Sovereign Class and Photon Torpedoes

[EmperorTiberius]

As for doubting my launcher size comment, I did some calculations, and got the following:

Galaxy Class
Aft Launcher: 43.7 Meters
Forward: 36.8m

Sovereign:
All Launchers: 16.2 Meters, and this is a generous estimate, you could argue that they are even smaller. The ones that are glued on are not on msd, but I'd say probably like 5 meters.

They are clearly not the same class.

[Plecostomus]

My take on the situation:

The E-D was configured out of the yard as an long-term exploration ship, for deep-deep-space missions. Because of this she had to carry consumables like torpedoes onboard. Yes they could replicate more, but that's energy intensive.

The deep-deep-space mission never happened (Farpoint) so she was recalled and some of her "excess" inventory offloaded as now she could zip to a Starbase for resupply.

The E-E on the other hand was configured out of the yard for combat because Starfleet was on a war-footing. From the Dominion War to Borg Incursion to Sona Nonsense to the Romulan Unpleasantness the E-E has had little time to Boldly Go... every time she Boldly Goes she runs into a combat situation, and has to return to the yard for another refit. No wonder the profiles don't match anymore.

Now assuming that Starfleet eventually gets back to Boldly Going and exploring the Sovvies will either be mothballed or refit for scientific and deep-space exploration. That includes removing some torpedo bays, adujusting inventorys and internal layouts. More labs, diplomatic rooms, possible civilian quarters...

Comparing the Galaxy as seen in TNG and the Sovvie as seen in the movies is pointless unless you factor in the political enviroment and mission profile, as I did above.

[JNG]

DRACO wrote:

---

regardless if we are oing to argue
about weather the Sovy has type XII phasers... there are amny sources that state that, in fact they neerly all do, I can't think of one that
says something different

You named one source, not "amny": Star Trek: The Magazine, and it's not in a section authored by anyone who had anything to do with the design of the ship as far as I can tell. It's probably text by Penny Juday or someone. It's not from a movie script, it's not documented from any backstage source; it's not from anywhere.

When a magazine article is directly authored by someone like Rick Sternbach, we should at least take it into consideration, but unattributed text in a tie-in magazine is not a "source" worth taking seriously.

There are no canonical sources that claim this type of phaser even exists, let alone that they are mounted to Enterprise-E. John Eaves made the comparison I described before in the Sketchbook, obviously not intending to convey new or superior phasers by giving them an identical look--unlike the case with Defiant on DS9, in which the script specified that the phasers should appear different somehow from what we've seen before. The phasers don't appear to me to be physically larger than those on Enterprise-D, or to be functioning in a different manner, and while direct comparisons are lacking, I see no evidence of exceptional effectiveness demonstrated by the movies either.

You're claiming a type of phasers larger than the largest ones mounted to starbases not only exists but is mounted on a ship type probably designed relatively few years after the Galaxy, and your source for this is what I believe to be an unattributed line in a now-defunct tie-in magazine--a magazine which also had a tendency to thoughtlessly reproduce errors from other sources, such as thinking the Saber-class starship is 372 meters long or that Voyager was over a million tons.

There are no other sources. This is listed under "False Canon" at EAS for a reason, you know.

[Timo]

OTOH, the two ships could be meant for the very same mission and situation. It's just that they take slightly different technological approaches - one covers with quantity what it cannot afford to do with quality.

But it could also be argued that they were always intended to fight in completely different leagues. The E-E certainly looks more like a successor to the Excelsior class than to the Galaxy one - possibly inheriting the former's rather militant TNG era role. Which makes one wonder what sort of a successor Starfleet has got planned for the Galaxy class, and when it's scheduled to come out. The early 2400s, perhaps?

Timo Saloniemi

[JNG]

^I think the Excelsior was a definite inspiration artistically.

Few more comments:

DRACO wrote:

---

also, yes she's new so yes she'll have new tech but, the Akira was new, she didn't have Quantums nor Type XII phasers..... and she was built for war
in fact

What supports the war idea? Her registry and design suggest to me she is probably from the late 2350s/early 2360s; I see no reason to conclude she is new. It is possible she was designed under the looming threat of the Cardassians, I guess.

DRACO wrote:

---

you don't want to have to mothball a hip that new and of that size after wartime... but she was designed with the Bord the Dominion and other threats in mind,

Already disproven.

DRACO wrote:

---

so while war wasn't a big consideration with the Galaxy, it was with the Sovy being one of it's design specifications

You keep saying it, but there's no evidence to back it up.

DRACO wrote:

---

heh, X+ plus could be type XI but chances are it isn't

I'm going to take the DS9 Technical Manual over your opinion, because that's what it says.

DRACO wrote:

---

many like, Star Trek The Magazine, issue 1, Eneterprise E briefing,

That's one...such as it is.

DRACO wrote:

---

so as their building this ship, as a future propsoal for severe threats, things happen that influence to design as it's being developed obviously, I mean when they tell you it's designed to combat
threats like the borg and the dominion ok

It was never said of the ship that it was designed for that in the first place, and the class ship had been in space for years by the time the Dominion was first encountered.

