Please post your Soyuz class opinions here. My other thread is for discussion of what's wrong in my list.
------------------ What bloke invented signatures?
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
There was actually a pretty good discussion on the Soyuz way back in the old forums. My guess is it was some kind of signals intelligence ship used to scout borders and eavesdrop on potential threat forces. Sure the sensors could be used for natural phenomena but wouldn't a science ship be more suited for that?
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
Some Soyuz observations: What was the Bozeman's registry? The Encyclopedia says 1941 and has a shot of the saucer top to back it up. But in the episode we only saw the saucer bottom and that said 1841.
I have the Soyuz entering service in the mid 2270s, along with the Miranda cruisers and the Avenger heavy frigates. I agree with the idea that it's a specialist signals/sensors platform, possibly acting as a co-ordinator for perimiter action ships.
The problem is why were they removed from service in 2287? Had ordinary starship sensors improved, making the specialist platform obsolete? had Starfleet built a large number of outposts along its borders? Was the design flawed in some way?
------------------ -->Identity Crisis<--
Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :
Well, I wouldn't say flawed - after all, until we know to the contrary, the Bozeman is now back in service. I'd reckon that the border, once quite fluid, now became static as an uneasy stalemate with the Romulans and Klingons developed. Far easier (and cost-effective in the long run) to put listening posts in place on asteroids and so forth than to maintain a fleet of specialised surveillance ships. How about that listening post that V'Ger got?
As for the improvement in sensors, I hadn't noticed much - but then again, there is evidence: the taps into the comms of the Klingon cruisers that encountered V'ger; far better sensors in the battle with Khan; the viridium patch detected several sectors away. . .
Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :
Bozeman was deployed as a frigate defending the border against Klingons in 2280's.
Soyuz class discontinued as stipulation on peace treaty with Klingon's.
Bozeman in 2370's was refitted and put into service
------------------ "Execute" Captain Styles USS Excelsior (ST III) Hey I'm sick of "Engage"
Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :
No, no, NO! You're using non-canon information from that execrable book! There wasn't any peace treaty in 2288 when the class was withdrawn from service!
Posted by Trinculo on :
I have no opinion on the Soyuz Class.
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Quintesson: "You are the Autobot named Kup. You are Cybertron's chief of security." Kup: "Nah, my name's Teaspoon, and I'm Cybertron's chief dishwasher."
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I still think that the Soyuz class was flawed and retired early and that the Bozeman in ST7 and ST8 was not the same one...
------------------ "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." -George Orwell's Animal Farm
Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :
*thinks it is the same one, because it would be in perfect condition, almost*
------------------ "Audaces fortuna juvat." "Fortune favours the bold."
Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :
My theory: The USS Soyuz, Reliant-class was outfitted as a testbed for new sensor pods and such for long-range picket duty on the Klingon border. It soon proved effective, and severalmroe ships were either refitted or built-up to the Soyuz-class. After the Khitomer Accords, the Soyuz-class became less important until their special equipment was moved to new exploration ships like the Excelsior and Galileo-class ships. The Soyuz-class ships were then used for administrative use within the Federation, and also as second-defense ships. Some may have had their Reliant-equipment restored, and they were re-designated Reliant-class.
------------------ What bloke invented signatures?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
By Reliant class I presume you mean Miranda class? There is the fandom Avenger class designation, but I don't think I've ever heard of a Reliant class one.
At any rate, the Khitomer peace conference is suggested to occur in 2293, while the Soyuz was withdrawn in 2288.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
FASA, I think, called it Reliant-class.
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Quintesson: "You are the Autobot named Kup. You are Cybertron's chief of security." Kup: "Nah, my name's Teaspoon, and I'm Cybertron's chief dishwasher."
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Really? I wonder why they didn't just go with Avenger...that was the consensus at the time, or so I thought.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Trinculo on :
The USS Bozeman NCC-1941 is seen visually in the movie First Contact.
Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :
In ST7 and ST8 Bozeman could be the Soyuz Class because:
1. Easy to upgrade; Miranda's still in wide use therefore easy to get parts for it.
2. Starfleet in had a lack of attack frigates, on that date. Even if it was mothballed, it would have be recalled during Klingon incident (DS9)
------------------ "Execute" Captain Styles USS Excelsior (ST III) Hey I'm sick of "Engage"
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The ship from First Contact was just a normal Miranda, and not a Soyuz. Though it is possible that the Bozeman was refit as a Miranda, that's not enough to say that the Miranda we saw was the Bozeman.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Don't forget, the DS9TM suggests that Soyuz class components were applied to DS9. It seems obvious that much of the sensor systems were probably removed and applied to DS9's systems, as a result, the Bozeman probably resembles present day Mirandas more than it does past Soyuz ships.
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
FASA couldn't use the term AVENGER because they didn't have the permission of the people who ahd invented that term. Likewise they couldn't use any of the ships from the classic Starfleet Technical Manual. Copyright is a powerful force.
------------------ -->Identity Crisis<--
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I think we shouldn't rule out the possibility the Bozeman NCC-1941 might have returned to the 23rd century, by free will or following some temporal directive.
Another reason that the First Contact ship is not necessarily the NCC-1941 is that, following its tradition, Starfleet has probably named a new ship in honor of the "lost" Bozeman. The question is which of the ships kept the name "Bozeman".
Maybe they came back at a "lucky" time and no Bozemans were around. At least we know she was stripped of some equipment and due to the numerous examples of Miranda class starships still around, I'd bet the Bozeman was refurbished to Miranda standards.
Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :
Because there are different types of Miranda-class ships, I go by the following:
Miranda: Everyday Miranda without rollbar. Reliant: Everyday Miranda with rollbar. Avenger: Modified Reliant with a more curved hull.
------------------ What bloke invented signatures?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Shipbuilder: Good point. Since the DS9TM says they used Soyuz parts, maybe they did strip down the Bozeman. Maybe they used practically the whole thing, so there isn't much left of the ship, so it is out of service anyway.
Whatever parts they used most likely did come from the Bozeman, since there probably isn't much left of the ships that were retired 90 years earlier...
------------------ "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." -George Orwell's Animal Farm
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I don't think the DS9 tech. manual was talking about the Bozeman. For one thing, parts weren't taken from one Soyuz, they were taken from many. But I suppose we could just ask Sternbach...
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Captain Stark (Member # 70) on :
I'm not certain of all of the locations of this picture, but in the first edition Star Trek Chronology there is a picture of the USS Bozeman with the registry NCC-1941. The model builder, Greg Jein (IIRC) gave it that registry number as a tip of the hat to his model work he did for the movie 1941.
------------------ -=/\=- Captain Stark http://beam.to/readyroom
"The man on the top walks a lonely path. The chain of command is often a noose." Dr. Leonard McCoy --Obsession, Stardate: 3619.2
Posted by Trinculo on :
This thread is coming to appear like a POW on the Bataan Death March who had the misfortune of falling and being squashed by many large moving vehicles-an indistinguishable, gloppy mass of something.
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Somebody will have to check this out (DS9TM not available at the moment) but I'm pretty sure it says the parts were from a Soyuz class ship that still had some "mileage" left in it (paraphrased of course).....that could only mean the Bozeman, since all others were long gone. It sounded like they just removed some large antenna systems, possibly the rods mounted on the Soyuzs' back top and bottom. I still go with her being stripped down and refurbished to Miranda specs.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I wish this one had an index...
Regarding phasers:
"The standard units were aft-firing phaser strips obtained from Soyuz-class starships nearing the end of their operational lifetimes."
Actually, reading this...I think we might have to discount all references to the Soyuz class as a mistake. Read this:
"The Starfleet subspace transceivers are all taken from Soyuz-class starships nearing the end of the vessels' primary operational lifetimes."
Here's the part I speak of:
"Since the most recent swapout of subspace equipment from the Soyuz class was performed only eight years earlier, the predicted nonwarp MTBF..." etc...
Now...this might work, if we were to say that a good number of Soyuz class vessels remained in service despite the class itself being withdrawn from service, but...it seems a bit dodgy.
Aside from that, no mention of any single Soyuz like the Bozeman.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Eight years prior would put it in '91 or '92 year right, so that is the exact time that Cause and Effect aired (Season 5 91-92). I'm positive this is a reference to the only Soyuz class ship that would have even been possible of donating any functional (effective) hardware....the USS Bozeman. Even if some old Soyuz class ships were stored at decomission, I doubt they would have anything useful after 90 years of storage conditions. As for a mistake by TPTB, I doubt it, they seemed pretty adamant about this repeating the account of Soyuz class parts several times....not that that makes it any truer, just more probable.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The only way it could be the Bozeman is if that time warp created multiple Bozemans...
Assuming the tech. manual was written during the sixth season of DS9, eight years before that would be the third season of TNG. "Cause and Effect" was in the sixth season of TNG. The Bozeman wasn't around to be refit.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
I'm assuming it was written in mid-late '97 and 8 years before that would be mid-late '91....TNG Season 5. At least the stuff written was expected to be seen in '97-'98 so eight years prior is the time of Bozeman's return.
Posted by Trinculo on :
Shipbuilder: How did you do in math at school? The book is published in 1998. 1998-9=1989. The book is set in the year 2374. 2374-9=2265. Three years before the USS Bozeman appeared. The quoted portions do not mention the ships being active. "Unification, Part 1" established that ships are salvaged for parts. Could there be a dockyard of old Soyuz Class ships? There are two ways to read the "nearing the vessels' primary operational lifetimes": 1. the ships were retired early in 2288 (what is a primary operational lifetime for a Miranda Class starship? About 50 years-there are Miranda Class starships in the Qualor II surplus depot. This places the construction of the first Soyuz in 2238-making the class older than the Miranda Class.) 2. the ships were operational in 2365. Not supported by canon evidence. 1 is the best choice. I live near the moth ball fleet. They have ships that date to at least 50 years and more. These ships are on reserve duty-meaning some can still work. Imagine-there is a dockyard of Soyuz Class starships. The subspace transceivers and weapons equipment still work. These parts are removed from ships that could still be active and placed in storage. DS9 needs weapons. Why build new weapons when a storage yard has a surplus of old but active weapon systems? These are used. Any opinions?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The only problem with taking parts from decommissioned ships is the weapons.
The station's phasers kick ass, to use a technical term. Hardly what you would expect from 80 year old systems.
Personally, I'm still leaning towards individual Soyuz(es?) being kept on as testbed vessels long after the class was retired. It seems at least moderately reasonable that an advanced phaser system was tested on a few of them at some point in the past.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by deadcujo (Member # 13) on :
The phasers definitely kick ass...but I assumed the Soyuz ones were just temporary.
------------------ The Unknown Vulcan
[This message was edited by DeadCujo on April 21, 1999.]
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
I did fine in math thanks (4.0 in Mechanical Engr. grad school at the moment). But your right I was thinking TV season times and stretching them...end of 98 - 8 years puts it in 90. Sorry I guess I looked at TNG Season 5 dates wrong. So apparently, according to the DS9TM some Soyuz ships were still around.
