Galaxy class a failure?

[Dac]

Having a vessel ram your engineering section at a significant fraction of c is likely to ruin any starship's day :P

yep but it's kinda embarrassing when the biggest & baddest ship in starfleet is destroyed by a bugship.

Prior to that engagement I doubt the Federation had met an enemy who would openly ram your starship with theirs while your retreating.

Outside of the Universe explanation - The Writers needed to establish the Dominion as a threat, and the visual cue of this new bad guy blowing up the Enterprise (Yes, I know it isnt THE Enterprise but a ship of the same if not greater ability none the less) is a powerful one.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I don't think the Galaxy-class was a failure at all and I think the design will continue to be in service until the mid 25th-Century. I think the problem is that space just got a lot more dangerous during the late 24th-Century.

Boldly going where no one has gone before sometimes comes with a price, IMO...

 

[TremblingBluStar]

so was the galaxy class a failure?

Yes. Of bad writing! ;-)

Seriously - I remember being a kid during TNG's run, and loved the fact that old Excelsior class ships were still up and running 70 or so years later. I read (in the TNG Tech Manual, of course) that Galaxy Class ships were designed for service lives of 100 years or more!

I personally wish Berman had stuck with the good ol' Ent-D throughout the movies. I think it was a huge mistake to trade her in for a ship TNG fans have nothing invested in and care nothing about.

 

[cwl]

Having a vessel ram your engineering section at a significant fraction of c is likely to ruin any starship's day :P

yep but it's kinda embarrassing when the biggest & baddest ship in starfleet is destroyed by a bugship.

Prior to that engagement I doubt the Federation had met an enemy who would openly ram your starship with theirs while your retreating.

Outside of the Universe explanation - The Writers needed to establish the Dominion as a threat, and the visual cue of this new bad guy blowing up the Enterprise (Yes, I know it isnt THE Enterprise but a ship of the same if not greater ability none the less) is a powerful one.

well i'm pretty sure somebody got rammed in the 200 years of the federation.

 

[RyuRoots]

So...3 ships get destroyed, and the class is considered a failure?

Aside from the first Breen engagement (where no one on our heroes' side did all that well), the Galaxy-class ships kicked all kinds of ass in the Dominion War, and as far as I'm concerned, the Odyssey, Yamato, and Ent-D are all special cases. The Iconian probe/virus was something that would've fried any ship, not just a Galaxy from what we know about it. The Odyssey basically had no shields due to the Jem'Hadar's weapons, and had taken a lot of damage when it got plowed into. And in the case of the Ent-D, it effectively crippled, because the Duras sisters could constantly change their shields and weapons accordingly.

However, I do think one aspect of the Galaxy failed (and thank the prophets that it did, 'cause it was frickin' stupid if you ask me) and that was all the random civilian families onboard. Notice in the last 3 movies we never see a non-Starfleet, non-delegate, etc. person on the Ent-E (Borg notwithstanding).

 

[cwl]

only small numbers of galaxys were produced perhaps only single digits worth

 

[Praetor]

The Galaxy fanboy in me immediately screams "No!" but lets look at this logically.

Remember that, in both the real world and the Trekverse, the Enterprise-D was designed to go even farther into unknown space than the TOS Enterprise, which was strongly indicated in the first two seasons of TNG. The D was basically a mobile small colony, which explains why she had civilians aboard. (I believe GR thought that people who were going to be that far out shouldn't have to leave their loved ones behind.)

However, as TNG progressed, we saw the D seem to stick closer and closer to home. Does this mean that Starfleet considered the class a failure, or that they simply rethought their deep space exploration missions? The D was, after all, the Federation flagship, so perhaps it was felt her presence was needed closer to home in a time of strife? After all, losing the flagship during a time when the Borg have emerged, the Klingons are almost at civil war and the Romulans have reappeared might have been a devastating morale blow to the Federation.

Additionally, the TNG TM suggests that six original Galaxy class ships were built, with six more spaceframes held in "reserve." The DS9 TM suggests these six were quickly made ready for combat and launched with many of their non-combat facilities incomplete. Personally, I think the numbers we saw on DS9 suggest that even more of them were built, and that means to me that the class wasn't a failure.

