www.ditl.org

Deepcrush wrote:My objection is to the ship class being in production prior to the flaws being corrected. So does it being formed from incompetence or malicious intent change that the class should have been cancelled or delayed?

Who says they didn't halt production when the Yamato blew? You would, however, still have the problem of the E-D at least continuing in service, so that at least tends to lean rather more heavily towards "malice" over "stupidity".

It should never have reached the Yamato. If that were any other class the likely outcome would have been "Virus in the computer, computer failure... damn-it someone hit the reset button already!"

The GCS shouldn't have left UP let alone be sent out into the dangers of space unprepared.

Absolutely. As I've said, no one's arguing about whether or not the GCS was a fuckup of epic proportions, but about the precise nature and cause of the fuckup.

Captain Seafort wrote:Absolutely. As I've said, no one's arguing about whether or not the GCS was a f****p of epic proportions, but about the precise nature and cause of the f****p.

So then we come to the following...
A, the GCS was not only found faulty in time but was so by design.
B, that at least six ships of this batch were produced with said faulty design.
C, that the degree of incompetence involved defies any logic.

With that we are left with one simple question. Is there any reason to believe that the deployment of the GCS with such faulty systems wasn't by intent? Personally, I see nothing to say that the GCS wasn't knowingly deployed by the design team with these flaws in place.

More to the point, I'm making the distinction between incompetence and willful negligence. Maliciousness never, to my knowledge, entered the arena. The cclass was in production prior to the flaws being corrected BECAUSE the class was in production prior to the flaws being known. That may very well be due to an extremely poor R&D SOP, but it isn't the same thing as knowingly letting a grenade of a ship go into service.

If they knew the ship was a bomb before it went into service, then I don't see how it can be anything but malice, as Deep asserts. If, however, they didn't know it was a bomb, then they were both incompetent and negligent, because it shows that they didn't test the design properly.

Failing to test = negligent.
Testing properly, but according to a poorly-conceived testing SOP = incompetent.

As far as a positive assertion of maliciousness goes, I'd have to see some concrete evidence that indicates that the GCS' problems were known, and known to be critical, before pressing the ship into service.

Since my thoughts are pretty clear on the matter, I'll ask the rest of those involved here this.

How do you explain a ship that has not been stress tested, had its internal atmosphere sealed, had its environmental systems safeguarded, holodecks failsafed, warp core insulated, control panels treated against (C4) plasma leaks and primary computer core not protected against any form of intrusion being deployed anything other then gross incompetence and even as Seafort puts it malice?

Mikey wrote:Failing to test = negligent.
Testing properly, but according to a poorly-conceived testing SOP = incompetent.

If they tested it at all, they did so exceptionally poorly. Either failing to do so or doing so so badly that they failed to spot the problems counts as both negligent and incompetent.

There is another theory about the designs flaws: Maybe Romulan &/or Klignon Spy have infiltrated Utopia Planitia because Negh'var and Norexan weren't ready to match GCS, when Vor'Cha & D'Deridex were Outmatched (D'Deridex seems to have heavier loss in Dominion War).


Well , it's true Yamato has blew-up and Enterprise needed Data's brain to be saved.

Deepcrush wrote:has not been stress tested

While I agree that the GCS "Mk 1" had many flaws, failure in the degree of RBM was not one I remember. Please provide the ep or movie in which the material RBM was the issue with the ship.

Deepcrush wrote:had its internal atmosphere sealed

I think it's atmosphere was sealed, because everybody failed to die when the ship first entered space.

Deepcrush wrote:had its environmental systems safeguarded

Failure of the SOP, but not indicative of malfeasance.

Deepcrush wrote:holodecks failsafed

Judging by similar incidences in DS9, I'd say that was an issue with the technology in general rather than the GCS' systems.

Deepcrush wrote:warp core insulated

Indeed, a horrible flaw. Again, evidence of either negligence or a poor SOP, but not a basis for an allegation of malfeasance.

Deepcrush wrote:control panels treated against (C4) plasma leaks

A problem which is common to every ship ever shown in 'Trek, whether Fed or alien. I can't fault the GCS for an issue which affected every ship in the history of ever (in 'Trek.)

Deepcrush wrote:primary computer core not protected against any form of intrusion

Again, a glaring problem; again, not one which can be definitely ascribed to the GCS design process. Given the lack of surprise by the ease of infection which the crew exhibited, poor IT safeguards seemed to have been the norm for Fed ships. That of itself is an awful failing on the part of the UFP's SOP, but not necessarily an indictment of the GCS itself.

Look what fan work I have found on the web:

"...allowing them to get off TWO clean shots"?

Bull.

What the hell is the Enterprise class?

Guessing, but back in the day some people thought the refitted 1701 deserved a new class name, and since the 1701 was the first to get it... Enterprise class.