RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,629
Posts: 5,427,320
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 562
Newest member: Rom

TrekToday headlines

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 30 2012, 08:15 AM   #16
Deks
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

R. Star wrote: View Post
I think those were from fan productions... everything else is accurate.

And of course Voyager is faster, it's smaller. That doesn't translate to great combat ability though.
Except that Voyager was launched roughly 7 years after the Enterprise-D.
Starfleet was building smaller and more powerful ships ever since the BoBW - the Defiant is a prime example, and Voyager could easily be as well.

Just because a ship is smaller, doesn't mean it cannot match or surpass the larger ones in terms of combat ability.
The Enterprise-D has to support a much larger crew, ergo, its life-support (which is a power hog anyway you put it) would draw that much more power compared to the one on Voyager.

Also... the galaxy class has a number of different non-combat systems which are left on during combat situations.
Voyager is a stripped down star-ship if anything - minimum amenities... think a compressed Galaxy class.
Also, while Voyager is able to reach much higher Warp velocities... that could be easily due to more efficient ways of achieving Warp in the first place (variable nacelle geometry) which wouldn't necessarily require more power.

Btw... since when are small ships inherently faster than bigger ones?
The Defiant was rather slow if anything and the crew had to go out of their way to increase the speed to levels (without shaking itself apart) where the Intrepid for example would run circles around it (and probably the Galaxy class).

The approach to the Defiant was to completely remove ALL crew amenities.
Given the size of the ship, its no surprise either.
The Intrepid on the other hand is 15 decks large (about 11 decks more than the Defiant).
While the Intrepid would employ far fewer amenities compared to the Galaxy class, if it was built with the similar philosophy in mind like the Defiant, then it would be able to match a Galaxy class in combat situation.

The torpedo counts between both ships is a different story.
Its probable the Galaxy class has an inherently larger storage capacity given its size... but the Intrepid would NOT be limited to mere 36 photons (because the Defiant was left with 45 after a large combat), and rather the number could be in well over 100 range.

The Galaxy class would have more torpedoes to spare, but I doubt either ships shields would hold on until they expended 100 of them each (actually both would collapse probably when reaching the number 10, maybe 15 or so).
__________________
We are who we choose to be but also have predefined aspects of our personalities we are born with, and make art that defines us.
Deks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 08:43 AM   #17
RB_Kandy
Commander
 
RB_Kandy's Avatar
 
Location: RB_Kandy
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

Voyager was "theoretically" a weaker, but much faster ship than Enterprise D. However, according to the Voyager episodes, the ship was dozens of times more powerful than than Enterprise D.
Look at the fact that a lone borg cube wiped out something like half the federation ships. in Best Of Both Worlds. And Enterprise D was powerless to stop it.
Now Voyager takes on a Borg Tactical cube, you know, a borg cube amped up to the inth degree. And single handedly cripples the cube. Wow, either Voyager is tough, or Brannon Braga needs to be taken out to the wood shed.
RB_Kandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 09:57 AM   #18
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

The ships are as weak or strong as the plot dictates.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 10:49 AM   #19
Tiberius
Commodore
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

Captain McBain wrote: View Post
Voyager has more firepower than the Enterprise, though, correct?
No. Why would you think that? The Enterprise D is a capital ship, designed to be able to complete many different types of missions, including battleship. We saw quite a few of them in the Dominion War.

Voyager is a science vessel.
Tiberius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 12:40 PM   #20
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

Voyager, is not a dedicated science vessel, if any class from that era could be classed as a dedicated science vessel it would be the Nova Class just as the Oberth Class was the science vessel of the late 23rd early 24th century.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 05:56 PM   #21
Deks
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

Technically, ALL SF ships would be exploratory type ships (oriented towards science).
The way they were designed seems to be 'ultimate versatility and exploration' in mind (at least before Ds9 decided to make 'dedicated warships') and probably an even match to most ships of neighboring interstellar powers the Federation is aware of.

