I watched this episode not too long ago and heard this infamous quote for myself.
Now I should preface my tiny and inconsequential discovery (assuming it hasn't already been talked about) with my belief that there are no where near 93 Galaxy class ships, let alone 93 wings of them. (Going by modern Air Force terminology, a Wing is composed of Squadrons, which is in turn composed of Flights, which themselves contain the individual units, ie ships, people, or planes)
So imagine my delight when I heard this quote and instead of it being what everybody said it was, it turned out to make my desire to explain a small Starfleet that much easier.
It is not, "Galaxy Wings NINETY-ONE through NINETY-THREE"
It is, "Galaxy Wings NINE-ONE through NINE-THREE"
In sort, without the padding of unneccessary bullshit to conceal the lack of new stuff to talk about, this is another example of the starbase or Jupiter station speculation.
Are starbases numbered chronologically? There is no evidence towards that, where there are several real life examples of things and particularly installations not being numbered sequentially.
And this wording makes it that much easier to chalk this up to the idea that this is another example of things being numbered in a way that we simply do not have enough information to make sense of.
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Um, rightio.
Posted by Cherry Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
The thing is, there was never any real correlation between "Galaxy wings" and Galaxy class starships. Perhaps if Sisko had additionally said "Excelsior wings" or "Miranda wings," it would have been clearer. But for all we know, galaxy wings are just a referral system to a certain formation of ships. They could also have had "universe wings" or "star wings" or something as well.
Posted by Mr. Pink (Member # 621) on :
So what are you saying, David? That this has been discussed before and I thus look like an idiot or that you just don't care?
True, Dukhat. And I'd have no problem divorcing the line from the class of ships at all. But given the lack of information either way, I could see it realistically being in reference to the ships as anythig else, and in that case at least require an explanation as to why it doesn't mean 93 different Galaxy class ships.
Posted by Colourblind Harry (Member # 265) on :
But what exactly is a Galaxy wing? A wing composed of only Galaxy class ships? Or a Galaxy class ship and it's battlegroup, like modern aircraft carriers?
And 9-1 and 9-3 could mean something like the 1st and 3rd Galaxy wings of the 9th fleet.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I've always figured that "Galaxy Wing" meant a division of the Fleet (9th, 2nd, 5th in this instance) that was commanded by a Galaxy-class ship. Therefore, there could also be some "Excelsior Wings" or "Ambassador Wings" or "Nebula Wings" -- maybe there was even a "Defiant Wing" if Sisko weren't focusing on the overall strategy from what we saw. (We know that there were a number of ships that were directly accompanying the Defiant for a while, anyway.)
Anyway, I figure that "Galaxy Wing" was a colloquialism or "shorthand speech" for some relatively longer code-name.
And Harry's suggestion that the number 9 means "Ninth Fleet" and the number 1 (or 3) means the first or third division of that fleet.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
I'm not a hundred percent sure on this but it at least sounds plausible... But then again, contrary to what others may think, it's reasonably safe to assume that Galaxy-Wing refers to a squadron of ships led by one Galaxy Class command ship. I think that is what the script writers were trying to convey, what else would it be?
The Cardies had hundreds of their primary warship, the Galor Class so why can't the Feds have at least 100 Galaxy Class ships?
Other than Wings, that Federation taskforce also employed Destroyer Units. This, I would assume, consisted of a squadron of Destroyer-type ships. These laid down cover fire for the larger Galaxy Wings that led the front line.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Galor (tried and true workhorse of Cardassian fleet) != Galaxy (new and expensive top of the line exploration vehicle)
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Starfleet has the capability to build 1,000 Galaxy class ships if she wanted to from 2358 to the war, if that's all she built. Economically and demographically, Starfleet should handle up to a fleet of like 100,000 ships, yet all we see is 600+ ships to take on a 1,254 ship Dominion fleet.
IMO, I'd think by the time the war comes around, each fleet has about 6 Galaxy class ships, which is broken down to wings, with the Galaxy class ship as the command ship of the wing.
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
Starfleet has the capability to build 1,000 Galaxy class ships if she wanted to from 2358 to the war, if that's all she built.
Um...Buh? I'd like to know how to contact your dealer, so I can enjoy some the same delicious crack-cocaine.
[ July 30, 2002, 13:35: Message edited by: Magnus Pym Eye ]
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
There can't be that many Galaxy-class ships! I'd be willing to buy into a couple of dozen Galaxies, if we use the DS9:TM's excuse that a bunch of them were not "filled out" and had most of the spaceframe empty.
There's also the fact that Starfleet likely went on a shipbuilding spree in the years after Wolf 359, and so the addition of several extra Galaxy-class ships is certainly possible.
20 or at most 30 Galaxies is feasible, maybe. 1,000? Certainly not. It took 10 years to build the first ones. If they managed to cut build time in HALF (which is a huge cut), that still means five years to get one of those behemoths into service.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
Im thinking that if a Galaxy were fitted out to have extra storage space beneath shuttlebay one for fighter ships (since we know these Galaxys were possibly built quickly with space to spare, not requiring labs and other nonsense), it could deploy a number of fighters. or possibly just have a squadron of smaller ships assigned to escort it. for all we know 'Galaxy-wing' refers to a group of Defiants, Mirandas and Peregrines assigned as the Escort for the Trinculo or something.
And 1,000 Galaxy class ships seems very possible.. FOR ME TO POOP ON! i, mean, really? whats got into your noggin, man?
Posted by Rogue Starship (Member # 756) on :
IMO, I'd think by the time the war comes around, each fleet has about 6 Galaxy class ships, which is broken down to wings, with the Galaxy class ship as the command ship of the wing.[/QB][/QUOTE]
I agree with you, that is what I was lead to believe...I would think that a Galaxy Wing would be a wing/squadron of ships Akira, Excelsior ect. lead by a Galaxy command ship. But since Starfleet has been based on a USN type system( as we have previously seen) it could also mean a wing, 3-6 ships, of Galaxy's...we can see this shown in a destroyer wing from WW2, that type of wing usually flanked a carrier or any ship with value. i.e a command ship.
We can only speculate.....
RS
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
1000 Galaxies isn't feasible at all. I've speculated about 60 on my site, that is a more sensible guess. Yes, the Galaxy project took 20 years to perfect and develop before the first operational prototype was commissioned. Once that's nailed down they can roll them off the production line with no problem. It's the same today with cars.
There are many fleet yards throughout the Federation. Let's say for example there's only 25 yards. If each yard constructed one fully operational Galaxy Class ship in a single calendar year, they would have built approximately 375 operational Galaxy Class ships since the prototype was first commissioned. If there were only 20-30, as has been suggested then what the heck has Starfleet been doing these last fifteen years??!! It would mean Starfleet's construction rate and fleet logistics capability would be woefully poor and inadequate, they would certainly not have a sufficient fleet to patrol and maintain an area of space as large as the Federation.
Yes, 375 is probably too high. But 100 Galaxies is not at all unrealistic.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
But you've also got to consider that Starfleet has to maintain a fleet of thousands of ships. (Yeah yeah, let's avoid that damn "Size of Starfleet" debate...) It might be theoretically possible for shipyards to reach that level of production, but it would probably mean severely curtailing production of most other kinds of ships. In the Dominion War, numbers counted a bit more than size, overall.
There's also the problem that all of these shipyards need to be able to MAINTAIN the existing ships -- provide repairs and support for those that are in for their refits and overhauls. (Not standard resupply -- that's what the normal starbases are for.)
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Pink: So what are you saying, David? That this has been discussed before and I thus look like an idiot or that you just don't care?
I've been so used to discussing what the Galaxy is capable of, that I forgot what my opinion on the numbers in service was. I'd have to go with Red Admiral's numbers, maybe somewhat less than his optimal guestimation. We do see quite a few Galaxies during the War, in basically every fleet that we comes across.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
The Federation though is a huge entity, with a massive amount of resources at its disposal. I can't see a problem with the Federation running a fleet of around 8,000 ships, at least...
Posted by Siwiak (Member # 842) on :
There certainly aren't that many Galaxys around, seeing that we're contantly infromed that it's a unique and expensive starship. That'd be like saying that there's 100 Sovs and Prometheus-class ships running about, when I think it's more reasonable to say that there's most certainly below 10, or even more likely, 5 or less of each.
But, back to the episode... when we do hear for the Galaxy wing to engage the Cardassian Galors, we see a couple of Galaxy's on our TV screen firing phaser blasts in that memorable moment, suggesting that it is in fact made up of Galaxys.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
But Sisko did speak of *two* Galaxy wings, and we see two Galaxy class ships...
Frankly, I'd have liked to see more correlation between the dialogue and the VFX. Nowhere in the battles did the Federation ships appear to be fighting in formations of any sort. It was everybody for herself, except for those annoying obligatory moments of "Bogie on your six!" "I can't shake him!" "Hang on!"... No organization whatsoever.
How would a "Galaxy wing" operate, assuming it's something built of a Galaxy and her escorts? From the looks of the Galor-cutting sequence, it could be that the Galaxy spearheads the formation, eliminates the hardest resistance, and allows the lesser ships to move in and finish the job, then perhaps turns tail and runs so as not to be damaged by the lesser opponents. Much like a war elephant might plunge into the ranks of enemy cavalry, opening the way for the infantry to engage the enemy infantry, and then escaping before the mighty beast panics.
In no case could I see a "Galaxy wing" operating in the same manner as today's carrier wings. A wet-navy carrier is a defenseless hindrance to the wing in ship-to-ship or ship-to-sub combat - a Galaxy is the wing's most potent combatant in that form of fighting.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Well, in the context of the "Sacrifice of Angels" battle, which was sublight and close-quarters...
I'd suggest that it was generally an organized free-for-all, where each wing had a certain basic vector to try to cut their way through the Dominion fleet. The Galaxy-class ships spearheaded the advance -- blowing the crap out of the Galor, for example -- and did the maximum damage first in order to soften the enemy up for the rest of the Starfleet ships that were following them.
Sheer speculation, but imagine a "Galaxy Wing" of something like:
1 Galaxy Class starship
4 Excelsior Class starships
10 Miranda Class starships
5 Akira Class starships
And so on...
So basically, the Galaxy would act as a "battering ram" against the enemy, blast their way in and make way for the rest. One interesting detail, though, is that not a single Federation starship (aside from Our Heroes aboard the Defiant) managed to make their way through the Dominion lines. So the question is, were the other ships simply bogged down and cut off by the Jem'Hadar, unable to get out of the melee? Were they destroyed? Or did they conveniently forget Sisko's orders in order to (1) allow for the convenient climax of "one little ship against thousands of reinforcements" and (2) foresee the Dramatic Victory of the allies against the Dominion fleet?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
My memory isn't 100% here, but I seem to remember other Federation ships did break through the Dominion line right at the end of the episode, just after the Defiant comes out of the wormhole. It was either Federation or Klingon ships at any rate, and it led to Weyoun to comment "Time to start packing".
In an organised free-for-all, you would expect a ship like the Defiant to fare better. It would have been one of the few ships there that could really manouver. The Galaxies and other big ships would just float around, shooting at whatever they came near. The Defiant could duck and dive like some crazy cockney.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Yeh you're right. At the end 200 ships break through Dominion lines and head for DS9.
Siwiak: I have no knowledge of us being constantly informed that it's (the Galaxy Class) a unique and expensive starship. The reason there aren't 100's of Sovereigns and Prometheus's around is obvious. They're new ships, freshly commissioned. The Galaxy is not so new, it's been around for about 20 years now - the USS Galaxy being commissioned in 2357. As soon as the construction order was finalised for the Galaxy Class, six spaceframes were prepared. That was 20 years ago. 100 by now, Federation-wide, is not at all out of the question.
Posted by Prismatic EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
maybe the galaxy wings were exactly that: the wings of the galaxy fighting for the federation. it would make more sense than threshold. personally, i think that "galaxy wings" was just a throw away term that sounded "cool" at the time. i doubt that the writers were pondering "hmmmm, is a galaxy wing a formation headed by a galaxy class starship, or is it a big group of GCS"? if they were thinking that, i would choose the former. maybe galaxy wing is a maneuver. maybe it is a military code name. maybe sisko was having an orb experience while he was saying it. who knows. and i would certainly also like to have some of that crack cocaine that Matrix has.
Posted by Red BWC (Member # 818) on :
But wouldn't it make more sense to just send in the Stardrive Section? Lose 60% of it's mass and you've got a small target and hard to hit.
Posted by Colourblind Harry (Member # 265) on :
Yes, but it looks weird (casual watcher: the "fuck"!?) and needs a new cgi model.
Posted by Magenta Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
There was some suggestion of a formation of sorts during the battle. The Sitak and the Megellan were flying in formation with the Defiant, covering her flank.
This might suggest that groups of 3 or 4 ships were paired up within the various wings. But we really didn't see any other evidence of that other than the fighters flying in groups.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
BWC: The sole purpose of saucer separation was for the evacuation of civilians in emergency situations. Do you think that Starfleet let family members stay aboard ships that were being sent on an invasion of enemy territory?
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Plus you wouldn't want to deprive yourself of those 2 extra impulse engines (which seamed to be in full use during the battle). Not to mention that wacking great shuttlebay for fighter support, or the extra phaser banks, sensor arrays and a battle bridge that is much more protected when the sauser is docked.
Posted by Red BWC (Member # 818) on :
I know. MMan, but there should be at least some Galaxies seperated. I wouldn't want my captial ship to go and be destroyed... not like they had a chance, though.
Posted by Prismatic EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
other than the Big O, we never saw a Galaxy class destroyed by the Jem'Hadar. theory killed.
Posted by Red BWC (Member # 818) on :
And that's couting off-screen, I presume?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Sitak and MAJESTIC, Aban.
As for the whole wing thing, note that in both "Favor the Bold" and "Sacrifice of Angels" we see small formations of ships in classic arrowhead shape, with a Galaxy at the tip. I'm thinking that this is at least part of what a "Galaxy wing" is. Likewise, I think that they were saying nine-one and nine-two, as in a "section nine, wing one" type of deal.
One problem with Trek ships is that they don't necessarily have to be bigger to be better. Sternbach has posited often that ships as small as the Intrepid and Defiant can mount a Type-X phaser, which would therefore match the firepower and range of a Galaxy's primary beam armament. Phaser endurance and rate of fire would likely be factors, however it means that a much smaller ship can have a similar punch at least at the outset as Starfleet's biggest.
Mark
Posted by Siwiak (Member # 842) on :
On that same note, did we ever see any Galaxy wreackage in the episodes? Even from the crippled fleet scene when the Defiant was destroyed? We sure went through a lot of Mirandas, Excelsiors and the occasional Akira...
Posted by Prismatic EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by Red BWC: And that's couting off-screen, I presume?
would someone please make me a moderator for 10 minutes? the trash needs to be taken to the curb.
Posted by Red BWC (Member # 818) on :
Ok, if you want me to shut up, I will. (Outside of Designs where I'm intelligent) See you in a month!
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
"Designs where I'm intelligent."
Nope.
Posted by Mr. Pink (Member # 621) on :
quote: The Federation though is a huge entity, with a massive amount of resources at its disposal. I can't see a problem with the Federation running a fleet of around 8,000 ships, at least...
It's not just about building them and sending them on their way. For every ship that's out there, you have to crew, repair, resupply, refit, refuel it, etc. Basically a lot of 'r's.
It's not a question of can the Federation BUILD 8,000 ships. It's a question of whether they can OPERATE 8,000 ships.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Now hold on, I'm not defending BWC, but he's got a point here. Just because we never saw any GCS being destroyed on screen by the Dominion (other than Odyssey) nor have heard of any being destroyed, it doesn't mean it never happened. We did see quite of few GCS in the fleets, but it doesn't mean we saw all of them. We don't know how many were put into service for the war. It's possible a few were destroyed.
Now for saucer sep in the fleets, it's 50/50 on whether a captain would do it. Sure you have the extra impules engines, sensors, phasers, etc that comes with the saucer. But with the separated saucer, you've also got an extra torpedo launcher, and the primitive "multi-vector" thing going seen with the Prommie class. In effect, you now have two ships able to go after you enemy and they now have extra targets to get rid of.
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
*crack knuckles* OOUCH! I mean, here I go.
quote:Originally posted by Prismatic EdipisReks: other than the Big O, we never saw a Galaxy class destroyed by the Jem'Hadar. theory killed.
