Sovereign Class question

[Deks]

Ah, but we cannot be sure if the Defiant took 24 hits.
In most battles, inertial dampeners go out rather fast (as do numerous systems), so it's possible that weapons missed the Defiant but exploded (such as torpedoes) in immediate vicinity (which would shook the ship) or overloads occurred internally.

If you'd also recall, there were numerous instances where ships were said they cannot take another hit, and then you readily hear an explosion against the hull for several more times.

 

[Saquist]

Ah, but we cannot be sure if the Defiant took 24 hits.

What we can be sure of is that Defiant endured 2 minutes of assault with no shields with the Vorcha moving to point blank range in the last minute. We know the time was edited out.
In most battles, inertial dampeners go out rather fast (as do numerous systems), so it's possible that weapons missed the Defiant but exploded (such as torpedoes) in immediate vicinity (which would shook the ship) or overloads occurred internally.

But the Vorcha was firing beams, not torpedoes or pulsed disrupters .

If you'd also recall, there were numerous instances where ships were said they cannot take another hit, and then you readily hear an explosion against the hull for several more times.

The proximity hit I think is just as much a factor as a direct hit to consider how much the armor takes. But it seems right now just based on a non biased view of the evidence that the armor is good for 10/15 shots at the minimum because Defiant took this punishment all from the rear and didn't lose either impulse or warp engines as a result.

If we just go by the Vorcha's rate of fire 3 shots in 2 seconds followed by a 3 second interval... 120 seconds minimum still comes down to 24 volleys...now reducing the Vorcha's effective hits to 50% that comes to 36 shots at the rate we see on screen...

My last estimate of 24 based on the number of blast observed on the bridge during the 2 min period was far more conservative than the literal translation.

 

[krovikan]

Some info regargind some above posts...

Prometheus Max warp was never tested (or hadnt been tested prior to "message in a bottle"
also, the defiant class could not catch up to a ship doing warp 9... that was just put in for a cooler battle scene... there was only 1 epi that i can remember that they did break warp 9 and they had to canabalise their weapons to do it

Prometheus and Soverign use Type XII phasers (Tyoe X from Galaxy calss is outdated by now)

Ablative hull armor
Defiant: 20cm
Prometheus: 18cm
Soverign: 10cm (the other ships are for combat where Soverign is an Explorer)

The strength for the Feds most powerful ships shileds will be proportional to its size... bigger ships can generate more power and will therefor have better shields

 

[Saquist]

Unfortunantly Defiant displays far superior shield power than it's size indicates.
That Vorcha WAILED on Defiant's shields and they were in no danger of collapsing any time soon.

Then if you look at the fact that Defiant's shields apparently failed before Lakota's (ignoring the 2-3 cheap shots from Lakota) it implies that Defiant has Galaxy level shield strength...especially since NO SINGLE SHIP Defiant's size was ever capable of over coming it's shields. SPUNKY....

 

[MatthiasRussell]

^ It would make sense to me for the Defiant's ablative armor to have a more limited duration, since its design purpose is to melt off with the blast and take some of the concussive force along with it. It's nice for protection, but unless you have a lot of it on the ship, it's gone quickly in an intense fight.

I would add to this statement that ablative shielding is probably heavy, ablative heat shields for spacecraft are. A large ship covered in this would be weighed down, which would limit maneuverability.

 

[Saquist]

It doesn't matter in Trek is all the magic fields...maneuverability has more to do with the Engines.

 

[MatthiasRussell]

The heavier the ship is, the more difficult it is to turn it. That is simple physics, Trek doesn't try to break physics. Maneuverability has A LOT to do with weight, that is kind of a no-brainer.

 

[The Librarian]

A larger ship would probably need less armor proportionately, as it would have a greater ratio of volume to surface area. Not only that, but it would have larger engines, and so even if the armor is proportionate, the engines would be as well, resulting in the same acceleration curve. These are spaceships, not naval vessels or aircraft that are constrained by water and air. It doesn't matter if the engine:mass ratio is 1:1 or 10:10, the result is the same.

Of course, that assumes that Trek ships have anything more than a passing familiarity with Newton's laws. I think "Booby Trap" is the only time a Trek ship spins around and keeps going backward like a Starfury. In any case, I can't think of any maneuvers that the Defiant did that we haven't seen larger ships do as well.

 

[Mytran]

The heavier the ship is, the more difficult it is to turn it. That is simple physics, Trek doesn't try to break physics. Maneuverability has A LOT to do with weight, that is kind of a no-brainer.

If the Ent-E is indeed equipped with ablative armour (and thus be that much heavier) then this might explain the sudden increase in nacelle size for the Sovereign class.

 

[cwl]

Defiant is a God ship. the writers went a bit too far with it IMO.

 

[MatthiasRussell]

The heavier the ship is, the more difficult it is to turn it. That is simple physics, Trek doesn't try to break physics. Maneuverability has A LOT to do with weight, that is kind of a no-brainer.

If the Ent-E is indeed equipped with ablative armour (and thus be that much heavier) then this might explain the sudden increase in nacelle size for the Sovereign class.

The nacelles for the Sovereign aren't anymore bigger in scale to the rest of the ship than the Constitution or Excelsior were. The Defiant engines are definitely oversized and the Intrepid way too small.

 

[Mytran]

The Intrepid nacelles aren't really that much undersized if compared to the Galaxy class vessels. Both the Constitution and Excelsior classes are over 80 years old by this point, so you would expect the hardware to be larger.

I agree that the Defiant's engines are too large, but then again it is stated many times to be an overpowered little ship!

 

[Saquist]

The Intrepid nacelles aren't really that much undersized if compared to the Galaxy class vessels. Both the Constitution and Excelsior classes are over 80 years old by this point, so you would expect the hardware to be larger.

I agree that the Defiant's engines are too large, but then again it is stated many times to be an overpowered little ship!

Defiant's warp engines don't deliver power they use it.
They needed to keep Defiant's engines constrained within the armor of the ship and not exposed. That's why they are much wider than longer.

Galaxies' engines comprise half the vehicles length.
Intrepid merely a 1/4. Thats a considerable reduction since Intrepid's engines didn't get wider as a resut meaning they still needed coil mass for higher speed as Trip implies in ENT.

 

[Mytran]

Never mind the length of the Galaxy Class, what about the enormous width?! That is one humungous saucer after all, quite different from the Intrepid.

 

[Saquist]

Defiant is a God ship. the writers went a bit too far with it IMO.

GOD ships don't die.
Defiant was exactly what it should have been.
The problem is Defiant was always depicted far to small the ship's detail indicates a ship comparable to Miranda not 120 meters.

Never mind the length of the Galaxy Class, what about the enormous width?! That is one humungous saucer after all, quite different from the Intrepid.

Wider is better: Literally. The Galaxy Saucer makes for better stability at high speed.

Voyager saucer makes for higher speed period.