No. Why would you think that? The Enterprise D is a capital ship, designed to be able to complete many different types of missions, including battleship. We saw quite a few of them in the Dominion War.
To my knowledge, it was never stated the Enterprise-D is a 'capital ship'. It may have been the 'flagship', but hardly what I would call a 'battleship'.
The closest we can come up with using canon data is that the Enterprise-D was a ship of exploration (and Voyager was also mentioned to be one).
What we saw during the Dominion War was a bunch of pre-existing Federation star-ships that were fighting against the Dominion - I don't think any 'military' designations were given to different Federation ships (except 'fans' who apparently had a need to transpose current day terms to something that was supposed to be inherently different - even Picard found it incredulous that a man from the late 20th century in 'The Neutral Zone' compared the Enterprise to a 'naval ship').
We also saw just 1 galaxy class featuring minor upgrades to its weapons systems... the USS Venture (which was modified with 2 extra phaser strips, each one on the top of the warp nacelles) - we hadn't seen other Galaxy class ships being outfitted with these phaser changes, and perhaps they weren't needed as most of the upgrades would probably occur on the inside to increase effectiveness against Dominion ships.
__________________
We are who we choose to be but also have predefined aspects of our personalities we are born with, and make art that defines us.
Deks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 06:31 PM   #22
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

Deks wrote: View Post
Except that Voyager was launched roughly 7 years after the Enterprise-D.
As the "Flagship of the Federation," the Enterprise would of had access to all the newest upgrades in sensors, phaser emitters, torpedoes, computers, etc.

Look at the battle between the Defiant and the Lakota. The newest, most heavily armed for it size warship in Starfleet verses an aging Excelsior Class cruiser, but with it's resent upgrades the Lakota held it own.

Just because a ship is smaller, doesn't mean it cannot match or surpass the larger ones in terms of combat ability.
It kind of does. A larger ship to begin with has a larger warp core. By necessity just to move it - more powerful impulse engines (additional power production). More numerous auxiliary power units. And all these thing can be spread farther apart, making collateral damage less likely.

While the Enterprise is a larger target, much of the Enterprise's internal volume is non-combat critical. A lesser percent of the Voyager could be described the same.

The phaser emitters (the "strips") on the Enterprise have over twice the width of Voyagers. Suggesting greater energy output.

And remember, prior to battle (or during) the Enterprise can jettison it saucer section, Voyager can not dispense with a portion of it bulk.

the galaxy class has a number of different non-combat systems which are left on during combat situations.
Or casually switched off. One of the advantages of the Enterprise's large volume is that life support can be switched off and simply keep the air circulation "fans" running. Voyager has a lesser per person cubic meter ratio.

Deks wrote: View Post
Picard found it incredulous that a man from the late 20th century in 'The Neutral Zone' compared the Enterprise to a 'naval ship'
Buzzer -- the guy from the 20th century said that the Enterprise wasn't as efficient run as a luxury cruise ship he was once aboard.

He never at any point compared it to a naval ship.

RB_Kandy wrote: View Post
Now Voyager takes on a Borg Tactical cube, you know ...
You mean "the baby cube?"

In military parlance, tactical means small, local, lower powered, short term and flexible.

Flexible is alway good.

in Best Of Both Worlds
That was a full sized cube, what I and some others (completely non-canon) refer to as a "strategic cube." From shot of the Enterprise and the cube on screen simultaneously, this thing was over ten cubic kilometres in size, and was in no way "tactical."

Tiberius wrote: View Post
The Enterprise D ... [snip] We saw quite a few of them in the Dominion War.
And in the Dominion War, when the Federation was fighting for it's life, anyone remember Starfleet using any Intrepid class starships in battle?

That says something.


Last edited by T'Girl; September 30 2012 at 06:42 PM.
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 08:46 PM   #23
NCC-1701-B
Fleet Captain
 
NCC-1701-B's Avatar
 
Location: Liverpool
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

T'Girl wrote: View Post
And in the Dominion War, when the Federation was fighting for it's life, anyone remember Starfleet using any Intrepid class starships in battle?

That says something.

But how long does it take to build a starship? The Intrepid class entered service in 2370, with the Dominion war taking place from 2373.

By 2373 we know of there being 3 ships? The Intrepid, Voyager and the Bellerophon, I think Voyager and The Bellerophon were commissioned in 2371. So with Voyager being away, that leaves 2 Intrepid class ships that are known about at the time of the dominion war. Surely it would be much easier and quicker to upgrade the countless excelsior and miranda class ships than to build more new ships?
__________________
____________________________________________

Hellooo...
NCC-1701-B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 09:10 PM   #24
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

NCC-1701-B wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
anyone remember Starfleet using any Intrepid class starships in battle?
But how long does it take to build a starship?
How long does it take to deploy whatever number of the mighty Intrepids to the front? Again, we didn't see any. Perhaps they are not that mighty?







.

Last edited by T'Girl; October 1 2012 at 12:25 AM.
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 09:13 PM   #25
NCC-1701-B
Fleet Captain
 
NCC-1701-B's Avatar
 
Location: Liverpool
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

My point was really that there were only 2 intrepid class starships in service at the time, that we know of. How much of the war got actual airtime? Quite possible we never saw one for that reason.
__________________
____________________________________________

Hellooo...
NCC-1701-B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30 2012, 09:17 PM   #26
Dream
Admiral
 
Dream's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

I can see the Galaxy Class being very useful during the Dominon War. It's large size would be useful for carrying troops into battle, and it became even more tough after some weapon and shield upgrades.
Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2012, 01:11 AM   #27
Deks
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

NCC-1701-B wrote: View Post
[
But how long does it take to build a starship? The Intrepid class entered service in 2370, with the Dominion war taking place from 2373.
Actually, star-ship build times would have to be small if you take into account the premise of using automation for construction (humans/humanoids slow the construction process down considerably, therefore, this kind of process wouldn't allow for humanoid interference - only perhaps at the drawing boards).

T'girl
The only reason we only saw the Bellerophon in Ds9 was because the producers didn't want to 'confuse' the audiences (the same reason the Enterprise-E was never shown, even though that by the time FC rolled out, DS9 would have been in its 4th season - before the Dominion war).
On that same subject... we have seen in TNG both the Ambassador and Constellation classes being used for blockade of the Romulan Neutral Zone. Why hadn't we seen them during the Dominion war whereas the dingy Miranda's apparently made it along with the Excelsiors?

As the "Flagship of the Federation," the Enterprise would of had access to all the newest upgrades in sensors, phaser emitters, torpedoes, computers, etc.

Look at the battle between the Defiant and the Lakota. The newest, most heavily armed for it size warship in Starfleet verses an aging Excelsior Class cruiser, but with it's resent upgrades the Lakota held it own.
So what if the Enterprise would have access to all the newest upgrades?
If SF designed the Intrepid class to be a downsized Galaxy class, they would probably keep it's combat capabilities on the same level.

As for the Lakota vs the Defiant - yes, an ageing Excelsior class was upgraded to match the Defiant... but that doesn't mean same type of upgrades would be available for the Galaxy class (which basically received an upgrade to its warp core and warp speed by Season 7 of TNG - modifications to the phasers and torpedoes were also done largely to accomodate anti-Borg systems, but those would already be a part of the Intrepid class starships, and Voyager was equipped with Type 6 photon torpedoes which at the time were praised to be 'newest').

