Modern suits can remove and replenish upon demand (via mouth niple in helmet, direct intraveinus infusion and catheter) most if not all needs of nourishment and waste removal.
Given that while in space one will not drop out of the sky if halted (or even flying) sleep is a non-issue, especially for a combat trained or experienced pilot. One can sleep while on autopilot in space.
The only concern would be confiment of space in the cockpit for extended time periods cuasing muscle atrophy. If one is in a vessel so long as for this to happen, then they need to get out more.
That could be solved with nano-tech suits that can actually force the muscles to "exercise" while limited the necessary movement to literally inches.
That could be solved with nano-tech suits that can actually force the muscles to "exercise" while limited the necessary movement to literally inches.
True, but it may depend on wiether a fighter craft has artificial gravity or just enertial dampers to keep the pilots in place. Gravity is needed to offset muscle and bone atrophy in a low gravity enviroment, not just exercise alone.
True, but it may depend on wiether a fighter craft has artificial gravity or just enertial dampers to keep the pilots in place. Gravity is needed to offset muscle and bone atrophy in a low gravity enviroment, not just exercise alone.
For long periods of time yes. If I remember correctly exercise worked for 1 month or less missions to Mir, over that yeah you're looking at some low grav atrophy.
True, but it may depend on wiether a fighter craft has artificial gravity or just enertial dampers to keep the pilots in place. Gravity is needed to offset muscle and bone atrophy in a low gravity enviroment, not just exercise alone.
It seems even the tiniest shuttles we have seen in Startrek had gravity, so that should be less of an issue. The Peregrines have already been established large enough for that, I think. And I don't think the l science of Startrek really allows ships without Inertial Dampeners to fly at any meaningful speeds, particularly once it goes to warp. If they don't even got that, t he fighters would probably be even less useful.
On the flip side, you would be crazy not to build carriers and use fighters and drones if for nothing else, cost and efficiency. Replacing fighters is cheap, replacing cruisers and destroyers is not.
We didn't always use fighter or drones or similar equivalents. There is a certain requirement to have weapons that are "lethal enough". If you can't equip your drone with a type of gun or missile that can break a tank, then you can't use it for that purpose ever. And if you have to expect to fight a lot of tanks, then you will build tanks, even though they are much more costly and harder to replace.
We didn't always use fighter or drones or similar equivalents. There is a certain requirement to have weapons that are "lethal enough". If you can't equip your drone with a type of gun or missile that can break a tank, then you can't use it for that purpose ever. And if you have to expect to fight a lot of tanks, then you will build tanks, even though they are much more costly and harder to replace.
Actually, as I recall, tanks aren't what's usually used to fight against tanks. Anti-tank missiles are usually equipped on aircraft or are launched from non-tank ground vehicles or hand-held rocket launchers.
Additionally, we know that the firepower of a fighter can be quite effective as they can easily be equipped with beam arrays, beam banks, cannons, and torpedo launchers. It is, of course, reasonable to assume that these would be smaller than those used by the larger ships, but that doesn't inherently negate their effectiveness. Torpedos of larger ships are rarely used at their maximum yeild. The mid-range yield of one of Voyager's torpedoes, which is what they usually fire them at, could reasonably be the maximum yeild of torpedos that'll fit in the Fighters. This would still make the fighters effective and lethal enough in numbers higher than ONE, which several of you seem to be focusing on the idea of.
Well the at least one Prometheus was around in Voyager "Engame".
Whether that was the original prototype or not is not clear.
Actually, it's very clear.
While the actual -number- for the ship's registry is somewhat debatable due to being displayed as one number on the hull and a different number on internal displays and the ship's plaque, all registries for the ship used the prefix NX, which is the prefix for all prototypes of a vessel class. With the exception of the Enterprise NX-01, all known prototype ships had the same name as their class, such as the USS Defiant of DS9. I would also point to the fact that the prototype Defiant had the NX prefix as well, and the second USS Defiant of the 24th century had the NCC prefix, because it was a production model and not a prototype.
So every ship that has some kind of armed shuttlecraft is a carrier, even when in a battle situation where the ship is at stake noone would bother to launch them, which is the actual mark of a true carrier.
The Scimitar was never considered to be "at stake" until the Enterprise-E began its charge to ram it. By then, it was too late to launch fighters.
Also, if the fighters were designed for atmospheric combat only, they wouldn't have been utilized in space, which -is- a reasonable setup, and doesn't change the fact that the Scimitar was a carrier.
