But, I do not like where you're argument leads us. By singling out canon so specificly it implies that we cannot trust visual markers provided by the tech manuals and Star Trek the Magezine that obviously correspond to known hardpoints I can't go with you there.
If canon is the only admissable data then perhaps just shut down the tech section of the forum because canon explains precious little. I myself only require the manuals to not contradict the canon.
Remember all things written are not canon, until they are shown on screen, no matter who writes them. Voyager shows the outline of a captains yacht yet one is never used. The same can be said of the Galaxy Class. One could argue that Voyager left Space Dock without it, and that is a valid argument, but it is still only speculation. The counter to that would be that it was never really needed and when the time came for a different type of shuttle to be used, the Delta Flyer was a better design.
What happens when canon contradicts the manuals? The Defiant's Pulse phasers, from what I've read, are fixed forward, yet they have been seen shooting at angles that are off the X Axis.
The manuals are a good point of reference; however, canon is always in motion. A manual made today, could be obsolete by the next movie or episode.
Shutting down the Tech Forum, because the reasoning you use is not universally accepted is silly. It is here to try out theories and debate ideas about how things work. I don't agree with your reasoning, but that doesn't mean I'm right. I, like everyone else who posts here, is giving their own opinion, and debating them.
The reason why I hold on them is that while array technology has obviously been around for a while before the Galaxy (60,000 Units before) I find it difficult to suggest the technology has remained the same.
To me that implies less effective over a multitude of arrays, thus applying more independent arrays (but that's just me)
You're going to have to explain by what you mean by units. I had thought they meant registry numbers, if that's the case, the people in charge say the Registry system is not well ordered. Saying that older numbers mean older ships is not right, but I'll get to that later.
In Q-who Enterprise struck with lethal force.
"
The Enterprise's phasers weren't just on Full, they were NXS of 100% power and destroyed 4.3 Trillion Metric Tones of the Borg Cube (by borg ship standards) Mathematicly and computer aided models agree this is about 2% of the Cubes Mass which confirms wesely's statement that they had only scratched the Cube. Yet the Enterprise caused 20% damage to the Cube.
Enterprise caused this amount of damage in 3 shots in burst lasting just under a second in duration. That means it would take 2 1/2 minutes of continuous fire from the Enterprise's main arrays with no recharge time in between to completely destroy the Borg Cube. " With Recharge time included (30 sec after every 3 shots) It would take 25 minutes to take down the Cube.
Time is obviously a factor.
I do not believe anyone ever said that the phaser were firing above 100% capacity. In one episode, Geordie does mention he has made the phasers as hot as they can go, implying 100% capacity.
Defiant
In comparison to the Galaxy, Defiant has displayed far superior fire power
Where as Defiant took out an Attack ship in 2-3 seconds the Odyssey and two runnabouts couldn't even damage one. That battle lasted 5 mins.
Defiant Destroyed it's target infinitely faster than the Odyssey but it was about 4-5 times the fire power and at 3x the speed. At just that speed but at the same fire power of the Galaxy the Defiant could take down same cube in about 8 minutes (no manuvering but the same recharge rate)
The problem isn't that Defiant wasn't the right ship for the Job in First Contact. This clearly wasn't the same technology the Enterprise went up against in TNG. As VOY and First Contact showed...the Borg had adapted there shields to absorb all incoming fire greatly reducing the shield effectiveness. We also see that the armor of the Cube had changed. The Federation phaser could no longer vaporize huge section of the vessel when punching past it's protective magnetic field.
The Odyssey and the Runabouts could not take out the Dominion ships because their shields were not effective against Dominion weapons. When the Defiant went into Dominion space in
The Search, it too had the same problems. It wasn't until a crashed Dominion ship was brought back to the Federation that Starfleet's shields were able to hold against Dominion weapons. Voyager was launched before that took place so if it had made it back during the war, it would have undergone upgrades to make it shields hold against Dominion weapons and have weapon upgrades.
You are correct that the Borg had indeed adapted by the time of
First Contact.
TNG set the standard for 24th century designs. The array is a phaser emitter. Untill specificly outlined by a technical manual I have to hold on speculation of the existance of other phaser hard points. Just because there could be other phaser hard points undefined doesn't mean they should be considered.
The number of phasers a ship reveals nothing about the age of the Design of a ship class. The Enterprise class had 18 phaser pods in 12 banks. Reliant had 8 banks and 12 pods and 2 canons. Excelsior had 24 pods and 14 banks and they're all much older than the First Contact ships.
As I said before, canon is always in motion. Just because they are not shown in the manuals doesn't mean they are not there. In some cases, even though they are shown on screen doesn't mean they are there (the 1701D firing phasers from the torpedo launcher).
Registry
Mike Okuda is on record with Berman confirming that the Registry isn't the well ordered system we think it is. Rather it's straight forward. Many fans wonder if the ships like excelsior when in blocks of construction. They're saying it wasn't planned to that detail. Simply that older numbers were older ships.
Sternbach is also on record with his thoughts that in his opinion the Federation has (at that time) tens of thousands of ships when asked directly in interview. This is congruent with the Registy. My memory fails me but he did give a numerical estimate.
If the system is not well ordered, then anything is possible in regards to what registry numbers mean.
It was Moore you're mentioning, and he was just saying the reasoning used by the interviewer was sound. The interviewer said that Starfleet was possibly about 30,000 ships strong, based on subtracting the lowest seen registry from the highest, and then subtracting to account for lost ships or skips in numbers. The lowest ship he referenced is the Hood and the highest being Voyager. So no, it's not canon, just a possibility.
LINK. (I will admit I have not read the whole article just the part about registry numbers and fleet size.)
There is no known methodology for the numbering of ships. If it the methodology is not know and that registry numbers weren't planned to a specific detail and the system is not well ordered then you cannot say a ship with a higher registry is a newer class.
