View Single Post
Old January 24 2009, 03:04 AM   #32
kent
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

That's precisely the case. And this isn't a pointless argument, star trek is one of the sci fi shows that actually give figures for things like the tactical systems. sometimes they are a little off and contradictory, but in general you're able to piece together what does what.

One thing i will NEVER understand though is starfleets decision to suspend production of Galaxy class ships.

It seems utterly wasteful to devote so much time and energy and expense into a ship that's meant for expansion and refitting to keep up with tech advancements, and has a hull life expectency of 100 years with regular refits.

Not to mention, on standard Galaxy class ships, a quarter of the internal space is left empty for expansion. The Galaxy class is a very flexible design and would more than be able to keep up. As for the weaponry, you can install a couple quantum/photorp launcher in place of the old ones, and even extra launchers say on deck 11 or 12, and on the aft neck.

The phasers could be uprated to be more on par with a Sovereign as well. You just uprate the warp core and modulate the EPS taps better so the phasers and subsytems can handle it. With slipstream drive using the deflector dish, and advancements in computing technology, you could theoretically use the saucer deflector to allow the saucer to achieve warp speeds as well.

If the Intrepid is a smaller Galaxy, and the Defiant and Prometheus the primary combat ships, and the Galaxy who does everything, what the hell is the purpose of the Sovereign?? It seems wasteful to get this spankin' new ship that probably costs more to build because it's newer with newer technology than the Galaxy class, or at the least uses up resources, when you have ships that already fit the roles needed and are more flexible in their design.

So stupid.
kent is offline   Reply With Quote