Galaxy class subtypes

The Next Generation

Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Meste17 » Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:22 am

Since the Nebula class is modular, and itself is only a spinoff to the Galaxy class, doesn't that mean that the Galaxy class can be fitted to house a weapons/science pod as well?
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 1:45 pm


Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby McAvoy » Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:14 am

No. Needs a hard point and structure which it doesn't have.

Might as well say the Galaxy could employ a second saucer on top of the existing one.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Captain Seafort » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:28 am

I suppose they might be able to employ mission-specific saucer sections, but their usefulness would be severely limited by their dependence on the existing umbilical connections to the engineering hull, which are severely limited by the pretty narrow gap between the main impulse engine, the forward torpedo launcher, and the top of the main deuterium tank.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 15475
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Mikey » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:33 am

Captain Seafort wrote:I suppose they might be able to employ mission-specific saucer sections, but their usefulness would be severely limited by their dependence on the existing umbilical connections to the engineering hull, which are severely limited by the pretty narrow gap between the main impulse engine, the forward torpedo launcher, and the top of the main deuterium tank.


In addition, the logistics of getting alternate saucer sections around to various starbases for deployment would be far more of a nightmare than that of the Nebula pods.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Teaos » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:51 am

And also a huge waste of resources for the ones not in use.
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 15258
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:00 am
Location: Behind you!

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby RK_Striker_JK_5 » Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:09 pm

Teaos wrote:And also a huge waste of resources for the ones not in use.

Although you could hold one hell of a kegger in them. :D Or the ultimate Ultimate Frisbee tournament?
User avatar
RK_Striker_JK_5
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 11628
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:27 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby McAvoy » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:19 pm

I always liked the idea of a battle saucer. Having warp nacelles tucked in the sides and has alot of weapons.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Jim » Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:44 pm

McAvoy wrote:Might as well say the Galaxy could employ a second saucer on top of the existing one.


Get to welding!
Ugh... do not thump the Book of G'Quan...
User avatar
Jim
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:32 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Graham Kennedy » Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:02 pm

Meste17 wrote:Since the Nebula class is modular, and itself is only a spinoff to the Galaxy class, doesn't that mean that the Galaxy class can be fitted to house a weapons/science pod as well?

Is there any weird distortion of a ship design that you don't like?

Up next :

Can the Defiant be turned into a mobile amusement park?

Can a Type 9 shuttle tow a passenger pod with 5,000 people in it as an alternative to a cruise liner?

Could Ben Sisko's wooden solar sail ship have 400 Type X phaser arrays mounted on it to turn it into a super-battleship?

Could the Nebula class be refitted to have 20 times as many toilets?

Would it be possible to weld and Excelsior class to an Ambassador class, and would that make it better in some undefined way?

What it confer some sort of advantage if an Akira class was crewed entirely by monkeys?

Hospital ships : Could they make good battleships if you put lots of weapons on them? And high power shields? And a boosted structural integrity system? And better inertial dampeners? And damage resistance control systems? And bigger nacelles? And a bigger warp core? And better firecontrol systems? In other words completely rebuild the ship, but still start with a hospital ship for some reason?

If we put nacelles on the TARDIS, would it make a good starship? Would it still be able to move through time?

And could somebody please create detailed specifications for all those ships for me? And maybe draw pictures of them? And if you have time, carve little wooden models that are all to scale with one another, and paint them, and mail them to me?
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11062
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Mikey » Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:32 pm

"Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon."
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby McAvoy » Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:47 pm

Graham Kennedy wrote:
Meste17 wrote:Since the Nebula class is modular, and itself is only a spinoff to the Galaxy class, doesn't that mean that the Galaxy class can be fitted to house a weapons/science pod as well?

Is there any weird distortion of a ship design that you don't like?

Up next :

Can the Defiant be turned into a mobile amusement park?

Can a Type 9 shuttle tow a passenger pod with 5,000 people in it as an alternative to a cruise liner?

Could Ben Sisko's wooden solar sail ship have 400 Type X phaser arrays mounted on it to turn it into a super-battleship?

Could the Nebula class be refitted to have 20 times as many toilets?

Would it be possible to weld and Excelsior class to an Ambassador class, and would that make it better in some undefined way?

What it confer some sort of advantage if an Akira class was crewed entirely by monkeys?

Hospital ships : Could they make good battleships if you put lots of weapons on them? And high power shields? And a boosted structural integrity system? And better inertial dampeners? And damage resistance control systems? And bigger nacelles? And a bigger warp core? And better firecontrol systems? In other words completely rebuild the ship, but still start with a hospital ship for some reason?

If we put nacelles on the TARDIS, would it make a good starship? Would it still be able to move through time?

And could somebody please create detailed specifications for all those ships for me? And maybe draw pictures of them? And if you have time, carve little wooden models that are all to scale with one another, and paint them, and mail them to me?


How about raising an old blown up WW2 Battleship to be used as a space Battleship that somehow is comparable or better than purpose built space battleships? Is that doable?
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby Graham Kennedy » Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:03 pm

Maybe the Japanese could pull it off, I guess. Those folks are pretty clever.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11062
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK

Re: Galaxy class subtypes

Postby McAvoy » Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:46 pm

Or what if we put gatling gun type pulse phasers on the Defiant to be extra bad ass?
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ


Next

Return to TNG

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest