectively the only situations where Starfleet is ever shown deploying large numbers of ships into a firefight. Even then I can count only a handful of actual fleet-scale battles ever depicted (Chin'Toka I/II, Op. Return, Cardassia, Second Battle of Sector 001).
Of those battles, only two (possibly three) were ever portrayed as more than a running brawl (Return, Chin'Toka 1 +/- 001) or a totally one-sided affair.
Everything else was focused on single-ship/small group heroics.
Now that's not to say the kind of specialization and expertise you're looking for couldn't or didn't happen. I happen to believe it would rapidly be a battlefield priority. It just isn't shown.
... and no, I dont care if anyone thinks it's canon or not ....it was cool because it had original cast members and ToS series guest stars in it. ( thought I'd end that debate before it even starts ).
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Figures. I guess the Star Trek executive producers back then couldn't pony up for that last bit of special effects. It's always boiling down to a budget, so it's no wonder they couldn't show it. So what you're saying makes sense.
While all the above is true, Roddenberry also had a series of very explicit subjects he wouldn't touch. Turning Starfleet into a military was one of those subjects.
For example, most of the DS9 writers who worked on the Dominion War arc (the war from which the video linked earlier is taken) have talked about how the whole thing wouldn't have been green-lit had Gene been alive when it was pitched.
Indeed. But it couldn't have been avoided. Something's gotta have a basic conflict. I, for example, am an atheist myself, and according to the Great Bird of the Galaxy himself, almost everyone on Earth was an atheist and was better for it, according to him. I have another thread that I posted talking about those particular issues that he wouldn't dare touch. Though since he's been gone, the producers and writers did the right thing, and pushed the boundaries of the show, and exposed those conflicts that gave the show such great story and plot development.
Alas, though I feel that Gene Roddenberry was on par with Rod Serling when it came to a message presented, he could never deliver as powerfully as Rod Serling. One man's opinion.
Conflict doesn't mean military forces in opposition. Violence just happens to be one of the most popular ways of showing conflict in current-day storytelling.
Yes, that's true. But as Captain James T. Kirk once put it, "the best kind of diplomacy, is a fully armed phaser." Cowboy diplomacy.
" Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. "
- Will Rogers
.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----