Mikey wrote:That would be a good response if you'd read what I said. First, we don't know whether the GCS' early tendency to go boom was a result of the design of the core, poor software controls, inadequate failsafe design philosophy, or whatever.
I did read what you said and it was just silly. If you do or don't know why your SOTA ship is exploding... its still a bad thing. Regardless of the causes if you can't field a safe ship then it shouldn't be fielded. As we saw just prior to the Dominion War the GCS had been refitted and seemed to operate well so we know they could fix the problem. SOTA is good for when it works, but if it spends more time killing you then it does helping you its no long SOTA but simply over complicated.
Mikey wrote: Second, what I said was that a problem that would manifest itself in the future can't be a valid reason to NOT make a ship, when that problem is unknown at the time of the design.
If you have a current class of ship that works and a new class of ship which explodes without reason... then thats a perfect reason to not build that class of ship. That is unless we go with the idea that none of the problems showed because they didn't test for them. It seems strange that they would build such a SOTA ship and not bother to test the reactor, engines, shield, holodecks, weapons, navigation systems, environmental controls and computer safeties. At that point again its not SOTA but simply someone begging for an excuse of calling it SOTA.
Regardless, the Ambassador class remains a clearly safer and more cost effective ship.