Enterprise-D vs. Voyager (extenuating circumstances)

[Deks]

MacLeod wrote:

---

You know I suspect that a Galaxy Class vessel that was consturcted in 2371 and an Intrpeid Class that was constructed in 2371 would have identical sensors.

I would say I agree... but we aren't talking about that.
As it was already established, we have 0 evidence to support the claim the Enterprise-D or the Galaxy class in general are 'more powerful' than Voyager or Intrepid class star-ships.

Phasers were never stated/implied to operate on the principles that length of arrays has anything to do with power output (this is rather inferred by the Phaser TYPE... and both vessels seem to have Type-X phaser arrays) - rather the length seems to imply coverage.

We do know the Galaxy class has over 200 torpedoes.
The Intrepid's torpedo storage capacity is unknown (because for a vessel of that size, I doubt that 36 would be the 'limit' especially when we take into account that Voyager was launched with a 2 week mission in mind to track down a small Maqui ship - with no supplies - I would sooner estimate the Intrepid class torpedo storage capacity to be in the range of 100/150 or perhaps half of that found on Galaxy class ships).
Either way, neither vessel's shields would likely last long enough to the point where exhausting torpedo supply would become an issue.

Shields... to my knowledge, I don't think we know anything concrete in regards to how powerful either are (seeing how canon evidence seemingly changes this info).
But there's no reason to think the Intrepid would feature less powerful shields - not if it was built with similar philosophy in mind as the Defiant - more compact version of larger ships - the Intrepid being able to get away with minimum amenities for the crew due to its size while matching firepower and shields found on Galaxy class ships, while the Defiant due to its very small size cannot feature any amenities and thus most of its space is optimized for offensive/defensive capacity which makes it comparable to larger ships - see the battle between the upgraded Excelsior class ship and the Defiant for reference - and the Defiant winning a battle against Jem'Hadaar ships only means that anti-Borg systems merely made its weapons and shields more effective against the Dominion ships whereas the Odyssey lacked them - We've seen SF not upgrading some of its ships on a regular basis and behaving like utter morons in ignoring the Borg as a threat).

[T'Girl]

mtblillie wrote:

---

the Galaxy class separating into two vessels isn't necessarily a prime tactical decision since the saucer has no warp propulsion and limited weapons systems

The primary purpose for separating the saucer from the drive section is to increase the abilities of the drive section in combat. Less mass, smaller size, smaller target, smaller deflector shield, smaller warp field. Power not needed to enclose the saucer in a warp field and a deflector shield are diverted to weapons.

Plus the saucer does have an aft facing photon torpedo launcher (it's on the MSD board), and it can fire it's phaser banks with the power of it's impulse engines. The saucer has all the craft on the main shuttle deck, which might include runabouts. Runabouts (from DS9) are useful in combat.

Deks wrote:

---

As it was already established, we have 0 evidence to support the claim the Enterprise-D or the Galaxy class in general are 'more powerful' than Voyager or Intrepid class star-ships.

Except for all the examples given so far in this thread.

Phasers [snip] rather the length seems to imply coverage.

As I pointed out earlier, the Enteprise's strips are over twice as wide (or tall) as the Voyager's. It's not just the case of her having more length. There's more emitter surface.

the Intrepid being able to get away with minimum amenities for the crew due to its size while matching firepower and shields found on Galaxy class ships

You brought this up before and I'm not sure what it has to do with combat ability.

And where do you get the idea that the Voyager has "less amenities?" If the Voyager has two holodecks for 150 people, and the Enterprise has thirteen or fourteen for 1000 people, it's the same ratio of holodecks to people isn't it?

I doubt that 36 would be the 'limit' especially when we take into account that Voyager was launched with a 2 week mission in mind to track down a small Maqui ship

Facing possible combat with known terrorists, the Voyager would have been carrying a full weapons load, including two tri-cobalt warheads.

[EmperorTiberius]

There is some evidence that the battlesection is not more powerful without saucer though. I think it was in BOTBW that Riker laments that they won't be able to use impulse engines from the saucer section as a source of power. It might have been another episode though.

Also, during the Dominion War, they go in full size, if there ever was a time to seperate, that would be it.

My opinion is that saucer is just a giant lifeboat, it's not meant to escape the enemy, fight the enemy, nothing of the kind.

[Edit_XYZ]

In warships size MATTERS.
More power, heavier weaponry.
There's no such thing as a magical "fit everything that makes a cruiser into a destroyer".

Plus, Voyager was shown as having an equally large percentage of amenities as the Enterprise (crew quarters, etc). It's not even built with a Defiant-like philosophy.

At an equal technological level (which is the case), the larger ships wins, easily.
Meaning - Voyager gets fried against the Enterprise.

[Deks]

Trannie~sylvania wrote:

---

The primary purpose for separating the saucer from the drive section is to increase the abilities of the drive section in combat. Less mass, smaller size, smaller target, smaller deflector shield, smaller warp field. Power not needed to enclose the saucer in a warp field and a deflector shield are diverted to weapons.

Mass in space is a non-issue.
Trek technology also completely negates mass oriented issues by using subspace fields, that's why in early TNG large ships were portrayed as being able to turn like small fighter crafts.
As for 'enhancing' ships combat abilities while separated... doesn't make sense really because the saucer has power sources of its own to make it completely self-sufficient under sub-light conditions (for achieving Warp speed though, it needs the star-drive) and not to siphon any power during combat conditions while connected to the star-drive section (besides, most combat situations saw the Enterprise-D and other Galaxy class ships connected - even during major battles such as with the Dominion - so the 'enhancing of ships combat abilities' kinda goes down the drain.
Besides, all occasions where we witnessed the Enterprise-D separating (which were a hand-full) was mainly to protect the civilians and non-critical personnel (or in other words, evacuation).

As I pointed out earlier, the Enteprise's strips are over twice as wide (or tall) as the Voyager's. It's not just the case of her having more length. There's more emitter surface.

0 on-screen evidence supports the claim that the length or emitter surface area has any bearing on the phaser power output.
If it did, and if the Galaxy's star-drive really 'shines' in combat while separated... why lose the 'more powerful' phasers ability (especially when basically the only time we saw both sections in battle was versus the Borg, and that was only when the saucer served as a DISTRACTION - usually though, the Saucer was NOT part of other combat scenarios).

You brought this up before and I'm not sure what it has to do with combat ability.

And where do you get the idea that the Voyager has "less amenities?" If the Voyager has two holodecks for 150 people, and the Enterprise has thirteen or fourteen for 1000 people, it's the same ratio of holodecks to people isn't it?

Voyager has much fewer amenities compared to the Galaxy class due to its size and crew compliment, but also to probably increase its combat ability so it can be a match to larger vessels.
The Galaxy class also has numerous recreational areas (amenities if you will) that basically make it a small mobile city of sorts - the Intrepids don't have such 'luxuries'.
As I said, if the Defiant was able to match larger vessels in combat ability, there is no reason Voyager wouldn't be able to do the same (only its size gives it the option to have bare minimum amenities for the crew, whereas the Defiant cannot even have 1 holodeck because its extremely compact).

Facing possible combat with known terrorists, the Voyager would have been carrying a full weapons load, including two tri-cobalt warheads.

Actually, given that Voyager was launched for a 2 week mission to find a LONE Maqui ship (and technologically inferior on so many levels) in the Badlands wouldn't necessitate a full torpedo compliment.
Its entirely possible this was supposed to be Voyager's 'shakedown' cruise - and it might have been a way for SF to test the tri-cobalt warheads as well.
We don't know the full reason, but I find it difficult to imagine that a ship of Voyager's size would only carry 36 photon torpedoes (which were Type 6 and supposedly 'newest' at the time, so its possible SF didn't have more to spare when they launched Voyager and figured 36 would be enough for a 2 week mission).

SF ships WERE launched half-ready before, and Voyager didn't have any additional supplies on board compared to say if they were launched for a deep-space mission (like the Enterprise-D was).

[T'Girl]

Deks wrote:

---

so the 'enhancing of ships combat abilities' kinda goes down the drain.

Korris: "We have heard this ship can separate in time of battle."
Worf: "Yes. When relieved of its bulk, the Enterprise becomes an exceptional weapon."

Sounds like the truth just came back up the drain, didn't it?

Voyager has much fewer amenities compared to the Galaxy class due to its size and crew compliment, but also to probably increase its combat ability so it can be a match to larger vessels.

Again this makes no sense. The Voyager's per person amenities, are equal to the Enterprise's. Voyager has 150 people, Enteprise has 1000 people. Both ship have about one holodeck per 75 people, the same amenities. The living quarter appear to be about the same size, same amenities. Voyager's officer's mess fulfills the same function as ten forward, the same amenities.

The only real difference between the two is Janeway would appear to be running a pretty dry ship, little alcohol.

the Intrepids don't have such 'luxuries'

Yes they do, given the relative crew and ship sizes, proportionally the luxuries are the same.

if the Defiant was able to match larger vessels in combat ability

The Defiant took on small and medium sized vessels quite well, but when it engaged larger vessels it's results were minimum.

Actually, given that Voyager was launched for a 2 week mission to find a LONE Maqui ship (and technologically inferior on so many levels) in the Badlands wouldn't necessitate a full torpedo compliment.

Voyager was entering a war zone, and inspite of it's mission didn't know what they would end up fighting, therefor a full weapons load.

but I find it difficult to imagine that a ship of Voyager's size would only carry 36 photon torpedoes

That how many torpedoes the ship's magazine could accommodate, after all it was primarily a science vessel.

Voyager didn't have any additional supplies on board compared to say if they were launched for a deep-space mission

Other than a incomplete astrometric, what was missing? What addition supplies should have been on board that were not?

[CaptainStoner]

Ok, disregarding Algernon Barclay or a Borg'd USS Voyager, I agree that the Enterprise is heavily favored. And is sexier.
So the question is, could Voyager sufficiently gimp Enterprise in the opening exchanges, while avoiding destruction herself? I dont't have much data, but all things being Star Trek, probably yes. Not likely, but possible. If Voyager could disable Enterprise shields and sensors, somehow before getting slagged, she might be able to torpedo the Enterprise while she fires blind. Really depends on if Worf is on his shit that day. If its a timewarp situation, and its Voyager vs. early TNG Worf, he's going to miss.

[Hartzilla2007]

Deks wrote:

---

As I said, if the Defiant was able to match larger vessels in combat ability, there is no reason Voyager wouldn't be able to do the same

Except the Defiant is a warship and Voyager was not.

[mtblillie]

Edit_XYZ wrote:

---

At an equal technological level (which is the case), the larger ships wins, easily.
Meaning - Voyager gets fried against the Enterprise.

Why? No one on here has given any evidence as to why. The only thing people keep saying is that a larger ship has more power and more firepower. That has not been proven. These ships were built with exploration in mind, combat abilities are based on defense. The only time ships were used with true battle fashion were during the dominion war.

No one has given any proof that more power isn't just a misconception.

[EmperorTiberius]

Deks, is it possible, to describe in words, how much you love Voyager?

[Edit_XYZ]

mtblillie wrote:

---

Why? No one on here has given any evidence as to why. The only thing people keep saying is that a larger ship has more power and more firepower. That has not been proven. These ships were built with exploration in mind, combat abilities are based on defense. The only time ships were used with true battle fashion were during the dominion war.

No one has given any proof that more power isn't just a misconception.

Because:
In warships size MATTERS.
More power, heavier weaponry.
There's no such thing as a magical "fit everything that makes a cruiser into a destroyer".
This is, of course, true of the real world, as well. Nobody would use a battleship if a destroyer could bring the same firepower to bear (by using any design philosophy you'd care to think about).
Much like it's true in the trekverse, as well - I take it you see the difference between a runabout and the enterprise or between a bug and a heavy dominion battleship.

Plus, Voyager was shown as having an equally large percentage of amenities as the Enterprise (crew quarters, etc). It's not even built with a Defiant-like philosophy.

PS - Do try to read the posts.

[T'Girl]

mtblillie wrote:

---

The only thing people keep saying is that a larger ship has more power and more firepower. That has not been proven

Okay let's try this again. The Enterprise is a big ship. The big ship has a pair of big engine (you can bloody see them). The big engines require a big warp core to power them (you can see it too). Being a big ship, it needs to be surround it with a big warp field, logically this requires big power.

If the big ship is not at warp, that big power can be used elsewhere.

We once saw the Enterprise enclose a big asteroid in it's warp field, grab it with a tractor beam, and move it with the ship's engines. All that required big power.

The Voyager is a medium sized ship, medium engines, medium warp core (again you saw them).

Voyage is a medium sedan, Enterprise is a big truck.

Fire power. Voyager carry's 36 torpedoes and has four launchers. Enterprise carry's 275 torpedoes and has two exposed launchers. Unlike Voyager, the Enterprise has been seen to launch multiple torpedoes at the same time, up to ten simultaneously. So even though Voyager has twice the launch tubes, Enterprise can launch five times the torpedoes in a given time period.

After the TOS era, phasers are only used in sublight combat, not at warp.

Voyager can put the energy surplus not being employed by her medium sized warp engines into her medium phaser strips.

Enterprise can put the energy surplus not being employed by her big sized warp engines into her big phaser strips.

In plain language, the Enterprise can hit harder, it has more "muscle."

[mtblillie]

Yes, I'm not stupid I can see the big engines. I'm saying there is no proof that the warp core in an intrepid class produces less power than one in a galaxy class, saying it does simply because the ship is smaller does not make it so, it's an assumption, a reasonable one, I will not deny it, but it is not necessarily true.

And again, even if it is true, which again I will concede is a distinct possibility, firepower does not win a battle, strategy does: USS Johnston (DD-557)

[T'Girl]

mtblillie wrote:

---

there is no proof that the warp core in an intrepid class produces less power than one in a galaxy class

Okay, if I might ask, what kind of proof would you be willing to accept? I'll see if I can provide it.

firepower does not win a battle, strategy does

If you're discussing the relative capacities of two different types of ships, then strategy doesn't enter into it.

[mtblillie]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Okay, if I might ask, what kind of proof would you be willing to accept? I'll see if I can provide it.

Anything other than an assumption. For example, I remember Data mentioning the actual output of the Enterprise's warp core, if there was for example a mention of Voyager's output, and it turned out to be significantly less, that would be acceptable.

T'Girl wrote:

---

If you're discussing the relative capacities of two different types of ships, then strategy doesn't enter into it.

Fair enough, the simple point I'm trying to make is that relative capabilities don't necessitate victory.