[Psionics] [Space] Psi Trek - Worldbuilding

[Prince Charon]

The post that I wanted to do next isn't ready yet, but this one is:

Cloaking devices

Should cloaking devices exist in this setting, and if so, how common should they be? Please include the number of your preferred option in your vote.

*1. There Is No Stealth In Space (No cloaking devices at all).

*2. No cloaking devices, but less complete forms of sensor countermeasures do exist, leading to combat ranges generally being shorter when SCM is more effective, and longer when sensor counter-countermeasures are more effective.

*3. Cloaking devices are very rare and expensive, and generally experimental in any polity that uses them, never standard issue.

*4. The Romulans are the only polity that uses them, and they're rare even then.

*5. The Romulans are the only polity that uses them, but they're relatively common among the Romulan fleet.

*6. Two or three polities use cloaking devices.

*7. Lots of polities use cloaking devices.

*8. Small Cloaking Devices exist (i.e. man-portable), but the Romulans are the only ones with ship cloaks.

*9. Something that I haven't considered (please specify).

EDIT: OK, the consensus appears to be that while only the Romulans have proper vehicular-scale cloaking devices, personal scale cloaks are available in other polities, and advanced sensor countermeasures are, as well.

[TGLS]

OK, let's call this 8: Small Cloaking Devices Exist (i.e. man-portable), but only the Romulans are the only ones with ship cloaks.

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by TGLS

OK, let's call this 8: Small Cloaking Devices Exist (i.e. man-portable), but only the Romulans are the only ones with ship cloaks.

OK, that was interesting enough that I edited it in and renumbered the end of the list.

[Emerald Cat]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Cloaking device question

Should cloaking devices exist in this setting, and if so, how common should they be? Please include the number of your preferred option in your vote.

My preferred option is 5. Cloaking is too iconic for the Romulans to not be common in their fleet.

For everyone else, I'm going to suggest option 2. I'd also make FTL sensors more susceptible to countermeasures than STL sensors. Countermeasures to passive thermal and visual sensors strains my suspension of disbelief too much. On the other hand, unlike with Trek's FTL sensors, that won't be a problem until the light has had a chance to propagate.

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by Emerald Cat

My preferred option is 5. Cloaking is too iconic for the Romulans to not be common in their fleet.

For everyone else, I'm going to suggest option 2. I'd also make FTL sensors more susceptible to countermeasures than STL sensors. Countermeasures to passive thermal and visual sensors strains my suspension of disbelief too much. On the other hand, unlike with Trek's FTL sensors, that won't be a problem until the light has had a chance to propagate.

In a psychotronics-based setting like this one, countermeasures to both passive visual and passive infrared detection are a bit more plausible than in a more 'hard science' setting.

It's still a fair vote though.


In case anyone is wondering, I currently plan to leave the vote open until at least April 25th.

[Prince Charon]

I'm hoping to see more than just the two votes before Saturday. On the bright side, they aren't really contradictory, so if that's all I have by then, I should be able to come up with an answer that satisfies both.

[Prince Charon]

Alright, the Cloaking device post has been edited with the answer, now here's a new question:

On fighters, missiles, and probes

A 'fighter,' in this context, is any small space or aerospace vehicle which is, compared to other vehicles of its size, heavily armed, well-shielded, highly manoeuverable, and lightly crewed. They are normally organized in something like traditional 'air force' fashion, and frequently are not intended for long journeys without some sort of tender or carrier. Most aerospace fighters are around the size that someone from late twentieth or early twenty-first century Earth might expect, while most starfighters are larger than that, and mostly have more crewmembers. Smaller fighters often have the control room and most or all of the other habitable sections (if any) in an ejectable cockpit-style escape pod (mechanically, an Upper Stage), with the the vehicle saving space by having little or no room for people in the other sections, just big reactors, big engines, weapons, et cetra. In particular, the fighter would need to have storage room and launch systems for missiles, because most space fighters in this setting are basically manned, reusable missile buses.

The main reason for this is that a lot of psychotronic technology works best (or at all) in the environment of the psionic fields created by sapient or nearly sapient life, and responds to same. While it is possible to create more robust psychotronics that will continue operating for hours or even days outside of such a psionic field, this does require something of a balancing act. In many cases, this has lead to star nations deciding to build fighters for missions where a larger vessel is not required, or where multiple smaller targets to split the enemy's fire would be beneficial. An alternative is to build missiles with few or no psychotronic components, which leaves the question of what you leave out: a missile with no shields and no defences against direct psionic attack is far easier to defend against, one with no inertial control is limited by g-forces and is less manoeuverable, one without a warp drive is nearly useless against a target that has a working warp drive, et cetra. Generally, the decision has been to design the missile components to 'run hot,' burning themselves out on the (usually correct) assumption they they will hit something and explode before they enter any other failure mode, and not plan on having them in flight for long periods.

Probes hit this problem in a different way, as they are most useful if they last a long time, but do not generally need to move fast or defend themselves. Probes with no psychotronic components at all are far more common than missiles without such components. For probes that need or would especially benefit from psychtronic components, but also are intended to be stationed away from inhabited planets, two strategies have evolved: Firstly, designing the probe with the most robust psi-tech possible, able to be outside of any psionic field for long periods, and then regularly sending warp-shuttles or warp-fighters to maintain them. Secondly, building the probe's components so that they can handle a weak psionic field, and adding a life-support system and a small life-form or group of life-forms (such as the more psychically-active guinea pig or rabbit breeds) - this greatly increases the size of the probe, however, and is nearly pointless for missiles. Civilizations that do not have animal rights laws (or have very different ones) sometimes solve the problem by removing the animal's brain and keeping it alive in a jar (see also 'Psiborgs,' GURPS Psi-Tech pp39-40), though this still requires a good life-support system, and does create a small risk of the animal finding a way to rebel, or entering a vegetative state that weakens the psionic field below viability. Adding something like either of these to a missile is certainly possible, but most USA members consider it even less ethical than doing it for a probe, and it requires a stronger inertial dampening field than that used for missiles without organic components.

(The following links are not directly canon to Psi Trek, but can be taken as inspiration for fighters and carriers in this setting: To use Star Trek: Deep Space Nine as an example, the Federation attack fighters are around the size of a typical aerospace fighter, the Danube-class runabouts are roughly the size of the smallest dedicated space fighters, and the Defiant-class 'escort vessels' are somewhat bigger than the largest. Further inspiration: The Yorktown-class carrier and Minotaur fighter (the equivalent of Minotaur fighters in this setting would be among the vehicles with ejectable cockpits); Archer & Curran classes (primarily system-patrol vessels, but in many cases effectively large fighters; see also Discarded variant deck plans 1 and 2 in the Yorktown page); 23rd century carriers and fighters. Missiles and probes that look like coffins may or may not exist in-setting.)




So, does this work as is? If not, what do you think should be changes, or what am I missing?

[TGLS]

No. Fighters aren't at all prominent in Trek and shouldn't be made prominent if you want to keep a Trek-like feel. Trek is dominated by big ships pounding on each other until one blows up or runs away. Sometimes one faction uses a bunch of tiny ships and dog piles a big ship. But usually just big ships.

If you feel torpedoes don't work because your phlebotium requires lifeforms to work, redefine torpedoes to directed psionic energy orbs or something.

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by TGLS

No. Fighters aren't at all prominent in Trek and shouldn't be made prominent if you want to keep a Trek-like feel. Trek is dominated by big ships pounding on each other until one blows up or runs away. Sometimes one faction uses a bunch of tiny ships and dog piles a big ship. But usually just big ships.

If you feel torpedoes don't work because your phlebotium requires lifeforms to work, redefine torpedoes to directed psionic energy orbs or something.

Um, 'not prominent' is not the same as 'non-existent,' though. They do have fighters in canon, and vessels that might as well be fighters (the runabouts are used that way several times, Maquis fighters & raiders appeared a lot, I think there were one or two Bajoran fighters in an episode, Jem'hadar fighters were most effective as manned missiles but also served as fighters, et cetra), mostly in DS9. That should be addressed, and this seems like a way to both have fighters exist, and not need fighters to be a big thing.

[Phantasm]

I think what happens is that most people who didn't religiously sit through the Starfleet Academy court-martial episode or the Dominion War in DS9 automatically assume that small, one-manned craft don't exist in the Star Trek Universe, because they're not a big part of the setting they way they are in, for example, Star Wars or Battlestar Galactica. Fighters in some form exist, but they're not the backbone of any galactic power's military force, as those prefer large 300 to 1000-man crew starships duking it out at what amounts to point-blank range at sublight and warp speeds.

So the big question is not "do they exist?" but "what factors prevent them from being the backbone of the force?" They exist - Starfleet Academy uses them as single-person trainers, Data flew one early on in Insurrection, and as noted they're all over the place during the actual combat sequences of the DS9 Dominion War.

Star Trek often has that "Age of Sail IN SPACE!" feel to it with cruisers and frigates giving each other phaser and disruptor broadsides, as opposed to Star Wars's "WWII IN SPACE!" feel with fighters in every major operation that's not planet-side (and some that are!). Neither feel is "wrong", just different. Be sure which you're going for.