Galaxy Class Capability

[m52nickerson]

Yes. And his "industrial capacity vs. attrition" basis for that is as completely unsupported as the "E-D had better guns" idea, and equally logically based.

Which goes back to why when trying to assess what a GCS can do using the one from the alternate timeline is not a good idea. We don't know what has been changed, nor can we just assume that things have not been changed.

[Captain Seafort]

Nor can we assume that the ship is technically distinguishable from it's "real" equivalent at all.

[m52nickerson]

Nor can we assume that the ship is technically distinguishable from it's "real" equivalent at all.

......so we don't use that ship or that episode as a base of any arguments.

[Captain Seafort]

Fair enough.

[Deepcrush]

Occam's Razor states that theories should be free from unnecessary entities. Occam's Razor does not state that the simpler explanation is better or preferred, this is a common misconception. So if more powerful weapons are needed as part of a theory the Razor does not apply. More powerful weapons explains why the YE-E was able to destroy the Klingon ship so quickly, and the E-D was not able to do the same in "Generations".

YE E-D fired several times, Gen E-D only once. Occam's Razor for this would only state that 3 shots from a GCS do more damage then 1 shot. Duh.

[Kevsha]

Fair enough.

Man why didn't you say that when i suggested we throw out the yesterday's ent arguement like 2 pages ago....

[Deepcrush]

Safe bet? Because people were still trying to use it.

[m52nickerson]

One thing that bothers me about the a cooling leak causing the core to breach is why could the reaction not be stopped? The only thing that I can come up with is perhaps it could but the coolent is to deadly to allow time to shut down the core or even eject it. If you take into account that those fuctions could be preformed on the bridge it does not make sense.

Thoughts.

[Mikey]

You're right - it makes no sense at all. An automatic, mechanical (as opposed to active, computer or electronically-controlled) system should be in place to shut down the reaction in such an instance - as Seafort has said many times, like an automatic control roddrop in a fission reactor. As to coolant being deadly or dangerous, we've seen that they have both (active) force fields and (simpler, mechanical) impregnable blast doors.

[Deepcrush]

Another reason why the GCS sucks.

[Sionnach Glic]

Aye, one of the most oft-cited and serious flaws with the ship.
Of course, it seems to be the same for every other ship, so the stupidity isn't unique to the GCS.

[m52nickerson]

Aye, one of the most oft-cited and serious flaws with the ship.
Of course, it seems to be the same for every other ship, so the stupidity isn't unique to the GCS.

Unless, and yes this is pure speculation, the AM injection system could not be designed to automatically such down. It is not like you can just close a valve or equivalent. It seems the shut down would have to involve a change in the containment field to stop the flow of anti-matter.

[Deepcrush]

Seeing how E-nil, E-A, E-B, E-C never died a hundred times over from Warp Core problems. The problem isn't tech, its design.

[m52nickerson]

Seeing how E-nil, E-A, E-B, E-C never died a hundred times over from Warp Core problems. The problem isn't tech, its design.

It would seem that the designed protection for the containment and the cooling system were iffy at best, but this doesn't answer why the reaction did not shut itself down or how that would be done.

[Mikey]

The problem is, how would you have a passive, mechanical failsafe? Containment, "opt-in" ejection/shut-down systems, etc. are vulnera le to the same issues which damage the core itself.