Galactica Class
- Captain Seafort
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15548
- Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Blighty
Re: Galactica Class
True, but I think the overall look should be closer to the Sov than the Defiant. Pull the nacelles in closer to the hull, bulk the whole thing out a bit more (especially the nacelle pylons) and armour the hull to a degree similar to the Defiant's, and I think you'd be in business. Extra nacelles would also be a good thing, both for redundancy and to help the ship maintain decent speed with the extra mass.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Re: Galactica Class
If we use naval terms and comparisons like some have suggested then this ship could be considered in comparison to the Sovereign would be the equivalent to a Iowa class (Sovereign) and the Montana class (this ship).
Of course we do not know how fast the Sovereign is since some say it's rather slow even to a upgraded Galaxy class to super fast. Assuming the later we the Iowa class with second most powerful armament, the fastest speed, and moderate protection. But the Montana class were slower but more heavily armed and armored. Arguebly the most powerful battleships ever laid down. The difference would be speed.
So your ship could be this heavily armed and shielded/armored ship that is slow. So instead of ships moving about in a fleet action this ship would just go forward and move slightly to starboard or port if need be. But no maneuvering. Instead would use it's heavy weapons and shielding to pound away at targets.
But make no mistake that it has no weaknesses either. This ship shouldn't be able to for example take on a dozen ships with ease. That and perhaps it would need escorts like the Defiant class or Sabre class.
Of course we do not know how fast the Sovereign is since some say it's rather slow even to a upgraded Galaxy class to super fast. Assuming the later we the Iowa class with second most powerful armament, the fastest speed, and moderate protection. But the Montana class were slower but more heavily armed and armored. Arguebly the most powerful battleships ever laid down. The difference would be speed.
So your ship could be this heavily armed and shielded/armored ship that is slow. So instead of ships moving about in a fleet action this ship would just go forward and move slightly to starboard or port if need be. But no maneuvering. Instead would use it's heavy weapons and shielding to pound away at targets.
But make no mistake that it has no weaknesses either. This ship shouldn't be able to for example take on a dozen ships with ease. That and perhaps it would need escorts like the Defiant class or Sabre class.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
- Deepcrush
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 18917
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
- Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA
Re: Galactica Class
A squadron of Defiants and a pair of Akiras would make sense.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Re: Galactica Class
Yeah I agree. VOY Messege in a Bottle's scene with a single Akira and two Defiants is perhaps one of Starfleet's better deployment decisions.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
-
- Lieutenant Commander
- Posts: 912
- Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 6:52 pm
- Location: I'm in your mind!
Re: Galactica Class
The Akira's can act as a torpedo boat and a shuttle/fightercarrier
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Galactica Class
Careful. We use them as such in our RP, but there is the sum total of zero canon supporting the idea of the massive carrier deck in the Akira-class.alexmann wrote:The Akira's can act as a torpedo boat and a shuttle/fightercarrier
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
-
- Lieutenant Commander
- Posts: 912
- Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 6:52 pm
- Location: I'm in your mind!
Re: Galactica Class
Two shuttlebay doors.
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Galactica Class
And...? This is evidence of an extra door. The through-deck hangar about which fanon speculates is based on no canon evidence.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 10654
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
- Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh
Re: Galactica Class
And the Ent-E has just as large if not larger a shuttlebay door and zero evidence it's a carrier. And in space with anti-gravity systems you don't really need a through deck set up anyways.
Re: Galactica Class
So we have a ship with 15 torpedo launchers and a thru deck for shuttles/fighters. The ship must have a small crew to fit all of that including the usual stuff that goes into a starship.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Galactica Class
Yep.
Except, we don't have that stuff. Most of the torp launchers, if not all, are visible on the models IIRC; but the only evidence we have about the shuttle hangars is that they exist - there is nothing to support the idea of a greater hangar volume:total volume ratio than typical, let alone a through-deck hangar.
Except, we don't have that stuff. Most of the torp launchers, if not all, are visible on the models IIRC; but the only evidence we have about the shuttle hangars is that they exist - there is nothing to support the idea of a greater hangar volume:total volume ratio than typical, let alone a through-deck hangar.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Re: Galactica Class
I agree. Just because there is a thrudeck bay does not mean it's a carrier. The ship needed a shuttlebay that's all.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 10654
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
- Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh
Re: Galactica Class
And really, given the amount of wasted empty space aboard a starship you really wouldn't have to cram anyone together to fit in a large shuttlebay.
Re: Galactica Class
Shut your mouth! Heaven forbid that a Fed ship is built like a current naval warship.Tyyr wrote:And really, given the amount of wasted empty space aboard a starship you really wouldn't have to cram anyone together to fit in a large shuttlebay.
But like I said just because it has thru-deck shuttlebay does not automatically make a space-fighter/whatever carrier. I think we need to find out if one of those Peregrines/whatever things can even fit through the aft bay doors. Not to say that just can't use the bow one, but it does limit how many an Akira can really carry.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Galactica Class
I'm sure one could easily fit... as easily as it could fit in a GCS shuttlebay, or Sov shuttlebay, or...
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer