What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

The Next Generation
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!

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Teaos »

Probably, it removes a system which reduces complexity and may improve speed/efficency.
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.
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

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Sionnach Glic »

Aye, that was my thought on the matter, as well.
"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!"
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Mark »

And one that didn't even LOOK that cool visually.
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Deepcrush »

Classes I hate more then the GCS?

The Excelsior refit (Ent-B). What bullshit was that. They built a ship without working PTLs. Lots of extra hull bits but with almost no armor as the Nexus wave cut through the hull yet took something like an hour to destroy a couple of transports. This was basicly the Generations way of spitting on the greatest ship (pound for pound) ever built.

Yeager... :wtf: Worthless.

Defiant... little uber ship that could. How many times do you think BB jerked himself off to this as the show went on? When she first came on screen she got her ass beat by 3 Bugs. THough it still took 3 of them to do it. That would have been an awsome ship. However, by the end of the series she was taking out a dozen or so Bugs per battle and even attacking full sized battlecruisers without worry. Started well then went to fuck.

Constellation... just crap. They had the Excelsior so why build that hunk of junk.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Mark »

I have to go along with Deep on that one. They HAD the Excelsior class, and they were still running Miranda class ships. What the hell was the point of the Constellation class?
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
User avatar
Reliant121
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 12263
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Reliant121 »

I believe an explanation was that the Constellation was designed to test the viability of a quad-nacelle design. It stands to reason that they might well be able to go faster, since Starfleet had never tested them before. They didn't, which is fair and the process of elimination continued. They were a failed experiment. Thats how i took the Constellations too. It also slots neatly into picard saying that the Stargazer was underpowered, as spreading the power of one Warp Core over 4 nacelles would likely mean less power to each nacelle than if it were simply two nacelles.
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Graham Kennedy »

me,myself and I wrote:Personally I always figured that since the Sovereign and other ships don't have the bendy nacelles, starfleet figured out how to get the same effect without the bending. Or just chalk it up to :Q
Yeah, but that's what I mean. That explanation makes sense, but it also makes the Intrepid a fairly pathetic design. "Well we had this idea for better warp drive... but it didn't pan out and we thought of something even better. Oh well."
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...
Lazar
Captain
Captain
Posts: 2232
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:29 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Lazar »

Deepcrush wrote:The Excelsior refit (Ent-B). What bullshit was that. They built a ship without working PTLs. Lots of extra hull bits but with almost no armor as the Nexus wave cut through the hull yet took something like an hour to destroy a couple of transports. This was basicly the Generations way of spitting on the greatest ship (pound for pound) ever built.
I've read that they added the secondary hull bulge just so there would be something that they could easily blow up in the Nexus scene.
"There was also a large horse in the room, taking up most of it."
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Deepcrush »

Well thats the OOU reason which makes a fair bit of sense. That and maybe they wanted to have something new looking.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Mark »

Bleh........I liked the NX-2000 WAY more than the E-B for sheer appearance. The E-B just didn't have the same...........feel...to it, if that makes any sense.
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Captain Seafort »

Eh, Deep, have you taken a close look at the Lakota recently? Not that I'm disagreeing with your points, but I thought you liked that ship. :lol:
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Reliant121
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 12263
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Reliant121 »

Captain Seafort wrote:Eh, Deep, have you taken a close look at the Lakota recently? Not that I'm disagreeing with your points, but I thought you liked that ship. :lol:
Crappy looks can be excused if a ship kicks ass 8)
RK_Striker_JK_5
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 13003
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
Location: New Hampshire
Contact:

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by RK_Striker_JK_5 »

I liked the COnstellation. I just saw it as another ship design from the movie era. *Shrug*
User avatar
Reliant121
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 12263
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Reliant121 »

I liked it as well. I always wanted to put a novel on one, one of the underpowered horses that tried to cut it in the Miranda's world but never really made it. It could be quite an interesting setting. And the obvious challenges of trying to coax decent performance out of the supposedly weak powerplant.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

Post by Deepcrush »

Captain Seafort wrote:Eh, Deep, have you taken a close look at the Lakota recently? Not that I'm disagreeing with your points, but I thought you liked that ship. :lol:
The Lakota looks the same as any Excelsior class. What I hate is the Ent-B and her pink hull.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Post Reply