View Single Post
Old January 26 2009, 08:14 PM   #43
kent
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Timo wrote: View Post
What did we see in Generations with Riker in command?
One measly phaser shot which did some damage to the BOP shields.
Why not fire 10 torpedoes in a Sierra pattern along with a full-out phaser barrage instead and turn the BOP into minced meat?
Umm, the sound effects of that fight suggest that Riker was firing more or less constantly.

Did the BOP's shields suddenly increase by a factor of 100 allowing their to be invulnerable completely while also dumbing down Riker and everyone else on the Enterprise-D? Apparently so.
I wouldn't wonder a bit. After all, the fact that "Our shields are holding!!" came as a joyous surprise to the two mistresses of the ship, after they had been convinced the attack would be suicide. It wasn't, thanks to Soran supplying an offensive ace. It would be eminently logical for him to supply a defensive one as well, to upgrade the shields.



I'm sorry but I don't put much credence on this source when it comes to describing the onscreen universe.



But that makes so little sense. How could a small ship mount as big a gun as a large ship?



Typically, a courier ship has different attributes than a combatant. We know the Intrepid class is ridiculously fast, so that makes her a good courier. We don't know that she would be particularly well armed or shielded, though, and we have never seen her like in Alpha Quadrant combat so we might well assume the exact opposite.

And why would an Admiral even have a personal ship? He'd be using whatever ship was available in the combat formation he commanded - and typically, he wouldn't choose the most powerful combatant, but rather a ship that has good command facilities and good protection. Today's Admirals may command from carriers as well as from large air defense destroyers, but they also commandfrom unarmed former amphibious assault ships.



Not in the real world. Instead, every ship design is a unique compromise optimized for the fighting needs of the day, often discarding some advantages that the previous ships had so that she could have different, more current advantages aboard instead. In many key ways, today's surface warships have armament and armor that is massively weaker than their WWII or even WWI counterparts: sometimes they compensate by introducing powerful weapons or protection systems from wholly different categories, but sometimes they are deliberately built weak because that's how they stand a better chance of winning modern wars.



What suspension? If it's the thing alluded to in the TNG Tech Manual, it sure didn't last long, as DS9 already shows multiple new Galaxies left and right.



So the Defiant is supposed to be the match of the Galaxy now? Hardly. We have no indication that these smaller ships can do what the larger ones can. The Defiant at best confronted a single Cardassian Keldon, while the Enterprise-D was supposed to tackle 15 Galors and carry the day. The Intrepid would logically fall somewhere in the middle.

Obviously the Defiant class ships can be used for border patrols much more effectively instead of sending an Intrepid or a Galaxy that could be much more useful in exploratory department.
Hmm... Border patrol in a ship that induces cabin fever? I'd much rather send an Intrepid, for greater endurance and greater flexibility and independence. The Defiant in DS9 excelled in short solo sorties.

The Prometheus class has 15 decks like the Intrepid class, it's merely longer with a smaller crew compliment to support it's extra combat capabilities.
How would a small crew "support" any extra capabilities?

Also, we know nothing about the size of that ship's crew. The only example we ever saw up close was hijacked during a test cruise, so the unknown number of Starfleet corpses aboard was probably way different from the regular complement.

As for why Starfleet would have both Galaxy and Sovereign, they also have Akira and Galaxy at the same time. Akira is about the size of the Sovereign. Probably Starfleet simply doesn't believe in the "single type for simplicity" credo, aka the "all eggs in the same basket" doctrine.

Timo Saloniemi


You can pack as big a punch in a small ship as a larger ship with advances in technology, like the Intrepid's warp core. The Sovereign for example is 24 decks in height versus the 42 decks of a galaxy, yet is more powerful....RIGHT there is pretty much proof that disproves what you said. The Intrepid has been said BY the producers to be a smaller counterpart to the galaxy almos equal tactically. Not completely equal, but close. And like i said before, Paris is QUOTED in an episode stating the ship was built for battle. And your reference to the real world is a little silly...ITS STAR TREK. Obviously we aren't talking about the real world lol. And remember i'm quoting actual episodes and an officially authorized magazine and articles that said these things, and like the writers bible stating the fact the Intrepid is a medium cruiser/deep space explorer.

And yes the Defiant class could go up against the Galaxy class. The Defiant class has been shown on numerous occasions going up against ships more powerful and larger. It's warp core is advanced and it's pulse phaser couplings run right past the warp plasma conduits, boosting the standard power by something like 50% or so. Not to mention they are armed with ablative hull armor (a new more advanced kind) and quantum torpedo's, not to mention it could run circles around a galaxy class. On numerous occasions the Defiant went up against dominion battleships, which were generally more powerful than a Galaxy class, in addition to the other reasons. Also, if you recall, the Defiant went up against the USS Lakota, refitted with more powerful phasers than a galaxy and quantum torpedo's. Granted it was a stalemate, but the Defiant was again SMALLER, yet could take on a ship larger and refitted with advanced weaponry. And it took the Lakota down. It didn't just go up against the Keldon class...did you watch the show? It went up against dominion warships, attack bugships, and Vorcha class klingon battle cruisers, and in a parralell univers against a ship bigger than even the Negvhar! And before it's argued it was a parrallel univers, the design schematics were stolen from the universe we know by the parrallel universe Obrien, or Smiley. So the ship was built to starfleet specs.


The admiral would have his own ship obviously, he was a fleet admiral. Remember in the alst episode of TNG Riker was a fleet admiral and chose the refit Galaxy class as his personal flagship. Again, star trek NOT real world. As for the Prometheus being 15 decks, you can reasonably assum based on the size of the window's and phaser strips, and the size of the bridge, that it's 15 decks. I believe it was also stated somewhere in the episode as well.


I'm sorry you dont put much credence in a magazine officially authorized by paramount, who BTW calls the shots on Star Trek. I'd also like to point out that the magazine actually calls the people on star trek, as well as interviews the producers, cast, and sometimes crew. So the information is pretty valid. I would agree with you if the magazine was not authroized. But if that's not enough you can look at onscreen evidence.

Examples:

The USS Voyager went up against three or four Kazon motherships, and was winning, in one of the major battles in Voyager. If it wasn't for internal sabotage they would have probably one. In addition to that supporting the argument that Voyager was a strong ship, it also shows that LARGER ships can be weaker than SMALLER ships.

Phasers and their components aren't always bigger = better. Advancements in technology allows for smaller compnents being more powerful than older larger ones. I can't beleive you don't realize this...I mean if you WANT to compare to the real world, look at laptops and personal computers now versus the huge ones back in the sixties? Or missles in the army/navy that are smaller, and even remote controlled, versus technology that was like 50 years ago. Nanites, a perfect example of smaller doesn't equal less powerful or productive. As technology advances things tend to get smaller. Also, they are called Bio-Neural, NEURAL AS IN BRAIN, gel packs. Is it really so difficult to make the logical next step in assuming it uses artificial nerual fibers?? It says NEURAL in the NAME of the gel packs. I don't think star trek felt the need to explain that any further, and i'm pretty sure they assumed we'd be smart enough to make the leap lol.

Tom paris, quoted in an episode, stating that the Intrepid class was built for combat. That's a tough one to argue, and if you want to go with on screen evidence there you go.

As for the prometheus class, if it's THAT gunned up then it probably has a large torpedo compliment. It also probably has heavier phaser components, though that wouldn't be the main thing because they wouldn't be THAT much bigger really. It has extra warp cores, and a very large shuttlebay, and can also separate into three smaller ships, which means each section has to have it's own dueterium and antimatter supply, as well as impulse engines which also means more fusion generators. Granted we don't know much about the crew compliment, but with all the extra components needed to operate as a battleship and in seperated flight mode, it's fairly obvious if you use common sense that the crew compliment would probably not be as high as an Intrepid class, which is indeed the same deck height. And as for supporting the hardware, well honestly much of it is automated so it doesn't need a large crew to operate. When we were first introduced to the Prometheus class, it was able to operate with a crew UNDER TEN. This is also why the Intrepid class doesn't have a larger crew compliment even though it's similar in size in terms of it's internal volume and space to a Constitution.
kent is offline   Reply With Quote