Why No Federation Ships Bigger Than A Galaxy Class?
- Thread starter Dayton3
- Start date
The Burke class destroyers aren't replacing the Ticonderogas.
The Burke class destroyers replaced the Spruance class destroyers as well as a couple of earlier destroyer classes.
The Burkes are larger than any of them.
The Ticonderoga class cruises are to be replaced by a New Generation stealth cruiser design that is more than 50% larger. On the order of 14,000 tons as opposed to the CG-47s 9,000 tons or so.
Incidentally, there is a fan designed "Oceania class" I believe it is called. More than 2,400 meters long.
With a hangar bay capable of deploying Intrepid or Defiant class ships.
The ship itself is so big so that it can hold some huge energy weapons capable of destroying a Borg Cube in a single massive attack.
Oh, I think that's a matter of interpretation. One could just as well say that the ASW destroyer mission is being discontinued, there are no successors to the Spruance class whatsoever, and the Burke is the modern air defense cruiser, coming in as Tico goes out.
It's extremely unlikely that any stealth cruiser will ever get funding, either in the case the new coastal warfare destroyer is a go (in which case it will drain all the funds and in any case already perform the mission already) or in the case it isn't (in which case Navy modernization can be taken for dead).
IMHO, that is.
Timo Saloniemi
Well, we HAVE seen the 1701-D fire volleys of torpedoes in groups, ala "dispersal pattern sierra". This never made much sense to me, until i realized that all the torpedoes are fired in a striaght line patter, one after the other, and then as soon as they clear the tube, the torpedoe's on-board computer auto-navigates the various torpedoes into their dispersal pattern.
I suppose Voyager COULD have had this ability as well, we just for whatever reason, never saw it used, although I could have sworn that on at least one occasion, Janeway called for dispersal pattern sierra.
God, I love these conversations... 
There are three issues being discussed, almost independently, here.
1) Why don't the good guys have the biggest ship seen on-screen?
2) Why are real modern navel ships being seen in different size mixes than we used to see?
3) Why are "fan-made" ships tending to be larger than anything ever seen on-screen?
The ANSWERS?...
1) The answer to the first one is simple... the TNG-era productions staff assumes that we (the audience) won't feel that there's a threat posed by an enemy ship unless it's bigger than the heroes ship. So NO MATTER HOW BIG THE HERO SHIP IS, THE ENEMY SHIP WILL BE BIGGER.
2) In real life, ships are not made to be "bigger" or "smaller," they're made to be THE RIGHT SIZE FOR THE JOB.
In other words, you start off with the mission profile... identify the hardware required to perform that mission profile... and then design a ship that has all that hardware, without being larger than necessary (after all, this is all done under a BUDGET).
As correctly pointed out, above, big "gun-based" battleships have been replaced, primarily, by missile launch platforms today. The ships are the size they need to be to do the mission they're intended to do.
and finally,
3) Why are the "fan designed ships" bigger? Because fanboys usually want their ship to be "the kewlest thing yet."
There are three issues being discussed, almost independently, here.
1) Why don't the good guys have the biggest ship seen on-screen?
2) Why are real modern navel ships being seen in different size mixes than we used to see?
3) Why are "fan-made" ships tending to be larger than anything ever seen on-screen?
The ANSWERS?...
1) The answer to the first one is simple... the TNG-era productions staff assumes that we (the audience) won't feel that there's a threat posed by an enemy ship unless it's bigger than the heroes ship. So NO MATTER HOW BIG THE HERO SHIP IS, THE ENEMY SHIP WILL BE BIGGER.
2) In real life, ships are not made to be "bigger" or "smaller," they're made to be THE RIGHT SIZE FOR THE JOB.
In other words, you start off with the mission profile... identify the hardware required to perform that mission profile... and then design a ship that has all that hardware, without being larger than necessary (after all, this is all done under a BUDGET).
As correctly pointed out, above, big "gun-based" battleships have been replaced, primarily, by missile launch platforms today. The ships are the size they need to be to do the mission they're intended to do.
and finally,
3) Why are the "fan designed ships" bigger? Because fanboys usually want their ship to be "the kewlest thing yet."
^^ Not sure I can follow Cary's reasoning.
In TOS, the Fesarius stands out as the only huge, formidable super-ship. Nomad seemed to be the deadliest, and it was tiny. The two major advesaries, the Ronulans and Klingons, had ships that were similar in size (or somewhat smaller) compared to the Enterprise. It never ceases to amaze me how many aliens in TOS either used someone else's ships, or didn't use/need ships to be a "threat". TOS seemed to rely more on imagination and different uses of dramatic jeopardy.
