www.ditl.org

Something that bothered me.

The Ambassador class is very large is still large even by 2380 standards. It's also very similar to the Galaxy class. It has practically almost everything the Galaxy class has.

Now what made the Galaxy class so special over the Ambassador class besides it's size and use of the latest technology for it's time? Is there a reason why the Galaxy class had to be so large? Obviously, the exterior design doesn't matter since Starfleet still fields Mirandas, Oberths and Excelsiors. An Excelsior class can even be refitted to take on the Defiant in almost even match.

What made it so large, mostly was that it was meant to be their really long term explorer type. It also fielded the newest tech (though with the warp drive, that wasn't much of an upgrade), which is why it was better than the Ambassador.

To be honest, I'd still rather an Ambassador under refit then the GCS. Since we didn't see a GCS without fatal errors for the first twenty six years of their service life.

True. Don't know how the battle turned out, but the E-C took a decent pounding without the core exploding.

Stitch, you're saying that the Ambassador class is too small to support a thousand people on a long term mission?

No, I'm saying it was not designed to do such. Everything was rather cramped on the E-C (compared to the E-D mind you). It was not roomy enough (by Starfleet's lavishness) to comfortably fit a large number of crew for a long period of time.

It also had much smaller weapons (torp launchers were smaller, as were the phasers) if that has anything to do with it, and did not have the feature of reattachable saucer separation.

McAvoy wrote:True. Don't know how the battle turned out, but the E-C took a decent pounding without the core exploding.

Exactly, seeing that the Ent-C managed to take enough damage that half her crew is killed and not only survives but is able to return to the battle. Taking on, depending on who you ask, between two and four Romulan Warbirds isn't something we could ever expect of the Ent-D or any GCS.

Stitch, you're saying that the Ambassador class is too small to support a thousand people on a long term mission?

A better question is "is the Ambassador able to support a thousand TNG era crewman on a five or ten year mission" from home. The Ambassador likely didn't have holodecks or many of the other hotel features a GCS comes with. Considering how lazy things have gotten in TNG, its not unlikely that the crews would simply break down and cry at the idea of serving aboard an Ambassador for such a long time.

In a DS9 episode a former SFA friend/opponent of Bashir comments that after only a few months the crew was suffering morale issues.

Don't discount the "mere" fact of the GCS having a huge SOTA advantage over the Ambassador, either. The Amb may be the first appearance we've seen of phaser arrays (rather than banks,) but the GCS would obviously have a much improved, refined version. That's true for any other technological component as well. "Just" being more technologically advanced isn't a minor thing; otherwise, the USN would still be operating sail-powered vessels as a matter of course.

Well that if fine. But we are not exactly talking from the transition from the Constitution to the Iowa class. The best similarity would be the difference between the HMS Dreadnought and the HMS Queen Elizabeth. The Dreadnought is smaller and introduced a few technical improvements and the QE class refined them and improved upon them.

So basically the only reason why the Galaxy class is so large is because of crew comfort. I am sure the technology aboard a 2340's era Ambassador class is much more bulkier than a 2360's era Galaxy class. I am also sure that the easier to remove components would be replaced by thr 2360's. Perhaps the phaser arrays are not replaced or expanded is because there are more 'stuff' that we don't see.

I am just saying that if you take a basic Ambassador hull and just refit it with the latest technology seen on a Galaxy class it would do pretty mcuh the same job. Refitting the Ambassador class is probably easier than refitting an Excelsior class for example.

More than likely, but refits aren't as sexy as a brand new ship.

Nor as efficient from a technical - if not resource - point of view. Refitting an Ambassador with GCS-spec arrays, SIF, or whatever more than likely isn't just a matter of swapping in the new components, even if those components fit properly (and that's a big "if.") New arrays (or other systems) require a new a/o uprated core; which in turn requires a new power delivery system. Those new systems require new control software and mechanisms, which may require any or all of an uprated computer system, ODN infrasystem, et. al. The list could likely go on for a while.

True. I am just talking about the size though of the Galaxy class. Was it really neccessary? If Starfleet built a new build Ambassador class in the 2360's it is reasonable to assume it would have had the latest.

Also there is something said about interchangable parts. With the huge amount of different classes of different ages, with the exception of specialized components for the class, for the most part Starfleet should have common components. Otherwise it would be a supply disaster. The supply chain in itself for so many different parts would be a massive undertaking,

Granted though, most of things could be replicated but we have heard in DS9 about needing a new part that can't be replicated.

Mikey wrote:Don't discount the "mere" fact of the GCS having a huge SOTA advantage over the Ambassador, either. The Amb may be the first appearance we've seen of phaser arrays (rather than banks,) but the GCS would obviously have a much improved, refined version. That's true for any other technological component as well. "Just" being more technologically advanced isn't a minor thing; otherwise, the USN would still be operating sail-powered vessels as a matter of course.

The problem is that the SOTA vessel had a habit of blowing up for its first 20 years in service. Just think how the USN would handle matters if one of our Carrier went critical each year.

Even without refits, if you can build two Ambassadors per every GCS... then to me the Ambassador class was still the better buy until the refitted GCS came out the year prior to the Dominion War. We've seen that refitted are totally workable in Trek, to my mind a MkII Ambassador would have been due. Instead of building the GCS space hotels, build a large number of Ambassadors.

McAvoy wrote:Granted though, most of things could be replicated but we have heard in DS9 about needing a new part that can't be replicated.

Lucky for SF those parts were all Cardassian items... because you wouldn't want to replace those...

McAvoy wrote:True. I am just talking about the size though of the Galaxy class. Was it really neccessary?

I dunno, depends on who crew's it. By most standards even the Ambassadors were more than large enough to have decent quarters for the crew and probably retro fit some holo-suite sized rec-rooms. Given that most any crew on a modern warship would consider them down right luxurious and be able to handle long cruises on them just fine.

However we're talking TNG era where Captains kept a shrink on the bridge. You'd never be able to have the space hotel thing going on in an Ambassador with each crewmen getting their own apartment, holo-decks big enough to ply racquetball in and such. So given the kind of people they had on crews it was probably necessary to make them that large just so they didn't start whining.

Deepcrush wrote:Since we didn't see a GCS without fatal errors for the first twenty six years of their service life.

To be fair they managed to fix that problem before the war broke out - the Galaxy herself took a pummelling at Chin'toka without blowing up, so they must have been refitted with a less explosion-prone warp core.

McAvoy wrote:Granted though, most of things could be replicated but we have heard in DS9 about needing a new part that can't be replicated.

Not just DS9 - there's a very long list throughout the TNG-era of stuff the replicators can't handle.