A lighthouse might have a dozen "decks" but a crew of two a Nimitz aircraft carrier has a crew of about 6,000, and while I couldn't find an exact figure for number of decks, based on the draft it's probably about the same. Your question hinges on the size of the decks. And Borg ships are extremely decentralized in nature, allowing undamaged sections to backup damaged ones. Almost every time we see the interior of a Borg ship we see huge open areas. In a way, Federation vessels are like extremely primitive Borg vessels. And when something critical is damaged, Federation systems are built with three redundant backups. Any damage that penetrates the shields is less likely to hit a critical system if it has to first get through three science labs and a holodeck. Also, with more space you can include more redundant systems. ![]() Larger, somewhat empty ships should allow for damage mitigation.Although even on a large ship like the Enterprise D ensigns are still assigned two to one cabin. With those two limits removed it becomes possible to build large ships with lots of room for everyone. Resources don't seem to be a large concern for the Federation (yay replicators), and money isn't either, at least internally. There are two non-exclusive reasons that come to mind for this. Presumably such differentiation in skills would be common aboard starships, as it is in hospitals and militaries in our own time. Dr M'Benga appeared in several episodes, and was noted as a xenobiologist who specialised in Vulcan physiology. Even TOS's Enterprise had more than McCoy he was just the senior doctor on board. Voyager's medical staff were killed in the pilot, and TNG only ever concentrated on Crusher and Pulaski. Bearing in mind that Star Trek: Generations and Encounter at Farpoint both showed that starships don't usually take on their full crew until after the conclusion of their shake-down cruise, and it's not surprising that Voyager had such a low crew compliment.Īlso, both ships had more than one doctor. After all, most of the decks would not be used for living space. I see no reason to believe more than 200 personnel would ever be needed on an Intrepid-class ship. Obviously this type of vessel is not built with families in mind, unlike the Galaxy-class, which could actually hold 3000 on occasion. As you can see at the link I provided, however, there are only 257 rooms on an Intrepid-class starship. Voyager, that would have a crew of roughly 300. ![]() Assuming a similar concentration for Intrepid-class vessels like U.S.S. Why Star Trek vessels are so big, when their crew is so small?Ī Galaxy-class starship, at 42 decks, had approximately 1000 crew-members. ![]() The ship is just enormously huge, when to compare it to the number of crew members and again have only one doctor. The same goes for Enterprise in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Which - when killed - must be replaced by EMH. Which we can clearly see, when it turns out, that on a such large ship and for such large crew there is only one doctor. I don't mean, that Voyager's maiden voyage was actually a rescue mission, on which virtually any hand could be useful. So, what are the real reasons? What is the reason for not taking much more crew - more scientists, support crew members, security officers, etc., etc., ![]() I know, that with new economics, it isn't a matter of how much would that cost, to build such a large ship for such a small crew. But still, isn't that a huge waste of space and resources (energy, air etc.) to power up, warm and oxygenate such large areas, when there is such small number of people per deck? I understand, that statistical calculation is wrong and that deck are used for many more purposes than just hosting crew members. Isn't that a huge waste of space and resources? That's statistically less than a ten crew members per one deck. Memory Alpha article about Intrepid class ship says, that for example Voyager had 15 decks and only 141 crew members, when setting off for her maiden voyage to Badlands.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |