I dunno, your jet fighter analogy seems to be working against you. The U.S. Navy's front line jet fighter of the 1970s was the F-14, and the last were retired from the U.S. Navy in 2006. Supposedly Iran still has some operational, left over from the Shah's air force, a few kept running by cannabilising others for parts, but that's because nobody will sell them newer fighters. The F-14 was not in any way a failure, it's just that technology improves.
Why was the USS Enterprise F decommissioned so early?
- Thread starter Snowdrop82
- Start date
Federation mission changed from a relatively peaceful galaxy in the 2300-2350s when the emphasis was on exploration, and the Galaxy class was designed for that. The Borg, then Dominion, emphasised the need to boost the military part, needing more, smaller, powerfully armed ships, giving more bang per crewmember.
The loss of half the Galaxy hulls in the first decade (Yamato, Enterprise, Odyssey) didn't bode well for confidence in the design either. Even before that, the Galaxy was supposed to be out exploring deep spcae for years at a time. We saw, especially post Yamato, that the Enterprise was relegated to ambassador shuttle runs and similar local duties.
I do wonder if the number of people willing to travel on a Galaxy class ship even before these hull losses was low. Remember that the Academy had very strict entrance requirements at that time too - even Wesley struggled with the entrance exam. The ship is an insane size for a crew of 1000 - just 25 people per deck. You could fit a thousand comfortably on deck 10 alone, with getting on for 200 square metres per person.
The loss of half the Galaxy hulls in the first decade (Yamato, Enterprise, Odyssey) didn't bode well for confidence in the design either. Even before that, the Galaxy was supposed to be out exploring deep spcae for years at a time. We saw, especially post Yamato, that the Enterprise was relegated to ambassador shuttle runs and similar local duties.
I do wonder if the number of people willing to travel on a Galaxy class ship even before these hull losses was low. Remember that the Academy had very strict entrance requirements at that time too - even Wesley struggled with the entrance exam. The ship is an insane size for a crew of 1000 - just 25 people per deck. You could fit a thousand comfortably on deck 10 alone, with getting on for 200 square metres per person.
People always say that, but it should be noted those ships were destroyed under extenuating circumstances, alien computer virus with the Yamato, getting rammed by another ship with the Odyssey and the enemy having a live feed from from the chief engineer's eyes with the Enterprise. There is nothing inherent to the ship's design that contributed to those destructions. And indeed, the fact that, at least canonically speaking no other Galaxy class ships were destroyed, not even during a major interstellar war where we see dozens of them partaking should speak to the strength of the design.
One was shredded up quite badly in the battle of Chin'toka. But they were solid dreadnoughts overall, all the space inside could be converted for carrying troops.
They probably got scared to encourage families back onboard. Children with no other relatives or born on the ship are probably the only ones but they would be raised on a voluntary basis like on Voyager. The Titan would have had at least Riker's children but no schools.
I imagine Odyssey, Jupiter, Typhoon and other large ships never went back to the dedicated multi-generational city feel.
By the time of the J perhaps.
Yes, I agree on some levels of course, but there's a difference between "technology" and "platforms/airframes." The F-14 was retired for various political and budgetary reasons, not because it wasn't a platform that could be upgraded.
Look at the new F-15EX, for example.
The F-15 and the F-14 were pretty much contemporaries of each other. In fact, both were demonstrated to Iran at the time, and Iran chose to purchase the Tomcat. But the F-15 airframe is still completely relevant almost 50 years later because they've upgraded the engines, avionics, sensors, etc. In fact, there are many arguments that the F-15EX is as relevant as any 5th Gen fighter in the sky due to it's role and the upgrades that have been made. The Tomcat could have remained similarly relevant.
Even in-universe, it makes no sense. The Excelsior-class spaceframe was still relevant almost 100 years after it went into service as was the Oberth-class and the Miranda-class. So, obviously Starfleet was starting to develop designs that would be upgradable and have multiple decades of life, or more.
I'm even of the mindset that the refit Constitution-class starships were retired too early. At the time the Enterprise was refit, it represented a major overhaul in tech, engine design, and capabilities. And Yet by TUC, maybe a decade later, they are retiring the class and you never see one again.
Heck, even the casual throwaway line played for laughs in S3 Picard about the destruction of the Enterprise-E was handled pretty poorly (and I loved S3). The Sovereign-class was a frontline starship.
But, we know the real "why." For whatever reason, the producers want to stay away from the "familiar" shapes of the past hero ships. Combine this with the fact that they all want to be credited with designing yet another Enterprise, and you have situations in-universe that make no sense unfortunately.
It was? I don’t remember that. I remember seeing Akiras, Excelsiors and Mirandas getting destroyed, but not Galaxies.
Isn’t the weapons platform just shooting at the ship’s shields before the ship destroys it?
This scene is from before the weapons platfotms are vulnerable. So this ship ends up with burning holes in it.
I imagine that would happen to pretty much any ship being shot at by a weapons platform.
Similar threads