Posted by Trinculo on :
The parts from a ship that has been retired can be modified, even upgraded. This is how you can see Douglass DC-3s and other old planes in operation. Starfleet took the weapon structure, modified the weapon structure to 2373 standards, and applied them to the DS9 station. This doesn't prove the existence of operating Soyuz Class starships. Let's look at the Qualar II surplus depot. There were modern starships intact, severly damaged starships, and ancient starships. The procedure is to strip the ships of useable parts, transport them to a waiting starship which then ferries the parts to a storage yard. The starship is a starship that is no longer in active, but in reserve duty operated by a civilian crew. (This disproves what the Encyclopedias say about the USS Tripoli. A decomissioned ship would not have warp capabilty. The USS Tripoli, which comes at a set time, would pick up the parts and then ferry the parts to an assigned location. If you don't believe me, watch the episode again.) The parts are then stored and modified when used. Isn't this the argument for those kit bashed ships? Are you going to tell me there are operating Constitution Class starships in the 2360's and the 2370's? The reason for the oddity is that some of the parts of the ships were already scrapped-necks, saucers, etc. And from I understand of these ships-they are flying weapons platforms designed for short operating lifetimes. I have heard in history of militaries doing similar kinds of activities. A military gets caught short-handed, so they improvise. Let's see-I have useable parts from decommissioned ships and ships lost in action. Let's combine the parts and create a ship that has a limited mission. Quick, effective, and ready to use. I am afraid in that mass of jungled matter that is a kit-bashed ship may be the USS Enterprise or the USS Kongo.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Are you saying they rebuilt old Soyuz phasers into new systems for DS9? I guess I can see that...but it seems to me it would be easier just to build new phasers in the first place, if that's indeed what they did.
But why would you upgrade equipment on a decommissioned ship?
Regarding the Tripoli, I have to say I'm not sure what you're talking about. The ship was stolen by the Romulans. Neither the encylopedia nor the episodes says how, exactly. Why, exactly, wouldn't a decommissioned ship have warp capability? If all the parts were there, all the Romulans would have to do would be to smuggle in an antimatter pod or two. Or they could have just towed it away. No one knows how big the Hokule'a class is.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
"The Starfleet subspace transceivers are all taken from Soyuz-class starships nearing the end of the vessels' primary operational lifetimes."
Either the DS9TM is wrong or the Enterprise-D crew. The statement in "Cause and Effect" is more prominent, and the DS9TM has proven wrong several times.
Trinculo: I have complained about the allegedly kitbashed ships in several threads. Combining components from different ship classes is easy, just weld them together. The problem is there are countless computer, power, turbolift and Jefferies tubes connections that have to be matched. Even if only the most essential of them are taken into account, there is a lot of engineering to do and it can't be done "hastily" as described in the DS9TM. Even if they are only weapon platforms, they are not intended to be suicide designs. Such ships need a powerful warp drive, impulse drive, weapons, shields and backup systems, otherwise they would be useless for any kind of combat. This applies likewise if they are only intended for support.
Beyond all the hypothesises, there are very few facts. This thread and others that depend on the DS9TM have become obsessive. I know that some of us are bored. One of two choices-we can be creative or we can become like the writers of Voyager? I elect to become creative. Good bye.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Excuse me? This thread has become "obsessive"? Not to hammer in a point, but you're at a Trek forum dedicated to discussing fictional technology. I presume you're here by choice.
Whether you choose to accept certain information as applicable is, of course, your choice. However, do not imagine that you speak for anyone but yourself on whether people have become bored with a thread. When interest runs out, the thread ends.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Bravo Sol. As for the thread itself, their may have been problems with replicating certain materials used in the phaser systems that required reuse of the Soyuz ship phasers (with modifications). That's not to hard to imagine. Not sure why they would want to use the transceiver systems from a 90 year old ship, if they are anything like today's tech (a big assumption) they get outdated pretty quickly (relative to 90 years). Maybe it was replication problems again???
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Trinculo: I hope you keep reading on, although you've given up this thread. I can't find anything wrong about it. There can't be always convergence of opinions, and there does not necessarily have to be a result at its end. Every thread seems to reach a point where very basics ("What is canon, what is true, what is the square root of 42?") are discussed. Just lean back and enjoy and return if you think it's useful again. I will listen to you.
Posted by Trinculo on :
Correct me if i am wrong which I am 90% of the time. Rick Sternbach wrote this book. Rick Sternbach actively participates in newsgroups-a computerized forum where questions can be asked. Rick Sternbach has never been asked questions about Soyuz class starships. If all is correct, then the fault lies with the inventor of soyuz hypothesises? I do not like inertia in an issue or in life. the argument of this thread is-we don't understand the soyuz class references in the new technical manuel. to explain, we will create hypothesises which are neither proveable or not proveable. the general consensus is that the fs hypothesis is the most valid given the evidence or lack thereof of evidence. unless new evidence emerges, this issue has become inertia matter and has lost its relevancy. one last point- Mr Okuda ferries starship models to conventions. Has anyone asked him the episode in which the starships were in?
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Sternbach only played a part in the writing of the DS9TM
------------------ "The one, the only, THE 359!"
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
I've got a feeling that if you asked Sternbach about the Soyuz stuff in the DS9TM he would refer you to Stipes or the other guys that were more heavily involved with the DS9TM writing....at that point you'd be talking to a brick wall, Sternbach is about the only talkative person in the whole group.
Posted by Trinculo on :
Shipbuilder's Hypothesis
Write to Sternbach about Soyuz Class starships. Sternbach will refer writer to Stipes. Stipes will not respond.
Will someone please write to Sternbach and ask him? I am curious to see wheter Shipbuilder's hypothesis is correct or incorrect.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It's possible to talk to Sternbach yourself, if you've got a newsreader handy. Just set it up to the news.startrek.com server, and the startrek.expertforum.ricksternbach newsgroup.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
The DS9TM was almost entirely Sternbach. Zimmerman contributed a bit, but Stipes didn't touch it. If anyone could answer the question, its Sternbach.
------------------ "......" �������������-The Breen at Internment Camp 371
Posted by Trinculo on :
Sol System: I am already an ass for presuming to know more about Star Trek and, especially, the Soyuz Class than I actually do-my experience with the forum has taught me that much. I am a humble Bajoran before the kai. Let an expert-you, shipbuilder, bernd, frank, anyone else who knows the Soyuz Class and Star Trek in general-ask the questions.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I think you misunderstand me.
I disagree with you about certain points in regards to the the Soyuz class. But that doesn't mean I don't respect your opinion, nor does it mean I don't get anything out of your posts. I listed Sternbach's newsgroup because I thought that it might interest you as a fellow "treknologist," as well as giving you a chance to ask your questions.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Trinculo on :
Sol System: I do not know the material of the DS9TM-I never bought the book. 25 dollars for a soft cover book is a luxury that I cann't afford. From reading the posts, I surmise that others have bought the book. They know the material. From material at hand, a question can be formed. Further, this forum is as deep as I want to get into the Trek society. Any deeper, I feel I will lose myself. I will not lose myself again.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Uh, ok. Sounds a bit like a TMBG song, in fact.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
Hey no problem I'll go ask, but I got a feeling I know what he'll probably say. Couldn't remember if it was Stipes or Drexler. I know with all the posts about the kitbash ships, Sternbach simply refers most everyone to Drexler, but since he did the graphics and presumably, Sternbach did the writing, maybe just maybe he'll have an answer.
Posted by Trinculo on :
Federation Shipbuilder: Thank you Sol System: Your reference is unknown to me. What is TMBG song?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
TMBG stands for They Might Be Giants, the musical group that is quoted in my signature.
------------------ "I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die." -- They Might Be Giants
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
Well, it looks like someone has asked this question in Rick's newsgroup. No one else has responded yet but here's what I wrote:
Option One: The DS9 TM is wrong.
Option Two: The DS9 TM is false information designed to fool Dominion spies. For an accurate copy please contact your nearest Starbase, be sure to include your security clearance and a blood sample.
Option Three: There's a Soyuz class named after the Russian spacecfraft and a Soi'uze class named after the Betazed's second moon. Someone was using a voice dictation system that got them mixed up.
I find it amusing when a person who has named themselves after a comic character seems to have no sense of humour....
------------------ -->Identity Crisis<--
Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :
What parts did they take from the Soyuz's? The ST:CCG has the Bozeman without sensor pods, but with a new weapons pod for use against the Borg.
------------------ What bloke invented signatures?
Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :
Trinculo: For what?
------------------ What bloke invented signatures?
Posted by deadcujo (Member # 13) on :
The manual said the station was fitted with Soyuz phaser...strips I believe. Or something
