Star Trek Fighter Craft
Krall, originally known as Balthazar M. Edison, is the main antagonist of the 2016 sci-fi action film, Star Trek Beyond. He was a human senior officer at the MACO Organization who had been mutated into a reptilian form by alien life-extending technology after crashing upon a planet with his. I may be given the Imperial Smackdown for this but.They have no fighters in star Trek the Peregine is a Gunboat or maybe even a patrol torpedo boat.Lets face facts here a fighter is a short ranged one or two man craft deployed from a carring ship.The Peregine has a crew of tweleve this is seen from Voyager because even here Mr.Wong has shown that the Peregine and the Maquis 'Fighter'are. I was wondering if anyone here feels it may be at all possible to develop a warp-capable, single-pilot fighter craft within the bounds of the Star Trek.
This question occasionally comes up, often clogging story threads (for example, the ): How viable are space fighter-craft in the Star Trek setting?Personally, I think it depends on what you mean by 'fighter,' as I'm perfectly willing to accept the Defiant-class vessels as space-fighters, being overpowered and over-gunned for their size, but not everyone agrees, and a number of people feel the need to point to the from DS9.So, weigh in, or just watch the fireworks (or walk off shaking your head, whatever). Click to expand.Or seeing as the Federation has a thing for modular ships.Have a ship that travels together as one unit, but can split into 4 warp capable sub vessels. The main hull is the line battleship, it is there to tank attacks and hold the enemy.
The civilians are evacuated onto the armoury which retreats to a safe distance. Then two smaller ships which are defiant sized torpedo spam boats. The main ship sits there and duels with the enemy battle line while the torpedo boats do torpedo spamming runs and then retreat to the armour ship for ammo resupplySo not like a carrier with a fighter wing, more like an armoured cruiser that tows around two oversized torpedo boats and a torpedo boat tender. Due to the peculiarities of warp ship design they can travel strategic distances faster as a combined ship than as individuals, while the sub ships FTL is good enough for tactical warp purposes (jump in, spam torps, jump out and back to tender, reload and repeat). Click to expand.something like that is defiantly better suited in the trek verse. From what i recall, nilli all ships in the trek verse use there shield to deflect incoming fire.
A fighter, would basically waist all its ammo on a few strafing runs and not even dint into the shield.but a gun boat/First Strike Destroyer would fit this role much better, more room for weps and other necessary systems, and because its role is to jump in, blow its load, and run (like some fathers i know) they don't take up much in terms of resources.thats what i consider the Federation Fighters. There gun boats.just for clarification, i see a Fighter as a small one/two man craft a'la BSG vipers, the Halo Broad-Swords are the upper end of the fighter scale for me.What kind of load-out do Runabouts Have?edit: sry, i've been drinking. Click to expand.But would they be worth building? Star Trek seems to function on a 'bigger is better' combat paradigm as far as space battles goes, although there seems to be diminishing returns at the upper end of the ship sizes that the Federation can build that are never elaborated on. If they can't do meaningful damage, then there's no reason to build them except insofar when NUMBER of ships becomes more important than the individual combat ability of the ship itself (ie, in peacetime, you build more, smaller ships to cover more territory and do more missions). But would they be worth building? Star Trek seems to function on a 'bigger is better' combat paradigm as far as space battles goes, although there seems to be diminishing returns at the upper end of the ship sizes that the Federation can build that are never elaborated on.
If they can't do meaningful damage, then there's no reason to build them except insofar when NUMBER of ships becomes more important than the individual combat ability of the ship itself (ie, in peacetime, you build more, smaller ships to cover more territory and do more missions). Click to expand.This is a big part of why I have no problem designating the Defiant-class as 'heavy fighters' or 'heavy fighter-bombers', and imagine them being organized as such in some of my Trek-related ideas.I'm pretty sure you were the one who posted a definition of 'fighter' that lead me in that direction, too.As for the Federation Attack Fighters, I could see them maybe carrying pairs of full-size photon torpedoes in one-shot launchers that have to be recycled after every use, because replicators are awesome that way. They wouldn't so much be an immediate threat individually, as an annoyance that becomes a threat in large groups, and thus is difficult to ignore in favor of the more-threatening capital ships. Of course, larger numbers of those same launchers could be used as 'down'-facing VLS in a Danube's modular sections, or mounted over the topside armour of a Defiant, or another such vessel. Click to expand.It seems that the shuttles mostly use, of you believe the DS9 Technical Manual. This is consistent with the glowy things we see on-screen being rather a lot smaller than the two-metre standard torpedo casings, and most likely doing far less damage.
Why the big ships aren't using microtorps like machine-gun bullets, I couldn't say, but probably has to do with the policy that Starfleet is not a military organization, despite doing the jobs of one (which is a whole 'nother thread, so let's not discuss it here). Expendable manned fighters would not be viable in the UFoP due to several factors:1. It is a purely military equipment and as such would be vetoed by the pacifist faction.2.
Anything a pure fighter can do can be done slightly worse by a multi-purpose shuttle and slightly better by a small ship that can do other things and has a peacetime use. The Defiant-class might possibly be defined as a super heavy fighter.3. Sending people out in fighters almost sure to be destroyed by any enemy fire goes against federation values and doctrine. Also by the federation doctrine all personnel shall be massively over trained and have a generally unneeded competence to serve at nearly all positions on the ship. Pilots are not expendable.Now drones on the other hand are quite viable and would be very deadly. The problem lies in restrictions set up against autonomous or even semi autonomous weapons. These same restrictions are the reason why control of a ship may not at any time be turned over to a ship AI despite doing so would increase a ships combat capability by a magnitude.
Star Trek Fighter Craft For Pc
I don't really think they would be. There was a scene in Best of Both Worlds when the Borg Cube is passing Jupiter and three small craft are dispatched to attack it. And are immediately blown out of the sky. Phasers fire too fast and too powerfully on a capital ship scale in ST for anything classifiable as a fighter to not immediately explode when shot, and fire control should be accurate enough to almost never miss. The introduction of TAC Fighters later, to me, was unfortunate as they really make no sense for the universe.
One point in favour of fighters: they're probably vastly cheaper to make than full on starships. Pound for pound you can probably replicate 100% of the fighter, whereas a starship has lots of unreplicatable components.I mean Voyager replicated entire shuttles constantly, just think about that.From a resources standpoint, making a 'mini-starship' like trek's fighters would be very efficient for frontier worlds, border patrol outposts, and to shore up fleet formations because they have replicator tech, and you can replicate entire fighters. Sure you need to crew them, but in Trek it's generally so easy to fly a ship a five year old could do it.The other thing is that we've never really seen fighters deployed by themselves. It seems that the shuttles mostly use, of you believe the DS9 Technical Manual. This is consistent with the glowy things we see on-screen being rather a lot smaller than the two-metre standard torpedo casings, and most likely doing far less damage.
Why the big ships aren't using microtorps like machine-gun bullets, I couldn't say, but probably has to do with the policy that Starfleet is not a military organization, despite doing the jobs of one (which is a whole 'nother thread, so let's not discuss it here). You guys are going about this the wrong way. First off we need to come up with a concrete set of guidelines about what a space fighter is. Notably, size is not a defining characteristic of a fighter when you leave the atmosphere. What makes them different from a runabout or a Galaxy class ship.The biggest thing that comes to mind would be crew compliment and the projected life time of the vehicle without industrial scale maintenance.
Voyager for instance was capable of making a projected 72 year journey without ever getting into a dry dock. Now think for a moment and consider the power outputs you could get from something maybe a 1/20th the size of voyager if you loosened limiters to the point that it would need to me put in maintenance after every couple engagements.
If you purposely limited the need for life support down to at most 3 crew members, didn't include more than a lavatory, cockpit and replicator as far as living concerns. No labs or cargo areas outside of those used to store torps. Just how much of a punch could you get out of something with maybe a single day's legs compared to a starship designed to last weeks or months without resupply?
UPDATE: New Weapon Systems, modelled by Omardex for Star Trek: Theurgy.These are the warp fighters the pilots on the U.S.S. Resolve and the U.S.S. Harbinger use in Star Trek: Theurgy.The first design of the Gryphon-class Warp Fighters were made by Andrew Gillespie (KadenDark) and GK Designs, and has more or less become canon to the Star Trek: Community at this point. It has been modelled and featured in a couple of old Star Trek games, chosen as fighters in many simms, and I want to commemorate this awesome fighter with a new rendition of it.I think I speak for a big part of the Star Trek community when I thank KadenDark and GK Designs for bringing this fighter to life, for it has inspired countless non-canon stories and the creativity of many artists. Thank you for this old achievement of yours, which still lives on to this day.This version above was made by me and the 3D model was a commissioning by Omar Tavera (Omardex).
The weapon systems show in the image were originally made for the Mk III Valkyrie. Blender scene, edits, texts and add-ons to the 3D render of the ships were made by yours truly. The new model can be seen in all its detail and glory below (and good luck if you want to look for the hidden Easter Egg while you are at it.):I would like to make this model available to all DeviantArt artists and the whole Star Trek community out there, anyone who want to use it in their art or their stories, and the only thing I ask is that you give due credit to KadenDark & GK Designs for the original design, and to Omardex for the model itself. Personally, I would be happy if you just mentioned where it came from and posted a comment in reply here, showing where you used it.
