Memory Alpha

Talk:Danube class

36,872pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Copyvio (obsolete)Edit

Most of this article is pure cut+paste from DITL. Unless Graham Kennedy wrote this, it's Copyright infringement, IMHO. --Andrew

I'm adding a copyvio notice to the page because I've found it does plagiarize some passages. I'm more interested in getting a workable version of the page with more canon data references, rather than tech manual stuff. I think the lack of episode references and style makes this a substandard article anyway. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 06:01, 28 Sep 2004 (CEST)
I've attempted to jazz this up a bit. I need a lotta episode references, though. quanta

The unknown runaboutEdit

The article states that there was a runabout with the registry number of NCC-73918. Was this the runabout that appeared in "Timescape" -Rebelstrike2005 18:23, 11 Feb 2005 (GMT)

No, it appeared in "Tacking Into the Wind". -- Michael Warren | Talk 18:38, 11 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Oh yeah, the one Kira, Garak and Damar just left floating in Cardassian space. Could this info be added to the page?-Rebelstrike2005 18:44, 11 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Since this list only reads the names and registries of various runabouts, i'd say an additional note would be out of place -- this information would be best placed in a new article about the NCC-73918 -- as can the additional unknown runabout, but I'm at a loss for naming that article. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 19:08, 11 Feb 2005 (GMT)

I hope someone can think of something--Rebelstrike2005 19:31, 11 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Runabout (Enterprise-D)? seeing as it was a runabout apparently assigned to the enterprise? or maybe add it to the Tomb of the Unknown Runabout ;P -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 20:32, 11 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Maximum Warp speed? Edit

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that the Danube-class was only capable of Warp 4? - the article states Warp 8 but in the episode "Dax" the people who arrested/abducted Jadzia Dax tried escaping in a vessel capable of going faster than Warp 4, knowing that the runabouts would be unable to pursue them. --Scimitar 21:42, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think the runabouts changed characteristics over the years -- while the 2369 runabouts were limited, it seems they were retrofit or replaced by faster versions over the years, as described in the DS9 Technical Manual. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 00:29, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That would explain it. Thanks.--Scimitar 17:38, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry , but I still dont buy it. Im preparing to play StarTrek RPG (decipher/coda system) and this kind of imput is usefull. Just think about a ship this small travelling at warp 8... all the logistics implications... Why would Starfleet have big starships? You could build an armada of runabouts using the raw materials of 1 starship. We would be seeing star wars.. not startrek. On top of that: it has so much internal space that almost no room for the engines. Sorry.. warp 8? no way :) the series just loose internal coerence. Dr sage
I don't remember which, but one episode of DS9 had a scene where Kira was looking for ships which could pursue a runabout, and stated that such vessels needed to be able to travel at Warp 5 in order to overtake the runabout. This would put the runabout's top speed in the high 4 range (4.7-4.9, perhaps). Roundeyesamurai 02:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
"it has so much internal space that almost no room for the engines." - Except for the two large nacelles, the space under the nacelle pylons and the whole of the dorsal spine? Thats where the engines are, both warp and impulse. The preceding unsigned comment was added by RedSavageWarrior (talk • contribs).
Update Needed: Okay, after nearly two years, no one seems to have located or provided any episode reference or reliable data of any kind that runabouts can exceed warp factor 5. That is the maximum speed supported in an episode reference, and there is nothing to support the article's current claim that they can go to warp factor 7. I'm just a guest, so I will simply post this here and urge a registered user to go ahead and edit the main page to remove the Warp 7 reference. The Writers' Guide for DS9 gave a maximum speed for the runabouts of warp factor 4.7, and the onscreen reference from "Dax" supports this, so I suggest that fact is all we know and need to know on this subject.--Guest, 14:38, 11 March 2007
I removed:
  • ...although some runabouts following 2372 were able to achieve speeds of up to warp 7. {{incite}}
I found no instances of a runabout going that fast in dialog. There are only 4 references to "warp 7" in DS9, and they are in reference to the Defiant or the Jem'hadar fighters. --Alan del Beccio 02:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Another unknown runabout? Edit