TMP, TNG and later, however, seemed influenced by SPACE: 1999 ("War Games") and the STAR WARS franchise, with bigger-is-better, over-detailed, mega starships from V'Ger to the Borg to Dominion battleships. The most obvious "Death Star", of course, being the Xindi superweapon. It seemed that imagination took a back seat to spectacle, in other words, we have to have whooping "RED ALERT" sirens and something that blows up.
So, yes and no. Imaginative stores can show aliens being a formidable threat, but imaginative stories don't need bigger alien ships.
In TOS, the Fesarius stands out as the only huge, formidable super-ship. Nomad seemed to be the deadliest, and it was tiny. The two major advesaries, the Ronulans and Klingons, had ships that were similar in size (or somewhat smaller) compared to the Enterprise. It never ceases to amaze me how many aliens in TOS either used someone else's ships, or didn't use/need ships to be a "threat". TOS seemed to rely more on imagination and different uses of dramatic jeopardy.
TMP, TNG and later, however, seemed influenced by SPACE: 1999 ("War Games") and the STAR WARS franchise, with bigger-is-better, over-detailed, mega starships from V'Ger to the Borg to Dominion battleships. The most obvious "Death Star", of course, being the Xindi superweapon. It seemed that imagination took a back seat to spectacle, in other words, we have to have whooping "RED ALERT" sirens and something that blows up.
So, yes and no. Imaginative stores can show aliens being a formidable threat, but imaginative stories don't need bigger alien ships.
^
Good points.
Anyone remember just how many times in the original series that the enemy ships were NEVER EVEN SEEN?
In "Arena" the Gorn ship never appeared.
Likewise with the Klingon ship(s) in Errand of Mercy.
In "Journey to Babel" Enterprise was nearly beaten by a small Orion scout ship which appeared as only a spinning dot.
Good points.
Anyone remember just how many times in the original series that the enemy ships were NEVER EVEN SEEN?
In "Arena" the Gorn ship never appeared.
Likewise with the Klingon ship(s) in Errand of Mercy.
In "Journey to Babel" Enterprise was nearly beaten by a small Orion scout ship which appeared as only a spinning dot.
I'm not sure what part of what I said you're missing...
For instance, if you're arguing that my "the production staff kept giving us bigger alien ships because..." point, well, you'll notice I SPECIFICALLY stated "TNG-era" in my answer. In other words, I left TOS out of it entirely, and your response is focused entirely ON TOS... isn't it?
I'll gladly clarify... but I'm not sure what's confusing you.
It's not a matter of confusion. It's a matter of authenticity.
After 40 years, TOS remains "the real McCoy." The rest had some interesting eps, but they remain the spin-offs, the copies of copies, the pretenders to the throne. TOS relied on imagination. The spin-offs relied on "badder is bigger". (Or was it "bigger is badder"? Or "Badder is better"? Never mind.)
After 40 years, TOS remains "the real McCoy." The rest had some interesting eps, but they remain the spin-offs, the copies of copies, the pretenders to the throne. TOS relied on imagination. The spin-offs relied on "badder is bigger". (Or was it "bigger is badder"? Or "Badder is better"? Never mind.)
Back to your original question.
I think I may have some more direct answers, coming from a couple of angles. Berman & Co. decided, very deliberately, to destroy the Enterprise-D because they wanted to take TREK in a new direction. This was evidenced by DS9's Defiant and the Enterprise-E. To me, this represented a symbolic repudiation of Roddenberry's (admittedly somewhat flawed) vision of what TNG was originally supposed to be. As I saw it, Roddenberry wanted TNG to exhibit a floating city-in-space, part Cousteau's Calypso, part LOVE BOAT, and part SAND PEBBLES. Berman & Co. apparently intended to trash all of that, by making TNG movies that destroyed the D and replaced with a smaller, more battle-worthy E (and more VOYAGER-like, by the way) and by making DS9 into a war series (clearly against TOS' original philosophy, witness "Errand of Mercy" and "The Corbomite Maneuver") and obviously setting the course of ENT toward a war before it was cancelled.
