I think Defiant > Cardassian cruisers. In that episode, she dodged some blasts from the ship, then disabled her power grid while the shields were up (penetration power of quantums i guess?), Riker could have finished them off if he wanted to.
What are you talking about? And why are you laughing in every sentence? The Galaxy had children. What I want to emphasize is that nobody said the Sovereign did not. Just because we didn't see any ikids or spouses in the E-E movies is no proof, as we so seldom saw any on the E-D, too. How so? We don't know if the technology even works. The only known Fed design to feature it was a prototype that never even completed her maiden voyage. Assuming, of course, that it ain't just a fancy name for standard shielding. The term was spoken by a computer, which would probably sprout technical jargon differently from a live being, going to needless detail. What makes it more advanced? Every warp core so far has looked different. Yet different doesn't mean better or worse. Isn't the TNG statement good proof that a starship cannot have those weapons? Doesn't sound too solid to me, but I could live with her being the second ship, yes. Indeed. However, this should not be taken to indicate that the E-E was a replacement for the E-D. For all we know, the E-E functionally replaced USS Expendable, a recently lost Excelsior class vessel, while the E-D was replaced by USS Dashing, a Galaxy class vessel. Why? Because she can pop small enemy ships? Klingon BoPs have performed the exact same feat. And Klingon BoPs have blown to pieces a Cardassian cruiser, something the Defiant never quite managed. Actually, that was sarcastically quipped by Kira, a known disbeliever in the propaganda that Starfleet typically sprouts about its benevolence and pacifism. Sisko only said that the ship was dedicated to Borg-fighting, and was "a warship, pure and simple". Doesn't mean Starfleet doesn't build warships as a matter of course - or even that Starfleet doesn't build Borg-fighters as a matter of course. Timo Saloniemi
Not really. What one could actually claim was that a torpedo boat had enough firepower to SINK a cruiser if it got into torpedo range, which is essentially true. It's worth remembering that submarines were originally just submersible torpedo boats themselves, and for the entire first world war and part of the second they made most of their attacks while running on the surface, even using their main deck gun as a primary armament. In those cases a submarine (which, let's face it, is really what we're talking about when we refer to the Defiant) was by no means as heavily armed as a cruiser or even a destroyer, but with a smart enough commander it could sink dozens of ships without ever taking a scratch. It was only in World War-II and after that submarines really emerged as different class of combatant, and later with the advent of sleek underwater hulls that submarines stopped surfacing altogether and made all of their attacks from under water. Since Defiant, like WW-I subs, cannot fire while cloaked, the fact that it has the torpedo armament of a heavy cruiser just makes it an ideal ambush predator. Otherwise, what you're really looking at is a Type-VII U-boat that happens to have a freaking enormous deck gun on the front of it. You could ask whether or not it can take on a heavy cruiser in a stand up fight, but stand up fights aren't what U-boats were designed for; you might as well ask how well the cruiser would perform in a dogfight. The full range of its capabilities can't be expressed unless you're using the ship to its specialty: since Defiant is an ambush predator, then it stands to reason that if it manages to sneak up on and ambush a Sovereign class starship, it will blow it out of the sky.
Twas neither a quip, nor was it intended in sarcasm; actually, it was a statement of incredulity, since as Kira knows, to quote a certain Vulcan philosopher, "Starfleet's mission has always been one of peace." True. It means only that, except for the Defiant, Starfleet doesn't build them anymore. Every Federation starship since the Constitution class has apparently been dual mission science/military, with no specialized combat vessels still in service. Probably the closest thing they had to such a vessel was the Galaxy's star drive section, and this is undoubtedly the exception that proves the rule, since the Galaxy is a dedicated long range exploration vessel that can't afford to call for backup if something goes wrong. In any case, it's exceedingly difficult to reconcile Defiant with Starfleet (and to a certain extent, Rodenberry's) vision of what the Federation represents. Then again, it's even harder to reconcile the Borg with that vision, which is probably why Defiant exists in the first place. Everyone else in the universe there is hope of peaceful coexistence on some level, and even patient cultural exchange to wear them down and win them over to Humanity's point of view. The Borg represent a force of nature that sees no point of view but its own, is unstoppable, unreasonable, and thoroughly impossible to coexist with. Defiant is therefore that last argument of Kings for use against that one enemy that will respect no other reasoning: brute force for a brutal opponent.
Sisko didn't say that. Sisko just said the Defiant was a warship, which is compatible with Starfleet building warships at that time, and having built them in the 22nd century, and planning on doing so in the 2380s as well. Kira in response rolled her eyes and said "I thought Starfleet didn't believe in warships" - a quip Sisko didn't really deign to respond to. Instead, he held his mouth for a short beat, then moved on to explaining why the ship came to be - to confront the Borg. Independent of that exchange, we don't know much about "Starfleet philosophy". Some skippers on some missions speak highly of the virtues of peace, but none really resort to non-aggression when an enemy tries to pick a fight. All our hero COs are seen conducting classic missions of military aggression, and (with the EXCEPTION of Sisko and the failed Defiant!) all are confident that their hardware will carry them through. It would be easy enough to argue that Starfleet vessels are warships first and foremost, and that a certain percentage of them carry additional capabilities which are extensively used in propaganda to make people forget the basic nature of the Fleet's hardware. Timo Saloniemi
Tone is important here. Timo and I don't always agree on things, but the guy is smart and thoughtful, and was treating you with a great deal of respect already. You have no right to be so hostile, and mocking no less, towards the guy. You need to take a step back and think a little more before you respond. And it's worse, even, than that... because the point you THINK you're "correcting" him on isn't the point he was making at all. If you'd stopped to actually read what he was saying, and thought it over before responding... instead of responding with a hostile, emotionally-driven comment... you'd have realized that the point he was making above wasn't "there weren't kids on the 1701-D" but rather that "we don't know if there were kids on the 1701-E." Reading comprehension (and proper spelling and grammar) count for a lot when your entire means of communication is built around the written word. Which is definitely the case here. I'm not a moderator... I'm just giving you friendly advice. But this BBS has enough "if you don't agree with me I hate you and will destroy you" types. Please don't fall into that trap yourself. Here in the "Tech" forum (like the "Art" forum) egos seem to be mostly in-check, and while we often disagree, the conversations are DISCUSSIONS, not "flamefests." I'd prefer for it to stay that way. I don't always agree with Timo, but I always like seeing what he has to say. And if you're polite and respectful of others (just as others ought to be towards you!), it'll be a lot nicer in here, don't you think?
Sort of a hundred year gap reflecting more peaceful times, though, which is the point of the conversation. It wouldn't have been that big an issue in, say, the Yesterday's Enterprise alternate timeline where the Federation was at war with the Klingons. And yet his response basically confirmed Kira's point: "Desperate times call for desperate measures." As a rule, Starfleet doesn't... unless the Borg are involved. ... except that even a a hundred year old rearline frigate like the Saratoga also houses the crew's family members. I don't know that dragging your wife and child into combat situations is something the Federation would do strictly for propaganda purposes. It's far more likely that that the Federation just isn't warlike but still reserves the right to defend itself. It's a real stretch to assume that Starfleet really is just the 24th century equivalent of the U.S. Navy but everything we've seen that says otherwise is just a facade.
The discussion in this thread regarding Starfleet and warships prompted me to start one in General here to see what the less tech obsessed among us might think. I'd invite any of you who hadn't had a look there to do so.