Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Successes of the Classes
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardian 2000: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Boris: [qb]"The Intrepid class might be trouble shooters, but that doesn't make it a super warship. Even the Ent-D was running trouble shooting for half of TNG, rather than actually exploring." But unlike the Enterprise, the primary mission of the Intrepid-class is troubleshooting, while the primary mission of the Galaxy-class is exploring (Troubleshooter vs. Explorer). Hence, it's more of a police cruiser class, and since the Galaxy class is a warship in wartime, the Intrepid can be informally called a super warship because it's more of a warship than the Galaxy class.[/qb][/QUOTE]I think you might be putting too much emphasis on the "shooting" part of the term "troubleshooting". Troubleshooting takes many forms, from diplomatic squabbles to potentially hostile situations. However, in general, Galaxy Class firepower was not required for most of the troubleshooting situations we saw the Galaxy Class engage in. One thing is pretty clear: if the Enterprise-D is any indication of what the Galaxy Class was often up to, then exploration of the distant reaches was often not their primary role. In any case, though, the notion of Intrepids as "super-warships" makes no sense, at least not as you've described it thus far. Besides which, if the Intrepids are the Federation's troubleshooters (which suggests that they'd be relegated to duties within or very near the Federation), then when war came they'd still be troubleshooting, a la Picard and the E-E in Insurrection. Indeed, they'd have to be doing *more* troubleshooting, since other starships that often got troubleshooting duties were now taking on Dominion warships. [QUOTE][qb] "and would mount weaponary at least equal to the Galaxy-class phaser and photon torpedoes" -ST:Mag "I would interpret this as mounting weaponary of equal type, and not a reflection of total firepower. The Galaxy out-guns the Intrepid by leaps and bounds." Nope. The word used is simply "equal." If A = B, then A can be substituted for B. If the phasers and photon torpedoes of the Galaxy class can be substituted for the weaponry of the Intrepid class, then one can't be inferior than another overall, if not in details. Besides, there is no evidence that the Galaxy outguns the Intrepid by leaps and bounds. Voyager survived a lot more than the Enterprise ever faced, without ever been to a starbase. It's technology is brand new, it's maximum speed is twice that of the Galaxy class.[/qb][/QUOTE]No evidence that a Galaxy outguns the Intrepid??? 1. Torpedo complement (standard): Galaxy 250 Intrepid 40* (*EAS has a count of 93 used by Voyager.) 2. Torpedo launchers Galaxy 2/3 @10per Intrepid 4 @1per (We've seen the E-D fire five torpedoes simultaneously, all of them splitting off then impacting on a target at the same time. The TNG:TM says ten torpedoes could be fired in such a fashion from one launcher. Or, we can observe "Half a Life"(TNG), where eight torpedoes were fired in quick succession. Intrepids, meanwhile, can fire one torpedo at a time from their launchers . . . I only recall perhaps three being fired from a single launcher in quick succession. But, suppose a strong target was facing both ships. A Galaxy could fire ten torpedoes aft (rigged to fly around and impact on target), ten torpedoes forward. Time it right, and BAM, you've got twenty photon torpedoes collapsing the enemy shields. An Intrepid, meanwhile, has, at maximum, fired a burst of twelve torpedoes (three each from four launchers), each pinging off the enemy shields within a short time, but not simultaneously. Thus, the firepower will be less, since the twelve detonations will occur over a longer period.) 3. Phaser emitters: Galaxy 11/12 Intrepid 13 (Looks impressive, but if the number of emitter segments is any indication of the strength of the phasers (i.e. if the 200 emitter segments of the GCS dorsal saucer array would make a phaser beam twice as powerful as a 100 emitter array), then an Intrepid cannot hope to have the same amount of firepower, even if she were somehow able to concentrate all of her phasers onto one target, since all the emitters on an Intrepid (if Type X) *may only barely* equal the 200 Type X emitters of a Galaxy. There's also the matter of phaser arc coverage. A Galaxy has a potential weakness against targets aft of the interconnecting dorsal . . . the only coverage available (assuming the primary saucer phasers cannot reach that far back) involves four phaser arrays . . . two small arrays on the upper rear of the stardrive section-side of the saucer, and two other small arrays to the port and starboard aft of the aft torpedo launcher. However, this problem is exacerbated in the Intrepid class, which has *no* dorsal engineering hull phasers, and only two tiny arrays on the back of the saucer. We see the Vaadwuar fighters using this weakness in "Dragon's Teeth"(VOY), primarily keeping above and to the rear of Voyager. Had they been below Voyager at any point, they'd have become open to fire from the *five* phaser arrays on the bottom of the Intrepid Class engineering hull. Frankly, I'd rather have two more (or two of the bottom ones) on top.)) The only thing I can think of that might suggest that the Intrepids could, even for a moment, have similar firepower to the Galaxy Class would be those tri-cobalt torpedoes. But, that's hardly the basis of a claim that the class is equal . . . just give a Galaxy tri-cobalts, and the show's over. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3