Additionally, they were -not- shuttlecraft, nor where they referred to as "shuttlecraft."
You don't seem to realize what the word "Shuttlecraft" means. Though, it's actual definition is pretty useless on its own as it merely means "a ship used as a shuttle." So, here's what "shuttle" means.
"a public conveyance, as a train, airplane, or bus, that travels back and forth at regular intervals over a particular route, esp. a short route or one connecting two transportation systems."
The Fighters aboard the Scimitar were not shuttles anymore than Deathgliders in Stargate SG-1 were shuttles.
At least you're closer to fitting into the definition of "Shuttlecraft" when you call the Couriers "shuttlecraft," though they're not really a "public conveyance."
Also between the disabling of the cloak and the ramming there were 6 minutes of screentime so there would have been enough time particularly since we can clearly see the the bay was manned (Remans running from the saucer coming towards them) and not empty when the Enterprise crashed into it.
Also after his claok was gone, he started to get frustrated, talked through his teeth and also began to scream orders ("Get.The.Cloak.Back!") so appearently he felt a little cast...in bad light without his cloak.
Well, I would not that 6 minutes of screentime doesn't necessarily equate to 6 minutes of in-setting time, but that's not entirely relevant.
I would note that while there are some Remans in the bay, I am fairly certain their were not enough to man an entire wing of 2-man Fighters/Flyers/whateveryouwanttocallthem.
Regardless, yes, Shinzon was angry. Again, I point to the fact that Shinzon was very cocky. It was his belief that the Enterprise, even with the help of the two romulan ships, had no chance of even disabling the Scimitar's cloak. The fact that they managed even that much was viewed by Shinzon as a major insult. That has nothing to do with whether or not the Scimitar was actually in a truly vulnerable state or in any actual danger of losing, at least in Shinzon's mind.
What does the cockpit have to do with this? The type-2 is overall smaller than a Peregrine, regardless of its cockpit size. I hope you did not assume they put a dozen people into the cockpit?
It's wonderful how oblivious you are. i said "cockpit/crew area." Meaning, the entire "habitable" area of the ship. Try again.
No. I stated it becomes unreliable when it is contradicted.
Which would make your own claims that they're shuttlecraft just as unreliable, since you're citing the statement of an individual character on the series, which is contradicted by the statements of other characters on the series.
ad·van·tage
/ædˈvæntɪdʒ, -ˈvɑn-/ [ad-van-tij, -vahn-]
noun, verb, -taged, -taging
#3 superiority or ascendancy (often fol. by over or of): "his height gave him an advantage over his opponent"
#4 a position of superiority (often fol. by over or of ): "their advantage in experienced players"
Wow...you really are oblivious. Alright, fine, yes, I say that Fighters are superior in certain ways. They're also inferior in certain ways. Ever setup is going to have its advantages and disadvantages. The key is the potency of each.
My stating that the fighters have some advantages/"superiorities" does not equate to saying "they are absolutely superior in all ways and should absolutely be used instead of any other setup."
So you're surmising that because we did not see them explode, they did not explode even though they do every time we do see them? With Sisko being forced to send "wave after wave of his best fighters"?
Oh, I'm sure that there were fighters that exploded off-screen. However, they weren't -constantly- exploding and they didn't simply explode as soon as they got in weapons range of the enemy. If that were the case, they wouldn't have been used at all. As you said, the Federation is rather particular about how many lives it wastes.
What leads you to this theory? The Mirandas surely worked fine as freighters
First off, all starfleet ships get refitted every so often. About the only exception to this, technically, is the USS Voyager, though they did perform their own little upgrades.
Second, why would they upgrade Excelsiors and not upgrade Mirandas that weren't much older?
Every ship has a shakedown cruise. This is part of normal naval procedure. The fact that Starfleet couldn't be arsed to finish the ship and instead opted to put her away (at least we got that sorted now!) does kinda point to the assumption that they did not really believe the Defiant to be useful in peacetime, no?
So, how many times do I have to say this? It was put aside, the project put on hold, because they had been unable to get the Defiant to work quite right. If I recall correctly, Sisko is the one who requested that the Defiant be brought out of "storage" for use as recon in the Gamma Quadrant, and he was one of the individuals who worked on the Defiant-class to begin with. He knew what the problem was, but was confident that even with the problem that had resulted in the project being put on indefinite hold, it would still be valuable for recon in the Gamma Quadrant. He was also confident that O'Brien would be able to find a solution for the problem, though exactly why this is...well, that would simply be a plot device.
I'll repeat this. The project was put on indefinite hold because it was costing resources with no solution to its "fatal" flaw in sight. This is done often with projects in modern day militaries as well.
Comments
That could be solved with nano-tech suits that can actually force the muscles to "exercise" while limited the necessary movement to literally inches.
True, but it may depend on wiether a fighter craft has artificial gravity or just enertial dampers to keep the pilots in place. Gravity is needed to offset muscle and bone atrophy in a low gravity enviroment, not just exercise alone.
For long periods of time yes. If I remember correctly exercise worked for 1 month or less missions to Mir, over that yeah you're looking at some low grav atrophy.
We didn't always use fighter or drones or similar equivalents. There is a certain requirement to have weapons that are "lethal enough". If you can't equip your drone with a type of gun or missile that can break a tank, then you can't use it for that purpose ever. And if you have to expect to fight a lot of tanks, then you will build tanks, even though they are much more costly and harder to replace.
Actually, as I recall, tanks aren't what's usually used to fight against tanks. Anti-tank missiles are usually equipped on aircraft or are launched from non-tank ground vehicles or hand-held rocket launchers.
Additionally, we know that the firepower of a fighter can be quite effective as they can easily be equipped with beam arrays, beam banks, cannons, and torpedo launchers. It is, of course, reasonable to assume that these would be smaller than those used by the larger ships, but that doesn't inherently negate their effectiveness. Torpedos of larger ships are rarely used at their maximum yeild. The mid-range yield of one of Voyager's torpedoes, which is what they usually fire them at, could reasonably be the maximum yeild of torpedos that'll fit in the Fighters. This would still make the fighters effective and lethal enough in numbers higher than ONE, which several of you seem to be focusing on the idea of.
Actually, it's very clear.
While the actual -number- for the ship's registry is somewhat debatable due to being displayed as one number on the hull and a different number on internal displays and the ship's plaque, all registries for the ship used the prefix NX, which is the prefix for all prototypes of a vessel class. With the exception of the Enterprise NX-01, all known prototype ships had the same name as their class, such as the USS Defiant of DS9. I would also point to the fact that the prototype Defiant had the NX prefix as well, and the second USS Defiant of the 24th century had the NCC prefix, because it was a production model and not a prototype.
The Scimitar was never considered to be "at stake" until the Enterprise-E began its charge to ram it. By then, it was too late to launch fighters.
Also, if the fighters were designed for atmospheric combat only, they wouldn't have been utilized in space, which -is- a reasonable setup, and doesn't change the fact that the Scimitar was a carrier.
Additionally, they were -not- shuttlecraft, nor where they referred to as "shuttlecraft."
You don't seem to realize what the word "Shuttlecraft" means. Though, it's actual definition is pretty useless on its own as it merely means "a ship used as a shuttle." So, here's what "shuttle" means.
"a public conveyance, as a train, airplane, or bus, that travels back and forth at regular intervals over a particular route, esp. a short route or one connecting two transportation systems."
The Fighters aboard the Scimitar were not shuttles anymore than Deathgliders in Stargate SG-1 were shuttles.
At least you're closer to fitting into the definition of "Shuttlecraft" when you call the Couriers "shuttlecraft," though they're not really a "public conveyance."
Well, I would not that 6 minutes of screentime doesn't necessarily equate to 6 minutes of in-setting time, but that's not entirely relevant.
I would note that while there are some Remans in the bay, I am fairly certain their were not enough to man an entire wing of 2-man Fighters/Flyers/whateveryouwanttocallthem.
Regardless, yes, Shinzon was angry. Again, I point to the fact that Shinzon was very cocky. It was his belief that the Enterprise, even with the help of the two romulan ships, had no chance of even disabling the Scimitar's cloak. The fact that they managed even that much was viewed by Shinzon as a major insult. That has nothing to do with whether or not the Scimitar was actually in a truly vulnerable state or in any actual danger of losing, at least in Shinzon's mind.
It's wonderful how oblivious you are. i said "cockpit/crew area." Meaning, the entire "habitable" area of the ship. Try again.
Which would make your own claims that they're shuttlecraft just as unreliable, since you're citing the statement of an individual character on the series, which is contradicted by the statements of other characters on the series.