There might have been one in the graveyard scene in "CFoE", I can't remember for sure. Anyone got a screen cap?
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: One problem with Trek ships is that they don't necessarily have to be bigger to be better. Sternbach has posited often that ships as small as the Intrepid and Defiant can mount a Type-X phaser, which would therefore match the firepower and range of a Galaxy's primary beam armament. Phaser endurance and rate of fire would likely be factors, however it means that a much smaller ship can have a similar punch at least at the outset as Starfleet's biggest.
*shoots Mark with an Isomagnetic Doohicky*
Type-X phasers relies on the coupling effect for most of its power, so the more emitter segments, the better. Each emitter only dishes out 5.1MW, so you need a lot of them working together to get anywhere. The short little strip on the Defiant, or even the larger forward strips on the Intrepid, no where near matches the forward arrays on the Galaxy or Nebula. If they're even Type-X emitters, that is. The emitters on the Defiant and Intrepid both look a size different from the Type-X on the Galaxy.
If I got a dollar everytime someone at the TrekBBS said the Defiant had more fire power than a Galaxy, I could afford to go to those American anime cons.
quote:Originally posted by Dat: Now hold on, I'm not defending BWC, but he's got a point here. Just because we never saw any GCS being destroyed on screen by the Dominion (other than Odyssey) nor have heard of any being destroyed, it doesn't mean it never happened. We did see quite of few GCS in the fleets, but it doesn't mean we saw all of them. We don't know how many were put into service for the war. It's possible a few were destroyed.
Certainly possible. When entirely Fleets are lost, like what happened with the 7th, and the fleet at Chin'Taka, you'd expect a few Galaxy to buy the farm. However, generally when we see Galaxies in action, they're usually kicking butt. Even when the Cardassian OWPs were slaughtering other ships by the handfuls in "Tears of the Prophets" (2 Akiras destroyed within the first 15 seconds of the platforms coming online ), the Galaxy held up alright (comparatively speaking).
quote:Now for saucer sep in the fleets, it's 50/50 on whether a captain would do it. Sure you have the extra impules engines, sensors, phasers, etc that comes with the saucer. But with the separated saucer, you've also got an extra torpedo launcher, and the primitive "multi-vector" thing going seen with the Prommie class. In effect, you now have two ships able to go after you enemy and they now have extra targets to get rid of.
Problem with that is the extra torpedoe launcher is point backwards. And there is no time to recover the saucer and run if the things go bad. The only useful thing you open up is the phaser array in front of the battle bridge, but in the long run it's not worth it. A separated saucer section's impulse drive has to both propell and power the saucer, limiting the amount of power going to the phasers dramatically. At full phaser power, the saucer section runs out of juice for its phasers in less than 15 minutes. In normal operation, the endurance for phaser jumps to around 45 minutes. Really big difference.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
imagine the battle power of these beauties if they built a warp core and inboard nacelles into the saucer section.
Peter David thought of it, for the new Excalibur Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
quote:Originally posted by Captain... Mike: imagine the battle power of these beauties if they built a warp core and inboard nacelles into the saucer section.
Peter David thought of it, for the new Excalibur
It's called Prometheus class.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
its on a much grander scale, the Galaxy compared to the Prometheus. And much less specialized. The Prometheus, with all the extra equipment for separation and redundance, wouldnt seem likely to fit non-violent mission profiles. The Galaxy would become much more useful with the increased power signature/battle readiness, because it would retain much more of the self sufficiency the class is famous for and more of the extra uses the Prometheus is not famous for.
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
Peter David writes comic books, so I suppose he can be excused for fanciful and asinine ideas.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
I posit that the Galaxy warp-refit is at least as asinine as the Prometheus over-design that actually made it on screen.
And if we are saying the comic book stuff is too fanciful for general Trek consumption, do we automatically treat the joystick as much better since it was one of the strenuously screened ideas that made it onscreen?