If you want the actual model, here it is.but bear in mind that there are no conversions available. This model was made in Cinema 4D and rendered in Octane Render, using Substance Painter. Without that specific set-up, the model might not look the same.However, the background-less renders ready to be inserted and edited into any space scenes without the use of the 3D model.BACKGROUND INFORMATION: TACTICAL CONN & THE VALKYRIE PROGRAMThe formation of the Starfleet Aerospace Command is heavily influenced by the successful deployment of Peregrine-class fighters aboard the starships serving as carriers in the fleet, yet the USS Theurgy does not hold a squadron of Peregrine-class fighter aboard, but the more developed Valkyrie-class. Namely, the prototype Mk III version, a superior fighter that make use of recent advances in technology.The year 2375 - after the conclusion of the Dominion War - the Mk I Valkyries were deployed. These fighters were assigned to the USS Typhon (TNG game: Star Trek: Invasion).
Cle word 2019 crack torrent. They were initially designed as a carrier-based fleet engagement craft. Initially, the design proved successful, with a high survivability rate matching the heavy fire power available to bring down larger ships. In learning that a full squadron of Valkyries would still require a lot of support from for engagements of a Dominion-War level threat, Starfleet deemed that the attack fighter needed an upgrade.
By 2381, these fighters are still being deployed in fairly limited numbers - shuffled around the fleet.Another development at the time was that a group of influential admirals in the fleet demanded to form a new - evaluational - department that hand-picked the Conn officers with the most tactical training. It was the only way, they reckoned, to ensure that the fleet used the right kind of pilots for these fighters. The original score of 400 personnel - the fleets new Tactical Conn officers - served as the foundation for a new and more organised department for fighter pilots. They accepted only the highest scoring Conn or fight-trained Security or Tactical Cadets, and then dealt them another year of training in the fields they lacked from their Academy training. White became the chosen colour for the department, and the admirals that rode this project into history became the core of the Aerospace Command.Both the Mk I and II Valkyries used Rear Intercept Officers (RIOs), but the Mk II Valkyrie - commonly called the Gryphon-class - could be flown without a RIOs as well, albeit at great difficulty in some situations. The efficiency in which the attack fighters were operated were doubled by allowing the pilots to focus solely on the manoeuvres and weapons employment of the craft during a fight, allowing the RIO to handle comm traffic, emergency repairs and tactic simulations.Among the improvements for the Mk II Valkyrie were a new ablative armour compound, improved power plant, and the employment of a hardpoint system beneath the wings.
With the Mk II, the Valkyrie truly stepped into a class of her own. At the success of the Mk II and the fleet-wide deployment of the Valkyries in the fleet, Starfleet Command began looking into the Valkyrie with more interest, and with new resources added to the Valkyrie Program, the Mk III Valkyrie would soon see the light of day:Star Trek: Theurgy functions solely as non-profit entertainment for writers where no economic gain is perceived by any of its members as a result of the available media.
Star Trek, Star Trek: The Original Series, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager, Star Trek: Enterprise, the Star Trek movies, etc. Are © Copyright Paramount Pictures and CBS Studios.Main Forum page:Star Trek: Theurgy is kind of a progressive novel, composed of large long-lasting story arcs that can go on through several Episodes, as well as the more common plots produced by character interaction. All of this is written cohesively by the writers, edited and corrected by the group and the Game Moderator to assure a consolidated storyline. Other terms for this kind of community are 'sim' or 'play-by-post/forum roleplaying'.' What kind of writers are we looking for at Star Trek: Theurgy?' We're looking for good, descriptive and creative writers that can handle English well. You should also know enough about the Star Trek Universe to be able to partake in creating intense, interesting storylines together with the other writers.
Star Trek Fighter Craft
We are a very literate group, with a minimum posting requirement of 200 words per post, and the commitment to the story is long-term. We have been running the story actively for five years, and we will continue for many years to come. Therefore, we are not interested in casual, brief commitments, but something that will last for many years.' What's the nature of the story?'
Star Trek: Theurgy is a detailed, quite dark, story-driven and long-term roleplay and while it's rated 18+, it is not some shoe-horned excuse to write Star Trek smut scenes. If that's what you are looking for, you can look elsewhere since you'll be really disappointed.It is not expected of any of our writers to detail the intimate relations of their characters with others, even if it's allowed.