Also, I think it's important to note that the Galaxy class wasn't just an exploratory ship. It was designed to do lots of things, and for my money was the closest thing the 24th century Starfleet had to a full-fledged battleship.

Were they a failure? No.

Were they put in situations where they were pushed to, and beyond, their limits? Yes.

That would be my assessment.

obsolete Bird of Prey vs Galaxy class

btw didn't the BoPs shields hold up well?

The Klingons had an unknown spy on board, remember? They had the shield frequency. For all intents and purposes, she had no shields. For all we know, the shield generators were damaged on the first shot.

Logically, no, it isn't a failure. But if, say, any military vehicle of the modern U.S. armed forces had the same sort of record, you can bet the designers would get called to testify on Capitol Hill. In other words, politically it doesn't look good.

EXACTLY! that's why I think we saw such an increase in smaller more mission specific vessels, like the AKIRA (war) NOVA (science) DEFIANT (escort/ battleship) INTREPID (exploritory) SF could not afford to lose another BIG mother ship like the GALAXY again! Can you imagine how the MEDIA must have hounded down Starfleet admirals asking why they seemed to keep loosing there best & safest(remember families are suposed to be own board) ships? It's not good PR people!

Remember the old adage: "Jack of all trades, master of none"? If anything I'd say the D was designed to do too much, and the apparent shift towards smaller ships indicated a doctrinal shift away from "bigger and better."

And, regarding the Sovereign class, I would suggest that it was in no way a replacement for the Galaxy class given the many differences between them. It, too, appears to be a product of the "specialization" doctrine, and for my money is a replacement for the aging Excelsiors.

 

[Sci]

Considering that we never saw a Galaxy-class starship doing anything during the Dominion War but kicking ass, I'd say that it's safe to say the Galaxy class is NOT a failure.

 

[cwl]

what I mean is- didnt the BoP shields hold up well against ent-D phaser fire.

 

[Sci]

what I mean is- didnt the BoP shields hold up well against ent-D phaser fire.

As I recall, the battle was relatively short because of their ability to find out the Enterprise's shield modulation, but even then the BoP was taking a beating. Had they lacked that advantage, the Enterprise would have been able to beat them -- the crew certainly wasn't worried about the BoP, and the BoP crew were convinced the Enterprise could kick their ass before they hacked into Geordi's VISOR.

 

[RyuRoots]

And, regarding the Sovereign class, I would suggest that it was in no way a replacement for the Galaxy class given the many differences between them. It, too, appears to be a product of the "specialization" doctrine, and for my money is a replacement for the aging Excelsiors.

The design certainly has much more in common with the Excelsior than the Galaxy. As far as purpose, perhaps a successor to both. We never got to see it without really special circumstances, but the Ent-E always came off to me as being very capable both as a fighter and an explorer.

 

[Timo]

Really, we're hampered by the fact that we know little of the other starship classes. Perhaps Akiras blow up even more often? It may well be that the loss rate of Galaxies is actually lower than Starfleet ever expected, and the class is thus hailed as a great success and used as a primary combatant and explorer as seen in DS9.

Certainly major losses in peacetime were the norm in TOS. Would that really change in the 24th century?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[cwl]

I would have thought the Ent-D phasers should have made easy work of a BoP

 

[Praetor]

And, regarding the Sovereign class, I would suggest that it was in no way a replacement for the Galaxy class given the many differences between them. It, too, appears to be a product of the "specialization" doctrine, and for my money is a replacement for the aging Excelsiors.

The design certainly has much more in common with the Excelsior than the Galaxy. As far as purpose, perhaps a successor to both. We never got to see it without really special circumstances, but the Ent-E always came off to me as being very capable both as a fighter and an explorer.

Well, I would suggest that there were Excelsiors which did perform some of the same missions as the Galaxys, just not with the same range or capabilities, and certainly were not capable of all of the same mission profiles.