DRACO wrote:

---

also, what episode did we first see the borg, early to mid TNG?

"Q Who?" in TNG second season, I believe.

DRACO wrote:

---

well, since there are supposedly what, two Sovies running around... yeah I'm sure some Galaxy classes did recieve some quanums, but I tought we where comparing the whole classes of them and not specific ships

What's the class have to do with ordnance? You're going to suggest that Enterprise-E received special fancy ordnance while she was running around not fighting the war, and the Galaxy-class ships we saw in the battles would not have gotten the Q-torps? That would be a bit silly of Starfleet, wouldn't it?

DRACO wrote:

---

no I mean the Sovy, which was constructed after the Prommy as far as I'm aware, it's mentioned in one of the Technical manuals, or something like that that she has them

Those books were published years before VOY: "Message in a Bottle" ever aired!

That episode takes place years in the chronology after Enterprise-E was flying, let alone the first ship of her class, and Prometheus is still a prototype and specified as singular.

There is absolutely no reason to think Prometheus is older than Sovereign.

DRACO wrote:

---

unerwarshp? lol well I do think allot of people forgot that she is an explorer just like those before her, but she was again designed with a strong militaristic view as well

You keep saying that, but where's the evidence to support she is any more "militaristic" than any other ship of the line? You know, Defiant is the only ship we know of for sure that Starfleet ever built specifically to fight, and obviously her differences are many.

DRACO wrote:

---

I don't think there was anything wrong with the design though, if there wasa maor flaw, we'd know by now, there would be a problem with the E, and it doesn't need any with
the situations it finds it self in... lol

I am not sure. The changes for ST Nemesis were pretty significant; changing the nacelle orientation would have been a big job. It is possible ships of the class had some problems if Enterprise-E was changed so dramatically after having been in space 5-6 years or so at max, but they may be corrected now.

DRACO wrote:

---

but if we are talking assignment lentgh, thats another thing

That's mainly what I meant. Available fuel storage plays into this, but so does ability to self-replenish, plus lots of other factors. I am sure a Sovereign-class ship is capable of long-range missions by Starfleet standards, but I think they send the "two kitchen sink" ships, with civilian specialists and room for even more specialized equipment and stuff like that, out on the really long independent probes into deep space.

It is a little bit of a bummer that Enterprise-E did not once really get to explore the unknown in the movies. The first TNG movie takes place at Earth, the next in territory where Starfleet and pals have already been doing business, and the last in Rom space and border areas. Picard even has a line in Insurrection where he complains, something like "remember when we used to be explorers?"

[Vanyel]

EmperorTiberius wrote:

---

As for doubting my launcher size comment, I did some calculations, and got the following:

Galaxy Class
Aft Launcher: 43.7 Meters
Forward: 36.8m

Sovereign:
All Launchers: 16.2 Meters, and this is a generous estimate, you could argue that they are even smaller. The ones that are glued on are not on msd, but I'd say probably like 5 meters.

They are clearly not the same class.

I'm going to assume that you used the MSD's of both ships and made each one to the same scale (example 1CM = 1M) for both. Otherwise your calculations would be off.

We're using the same scale to determine launcher length; could there be even the slightest, most minuscule chance that the launchers on the 1701E are smaller because the launchers are more advanced, and therefore equal to, or maybe better than, the ones used on a Galaxy class?

And as been stated in dialogue that the Defiant carriers a big punch in a small body. Proving that bigger is not better. The desktop computer I'm using right now is much smaller than the ENIAC, and it has much more processing power than it's Great Great Grandfather (Not sure how many generations of computer there were between then and now but that should be sufficient.); hell I even think I read that my desk top has more computing power than the ones on the Apollo space crafts.

[Timo]

And as been stated in dialogue that the Defiant carriers a big punch in a small body. Proving that bigger is not better.

Why would it prove that? The Defiant is good for a small ship, but she's never torn big capital ships a new one, the way the larger hero ships have done. The damage she dishes out on Cardassians cruisers in her titular episode is rather superficial, and she never quite kills a capital ship in any other episode, either. Bigger does seem to be better in that respect.

Although bigger certainly ain't better for survivability in those later battles. But that probably has got more to do with who's a hero and who's not.

Timo Saloniemi

[kent]

this thread seems to have taken on a different meaning, from whether or not the E-E fired photons (which it did, both in Insurrection and Nemesis).

As far as the Galaxy VS Sovereign debate goes, the Sovereign INITIALLY is more powerful. It has burst fire photorp tubes and rapid fire quantums. Better shields, and more manuverability..

The sovereign class seems to have a bias towards war. As far as its diplomatic capability goes, it probably is almost equal to a Galaxy. It could fit just as many VIP quarters and luxury rec areas that a Galaxy has. However, i've head from numerous sources, including backstage sources, that it wasn't constructed with families in mind which makes sense as it came out during the dominion wars. That though doesn't mean it can't be modified to carry them. The Sovereign class although not as many decks as a Galaxy is still a really big ship.