It kind of does. A larger ship to begin with has a larger warp core. By necessity just to move it - more powerful impulse engines (additional power production). More numerous auxiliary power units. And all these thing can be spread farther apart, making collateral damage less likely.
Actually, just because you have a necessity for a larger energy source to power bigger engines, doesn't mean firepower will also be equally large - it simply means you have that much bigger power demand for the engines to move a large ship which requires more power than a smaller one to achieve the same goal.
Spreading apart auxiliary power units doesn't really mean squat since we hadn't seen Federation ships employing such methods on their ships.

While the Enterprise is a larger target, much of the Enterprise's internal volume is non-combat critical. A lesser percent of the Voyager could be described the same.
Your point being?
Precision targeting pretty much negates these kinds of things and the last time I checked, both ships can be equally vulnerable on seemingly 'non-critical' parts.

The phaser emitters (the "strips") on the Enterprise have over twice the width of Voyagers. Suggesting greater energy output.
Phaser strips width were never stated to have anything to do with energy output.
Phaser Type on the other hand is a different story, and we know from the show creators Voyager WAS created to feature Type X just like the Galaxy class.

the guy from the 20th century said that the Enterprise wasn't as efficient run as a luxury cruise ship he was once aboard.

He never at any point compared it to a naval ship.
Picard's exact line: 'He's comparing the Enterprise to a cruise ship?'
Naval: Of or relating to ships or shipping

And remember, prior to battle (or during) the Enterprise can jettison it saucer section, Voyager can not dispense with a portion of it bulk.
Accurate, but Intrepids don't have the ability to separate (unless you count the latest non-canon novel in which they gained that ability) the Enterprise-D rarely employed its separation tactic and we don't know that when separated, the battle section would be more powerful than the Intrepid or basically gains the ability to maneuver a bit more while moving its civilian population to safety (which the Intrepids wouldn't really have in the first place, and they are already highly maneuverable).
__________________
We are who we choose to be but also have predefined aspects of our personalities we are born with, and make art that defines us.
Deks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2012, 05:31 AM   #28
EmperorTiberius
Captain
 
EmperorTiberius's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

^ I knew this big text was coming
EmperorTiberius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2012, 05:49 AM   #29
RB_Kandy
Commander
 
RB_Kandy's Avatar
 
Location: RB_Kandy
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

T'Girl wrote:
RB_Kandy wrote:
Now Voyager takes on a Borg Tactical cube, you know ...
You mean "the baby cube?"

In military parlance, tactical means small, local, lower powered, short term and flexible.

Flexible is alway good.
That was no "baby cube", here's a screen cap http://i45.tinypic.com/2ic7a55.jpg

That little blur on the left is Voyager.
That thing is at least the size of the cube that Enterprise faced. In fact I think it's bigger!

Look at the son of a brick, it has freakin armor!

This is what Seven Of Nine had to say about it.

"This is a class four tactical Vessel, heavily armed, the central plexes is protected by multi regenerative security grids..."

And she said it like "You honestly think you have any chance in hell of taking on this thing!?"

It's made clear in that episode (Unimatrix Zero) that this is not your run of the mill borg cube exploring space looking for things to assimilate. This is what the borg whip out when the kid gloves come off.

Normal Borg Cube= "Hi, we're the borg, we're just exploring. Would you like to be assimilated into our collective? We won't take no for an answer."

Class Four Tactical Cube= "We are the borg, bend over because your ass belongs to us now."
RB_Kandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2012, 08:44 AM   #30
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

RB_Kandy wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote:
You mean "the baby cube?"
That was no "baby cube", here's a screen cap http://i45.tinypic.com/2ic7a55.jpg


From this image, if the Voyager is even with the nearest face, and given that the ship is 132 metres across, that makes the cube's face about 700 metres square. Just 60 metres more than the Enterprise D's total length.

If the Voyager is pass the cube, then the cube is smaller than 700 metres. The further away the Voyager is in this image, the smaller the cube.

The baby "tactical" cube is much smaller than the large "strategic" cube that the Enterprise encountered. Each face of that larger cube was multiple times the length of the Enterprise.

T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.