Gone was the plush, uber-tech-advanced TNG mentality. We found each new series more limited, less advanced, more violent, and, I believe, a more cynical repudiation of TOS and the original TNG concept as well. Berman & Co. sought to promulgate this new bad-ass philosophy of a galaxy embroiled in violence, teaming with megadeath monsters (Borg, Jem'Hadar, Xindi/Sphere Builders) by putting forth new hero ships that were much smaller, more limited and lacked the grandeur and grace of the Galaxy class. Meanwhile the evil alien empires keep building bigger and nastier Wo Fat ships, culminating in the laughable Xindi "Death Star". (Doesn't it strike you as ironic that Jonathan Archer got to foil a plot by aliens by blowing up their uber-weapon in a HOGAN'S HEROES style commando raid, complete with one-on-one fisticuffs, in contrast to TNG's first-year "Conspiracy", which showed Picard uncovering the plot of aliens infiltrating Starfleet Command with the intent to take over?)
Now, let me approach from a different angle...
After the war with the Dominion and the Borg ("First Contact") had been so costly to just about everyone in the Alpha Quadrant of the galaxy, the United Federation of Planets would have to rebuild and reconstitute Starfleet. So, what would Starfleet look like? Would they be able to support ships like the Galaxy? Would they simply refit and "modernize" the Galaxy design, or build completely new ships? Would the Federation even be able to do any of this? This is the quandary of the Bermanian mess. He deliberately reshaped the STAR TREK franchise into a war franchise, when it was clear from the beginning that war is not what TREK was supposed to be about. In fact, TREK made it clear that warfare was a good way for spacefaring civilizations to simply annihilate each other.
So, I suppose it would be possible to think of a successor or refit to the Galaxy-class in the post-DS9-era. What would we call such a starship? The Enterprise-F? Or maybe some other name?
Unlike the Bermanian mentality, I do not agree that such a huge, explorer starship class would have to be built like a battleship or have the lines of a silly putty bullet like VOYAGER. In fact, I'd love to see a fresh idea that simply improved upon the Galaxy class:
* - Each ship would have to have a detachment of both shuttlecraft and runabouts, with more elegant designs like the Delta Flyer.
* - Each ship would have to the have significant civilian contingent, both in terms of permanent civilian staff and "expeditionary guests". If there's ever another TREK series, stories will have to take civilians more seriously than Wesley Crusher and Dr. Stubbs (TNG's "Evolution"). Just as NASA enjoys a significant contribution from civilian astronauts, so Federation starships should also host dedicated, professional explorers and scholars on various expeditions.
* - Instead of making the mothership into a battlecruiser, maybe she could also hangar one or two Defiant-class "escorts" to address hostile situations. These "escort" ships, as well as the shuttlecraft and runabouts, could be used to take the characters on expeditions like "The Galileo Seven" or "Metamorphosis", something TOS indicated has great potential for exciting stories.
* - I would also like to see the saucer section given limited warp capability. The Prometheus showed us this can increase the potential for the hero ship, and make the notion of civvie escape in the saucer more plausible. Give the ship a top speed of Warp 6 or Warp 7.
One place where I'm not sure I can agree with you is size. Does the hero ship have to be a kilometer long, or wide? Given the nature of the TREK universe and Starfleet, I'm not sure what that would accomplish. The Enterprise-D didn't make a habit of hauling colonists to and fro. The Federation seemed to have typically left that duty up to transport ships, if not civilian arks. (TOS "The Cage", TNG "The Ensigns of Command")
So, I guess the bottom line would be this:
What purpose would the Federation have in building a bigger starship? Firepower? (They have the Defiant for that) Hauling capacity? (Isn't that what transports are for?) Is there some other reason?
^
In regards to civillians, that's not really fair of you to say that TNG did not take them seriously... on multiple occasions, we saw the 1701-D warping to help out Federation research teams... NOT Starfleet people... research and scientist-like people... the anthropologists on Mintaka III, the scientists on that weather station from "A Matter of Time", the inventor of the soliton-wave technology, who was even an alien to boot. And we also saw Dr. Leah Brahms return.
In regards to civillians, that's not really fair of you to say that TNG did not take them seriously... on multiple occasions, we saw the 1701-D warping to help out Federation research teams... NOT Starfleet people... research and scientist-like people... the anthropologists on Mintaka III, the scientists on that weather station from "A Matter of Time", the inventor of the soliton-wave technology, who was even an alien to boot. And we also saw Dr. Leah Brahms return.
So Starfleet doesn't need anything bigger than the Galaxy. Why haven't we seen non-military Federation ships bigger than a Galaxy? Surely there are Federation-flagged civilian or corporate ships that have been built to great scale for reasons of economics or prestige. Cruise ships, mobile living communities, cargo haulers, tankers, etc. I suppose if they exist they stay away from the fun regions of space, but it would have been nice to see one or two when the heroes made one of their occasional visits to civilization.
In retrospect, we saw precious few ships overall in TNG. Those we saw usually served the story purpose of "enemy warship" (meaning they'd be small for the same reasons the Starfleet combat ships are small, only even smaller because the E-D had to triumph over them) or "vehicle for introducing the single guest character for the episode" (so small would be simpler).
There would have been some opportunities to see vast civilian-commercial vessels and installations, but usually the writers were told to make it possible for the producers to skip actually showing anything. Thus, we hear of thousands of people in distress aboard the Constantinople in "The Schitzoid Man", but we never see this vessel (which the Okudas later label as Starfleet anyway). Ditto with the Denver in "Ethics", even if the passenger count was somewhat lower there. The heroes do visit a number of large civilian installations such as the Argus Array or the Particle Fountain, though.
There would certainly be plotlines where humungous civilian vessels could plausibly be shown, but only the most recent shows could afford the actual visuals. Say, the uncrewed Woden from TOS "Ultimate Computer" could plausibly have been hundreds of kilometers long (hauling ore from star to star would seem to call for massive bulk), but that just didn't happen. And I fear the visual remake will retain an implausibly small design for the Woden, perhaps recycling the robotic freighter from TAS and from the "Charlie X" remake.
Also, generally the presence of a vast vessel would bring complications. If she really is that large on the outside, how come we never get to see much of her interior? If she really has so many people aboard, how come only one or two of them interact with our heroes, and only about eight to ten deaf-mute ones are ever seen on the background? If she is powerful enough to haul her bulk around, how come the hero ship still has to perform all the heroics? DS9 featured several episodes where these complications really hurt the stories... "Second Sight" perhaps worst of all.
Timo Saloniemi
There would have been some opportunities to see vast civilian-commercial vessels and installations, but usually the writers were told to make it possible for the producers to skip actually showing anything. Thus, we hear of thousands of people in distress aboard the Constantinople in "The Schitzoid Man", but we never see this vessel (which the Okudas later label as Starfleet anyway). Ditto with the Denver in "Ethics", even if the passenger count was somewhat lower there. The heroes do visit a number of large civilian installations such as the Argus Array or the Particle Fountain, though.
There would certainly be plotlines where humungous civilian vessels could plausibly be shown, but only the most recent shows could afford the actual visuals. Say, the uncrewed Woden from TOS "Ultimate Computer" could plausibly have been hundreds of kilometers long (hauling ore from star to star would seem to call for massive bulk), but that just didn't happen. And I fear the visual remake will retain an implausibly small design for the Woden, perhaps recycling the robotic freighter from TAS and from the "Charlie X" remake.
Also, generally the presence of a vast vessel would bring complications. If she really is that large on the outside, how come we never get to see much of her interior? If she really has so many people aboard, how come only one or two of them interact with our heroes, and only about eight to ten deaf-mute ones are ever seen on the background? If she is powerful enough to haul her bulk around, how come the hero ship still has to perform all the heroics? DS9 featured several episodes where these complications really hurt the stories... "Second Sight" perhaps worst of all.
Timo Saloniemi
AH... I see.
You're refusing to acknowledge that the other series are intended to be in the same "Star Trek reality" as TOS was.
Fair enough... it's all fiction, after all... but 99.999% of the rest of the world doesn't see things the same way, I expect.
In TOS, we had the following:
The USS Enterprise
The Fesarius
The Romulan Bird-of-Prey
The shuttlecraft Galileo, Columbus, and Galileo II
The Klingon Battlecruiser
The Tholian webspinner (which became the SS Aurora)
And THAT'S IT. Not much of a pool to compare around, really. Now, in the Remastered Trek we get to see a Gorn ship, a family of freighters based upon the TAS robotic freighter, an Orion ship, and maybe one or two other minor variations (maybe an Eyemorge ship?). But... it sounds like you're inclined to disregard those, too?
My comment was simply made from the standpoint... not an unreasonable one, I think... that whether it was "good" or "bad," anything that came after that carried the name "Star Trek" is, technically, still Star Trek.
I'm not going to play the "TINO" game. I use that to describe POLITICIANS ("RINOs"... republicans in name only... are big-government, tax-and-spend types, for instance...) but in terms of ENTERTAINMENT, I find the use of the term to be spurious at best.
Similar threads