Really, we're hampered by the fact that we know little of the other starship classes. Perhaps Akiras blow up even more often? It may well be that the loss rate of Galaxies is actually lower than Starfleet ever expected, and the class is thus hailed as a great success and used as a primary combatant and explorer as seen in DS9.

Certainly major losses in peacetime were the norm in TOS. Would that really change in the 24th century?

Timo Saloniemi

A very good observation.

I would have thought the Ent-D phasers should have made easy work of a BoP

But, we do not know for sure that the power or phaser systems were not damaged early on. Indeed, it was a problem with the power systems that destroyed the D.

 

[cwl]

And, regarding the Sovereign class, I would suggest that it was in no way a replacement for the Galaxy class given the many differences between them. It, too, appears to be a product of the "specialization" doctrine, and for my money is a replacement for the aging Excelsiors.

The design certainly has much more in common with the Excelsior than the Galaxy. As far as purpose, perhaps a successor to both. We never got to see it without really special circumstances, but the Ent-E always came off to me as being very capable both as a fighter and an explorer.

Well, I would suggest that there were Excelsiors which did perform some of the same missions as the Galaxys, just not with the same range or capabilities, and certainly were not capable of all of the same mission profiles.

Really, we're hampered by the fact that we know little of the other starship classes. Perhaps Akiras blow up even more often? It may well be that the loss rate of Galaxies is actually lower than Starfleet ever expected, and the class is thus hailed as a great success and used as a primary combatant and explorer as seen in DS9.

Certainly major losses in peacetime were the norm in TOS. Would that really change in the 24th century?

Timo Saloniemi

A very good observation.

I would have thought the Ent-D phasers should have made easy work of a BoP

But, we do not know for sure that the power or phaser systems were not damaged early on. Indeed, it was a problem with the power systems that destroyed the D.

so the Ent-D power system is vulnerable. plus we've established the warpcore is vulnerable too, anything else? oh yes the nacelles too.

 

[Sci]

But, we do not know for sure that the power or phaser systems were not damaged early on. Indeed, it was a problem with the power systems that destroyed the D.

so the Ent-D power system is vulnerable. plus we've established the warpcore is vulnerable too, anything else? oh yes the nacelles too.

ANY system on a starship is vulnerable when your enemy knows what modulation your shields are working on, because they can set their weapons to just pass through the shields like they're not even there with that info.

In other words, it's a biased test. Had the BoP not known the E-D's shield modulation, the E-D's phaser and power systems would not have been vulnerable at all and the E-D would have kicked the BoP's ass.

 

[Captain Fine]

I don't recall seeing any Galaxy-class ships destroyed during the Dominion War, excluding the Odyssey. Were there any Galaxy-class ships present at the battle where the Defiant NX-74205 was destroyed?

Oh and can anyone provide evidence that the Venture was any different than the other Galaxys? I don't mean those screenshots that show a supposed darker neck. I mean like artist's intent from the show, if they actually DID anything to make them look different.

I didn't like how some of the Galaxy's omitted registries from the bottom of their saucer sections so you couldn't tell what ships they were.

Isn't Venture the only we know for sure was a Galaxy?

 

[cwl]

the venture was a reused 4 foot model of the Ent-D. while the other galaxys in DS9 were CGI. the venture was the first galaxy to have registries at the bottom of the saucer.
the venture has phasers on the nacelle left over from tng: all good things

 

[Alidar Jarok]

only small numbers of galaxys were produced perhaps only single digits worth

Based on what? If you look at the percentage of Galaxy class starships in DS9 battles and assume a relatively equal proportion for the entire fleet, there would be thousands of them. Even if that's a bit extreme, there would at least be more than 10.

 

[Sci]

only small numbers of galaxys were produced perhaps only single digits worth

Based on what? If you look at the percentage of Galaxy class starships in DS9 battles and assume a relatively equal proportion for the entire fleet, there would be thousands of them. Even if that's a bit extreme, there would at least be more than 10.

The notion that only a small number of Galaxys were produced comes from the TNG Technical Manuel, which says that only six were initially built and six more in half-built in reserve. Presumably Starfleet upped Galaxy production after the Battle of Wolf 359.