What would you fix on the E-D?

The Next Generation
Post Reply

What would you change?

Add redundant weapon control systems
0
No votes
Give the holodeck a safe "off switch" located outside the door, to rescue crew in case of malfunction
12
30%
Place components that require maintainance in rooms instead of Jefferies tubes
0
No votes
Install dedicated computers to take over ship functions where possible, as opposed to relying on a single computer
1
3%
Link bridge consoles to a circuit breaker (no more exploding consloes!)
9
23%
Shrink the crew quarters substantially.
1
3%
Add two extra warp nacelles, six poorly scaled phaser cannons, and ten photon torpedo launchers
1
3%
Other (please specify)
5
13%
I would not suggest any changes.
0
No votes
Add diverse and redundant systems to prevent a warp core breach
11
28%
 
Total votes: 40
Sionnach Glic
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 26014
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath

What would you fix on the E-D?

Post by Sionnach Glic »

I think we can all agree that the original Galaxy class had more than a few design flaws. Form exploding warp cores to the idea that everything imporatant is in a Jeferies tube.
If you could fix just one of these problems, what would it be?

Inspired by a similar thread from another site.
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Post by Teaos »

I choose the Consoles because loseing bridge staff in battle can't be helpful.

I don't like the idea of computers controlling a ship in general so I would never choose that.

Also I think that any ship like the Galaxy class that has long missions needs good quality crew quarters so they stay big.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Post by Captain Seafort »

Fix the warp core. None of the other problems threaten the immediate destruction of the ship the way that Ford Pinto of a warp core does. In fact, I can think of at least six occasions on which a Galaxy-class ship was lost due to shoddy design.

PS. The idea of removing the saucer (and the civies) also has merit - it's meant to be a warship, not the Queen Mary.
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Post by Teaos »

PS. The idea of removing the saucer (and the civies) also has merit - it's meant to be a warship, not the Queen Mary.
No it was supposed to be an Explorer. Thus making the crew as happy and comfortable as possible is important. Only during the Dominion war was it used more as a Warship but thats a (Hopefully) one off thing.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Post by Captain Seafort »

Conundrum wrote:Worf:We are equipped with ten phaser banks, 275 photon torpedoes, and a high capacity shield grid.

MacDuff:We're a battleship.

Worf:It appears so.
The Galaxy may be designated as an Explorer, but it can go toe-to-toe with the best anyone else has to offer. Note that ave for a few cosmetic changes to the bridge the E-D of "Yesterday's Enterprise" was identical to the regular vessel (right down to the shoddy warp core), despite being designed specifically for war. Time after time after time te Enterprise has been sent into combat situations - the Ferengi, the Romulans, the Borg, the Klingons, the Cardassians, among others. You wouldn't send Cook's Discovery into those sorts of situations. You'd send Nelson's Victory.
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Post by Teaos »

It does do those things but it's primary role was as an explorer and a diplomatic ship. Making a crew comfortable and happy is important. Also apart from the Dominion war the Federation is generally a very peaceful place thus the risks of having civilians on ship are far less than the benifits.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Post by Captain Seafort »

Other than the Cardassian war, perpetual internal unrest in the Klingon Empire, the Romulans' constant mischief-making and random aliens-of the week droping in to blow something up.

If the Galaxy was a simple science vessel it wouldn't be armed like a battleship and it wouldn't spend half its time rushing to the latest trouble spot - quite the contrary, it would be running in the opposite direction. If it's a battleship, which fits all the evidence, it sure as hell shouldn't have civilians aboard. Besides which, sailing off into the unknown, ie exploring, is dangerous work. You never know what's going to be waiting in the next starsystem, whether it's a hostile alien or a natural threat.
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Post by Teaos »

Up until 2365 the Federation was reallativily peaceful. There is always somethign but not enough to worry about. All that stuff you said is in the last decade of our knowledge of the Federation.

It provides a better working enviroment to have civilians on board a ship. These ships a years away from their families and such it only makes sense to make them as comfortable as possible. They know the risks involved. Most Federation ships are in situatutions were they are in grave danger rearly.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
FASATrek
Crewman
Crewman
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:09 am

Post by FASATrek »

Id limit computer access from remote terminals. The bar computer should serve drinks not be able to control the ship.
celeritas
Lieutenant jg
Lieutenant jg
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 5:45 pm

Post by celeritas »

i'd add a toilet somewhere on that ship. :D
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Post by Captain Seafort »

Teaos wrote:Up until 2365 the Federation was reallativily peaceful. There is always somethign but not enough to worry about. All that stuff you said is in the last decade of our knowledge of the Federation.


The Cardasian war was in progress before TNG started, and Picard fought in it as CO of the Stargazer. Besides which, Starfleet's primary role may be scientific, but it is still the Federation's military, and they can't afford to have civilians on board, given the unpredictability of threats turning up. Look at the Odessy for example. What if the captain had ignored Dax's advice to strip down to a skeleton crew - there would have been over a thousand dead.
It provides a better working enviroment to have civilians on board a ship. These ships a years away from their families and such it only makes sense to make them as comfortable as possible. They know the risks involved. Most Federation ships are in situatutions were they are in grave danger rearly.
But when they are in danger, where would it be better for the crew's families to be? Safely on a planet or a few decks down being shot at along with everyone else? The result of the latter is that the crew will always be worrying in the back of their minds, distracting them from doing their jobs with potentially fatal results for the entire ship. If its a science vessel cataloguing stars or looking at nebulae deep inside the Federation this shouldn't be a problem, and could even be an advantage (though not necessarilly - look at the Saratoga for example). For a battleship like th Enterprise however, which runs into serious trouble every other week, its a serious problem.
Sionnach Glic
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 26014
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath

Post by Sionnach Glic »

The simple fact that the Enterprise is routinely called on to engage in military activities shows us that its not purely a science vessel.
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
JudgeKing
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:53 am
Location: Somewhere in the universe

Post by JudgeKing »

Add fix the whole ship with:
redundant weapons controls
tie circut breaker to the bridge consoles
redundant systems to the Warp Core.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Post by Captain Seafort »

Exploding bridge consoles aside, almost all the Galaxy's problem fall into one of two areas

1) Overreliance on computers. From the 2nd episode of the series on wards, the ships existence was threatened time and again because the computers were damaged, infiltrated, infected with a virus or a hundred other things, resulting in a mad dash to repair it before the whole thing went bang.

2) Lack of redundancy/overcentralisation. Again, time after time either all the weapons were knocked out by a single hit, or all the sensors went down, or the sole coolant system for the warp core was wrecked or the core ejection system was wrecked, and there was no backup.
User avatar
DarkOmen
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 499
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:35 am
Location: CALIFORNIA
Contact:

Post by DarkOmen »

i like the extra nacelle idea :P
Post Reply