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
The joystick kicked ass. I think it's the same model I have for my computer. So, really, it's like I fly the Enterprise.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
*takes three drinks*
Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
I'm not sure I understand this game.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
let [data="liking.joystick"] = [data="trying-on.TWOK-field_jacket] when assign.val [data="pathetic"] pathetic.val=[drinks.taken]1 * num.pathetic{statements.made}
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
For your info, the number 1,000 I picked out of my ass. However I said the capability to build 1,000 in 15 years or so years. Granted that's alot per year. But if we consider that (based on WWII demographics) UFP during the time of war, did some sort of drafting, their entire organization could be in the billions. However it's likely more of a non-drafted type, so it would be around in the tens of millions. Starfleet has the capability assuming that all starbases, space docks, or even build new ones (which shouldn't be too hard considering they are just made of some sort of mesh) within 15 years. I mean yuo first build up like 300 docks, put all Galaxy class ships in each one, maybe use some sort of mass production line for the smaller parts, assuming it takes about 5 years for each ship, Starfleet could have about 900 ships in 15 years.
I do not doubt the concept that Galaxy class ships have been destroyed. We see a very small part of some of the battles that could have happened during the war. At least one Galaxy class could have been lost in any of those unseen battles.
Posted by Captain... Mike (Member # 709) on :
i'm going to go with 'um, no'
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
There doesn't seem to be any clear trend as to which ships blow up and which don't in a battle. The VFX guys did some nice Miranda, Akira and Excelsior deaths, but that was mainly because those three models were the most detailed. Other ship types in those size ranges were saved from destruction because they didn't look so cool!
So ship size isn't a clear survival trait. Design age isn't a clear survival trait. Heck, even having heroes aboard isn't necessarily a survival trait any more, since we did lose the Defiant once.
All we have going for the Galaxies is the hint that one of them took a hit in "TotP" and didn't explode right away, contrary to what happened to the assorted Akiras and Excelsiors with first hits. Was that just because the Galaxy was bigger and could carry bigger shield generators? Would the same advantages apply to Nebulas? Why not to Akiras (do their supposedly cavernous shuttlebays perhaps reduce their structural strength or their size/number of shield generators?)?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:At full phaser power, the saucer section runs out of juice for its phasers in less than 15 minutes. In normal operation, the endurance for phaser jumps to around 45 minutes. Really big difference.
Take a drink everytime someone posts information from the tech manual as cannonical fact.
quote: The VFX guys did some nice Miranda, Akira and Excelsior deaths, but that was mainly because those three models were the most detailed.
I'm not arguing here, but isn't that also pretty much what 90% of the fleets were made up of? Pretty much the only other ships seen were Galaxies and the odd Steamrunner, correct.
For that matter, why were those ships the most detailed? During the days of TNG, it was because the Excelsior and Miranda were movie ships (and therefore high quality) but by the time of the big fleet battles of DS9 they were using CGI for the fight scenes. Did they just put more effort into the Miranda and Excelsior?
Posted by Colourblind Harry (Member # 265) on :
quote: Take a drink everytime someone posts information from the tech manual as cannonical fact
Take 2 drinks everytime someone replaces 'canon' with 'cannon'. Drink your whole beverage when someone replaces 'Bussard' with 'buzzard'.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Damn you.
It's not as bad as Omega thinking I come from "Brittain" though...
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: All we have going for the Galaxies is the hint that one of them took a hit in "TotP" and didn't explode right away, contrary to what happened to the assorted Akiras and Excelsiors with first hits. Was that just because the Galaxy was bigger and could carry bigger shield generators? Would the same advantages apply to Nebulas? Why not to Akiras (do their supposedly cavernous shuttlebays perhaps reduce their structural strength or their size/number of shield generators?)?
I don't even think the Nebula has as many shield generators as the Galaxy to begin with. The Nebula's a lot more compact, and doesn't have saucer separation, so she could make do with much few generators. I don't know about the Akira, she is quite a big smaller than a Galaxy. As for taking damage, I'd say the Galaxy, shielding aside, simply has more non-critical volume and mass to soak up damage. And the Galaxy in "TotP" actually took two hits. When you shoot up a Miranda, Excelsior, or Akira, you're a lot more liable to hit something important with your first shot, because of their smaller size.
Posted by Fedaykin Supastar (Member # 704) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: Damn you.
It's not as bad as Omega thinking I come from "Brittain" though...
[i'm probly gonna get shot, especially after making that 'the return of kirk' theory over on the ENT board....]
at least he didnt say "brattain"
[note to BWC: this wasnt exactly funny so it isnt exactly humor]
Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
A Miranda was seen taking many many hits by the owp, [this thing was getting riddled!] but it didn't blow up or at least not onscreen.
Posted by Ace (Member # 389) on :
We also saw the excellent skills of the USS Hood's helmsman as the Excelsior-class ship kept up with the fast pace of the Defiant and her other Miranda escort. Despite the trend to ridicule these old classes, they should be given a lot more credit. Anyone else agree?
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
^Definately. My opinion of the Excelsior is somewhat higher than the standard "cannon fodder" POV.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
"ugly cannon fodder" perhaps Posted by Magnus Pym Eye (Member # 239) on :
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
The Excelsior was a beautiful ship for its time. I love the refit-Enterprise, but it was successfully "upstaged" by the end of ST:VI in the "signing off" scene. And although the Excelsior compared favorably to the Enterprise-D, I think that you could tell that it looked "old."
"Cannon fodder"? Maybe... that depends on just how effectively the ships were refitted over the years. While the attrition rate was probably high based on what we saw on screen, I really don't think that they were death traps at all -- and they certainly were useful, or else some would've been withdrawn from the front lines. We still saw Excelsiors in the thick of things alongside Galaxies and the Defiant up until "What You Leave Behind."
Something you might want to consider here: a good deal of our perspective depends on the effects people and how they present the "non-focus" starships. In ST:III and ST:VI, the Excelsior was an Important Ship, and thus received some very favorable shots to make it look good. But looking at TNG, the Excelsiors seemed to appear dark and "run down" compared to the Enterprise-D... and obviously the focus was on the "D" as the star-of-the-show. And in DS9, the Excelsiors were nothing more than background decorations for the battle scenes, and so never received that much attention aside from a few "destruction" shots (the USS Valley Forge comes to mind).
I'd be surprised if the Excelsiors lasted very much longer as a front-line starship after the "upgrading" programs bringing in more and more new starships. They may be relatively outdated and not suited for deliberate offerings for the advanced enemies like the Dominion and Borg. But they're still a capable starship (from what we know about them), and certainly could be useful as a "coast guard" internal patrol ship, or else as a low-threat explorer, or even as a transport -- since Starfleet seems to like to refit "obsolete" classes and use them as container ships.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Plus, you forgot that the USS Hood has one kickass desk in its ready room.
Mark
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
I have always wondered what would have happened if Starfleet decided to refit all the Excelsior class ships to the USS Lakota standards. Remember she stood a fair chance against the Defiant. There's obviously something costly/useless about the Excelsior class that would make the refit seem not as appealing as it should be. I mean if I was Starfleet, I would bring in all the Excelsior class ships as fast I could, to refit them.
Perhaps the war stopped the refits, and instead of having a few powerful ships, they needed alot of weaker ships.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
MM has taken the "power" of the quotation mark to "new" heights "of" use.
Posted by Prismatic EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i think that the Excelsior class is still perfectly useful, but i think that starfleet would be smart to take the older ones of the front line.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Thanks for pointing that out, "Liam." I'll "try" to use the "quotes" less often in the future. Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
I do not deny the fact that the Excelsior looked better in the movies than in the series and that for it original time the Excelsior was It. But I never really liked the shape, I'm like the rest of the E crew at the end of Star Trek II.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Weary and depressed?
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
LOL!
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Balding and senile?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Do you feel young?
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Note to self: never leave a statement open ended on Flare.
Specifically, they didn't like it, except for poor Sulu who eventually got to captain the monstrosity.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Yes, because right after a traumatic battle in which they lost a large number of people, including their good friend Spock, the crew of the Enterprise say about and discussed the merits of the Excelsior.
And are you sure the Lakota had a fair chance against the Defiant. Someone rattles off a damage report at one point, and the Lakota is faring a lot worse than the Defiant. Take into account that the Lakota thought they were attacking a ship overrun with shapeshifters, and the Defiant was holding back, I'd say that Worf could have pummelled the Lakota if he'd have wanted to.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Hint: You probably mean the end of Star Trek IV.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I seem to recall that the big dilemma for Worf at the end of the "Paradise Lost" battle was that only a few more shots would likely finish off the Lakota -- killing 500+ Starfleet officers. The Defiant was also in bad shape, but IIRC they only had lost shields -- but still had their armor. Of course, the Lakota stood down shortly after that, and so everything was A-okay.
Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: And are you sure the Lakota had a fair chance against the Defiant. Someone rattles off a damage report at one point, and the Lakota is faring a lot worse than the Defiant. Take into account that the Lakota thought they were attacking a ship overrun with shapeshifters, and the Defiant was holding back, I'd say that Worf could have pummelled the Lakota if he'd have wanted to.
The Lakota was also holding back and never fired it's quantom torpedoes.
From what the admiral said, if the lakota had used them, the Defiant would have been much worse after the opening volley and most likely destroyed if she took a hit after she lost sheilds.
But the Defiant didn't unleash any quantoms eigther so both were sort of holding back.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
In the long run, both ships had yet to show what they were really capable of doing. But still, the Lakota was able to fight the Defiant whereas a comparably sized ship like the Galor class would have been diabled two seconds into the fight.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
The E-nil crew takes pot shots at the Excelsior every chance they get. I remember them talking about it in ST2, sabatoging it in ST3, and ridiculing it again in ST4.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Geez, that was only Scotty that expressed his disdain for the Excelsior. Kirk toleraterd the ship. Uhura's statement from ST3 only suggests amazement and you can't tell if she liked her or not. McCoy was said they would probably get a freighter instead of a front line ship in ST4 and in ST6 said the Excelsior was a big ship with no suggestion on whether he liked her or not. Both Spock and Chekov said nothing about the Excelsior at all, good or bad. Other than Scotty, Sulu was the one who kept talking about her. And he was saying grand things about her suggesting that he liked her a lot and was eager to captain her or just serve aboard her as just another officer.
Posted by Prismatic EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
well, Scotty liked the Enterprise-B, so i don't think that his comments about the Excelsior can be taken as disdain for the whole class. instead, i believe that Scotty thought the Excelsior was junk due to the fact that, in it's prototype stage, it really didn't work very well. the Excelsior, once fitted out and duty ready, was a grand ship.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I'll bet that a big part of it was originally envy, at having the grand old Constitution Class being pushed out of the limelight. At the same time, the Enterprise was appearing as a busted-up old rustbucket.
And the idea about the hair-brained transwarp drive probably had something to do with it. From what I recall about ST:III, Scotty didn't buy into the Transwarp Drive theory all that much. Especially because he easily sabotaged the ship later on.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by J: The E-nil crew takes pot shots at the Excelsior every chance they get. I remember them talking about it in ST2...
Then you have the most amazing version of ST2 that has ever existed.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Yes I don't remember anything stated about the Excelsior in ST2. In one of the books, maybe ST2, it was said that Sulu would get a Galaxy class ship. But books are non-canon of course.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Wow, that must've been some novel! Sulu was going to get a Galaxy Class starship after ST:II?? Lucky him.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Can someone help me out? I don't have the book, but when in the scene (reuse of the glory shots in STI) Kirk says "I hope I have you for a few more weeks. I don't think these kids can steer." It was said around there.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Although I do not remember the exact words, the line was more along the lines of "I'm glad we've got an experienced person at the helm."
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
In the days before TNG, there was a fandom ship class that was a really big exploratory cruiser, and it was called the Galaxy class.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I remember:
"Well, I for one am glad to have you at the helm for three weeks. I don't think these kids can steer."
And absolutly no mention of any promotion or new ship what so ever.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Sulu was going to get a Galaxy Class starship after ST:II?? Lucky him."
I wouldn't call him lucky.
Admiral: "Sulu, when we promote you to captain, we're going to give you a top-of-the-line Galaxy-class starship." Sulu: "Erm... But, the Galaxy class won't exist for about seventy years..." Admiral: "Hehehe..."
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
*points to post above*
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
It's in the book, not the movie. Just check around that scene, it's not in a dialogue.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I'm just pointing out that there was a fandom Galaxy class long before TNG came around.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Yes, I'm perfectly aware of that. I was making w/ the funny, ha, ha.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Ha ha, humour. Yes.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
), the Galaxy held up alright (comparatively speaking). ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)