Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Exact nomenclature is contradicting in some cases ("Fleet Yards" vs. "Ship Yards" etc.), so someone with more knowledge about the correct names should have a look at it. Does it make sense to keep the Sector/System/Planet headers? -- Cid Highwind 06:32, 29 Mar 2004 (PST)
- These names are 100% canon. There is no apparent consistent naming scheme withing Starfleet for yards. IDIC, indeed! -- Harry 23:52, 14 Dec 2004 (CET)
- Perhaps the distinction is that the ship yards just make ships, the fleet yards make more than ships (starbases, probes, maybe even smaller pieces of tech like phasers, tricorders etc.)...not canon, but if you're looking for a reason...Caducus 15:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
was there any cannon explination for why shipyards can't be giant replicators? Thy'd need a lot of power. but replecating ships would be rather efficent.– 7th Tactical 02:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- There was nothing mentioned on-screen, but this question is brought up in a background note in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual on page 17. Basically, the ability to create entire fleets at the start of a button would make "poor drama", so "starship construction facilities ... have been depicted as construction platforms rather than large replicators." Okuda and Sternbach went on to state their assumption that "replication is practical for relatively small items, but the energy costs would be prohibitive for routine replication of larger objects. (Jon Singer points out that if you could make a starship at the push of a button, you wouldn't need to....)" So, there you go. :) --From Andoria with Love 03:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)