As far as tactical capability...the sovereign initially has superior strength. it has more advanced computing ability, more advanced shielding, and more advanced weaponry than the initial batch of Galaxy class'. That said though, newer galaxy class' are big enough to support ALL of those advances and then some. There is a distinct advantage to being a bigger ship: longevity and flexability. In that right the galaxy class has a BIG advantage over the Sovereign. It would be easy to refit a galaxy with more modern systems, and even easier to build newer galaxy ships with those systems already installed.

push comes to shove, the galaxy is pretty much equal to a sovereign, with tthe advantage being flexability and the ability to be refitted with better weapons. But more or less they are the same, the Sovereign just has more of a military role..

[Crazy Eddie]

The Sovereign doesn't appear to have "more of a military role" at all. It lacks any of the specializations found on vessels that DO have a military role, like the Defiant's simplified interiors, a noticeable lack of science labs and creature comforts, ablative armor, etc.

Actually, the Sovereign appears to be exactly what Eaves described it: a long overdue replacement for the Excelsior class. It's more of a generalist workhorse like the old Constitution class and very much unlike the long-range fully loaded Galaxy.

[Praetor]

newtype_alpha wrote:

---

Actually, the Sovereign appears to be exactly what Eaves described it: a long overdue replacement for the Excelsior class. It's more of a generalist workhorse like the old Constitution class and very much unlike the long-range fully loaded Galaxy.

That's pretty much what I consider the truth; additional tactical ability is just a reflection of recent advancements combined with the more hostile environment of the 2370s. I think it's more or less taken for granted that the Constitution and Excelsior was quite well-armed for their day as well.

I imagine that the Galaxy is capable of operating independently for much longer if need be, but that both the Galaxy and Sovereign are generally capable of the same missions. It seemed that Excelsiors were still being assigned missions similar to the Enterprise-D in TNG, just with range limits in mind. The Sovereign, being smaller in mass, would probably just have less of each facility that the Galaxy had.

"Jack of all trades, master of none" anyone?

[Strider]

Timo wrote:

---

Why would it prove that? The Defiant is good for a small ship, but she's never torn big capital ships a new one, the way the larger hero ships have done. The damage she dishes out on Cardassians cruisers in her titular episode is rather superficial, and she never quite kills a capital ship in any other episode, either. Bigger does seem to be better in that respect.

Although bigger certainly ain't better for survivability in those later battles. But that probably has got more to do with who's a hero and who's not.

Timo Saloniemi

In the titular episode, Gul Dukat referred to the Defiant as "one of the most heavily armed warships in the quadrant". I know it's irritating from a real world standpoint, but nevertheless the Defiant was portrayed on DS9 as a complete ass kicker. Dialogue like that just confirms it.

[Praetor]

The Klingons also once called the NCC-1701 a 'Federation Battle Cruiser' in 'The Search for Spock' and while she was obviously capable of defending herself, the Constitution was not designed to be a ship of war.

Points of view, remember?

[Strider]

While I could see where Dukat might be exaggerating things just to be dramatic, Sisko didn't even bother to contradict it by saying "Oh no, it's only a light raider." Everyone was treating the Defiant as a serious threat, even when matched against much larger Cardassian warships. And as I said, that's only been confirmed by the way the Defiant was portrayed throughout DS9, particularly in episodes like "The Die is Cast", "Sacrifice of Angels", "The Way of the Warrior", and "The Changing Face of Evil".

[Crazy Eddie]

Not just portrayed, though. Defiant herself was able to take on a Keldon class cruiser single handedly later in that very episode. With a complement of quantum torpedoes and those pulse phaser cannons, actually the Defiant routinely demonstrates itself to be a "tough little ship" with on hell of a right hook.

What do you think for the modern equivalent? I always compare it to those Pegasus class hydrofoils the U.S. Navy used to have; now just add a twin-barrel eight inch gun to that hydrofoil and add forty reloads for its missile launchers and you've got tiny warship that moves really fast and carries as much firepower as a heavy cruiser.

[Praetor]

newtype_alpha wrote:

---

I always compare it to those Pegasus class hydrofoils the U.S. Navy used to have; now just add a twin-barrel eight inch gun to that hydrofoil and add forty reloads for its missile launchers and you've got tiny warship that moves really fast and carries as much firepower as a heavy cruiser.

That's it exactly.

It's not that she's a more powerful ship than, say, a heavy cruiser, its that she's as well armed as a larger ship while being faster and more maneuverable, and it's that edge of speed and maneuverability that allows her to have a slight edge on comparably-armed vessels. I would tend to think that three coordinated Keldon-class ships might have been able to defeat her handily. Even a gnat gets swatted eventually.

She was apparently outmatched by three Jem'Hadar bugs in 'The Search.' Perhaps the bugs are equivalently armed?

I wonder who win win in a fight of Enterprise-E versus Defiant, or E versus D? All three would theoretically be similarly armed (excluding the D's lack of quantorps) but I would think the difference would again lay in speed and agility.