Several writers among us have an aversion to writing graphic sexual scenes, so if that's not what you care for, then that's no problem at all. The story revolves around a ship and a crew in dire straits, against impossible odds, and with a lot of intrigue and mystery to it. We just don't enforce limits on what you care to write, like explicit scenes of violence or intimacy, as long you adhere to our and all writers consent to the specific scene their characters are in.' How do I join the story?' This page should serve quite well for an answer, but it's recommended you contact the Game Moderator if you have any questions:. So the Gryphon wouldn't be able to be remodeled into a Strike Fighter?
It has the capability to be converted into something akin to the F-105 Thunderchief which was a Fighter-Bomber, it could haul ordnance and lot's of it, but after the Phantom II, the F-105 has the second highest number of confirmed A2A kills over Vietnam.Mainly because think about it, let's say you want to carry a bunch of Hellbores, Valkyries can only carry two of the lethal torpedoes, while the AC-477 and AC-347 like the Gryphon can carry five. But, the Gryphon class certainly has the capability to carry way more thanks to two factors with the first being it's size and the second being multiple ejector racks. You could, with help from Starfleet Engineers rig the Gryphon up with at least four Triple Ejector Racks (TERs) maybe as many as six but this depends on Starfleet Engineers finding space, which they probably will. This gives you at least one TER on each wing plus two on the Centerline or as many as four TERs on the wings and two on the centerline.If you carry four TERs on the wings however you won't be able to carry any wing-mounted weaponry that can't be carried on the TERs like Mass Drivers, Torpedo Launchers, and External Micro-torpedo launchers, but your already carrying 112-Micro-torpedoes anyways plus that's what escort from Valkyries or other fighters is for. Additional changes would also be made to make the Gryphon a dedicated Strike Fighter that would make the Reaver weep because of how hopelessly outgunned it is, such as allowing the thing to use Tetryon Pulse Phase Cannons, you can squeeze in at least three, maybe even five depending on Starfleet Engineers handle it.Some of the many different strike package configurations that I have thought up for a Strike Variant if you choose to have the Gryphon converted into a dedicated Strike Fighter are listed below:I. Four external torpedo launchers (two under each wing) and a single centerline mounted twin-mass driver, allowing for twelve full-sized torpedoes, however many rounds the Mass Drivers carry, and 112-micro-torpedoes internally.II. Four External Torpedo Launchers (two under each wing for twelve torpedoes), a centerline Tetryon Pulse Phase Cannon, and 112-Micro Torpedoes carried internally.III.
Four external Micro-torpedo launchers for a total of 224-micro-torpedoes, a centerline mass driver, 112-additional micro-torpedoes carried internally.IV. Four external Micro-Torpedo Launchers for a total of 224-Micro Torpedoes, a centerline Tetryon Pulse Phase Cannon, 112-Micro-Torpedoes carried internally.V. Six Hellhound Cluster bombs on wing mounted TERs, two wing-mounted Mass Drivers, a Centerline Tetryon Pulse Phase Cannon, 112-micro-torpedoes internally.VI.
Six Hellhound Cluster Bombs on centerline mounted TERs, two wing-mounted Mass Drivers, two External Torpedo Launchers for six torpedoes, 112-micro-torpedoes internally.VII. Six Hellhound Cluster Bombs on Centerline TERs, two wing-mounted Tetryon Pulse Phase Cannons, two wing-mounted Mass Drivers, 112-micro torpedoes internally.VIII. Twelve Hellhound Cluster Bombs carried on wing-mounted TERs, six Hellbore Torpedoes on TERs carried on the Centerline, 112-Micro-Torpedoes.IX. Five Tetryon Pulse Phase Cannons and 112-Micro Torpedoes.I think you get the idea of how what used to be a rather humble fighter that was phased out by the newer Valkyrie class Fighter because the Valkyrie Charlie was smaller, faster, and more maneuverable, can be turned into a nightmare capable of menacing Starships with little trouble. I could imagine that such a project could be a home-grown project, similar to the Delta Flyer.Wouldn't AC-409-C work better since it would be spelled out as Attack Craft 409-Charlie Model? Rather than AC-409 Mark III?
I absolutely love the design of the Gryphon-class Warp Fighter it looks absolutely badass! As in, it could take on an entire squadron of TIE Defenders and win. But I also got a number of questions about the Gryphon class, mainly about the weapon systems and the specifications of the fighter itself.First, what caliber are the twin mass driver cannons? Also are they railguns, coilguns, or helical railguns?
Star Trek Small Ships
Not to mention, what is the maximum effective range and what sort of targets would the mass driver cannons be used against?Also, what sort of warhead does the Hellborne Mark I Torpedo use, does it have an Matter-Antimatter warhead, Quantum warhead, or Tricobalt warhead? Plus, what is the range on the Hellborne Mark I torpedo as well as it's yield?Also what is the firing mode for the Phaser Arrays?