Does anyone know if the runabout destroyed in "The Ship" was named? Also, the image of the runabout was stock footage of the USS Rio Grande from "The Homecoming", and the Rio Grande survived the series. Tough Little Ship 10:40, 25 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I don't believe it was, however the Fact Files seems to suggest it was the Volga. File 27 Card 13 (Deep Space Nine Runabouts) mentions in the Volga entry: "It is later used to take Captain Sisko through the wormhole on a mission to examine the mining potential of a small planet" and further down: "Status: Destroyed by a Jem'Hadar ship." All this despite the Volga being mentioned int he very same episode that the Yukon is destroyed (only 2 entries down on the Fact Files page). So thats the only name I've ever seen given to it, though obviously wrong and non-canon. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Talk:USS DanubeEdit

Moved from Memory Alpha:Votes for deletion.
USS Danube

Since we got rid of the rest of these non-canon prototypes, lets get rid of these, (keep first part of USS Springfield though.)

Ensign q 19:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

If neither of these can be found in a permitted resource (the Star Trek Encyclopedia, production art, etc.) they should go. Aholland 19:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Does the DS9 tecnnical manual count as that? - Ensign q 20:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to drop an FYI to Aholland, as it appears he didnt seem to notice the reference to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual cited to the Danube page. As for the Springfield, it was simply something that was overlooked (in part because there is a legitimate Springfield) yesterday while cleaning out the other "prototypes". I'm going to take care of it now as an addendum to the corrections that were made the day before last. --Alan del Beccio 20:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I actually didn't look at the article for the Danube; I assumed that the suggestion was being made because no citation was given. That'll teach me! Anyway, I believe the DS9 Tech Manual is a Restricted Validity Resource under the canon policy. I believe it also fits the criteria for potential use of information inside it (depending on the data in question) as the basis for an article. If the ship was included in that, it should be able to stay here. Aholland 20:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Very well, until further notice, will remove the warning. however, I will reinstate the warning if it turns out it is not metioned in the ds9 tech manual. - Ensign q 21:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I would check it out for you but, alas, don't have a copy handy right now. Aholland 22:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm making some stylistic changes, and tightening up references, but am doing so under the assumption that the claim that this ship is referenced with this data in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual is correct. Aholland 01:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I have the manual, the ship is indeed mentioned. I guess i could photograph the page its on if you need more proof than my word.. or would the photo be a copyright violation? -- Captain M.K.B. 01:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Nope, no need to violate copyrights. If you have a copy handy and have verified it that's fine by me. Aholland 03:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

By Inferno's LightEdit

I've just watched 'By Inferno's Light' from DS9's 5th season. Its the one where the Dominion have come through the wormhole and changeling Bashir dies. Anyway, I noticed something odd about the runabouts in that episode. As the runabouts are lauched ready for battle the second time, O'Brien's comm voice can be heard saying the names of the runabouts; Rio Grande, Volga and Yukon. That makes three, but Worf and Garak still had one in Gamma Quadrant (presumably the Rubicon), so that makes four. Since when did DS9 have more than three runabouts?

Also in this episode, when the runabouts are launched for the first time (just before Dukat joins the Dominion fleet), only two are shown joining the fleet (as it should be with one in the Gamma Quadrant). One of these two has a rollbar pod, however none of the three named runabouts were ever shown with rollbars, so is this a fifth runabout, in addition to Rio Grande, Volga, Yukon and Rubicon? And where was the other runabout(s) then? I presume that this rollbar runabout would be the one eventually destroyed at Empok Nor later in the series. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

DS9 has 6 runabout landing pads, so maybe the station did have more than 4 runabouts from time to time. Was it ever stated in an episode that there were only supposed to be three runabouts at a time?
I think the rollbar pod can be attached and removed as is needed. The USS Ganges was seen with a pod in most of its appearances, but without the rollbar in "Vortex" and "Progress". Also, the USS Rio Grande did appear with a rollbar in "Melora". But you're right, the USS Volga, Yukon and Rubicon were never seen with the rollbar. --Jörg 16:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it wasn't stated that the station must have 3, but thats always what have been shown, from Sisko saying 3 arrived on the Enterprise-D, to them only having three for fighting the Maquis and station evacuation/defense. This episode seems to be the only one that doesn't have the 3 limit. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

I never noticed the Rio Grande pod, although it seems like they mixed up the names in that episode, and should have had Dax and Melora on the Rio Grande, with Sisko and co. chasing in the Orinoco. The preceding unsigned comment was added by RedSavageWarrior (talk • contribs).
I'd have to agree with Jorg- it makes infintely more sense for the rollbar to be a quick-on-quick-off type of apparatus. If it were a permanent fixture, why not just build every runabout with one? Roundeyesamurai 12:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
A small error I've corrected, given the usage of pods atop runabouts in DS9: weapons, not sensors. Torlek 21:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
DS9 runabout delivery: I believe the Enterprise-D visited DS9 and delivered the initial 3 runabouts in 2369 (stardate 46388), not 2368 as stated. Also, is there any evidence that the runabouts were brand new at the time ? They may have been reassigned from other duties elsewhere in the Federation.--Amtom 17:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
The first three runabouts had sequential NCC-Numbers, suggesting they had come off the assembly line (or at least been launched) together. So, it looks like they came straight from the factory via the Enterprise to DS9. Later runabouts have unassociated (but generally increasing) hull numbers.

Court Martial? Edit

Something I've been wondering: As we've seen in Star Trek IV and "The Measure of a Man", when a starship is lost a court martial of the vessel's captain is standard procedure. So, as runabout are considered starships (USS names and NCC registries), does that mean that Sisko gets court martialled everytime a runabout is destroyed? If so, it means he's had about a dozen if you include the Defiant (maybe even Saratoga as he was the highest ranking survivor). The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk). September 27, 2006

I don't know about a court martial as standard procedure, but there would certainly be an official inquiry every time a runabout is lost or destroyed. (Star Trek IV is kind of an unusual case - Kirk and company *stole* the Enterprise and disabled the Excelsior, leading to the Enterprise's destruction; Starfleet did seem more concerned about the theft and sabotage than in its destruction.) If negligence can be proven, then a full formal court martial is certainly inevitable. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

4 Phasers?Edit

In The Maquis a phaser on the top of the runabout is seen, in Faith, Treachery and the Great River two forward mounted phaser on each side of the ship are seen, and in Valiant a phaser emiter on the under side is seen, but I'm sure that a runabout has fire an aft phaser before (though I can't think of an episode offhand), so that would be at least five. 23:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The runabout model has six clearly visible phaser strips: two forward, two on the tops of the nacelle front ends, and two on the back. Some models you'll see elsewhere have an additional detail on each nacelle pylon colored as a phaser strip, but these are not accurate to the runabout seen on the show, where that same detail is a dull gray. I don't know why the article would not mention the other phaser strips. 10:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Earth River Names Edit

I was just wondering if there's any evidence (canonical—preferably—or otherwise) to support that non-DS9 stationed runabouts are not named for Earth rivers as the article implies. To me it seems that, if anything, there is evidence to support that all runabouts are named for Earth rivers, given that both the main Danube class and the alternate timeline Yellowstone-class are both named for rivers themselves and we saw neither the prototype on DS9. Or am I just picking nits? — Ds093 00:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The only thing I could possibly think of, would be Kira Nerys comment about how Deep Space 9 seemed to be going through a lot of runabouts, and that is good that Earth had "so many rivers". While not stating true fact in itself, one could possibly infer that (as surly, runabouts in other locations are destroyed as well) that those station at DS9 are the ones named after rivers, or a certain "series" is assigned to the station, which includes the names of Earth rivers. Not sure, really, the line should probably be removed. --Terran Officer 01:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Removed the portion of the line regarding this(at the preference of Captain Benjamin Sisko). Even if all runabouts are named after rivers, we don't know that Sisko named all the runabouts, as he probably did not name the ones initially given to DS9. --31dot 11:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Dimensions Edit

It seems to me the width and height are switched here, as the Danube class is definitely not taller than it is wide. The two figure should be switched. -- 01:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Right enough: 5.4m is definitely not higher than 13.7m is wide. Fine the way it is. The preceding unsigned comment was added by TribbleFurSuit (talk • contribs).


It's been a while since I've read the DS9 tech manual, but I seem to recall that a runabouts entire bridge module can be detached as well, firstly to allow major refits, in the same way that the bridges of more conventional starships can be replaced, and secondly for use as an escape pod, since runabouts don't have any other means of escape in deep space. Should this be included? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

As "Background" information, since nothing of the sort was shown on screen. --Alan 19:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

USS-prefix actually canon? Edit

I don't seem to recall any instance of any of the runabouts mentioned with a USS prefix. If so, should we modify the runabout articles to reflect this?

Ambassador/Ensign_Q 16:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The "USS" is partly visible here: File:USS Yangtzee Kiang destroyed.jpg, and most likely was the intention all along. No need to modify anything in that regard. -- Cid Highwind 16:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
It's also legible on the hull of the USS Rio Grande in countless episodes. As Cid said, no need for change here. --Jörg 05:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the pics. I was just wondering, that's all. Ambassador/Ensign_Q 13:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

A Starship Class?Edit

I was wondering, where was this mentioned to be a starship class? I'm not denying it's a class, but I am curious as to the 'starship' status (or category really). Is it from the "USS" and "NCC-#####"? --Terran Officer 03:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The background section states: "The official name was originally mentioned in the Star Trek Encyclopedia, but was later seen in episodes as part of display graphics and reiterated in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual. The term "Danube-class" was first officially spoken on screen in "Hippocratic Oath"." — Morder (talk) 03:05, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
I see I misread your question. "starship class" vs. say a "shuttlecraft" - I assume as it was given a class and all classes seem to be long to starships while shuttlecrafts tend to have "types" but I can't say I know the answer to that. I think it's across the bay, in Alameda...(It's probably mentioned in the tech manual) — Morder (talk) 03:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, as this is what got me confused because in some instances I can seem to agree with the 'starship' but then it seems more shuttle like. Then as I look at some information, runabout was a craft type not a 'starship classification' so you know, Starship, Runabout, Shuttlecraft, etc... but who knows. Perhaps one day we will get some sort answer to this, perhaps not... --Terran Officer 03:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Language Edit

Removed the following as speculation and irrelevant to an article on runabouts.

The naming of the Danube-class seems to be another piece of evidence for the English language having taken over as the main Human idiom in the Trek universe. The European river Danube flows through numerous countries, however, none of them is English-speaking (at least not in the 21st century). Therefore, Donau, Dunărea, Dunav, Duna or Dunaj would have been names better reflecting the multifaceted universe of Star Trek.--31dot 11:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Dominion occupationEdit

What happened to this runabouts left behind on DS9 after the Dominion retook the station? Were they intentionally destroyed? I figured StarFleet wouldn't want their technology to fall into enemy hands. 18:15, June 21, 2010 (UTC)GThev

The impression I got watching the episode was that the runabouts were all used in the evacuation of Bajoran personnel from the station. (They probably weren't used in the later evacuation of Starfleet personnel from the station--the Defiant only got away because of its cloaking device, so a runabout wouldn't stand a chance with all those Dominion ships around.) Why bother to destroy them when you can just put them to good use? :-) At any rate, they would have been out of there by the time the Dominion arrived. -Mdettweiler 18:28, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Starship or Runabout?Edit

In a continuation of above, a recent check on an article somewhere, I saw it written as the Danube-class starship, which again got be wondering. While I do not deny that this is a class, and that the name was mentioned onscreen, and it has registries, were these mentioned onscreen to be starships? Did someone say "Federation starship CraftName"? I almost recall someone referring to it as a runabout when identifying one of the craft, but I cannot state for sure, can anyone else? --Terran Officer 03:33, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Removed Edit

In Star Trek Online,The Danube class can hold up to 5 crew.It is
Supposed that it was a error in the game.Also,there is a upgrade for
The class that is called,Yellowstone Class.

I have removed the above which was added by an anon. There is already a note referencing the ship's appearance in the game and the above is poorly worded. --| TrekFan Open a channel 11:43, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki