the problem is this is what trek fans assume. that whatever the newest thing is, is the most powerful, best, and is the new flagship. the galaxy and sovereign dont complete in the same category, one is a battleship with big guns, the other is a heavy cruiser with medium guns. for losing a galaxy class starship, picard was not rewarded with a more powerful ship. the next enterprise was a sovereign class because it was such a new, advanced, and impressive ship for what it was, thats more important to starfleet then whats the best at blowing away xeno scum, thats why they saw fit to make the succeeding enterprise a technically lesser ship then the former. it was never said to be the flagship.
the sovereign is not the successor to the galaxy, its a new heavy cruiser meant to replace old cruiser designs like the excelsior and ambassador. its real advanced and all, but nothing is most advanced for long, with how often things are upgraded. anti borg countermeasures did not fundamentally change ship building, its new tactics and technologies meant to fight against their adaptation. the defiant is the only ship actually built to fight the borg. small, cheap, disposable, with as much firepower as they could fit in it. a large general purpose cruiser is an incredibly waistfull thing to build to fight against the borg.
any argument for super powered mkXII emitters gets voided as soon as a galaxy gets upgraded to have them as well.
Which has certainly been done.
Starfleet would be foolish not to upgrade its biggest investment with the newest weapons availlable.
And yes Dontdrunk is right, the GCS is still the most powerful (canon) ship starfleet has. The sovereign replaces now the aging Ambassador and the ancient Excelsior Class (finally:D).
Btw. there was never any (canon) statement that the -E was Starfleets Flagship.
As dontdrunk stated, Picard certainly wasn't rewarded with the command of Starfleet new flagship and certainly not with a more powerful ship, after he lost the -D in a wantonly negligent way.
Personally, i just can't belive that with the experience of the -Ds 7 year mission and the following Dominion War, future Galaxy Classes (non representative ships) are being outfitted with families and other extreme luxury stuff anymore, like the Enterprise -D was.
Just imagine such a huge powerful ship completely outfitted with the newest technology, defensive and offensive systems, jam-packed with additional fusion recators, redundant computer cores and additional shield emitters.
If such a ship is manned with a professional and tactical trained crew, most of the dangerous stituations the -D ran into wouldn't be a big problem for such a ship.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Why would they ever consider separating the saucer section before combat if it meant a huge reduction in phaser damage? The Starfleet primary weapon of choice. That's bc the smaller phaser strip on the front of the battle section does not mean it's not as effective as the primary array on the saucer. Perhaps more capacitors behind it then but bigger =/= better.
Seperating the Saucer and fly the engineering section into battle would only be done if more maneuverability was needed and/or if the families had to be saved.
The engineering section would try to stop the enemy in order to let the saucer escape.
Unlike as in STO this maneuver was purely defensive. (But of course Cryptic did missunderstood the whole concept behind it)
Btw: more advanced doesn't mean more powerful. My cell phone is more advanced (newer) then my Computer but strangely STO doesn't run on my cell phone...
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I'm not going to continue to argue just say I wholeheartedly disagree. I don't agree that bigger always means better. I suppose the only way to know is to ask the ST developers themselves. We may never get a definitive answer.
actually, i really love that someone mail that question to the people that made the serie and the technical manual to known their opinion about that.
Mass = inertia = turn rate = galaxy will always be a barge
A incredibly powerful one!
an no i don't want to be a bald frenchman, lol.
I think it should be obvious for everyone that a GCS isn't a Defiant, but i wouldn't call her a barge.
To be honest i can't remember her much less agile than a Sovereign.
But in STO the GCS has the same turn rate as a Jem Hadar Dreadnought Carrier, who came up with such an idea?
What kind of people are working at cryptic?
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
SoV and Galaxy are the same, battleships a in war. Sov faster and more agilie. While Gal is more carrying space. again Galaxy designed during peace, Sov war and they reflect that. Gal is explorer first, warship second. Sov warship first exploerer second. fire power wise they are different but equal. also as far as we know only 2 sovs existed during DW, Sovereign and Enterpise. They were gearing up for conflict and since they hadf the materials for galaxys they built them. for they are still useful.
And IDK what people are smoking that Starfleet wouldn't give Picard a stronger ship to captain after the loss of the D...HE'S THE HERO CHARACTER. Why give him a ship at all if they found him to be at fault. If anything because of his heroic acts they gave him the next line of flagships, THE SOVEREIGN CLASS.
Why doesn't Starfleet make anymore Galaxy class starships????????????? (They only completed existing hulls for the DW.)
Because the Sovereign is the new king of the hill.
If that were the case, then where were the Sovereigns during the DW?
Flagship is not the uber ship of the fleet. It is anything that is being used as a command platform for a flag officer of the fleet. Picard is a flag officer of the fleet. The Enterprise is the Federations most recognizable ship name. It has such a history of being so Federation that it's name has become synonymous with the values of the Federation that is has been deemed the Flagship for the Federation and by proxy, Star Fleet.
The Enterprise could never be a Defiant class vessel as combat is not what the Federation or Star Fleet are about. It has always been Peace and Exploration first. Defense and War second. As a result each vessel is built in an attempt to exemplify this.
That alone says that the Sovereign was not built for combat.
As they could not place the name Enterprise on a warship.
In the DW we saw several Galaxy vessels. In excess of the previously stated numbers.
So new ships had to have been completed after the Enterprise D.
There is nothing that say those ships were pulled out of mothballs. Or launched with nothing but a small crew and minimal functions outside of combat. Nothing.
You wouldn't slap an inexperienced crew, or even an experienced one, in your most expensive ship ever constructed. And send them to the front lines of the most devastating conflict that the Alpha Quadrant has ever experienced!
Remember Picards words in Encounter at Farpoint?
"Let's see what this Galaxy Class Starship can do."
I think he meant that quite literally. Also, shakedown cruises exist for a reason.
SoV and Galaxy are the same, battleships a in war. Sov faster and more agilie. While Gal is more carrying space. again Galaxy designed during peace, Sov war and they reflect that. Gal is explorer first, warship second. Sov warship first exploerer second. fire power wise they are different but equal. also as far as we know only 2 sovs existed during DW, Sovereign and Enterpise. They were gearing up for conflict and since they hadf the materials for galaxys they built them. for they are still useful.
The Galaxy was designed during a time of multiple conflicts.
The Sovereign was designed during a time of minimal conflicts.
The Defiant was designed with the Borg in mind, not the Sovereign.
While I wouldn't say that the Sovereign is a battleship. She is a Battle-Cruiser. And a Heavy one at that. Serious firepower for her frame.
Both are explorers first. Warships second. This would be in accordance with Federation ideals and Star Fleet ship doctrine as we have seen it.
yea... it is a barge.
going from the sov to the galaxy you are taking a big chunk out of the agility.
either that or:
tripple the output of the warp core over the sov
and
tripple the thrust of the fusion drives over the sovs
and
tripple the thrust or the rcs thrusters over the sovs
and
tripple the power used be the stardrive to reduce the mass
which is the cube square law in effect, if the ships share design comonality, doubling the volume, doubles the strength(squares), but tripples the weight(cubes).
But agility also works around the distribution of mass.
Something that if stretched out is a mile long will not turn as well as itself folded into a smaller tighter area. Also math.
Further more the GCS was shown as being exceptionally maneuverable for her size.
We see in Generations an example of extreme warp field control and power output when she turns on a dime and performs a low warp turn. Another example of a low warp turn that is not as tight is in Q Who.
In DS9 we see an example of an Ambassador and a Nebula Class executing a very tight turn, both are ships of significant mass. So mass is important but so is its distribution.
A Galaxy's mass is better distributed for agility than a Sovereign is.
Unless we are talkin barrel rolls. Then the Sovereign is ALL over that!
If we want to talk power requirements of both ships to execute a quick turn, then the GCS looses due to the energy required to move its mass. While the Sovereign, having a lower overall mass, requires less output to execute the same.
So the Sovereign is the more efficient ship for quick maneuvers due to a lower power output being required. The GCS may be every bit as quick and agile as the Sovereign, but it will literally pay for executing the same moves as it will take far more energy than the Sovereign to do so.
The Sovereign looks to be more of a sprinter build. It would be interesting to see its acceleration stats. Lol, yes I know it isn't really possibly. But it would be cool to see those kind of comparisons for fun.
Was just doing a quick look over of some of my ships and few shots I have.
The Sovereign appears to have 8 RCS Thrusters. 4 on the dish and 2 on each nacelle.
The Galaxy appears to have 14 RCS Thrusters. 4 on the dish 2 flanking the dish and 4 on each nacelle.
going from sov to galaxy size will lose you a good chunk of agility unless you significantly boost the amount of power you have dedicated to manoeuvring.
so the galaxy would need to have a power core with 3 times the output, requiring 3 times the fuel etc.
but that would mean the galaxy would increasingly roflstomp a sov in terms of weapons due to the power available to drive them.
numbers =/= actual thrust though.
the galaxy must have 3 times the thrust for it to maintain the agility of a sov.
cube-square rule
I agree.
But distribution is what I was looking more at.
As far as the amount of thrust provided by each for each of the ships?
I don't know. I would imagine that the Galaxy would have larger RCS thrusters due to her own size vs those of the Sovereign. But the Sovereign also has over sized engine everything. So I can't say for sure right now.
As far as power and size.
Last I heard, the Galaxy warpcore was anywhere from 2-2.5 times the size of the Sovereigns. Drunk can correct me if I am wrong.
So yeah, she would basically roflstomp the Sovereign.
The Galaxy is a beast man :cool:
I agree.
But distribution is what I was looking more at.
As far as the amount of thrust provided by each for each of the ships?
I don't know. I would imagine that the Galaxy would have larger RCS thrusters due to her own size vs those of the Sovereign. But the Sovereign also has over sized engine everything. So I can't say for sure right now.
As far as power and size.
Last I heard, the Galaxy warpcore was anywhere from 2-2.5 times the size of the Sovereigns. Drunk can correct me if I am wrong.
So yeah, she would basically roflstomp the Sovereign.
The Galaxy is a beast man :cool:
you forget the Sovs double sheilds and though not as big. which still means nothing to me. she has more advance weapons and more torp launchers. Why Galaxy can manuver well the sovs design decreased the stress of pulling the same manuver.
not even i would try to argue that the galaxy could out maneuver a sovereign, it doesn't even need to. its biggest guns have very nearly total 360 degree coverage, you cant out maneuver the guns.
here's a picture i like to post to give a real perspective of the size difference. helps to dispel the notion that they are in the same size class.
impulse engines have a drive coil that literally reduces the mass of the ship at all times. as far as power output goes, a M/AM core generate so much power its truly does not mater with regards to non warp operations. full battle alert with weapons and shields fully charged and at full combat impulse speed wouldn't use a tenth of the power traveling at high warp would. in fact the impulse engines, with the core off line, can do all that for a half hour before burning through all the deuterium, see ST: nemisis.
the size or power output of the core is not a tell for how powerful a ship will be in combat, top warp speed is what requires a powerful core. its why ships need m/am reactors and space stations, like DS9, dont. based on volume calculations ive seen of the single cylinder galaxy core, compared to the 5 or so cylinder sovereign core, it turns out the galaxy core is a bit bigger still. does that even mater? who knows, all that might mater is the center reaction chamber. its all made up stuff anyway.
as far as impulse reactors go, the 2 on the galaxy's saucers are basically the same size as the 2 the sovereign has, plus its got the 3rd even more powerful impulse engine on the star drive as well. unless its in combat, thats the only engine a galaxy tends to run on out of warp.
you forget the Sovs double sheilds and though not as big. which still means nothing to me. she has more advance weapons and more torp launchers. Why Galaxy can manuver well the sovs design decreased the stress of pulling the same manuver.
Shield systems can be replaced with the newest ones, that shouldn't be a problem. I doubt that later GCS don't have similar shield technology than sovereign class, just more powerful.
not even i would try to argue that the galaxy could out maneuver a sovereign, it doesn't even need to. its biggest guns have very nearly total 360 degree coverage, you cant out maneuver the guns.
here's a picture i like to post to give a real perspective of the size difference. helps to dispel the notion that they are in the same size class.
impulse engines have a drive coil that literally reduces the mass of the ship at all times. as far as power output goes, a M/AM core generate so much power its truly does not mater with regards to non warp operations. full battle alert with weapons and shields fully charged and at full combat impulse speed wouldn't use a tenth of the power traveling at high warp would. in fact the impulse engines, with the core off line, can do all that for a half hour before burning through all the deuterium, see ST: nemisis.
the size or power output of the core is not a tell for how powerful a ship will be in combat, top warp speed is what requires a powerful core. its why ships need m/am reactors and space stations, like DS9, dont. based on volume calculations ive seen of the single cylinder galaxy core, compared to the 5 or so cylinder sovereign core, it turns out the galaxy core is a bit bigger still. does that even mater? who knows, all that might mater is the center reaction chamber. its all made up stuff anyway.
as far as impulse reactors go, the 2 on the galaxy's saucers are basically the same size as the 2 the sovereign has, plus its got the 3rd even more powerful impulse engine on the star drive as well. unless its in combat, thats the only engine a galaxy tends to run on out of warp.
Honestly, i love reading your posts.
That comparison pictures look frightening , i wouldn't have estimated that the sov is that small compared to a GCS.
This raises the question why anyone with more than just the superficial trek knowledge (as game developers should be) make the Soverign the more powerful ship....
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
(...)That comparison pictures look frightening , i wouldn't have estimated that the sov is that small compared to a GCS.
This raises the question why anyone with more than just the superficial trek knowledge (as game developers should be) make the Soverign the more powerful ship....
Because based on "common knowledge" the Sovereign Class Enterprise "replaced" the Ent-D, thus the Ent-E is better.
You have to keep in mind aside from the Ent-E we never saw a single Sovereign Class Starship on-screen making it unique and marvelous. The comparission is really impressive as it shows tat the Sovereign is akin to a heavy cruiser and while heavily advanced (probably being the most advanced class in the alpha-quadrant at that time) is meant to replace the other "heavy cruiser" class vessels like anything from the still used Excelsior, Cheyenne, Ambassador and Akira classes. The Sovereign is once again a multi-mission heavy cruiser, perhaps with a more sophisticated tactical setup but ultimately it's supposed to be a "mass produced" vessel to replace the aforementioned ships. The Galaxy remains the largest in-canon vessel, the command ship with probably the greatest possible firepower.
Now, if we take a look at STO the Galaxy isn't that ship anymore. Wether we like it or not but the Star Cruiser and the Odyssey have probably taken her place though I cannot for the life of mine think about how Cryptic's Star Cruiser fits in there at all. Yes, it's the free T5 cruiser but if you think about it, they had to design and construct those 1000+ crew vessels in the relatively short span of 30-ish years while they also designed the Odyssey class which is now the biggest vessel... STO's lore just makes no sense
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Because based on "common knowledge" the Sovereign Class Enterprise "replaced" the Ent-D, thus the Ent-E is better.
You have to keep in mind aside from the Ent-E we never saw a single Sovereign Class Starship on-screen making it unique and marvelous. The comparission is really impressive as it shows tat the Sovereign is akin to a heavy cruiser and while heavily advanced (probably being the most advanced class in the alpha-quadrant at that time) is meant to replace the other "heavy cruiser" class vessels like anything from the still used Excelsior, Cheyenne, Ambassador and Akira classes. The Sovereign is once again a multi-mission heavy cruiser, perhaps with a more sophisticated tactical setup but ultimately it's supposed to be a "mass produced" vessel to replace the aforementioned ships.
You mean the sovereign is replacing the Excelsior?
That seems likeable, since the Excelsior is almost 130 years in service, at least it is more likely than the Sov. replacing the GCS. Not only that, but i think the relative similarity of the Sovereigns appearance to the Excelsior may even point to it.
The Galaxy remains the largest in-canon vessel, the command ship with probably the greatest possible firepower.
Now, if we take a look at STO the Galaxy isn't that ship anymore. Wether we like it or not but the Star Cruiser and the Odyssey have probably taken her place though I cannot for the life of mine think about how Cryptic's Star Cruiser fits in there at all. Yes, it's the free T5 cruiser but if you think about it, they had to design and construct those 1000+ crew vessels in the relatively short span of 30-ish years while they also designed the Odyssey class which is now the biggest vessel... STO's lore just makes no sense
True.
In my opinion, there was no need at all to introduce the Odyssey in the first place. If anything they should have given the GCS a BOFF/Console Rework to make it more practical in gameplay.
Especially since the GCS was designed to last veeeery long, every 5 years a small refit, every 25 years a complete overhaul, which means a total replacement of all ships systems (if i remember correctly).
So she was estimated a total lifetime of 100 years (not including future technologies that could make that huge spaceframe last even longer).
Again Cryptic did it wrong...:mad:
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Btw. there was never any (canon) statement that the -E was Starfleets Flagship.
As dontdrunk stated, Picard certainly wasn't rewarded with the command of Starfleet new flagship and certainly not with a more powerful ship, after he lost the -D in a wantonly negligent way.
I have to disagree here. It's a well known fact that the Enterprise is the flagship of the United Federation of Planets - it has been, it is and it always will be the flagship. The name Enterprise has a long tradition as the flagship of Starfleet that outlives any of it's Captains.
So yes, the Sovereign class Enterprise-E was in fact the Federation's flagship. If Starfleet considered Picard a fail for losing the "D" they wouldn't give him command of a new Enterprise, they'd assign him to another vessel. The certainly wouldn't take away the tradition and priviledge of being a flagship from the name "Enterprise" just because Picard has to command the Enterprise, because he in fact - doesn't.
Now, that being said, I'm inclined to agree with veraticus on what is being discussed here. What many people are missing is that the pinacle of Federation technology doesn't mean a Death Star. The Sovereign in the time of her creation was the pinacle of Federation technology, no doubt about it. And she was the flagship of the UFP. What people have to realize is that Starfleet's philosophy doesn't revolve around big guns or killing stuff. They are explorers and scientists first and foremost and you can expect their flagship to represent those ideals.
Let's start with the Galaxy class - It is big, bulky and carries the largest guns in Starfleet. Yet, that same Galaxy class Enterprise-D carried civilians, crew member families with children, had schools, recreational facilities, etc. on board. In my opinion the most noble and forward thinking idea I've come across in Trek. The point is - even the ship with the largest guns in Starfleet was not designed to destroy stuff. If it were, it wouldn't have children on board. The big guns were suposed to help protect the civilans on board and deter any potential enemy for long enough for the Galaxy to scram.
Now the Sovereign - made more compact than the Galaxy. Reduced people on board because of no civilians, Starfleet probably calculated that it's too much of a risk for the time being. Therefore there was less need for space in terms of accomodations, facilities, etc. So we have a Sovereign that is smaller, but new with all the technology advancements installed. Yet, the big ol' Galaxy, being the most modular ship ever designed by Starfleet can be refitted with the same technology without any issues. And when this happens, it will probably kick the Sovereign's behind.
But that's not the point here. The new Starfleet flagship, the Sovereign class is not a warship. Just like the Galaxy before was not a warship. They're both explorers. So when Starfleet decided to design a Sovereign without all those added facilities for civilians and more personel, they didn't think "Hey, but let's make this ship even bigger, so it can have bigger phaser arrays". They wanted a compact ship that could acomodate it's crew size and preform well in the role it was intended for - exploration. And give it staying firepower enough to resolve certain hostilities or bad situations, or cover it's behind before it scrams. Just like tha Galaxy class, which was designed with the intent of sacrificing those big phaser arrays to enable the saucer with civilians to run away if neccessary, while the starboard section buys them time.
You see, Starfleet does not send their ships to kill the galaxy, they send them to explore it. So the basic idea behind those large ships that go on long deep space mission is not for them to be able to kill anything they encounter, but rather protect themselves from potential hostilities.
It's a thing of philosphy, values and beliefs. The UFP will not start a war with anyone, it's not what they do. They have no need to consider going into a offensive war, if it happens they'll fall back on their amazing technology and establishing defense perimeters with planetary defenses and whole fleets stationed to protect a planet.
Yes, they can make ships that can kick TRIBBLE. They did make one of the most menacing ships ever created - the Defiant class. Leave it to Sisko to design a ship that can throw a punch.
But even those Defiants were made with protection and establishing defence perimeters in mind. Could you imagine a Defiant class on a long mission in deep space? The crew would go mad.
Plain and simple - Starfleet does not make ships with the intent of going into an offensive war. There are other species in Star Trek that represent that philosphy. Starfleet will not make Vor'chas designed only with raw firepower in mind for conquering worlds and expanding the Empire like the Klingons.
So it's pretty plausible for the Galaxy class, if reffited with the latest technology, to be far more powerfull than the Sovereign and yet the Sovereign to be the flagship of the UFP. Because the UFP flagship is the one that represents the ideals of the Federation and serves as an ambassador to new species, not the one that hits the hardest. That's why the "D" with children on board was the flagship in her time.
You mean the sovereign is replacing the Excelsior?
That seems likeable, since the Excelsior is almost 130 years in service, at least it is more likely than the Sov. replacing the GCS. Not only that, but i think the relative similarity of the Sovereigns appearance to the Excelsior may even point to it. (...)
At least I think so. All those vessels (Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador with a question mark since they never really produced many of those I think) are roughly one "weight class". I think the Sovereign is an attempt to streamline that entire "line" of heavy cruisers so that you can produce Sovereign Class ships in many shipyards and replace all of those aforementioned. The Sovereign class can easily be explorer, patrolcraft, diplomatic vessel and confrontation cruiser - this way you don't have to patch your taskforces together using (exaggerated) twenty ship classes.
If you think about it, Starfleet really has only three to four major lines of vessels: Light cruisers that are meant for short to mid range missions and supportive escort duty which are probably Miranda/Constellation (which do seem to get phased out eventually), Centaur, Steamrunner, Norway, Sabre Classes.
Medium cruisers like the Intrepid and possibly the New Orleans class or Caeger Class (maybe even Springfield, another one of those classes that never really "existed") that may have very special tasks (the intrepid being a deep-space long range vessel and the others... we don't know )
Heavy cruisers like the Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador, Nebula and Sovereign, whereas the Sovereign could replace all of those except for the Nebula which still would have it's use due to the mission pod
All other ships are kinda specialized classes. Oberth, Olympic and Nova are not really suitable for combat and see scientific/humanitarian missions above all else, the Defiant and the Prometheus being dedicated battleships for tactical situations and the Galaxy being the "flagship"/command ship not only in a military sense but for example being in command of a whole colonization operation with it's huge storage capabilities and auxilliary craft.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I have to disagree here. It's a well known fact that the Enterprise is the flagship of the United Federation of Planets - it has been, it is and it always will be the flagship. The name Enterprise has a long tradition as the flagship of Starfleet that outlives any of it's Captains.
So yes, the Sovereign class Enterprise-E was in fact the Federation's flagship. If Starfleet considered Picard a fail for losing the "D" they wouldn't give him command of a new Enterprise, they'd assign him to another vessel. The certainly wouldn't take away the tradition and priviledge of being a flagship from the name "Enterprise" just because Picard has to command the Enterprise, because he in fact - doesn't.
Now, that being said, I'm inclined to agree with veraticus on what is being discussed here. What many people are missing is that the pinacle of Federation technology doesn't mean a Death Star. The Sovereign in the time of her creation was the pinacle of Federation technology, no doubt about it. And she was the flagship of the UFP. What people have to realize is that Starfleet's philosophy doesn't revolve around big guns or killing stuff. They are explorers and scientists first and foremost and you can expect their flagship to represent those ideals....
I don't think that every ship called Enterprise automaticly becomes the Flagship, that would be nonsense. What if the ship gets destroyed (the -D) or outdated (Kirks ship)?
About Picard, he left his ship in a potential dangeous situation and let his first officer carelessly loose it. I think every military court would be right to degrade him and put him to a desktop office.
Giving him a sovereign was more than he deserved IMO, especially since he always was the most professional Captain of them all.
As stated many times here, the -D was just a demonstration of federation ethics, not on a exploration or military assignment. So having Families on board wasn't that much of a problem.
Later ships (especially at and after the DW) certainly didn't have families on board, it just wasn't practical at all.
Btw. i never stated that the GCS was build to be a battleship, it was build as a Multi mission ship which includes being a combat vessel, that's a difference IMO. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion would think that "real" Starfleet is something like Cryptics bizarre Starfleet travesty.
I just meant that the "real" GCS isn't nearly as toothless than Cryptics Galaxy -R. I mean how wrong can someone make a ship for a video game? Especially since just that ship is the best documented of them all...
I don't get it, really.
Another point is that the design of a Starship thake much longer than just a few years. The Sovereign cannot be designed and build to replace the GCS, that would be nonsense, since the GCS is still early in her life. Such a big project as the Galaxy Class won't be replaced in the next 80 years.
It makes much more sense if the Sov. was supposed to replace the Excelsior, heck they even look much alike.
Just look at Dontdrunks comparison graphics, it clearly shows that the GCS and Sov. aren't even in the same league.
So i think both ships have their place in Starfleet, one is a less expensive but mass production capable ship and the other a expensive and huge multi mission ship. I don't see any problem with that.
Don't missunderstand me, there is nothing wrong with the Sov. being a Excelsior replacement, i think making her next enterprise is much more handy for the writers, since it is always difficult to create situations where the most powerful ship is in danger.
At least I think so. All those vessels (Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador with a question mark since they never really produced many of those I think) are roughly one "weight class". I think the Sovereign is an attempt to streamline that entire "line" of heavy cruisers so that you can produce Sovereign Class ships in many shipyards and replace all of those aforementioned. The Sovereign class can easily be explorer, patrolcraft, diplomatic vessel and confrontation cruiser - this way you don't have to patch your taskforces together using (exaggerated) twenty ship classes.
If you think about it, Starfleet really has only three to four major lines of vessels: Light cruisers that are meant for short to mid range missions and supportive escort duty which are probably Miranda/Constellation (which do seem to get phased out eventually), Centaur, Steamrunner, Norway, Sabre Classes.
Medium cruisers like the Intrepid and possibly the New Orleans class that may have very special tasks (the intrepid being a deep-space long range vessel and the new orleans... we don't know )
Heavy cruisers like the Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador, Nebula and Sovereign, whereas the Sovereign could replace all of those except for the Nebula which still would have it's use due to the mission pod
All other ships are kinda specialized classes. Oberth, Olympic and Nova are not really suitable for combat and see scientific/humanitarian missions above all else, the Defiant and the Prometheus being dedicated battleships for tactical situations and the Galaxy being the "flagship"/command ship not only in a military sense but for example being in command of a whole colonization operation with it's huge storage capabilities and auxilliary craft.
That would be a appropriate arrangement for starfleet ships in STO, instead of Escort/Crusier/Science !
I agree with you that the GCS and the Nebula are exceptions. The Nebula a much more science oriented smaller/more compact version of the GCS and the Galaxy being almost a mobile Starbase.
I think Cryptic did the common mistake to fall into gigantism, completely forgetting that a ship like the GCS is HUGE and almost too big, creating a ship like the Odyssey is rediculus IMO. Especially so "short" after the GCS, if anything a ship the size of the Odyssey should be introduced in the late 25th beginning 26th century IMHO.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I don't think that every ship called Enterprise automaticly becomes the Flagship, that would be nonsense.
Actually, not only it's not nonsence in Star Trek terms, but something that Starfleet clearly was and is doing throughout the whole history of Star Trek. The U.S.S. Enterprise is the flagship of the U.F.P. in any of her incarnations.
About Picard, he left his ship in a potential dangeous situation and let his first officer carelessly loose it. I think every military court would be right to degrade him and put him to a desktop office.
Giving him a sovereign was more than he deserved IMO, especially since he always was the most professional Captain of them all.
Starfleet is not a military organization, therefore I'm not sure a military court would apply, especially for the circumistances during the loss of the "D". Starfleet has a different angle on dealing with things.
Now, first of all I'll say that only the first part of my post was a reply to the part of your post I quoted. I say this because I think that there's some communication issues following.
As stated many times here, the -D was just a demonstration of federation ethics, not on a exploration or military assignment. So having Families on board wasn't that much of a problem.
Later ships (especially at and after the DW) certainly didn't have families on board, it just wasn't practical at all.
That's what I said as well. The "D" was the flagship and was configured like that so it represents the Federation philosphy, ethics and beliefs.
Configured for pure raw combat it's probably the most powerfull (except the Odyssey in STO terms, but I don't know where and how that one fits) ship in Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that she would neccessarily must be the flagship.
Btw. i never stated that the GCS was build to be a battleship, it was build as a Multi mission ship which includes being a combat vessel, that's a difference IMO. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion would think that "real" Starfleet is something like Cryptics bizarre Starfleet travesty.
Ok, now I'm really feeling like I'm falling into a parallel universe. Just to clarify, is this part here aimed as a reply to my post?
Because I never came to the conclusion that Starfleet is something like what Cryptic is portraying it to be in STO, quite the opposite actually.
I just meant that the "real" GCS isn't nearly as toothless than Cryptics Galaxy -R. I mean how wrong can someone make a ship for a video game? Especially since just that ship is the best documented of them all...
I don't get it, really.
Ofcourse it's not. My Renault Megane has more teeth than Cryptic's Galaxy-R. :P
You get no argument from me there, based on everything that we've seen in the shows and the tech manual, the Galaxy's interpretation in STO makes little to no sense.
Another point is that the design of a Starship thake much longer than just a few years. The Sovereign cannot be designed and build to replace the GCS, that would be nonsense, since the GCS is still early in her life. Such a big project as the Galaxy Class won't be replaced in the next 80 years.
It makes much more sense if the Sov. was supposed to replace the Excelsior, heck they even look much alike.
Just look at Dontdrunks comparison graphics, it clearly shows that the GCS and Sov. aren't even in the same league.
So i think both ships have their place in Starfleet, one is a less expensive but mass production capable ship and the other a expensive and huge multi mission ship. I don't see any problem with that.
True, the Sovereign was probably not designed with the intent of replacing the Galaxy class. However, circumistances allowed the Sovereign to bear the name Enterprise and become the next flagship of the Federation, due to the loss of the Enterprise-D.
If the "D" haven't been lost, she probably would continue her jorney as the flagship of the Federation, she was created with a lifespan of 100 years anyway.
But after that, Starfleet probably reevaluated their position on civilians and families on board ships and taking that into consideration, they decided to make the new, more advanced and more compact Sovereign the next Enterprise and give it to Picard and his crew. Now, I'm not saying there are no holes in the theory or the writing of Trek, but this can easily be explained by - without the excees need of space and facilities on board because of civilian personel, Picard's crew will do a good job in the smaller, more fitted to the number of crew and it's intended role - Sovereign.
I never said that the Sovereign was designed to replace the Galaxy. That would be stupid taking into consideration that a Galaxy class is suposed to be the most modular design in Starfleet with a lifespan of over 100 years.
What I'm saying is that the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy as the flagship of the Federation. Not replacing the ship or class itself, but the position of flagship. Starfleet obviously doesn't consider the flagship the most powerfull one, or the largest one, etc. They probably have a different thing going on there regarding that. For ex. - look at the Excelsior. It was better than the Connie in every possible way, it was better than the Connie Refit and yet the flagship Enterprise remained a Constitution class, only slightly refited rather than fully going Excelsior. (I'm obviously talking about the "A", since the "B" was an Excelsior)
Don't missunderstand me, there is nothing wrong with the Sov. being a Excelsior replacement, i think making her next enterprise is much more handy for the writers, since it is always difficult to create situations where the most powerful ship is in danger.
Well, I can't quite agree with this simply because they had no problems creating situations with the most powerfull ship in danger during the entire TNG.
What I think happened is they wanted something new and shiny, to breathe in a bit of the new visual efects tech. and refresh the look of the TNG movies, so they came up with a ridiculous way to dispose of the "D" as soon as possible, so they can introduce the new shiny and refreshing Sovereign as the new Enterprise. Purely for marketing reasons if you ask me. Remember we are Trek fans, but the writing for Trek was less than stellar on quite a few ocassions.
Actually, not only it's not nonsence in Star Trek terms, but something that Starfleet clearly was and is doing throughout the whole history of Star Trek. The U.S.S. Enterprise is the flagship of the U.F.P. in any of her incarnations.
...
Then a new Enterprise-E is comissioned.
...
Is suceeded by Enterprise-B.
What in the meantime? Starfleet without a Flagship for several years?
Anyway, there is absolutely NO canon indication whatsoever that any other Enterprise besides the -D was starfleets Flagship, ever.
Please check some reliable sources if you don't belive me.
You just assume the others where flagships too, but in canon there isn't any clue that would confirm that.
That's what I said as well. The "D" was the flagship and was configured like that so it represents the Federation philosphy, ethics and beliefs.
Configured for pure raw combat it's probably the most powerfull (except the Odyssey in STO terms, but I don't know where and how that one fits) ship in Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that she would neccessarily must be the flagship.
Ok, now I'm really feeling like I'm falling into a parallel universe. Just to clarify, is this part here aimed as a reply to my post?
Because I never came to the conclusion that Starfleet is something like what Cryptic is portraying it to be in STO, quite the opposite actually.
No, but your statements indicated that you where thinking i would belive Starfleet was a primary militaric organisation, similar to Cryptics Starfleet.
Ofcourse it's not. My Renault Megane has more teeth than Cryptic's Galaxy-R. :P
You get no argument from me there, based on everything that we've seen in the shows and the tech manual, the Galaxy's interpretation in STO makes little to no sense.
I never said that the Sovereign was designed to replace the Galaxy. That would be stupid taking into consideration that a Galaxy class is suposed to be the most modular design in Starfleet with a lifespan of over 100 years.
What I'm saying is that the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy as the flagship of the Federation. Not replacing the ship or class itself, but the position of flagship.
...
Well, I can't quite agree with this simply because they had no problems creating situations with the most powerfull ship in danger during the entire TNG.
What I think happened is they wanted something new and shiny, to breathe in a bit of the new visual efects tech. and refresh the look of the TNG movies, so they came up with a ridiculous way to dispose of the "D" as soon as possible, so they can introduce the new shiny and refreshing Sovereign as the new Enterprise. Purely for marketing reasons if you ask me. Remember we are Trek fans, but the writing for Trek was less than stellar on quite a few ocassions.
Outside ST universe:
In my opinion they just got rid of the GCS, because they wanted a new ship that resembles more Kirks Enterprise more.
For me, the Sovereign has much more similarities to a Constitution refit than a GCS. So i think they just wanted to show the audience a more familiar ship.
If they would have been ok with the Style of the GCS, they easily could have updated the Design in the next Movie without problem. (maybe something like STOs venture Class but without the ugly engineering section and the too close pylons)
They reworked Kirks ship too, at TMP.
A completely new ship but they kept the general design. But ST:8 showed a completely different design than a Galaxy Class.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
yes, even the exelsior, this ship can be quite tanky if you want to but...
i was speaking in an earlier post ( i don't remember if it is this thread ) that what is important, is the balance between offence and defense.
the exelsior have acces to ltcommander tact slot ( cstore version ) wich make all the difference, combine with it better turn rate and inertia.
he is not just a punchbag, he can also punch back more consistently, that is what save him.
if a player specced this ship more in defense than offense he is missusing the ship exactly like a star cruiser specced for damage would be.
every fed cruiser can serve as punchbag but some will be better at it than other.
but on the other hand, not every fed cruiser have the abilitie to "punch back" consistently.
I run a cannon/180 Q-torp/turret Fleet Excel, it can "punch back", but only in a limited manner. If a person uses beams, BO3 might give a good single hit punch, but the power drain (even with engineer bonus's, EPTX, Aux2batt, etc.) makes the following shots weak. CRF2 is helpful, but more for critting' and procs' than actual "balanced" pain giving. If Beam Overload wasn't such a drain to the system, I would be more inclined to agree with you.
The bane of cruisers is that the Engie' Boff skils, especially damage/debuff skills are much weaker than the other two Boff classes.
It has been figured that the Soverreign was a long running program. Idea was if need to quickly produce a more tactical ship when needed. thus every 10 years a design team meets and redsigns the ship for the latest tech. When conflict was becoming more likely and most of the first gen Gals dead the decided to bring her out. Also for Enterprise. Only D and E confirmed that they are flagships. the rest just famous ships like Hood or Constitution. Thus why i also go with Yamato haven't the first stated name not Okuda's.
Akira though in from succeds Mirada but funtion replaces Excel. Galaxy still had use and did well in DW but she's a peace leaning multi mission ship. Sov is tacitcal leaning ship. but like most ships Starfleet makes can function in peace or war.
Comments
Starfleet would be foolish not to upgrade its biggest investment with the newest weapons availlable.
And yes Dontdrunk is right, the GCS is still the most powerful (canon) ship starfleet has. The sovereign replaces now the aging Ambassador and the ancient Excelsior Class (finally:D).
Btw. there was never any (canon) statement that the -E was Starfleets Flagship.
As dontdrunk stated, Picard certainly wasn't rewarded with the command of Starfleet new flagship and certainly not with a more powerful ship, after he lost the -D in a wantonly negligent way.
Personally, i just can't belive that with the experience of the -Ds 7 year mission and the following Dominion War, future Galaxy Classes (non representative ships) are being outfitted with families and other extreme luxury stuff anymore, like the Enterprise -D was.
Just imagine such a huge powerful ship completely outfitted with the newest technology, defensive and offensive systems, jam-packed with additional fusion recators, redundant computer cores and additional shield emitters.
If such a ship is manned with a professional and tactical trained crew, most of the dangerous stituations the -D ran into wouldn't be a big problem for such a ship.
Seperating the Saucer and fly the engineering section into battle would only be done if more maneuverability was needed and/or if the families had to be saved.
The engineering section would try to stop the enemy in order to let the saucer escape.
Unlike as in STO this maneuver was purely defensive. (But of course Cryptic did missunderstood the whole concept behind it)
Btw: more advanced doesn't mean more powerful. My cell phone is more advanced (newer) then my Computer but strangely STO doesn't run on my cell phone...
actually, i really love that someone mail that question to the people that made the serie and the technical manual to known their opinion about that.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
A incredibly powerful one!
an no i don't want to be a bald frenchman, lol.
I think it should be obvious for everyone that a GCS isn't a Defiant, but i wouldn't call her a barge.
To be honest i can't remember her much less agile than a Sovereign.
But in STO the GCS has the same turn rate as a Jem Hadar Dreadnought Carrier, who came up with such an idea?
What kind of people are working at cryptic?
If that were the case, then where were the Sovereigns during the DW?
Flagship is not the uber ship of the fleet. It is anything that is being used as a command platform for a flag officer of the fleet. Picard is a flag officer of the fleet. The Enterprise is the Federations most recognizable ship name. It has such a history of being so Federation that it's name has become synonymous with the values of the Federation that is has been deemed the Flagship for the Federation and by proxy, Star Fleet.
The Enterprise could never be a Defiant class vessel as combat is not what the Federation or Star Fleet are about. It has always been Peace and Exploration first. Defense and War second. As a result each vessel is built in an attempt to exemplify this.
That alone says that the Sovereign was not built for combat.
As they could not place the name Enterprise on a warship.
In the DW we saw several Galaxy vessels. In excess of the previously stated numbers.
So new ships had to have been completed after the Enterprise D.
There is nothing that say those ships were pulled out of mothballs. Or launched with nothing but a small crew and minimal functions outside of combat. Nothing.
You wouldn't slap an inexperienced crew, or even an experienced one, in your most expensive ship ever constructed. And send them to the front lines of the most devastating conflict that the Alpha Quadrant has ever experienced!
Remember Picards words in Encounter at Farpoint?
"Let's see what this Galaxy Class Starship can do."
I think he meant that quite literally. Also, shakedown cruises exist for a reason.
The Galaxy was designed during a time of multiple conflicts.
The Sovereign was designed during a time of minimal conflicts.
The Defiant was designed with the Borg in mind, not the Sovereign.
While I wouldn't say that the Sovereign is a battleship. She is a Battle-Cruiser. And a Heavy one at that. Serious firepower for her frame.
Both are explorers first. Warships second. This would be in accordance with Federation ideals and Star Fleet ship doctrine as we have seen it.
But agility also works around the distribution of mass.
Something that if stretched out is a mile long will not turn as well as itself folded into a smaller tighter area. Also math.
Further more the GCS was shown as being exceptionally maneuverable for her size.
We see in Generations an example of extreme warp field control and power output when she turns on a dime and performs a low warp turn. Another example of a low warp turn that is not as tight is in Q Who.
In DS9 we see an example of an Ambassador and a Nebula Class executing a very tight turn, both are ships of significant mass. So mass is important but so is its distribution.
A Galaxy's mass is better distributed for agility than a Sovereign is.
Unless we are talkin barrel rolls. Then the Sovereign is ALL over that!
If we want to talk power requirements of both ships to execute a quick turn, then the GCS looses due to the energy required to move its mass. While the Sovereign, having a lower overall mass, requires less output to execute the same.
So the Sovereign is the more efficient ship for quick maneuvers due to a lower power output being required. The GCS may be every bit as quick and agile as the Sovereign, but it will literally pay for executing the same moves as it will take far more energy than the Sovereign to do so.
The Sovereign looks to be more of a sprinter build. It would be interesting to see its acceleration stats. Lol, yes I know it isn't really possibly. But it would be cool to see those kind of comparisons for fun.
Was just doing a quick look over of some of my ships and few shots I have.
The Sovereign appears to have 8 RCS Thrusters. 4 on the dish and 2 on each nacelle.
The Galaxy appears to have 14 RCS Thrusters. 4 on the dish 2 flanking the dish and 4 on each nacelle.
I agree.
But distribution is what I was looking more at.
As far as the amount of thrust provided by each for each of the ships?
I don't know. I would imagine that the Galaxy would have larger RCS thrusters due to her own size vs those of the Sovereign. But the Sovereign also has over sized engine everything. So I can't say for sure right now.
As far as power and size.
Last I heard, the Galaxy warpcore was anywhere from 2-2.5 times the size of the Sovereigns. Drunk can correct me if I am wrong.
So yeah, she would basically roflstomp the Sovereign.
The Galaxy is a beast man :cool:
you forget the Sovs double sheilds and though not as big. which still means nothing to me. she has more advance weapons and more torp launchers. Why Galaxy can manuver well the sovs design decreased the stress of pulling the same manuver.
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8792/3axissizecompare.jpg
here's a picture i like to post to give a real perspective of the size difference. helps to dispel the notion that they are in the same size class.
impulse engines have a drive coil that literally reduces the mass of the ship at all times. as far as power output goes, a M/AM core generate so much power its truly does not mater with regards to non warp operations. full battle alert with weapons and shields fully charged and at full combat impulse speed wouldn't use a tenth of the power traveling at high warp would. in fact the impulse engines, with the core off line, can do all that for a half hour before burning through all the deuterium, see ST: nemisis.
the size or power output of the core is not a tell for how powerful a ship will be in combat, top warp speed is what requires a powerful core. its why ships need m/am reactors and space stations, like DS9, dont. based on volume calculations ive seen of the single cylinder galaxy core, compared to the 5 or so cylinder sovereign core, it turns out the galaxy core is a bit bigger still. does that even mater? who knows, all that might mater is the center reaction chamber. its all made up stuff anyway.
as far as impulse reactors go, the 2 on the galaxy's saucers are basically the same size as the 2 the sovereign has, plus its got the 3rd even more powerful impulse engine on the star drive as well. unless its in combat, thats the only engine a galaxy tends to run on out of warp.
Honestly, i love reading your posts.
That comparison pictures look frightening
This raises the question why anyone with more than just the superficial trek knowledge (as game developers should be) make the Soverign the more powerful ship....
Because based on "common knowledge" the Sovereign Class Enterprise "replaced" the Ent-D, thus the Ent-E is better.
You have to keep in mind aside from the Ent-E we never saw a single Sovereign Class Starship on-screen making it unique and marvelous. The comparission is really impressive as it shows tat the Sovereign is akin to a heavy cruiser and while heavily advanced (probably being the most advanced class in the alpha-quadrant at that time) is meant to replace the other "heavy cruiser" class vessels like anything from the still used Excelsior, Cheyenne, Ambassador and Akira classes. The Sovereign is once again a multi-mission heavy cruiser, perhaps with a more sophisticated tactical setup but ultimately it's supposed to be a "mass produced" vessel to replace the aforementioned ships. The Galaxy remains the largest in-canon vessel, the command ship with probably the greatest possible firepower.
Now, if we take a look at STO the Galaxy isn't that ship anymore. Wether we like it or not but the Star Cruiser and the Odyssey have probably taken her place though I cannot for the life of mine think about how Cryptic's Star Cruiser fits in there at all. Yes, it's the free T5 cruiser but if you think about it, they had to design and construct those 1000+ crew vessels in the relatively short span of 30-ish years while they also designed the Odyssey class which is now the biggest vessel... STO's lore just makes no sense
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
That seems likeable, since the Excelsior is almost 130 years in service, at least it is more likely than the Sov. replacing the GCS. Not only that, but i think the relative similarity of the Sovereigns appearance to the Excelsior may even point to it.
True.
In my opinion, there was no need at all to introduce the Odyssey in the first place. If anything they should have given the GCS a BOFF/Console Rework to make it more practical in gameplay.
Especially since the GCS was designed to last veeeery long, every 5 years a small refit, every 25 years a complete overhaul, which means a total replacement of all ships systems (if i remember correctly).
So she was estimated a total lifetime of 100 years (not including future technologies that could make that huge spaceframe last even longer).
Again Cryptic did it wrong...:mad:
I have to disagree here. It's a well known fact that the Enterprise is the flagship of the United Federation of Planets - it has been, it is and it always will be the flagship. The name Enterprise has a long tradition as the flagship of Starfleet that outlives any of it's Captains.
So yes, the Sovereign class Enterprise-E was in fact the Federation's flagship. If Starfleet considered Picard a fail for losing the "D" they wouldn't give him command of a new Enterprise, they'd assign him to another vessel. The certainly wouldn't take away the tradition and priviledge of being a flagship from the name "Enterprise" just because Picard has to command the Enterprise, because he in fact - doesn't.
Now, that being said, I'm inclined to agree with veraticus on what is being discussed here. What many people are missing is that the pinacle of Federation technology doesn't mean a Death Star. The Sovereign in the time of her creation was the pinacle of Federation technology, no doubt about it. And she was the flagship of the UFP. What people have to realize is that Starfleet's philosophy doesn't revolve around big guns or killing stuff. They are explorers and scientists first and foremost and you can expect their flagship to represent those ideals.
Let's start with the Galaxy class - It is big, bulky and carries the largest guns in Starfleet. Yet, that same Galaxy class Enterprise-D carried civilians, crew member families with children, had schools, recreational facilities, etc. on board. In my opinion the most noble and forward thinking idea I've come across in Trek. The point is - even the ship with the largest guns in Starfleet was not designed to destroy stuff. If it were, it wouldn't have children on board. The big guns were suposed to help protect the civilans on board and deter any potential enemy for long enough for the Galaxy to scram.
Now the Sovereign - made more compact than the Galaxy. Reduced people on board because of no civilians, Starfleet probably calculated that it's too much of a risk for the time being. Therefore there was less need for space in terms of accomodations, facilities, etc. So we have a Sovereign that is smaller, but new with all the technology advancements installed. Yet, the big ol' Galaxy, being the most modular ship ever designed by Starfleet can be refitted with the same technology without any issues. And when this happens, it will probably kick the Sovereign's behind.
But that's not the point here. The new Starfleet flagship, the Sovereign class is not a warship. Just like the Galaxy before was not a warship. They're both explorers. So when Starfleet decided to design a Sovereign without all those added facilities for civilians and more personel, they didn't think "Hey, but let's make this ship even bigger, so it can have bigger phaser arrays". They wanted a compact ship that could acomodate it's crew size and preform well in the role it was intended for - exploration. And give it staying firepower enough to resolve certain hostilities or bad situations, or cover it's behind before it scrams. Just like tha Galaxy class, which was designed with the intent of sacrificing those big phaser arrays to enable the saucer with civilians to run away if neccessary, while the starboard section buys them time.
You see, Starfleet does not send their ships to kill the galaxy, they send them to explore it. So the basic idea behind those large ships that go on long deep space mission is not for them to be able to kill anything they encounter, but rather protect themselves from potential hostilities.
It's a thing of philosphy, values and beliefs. The UFP will not start a war with anyone, it's not what they do. They have no need to consider going into a offensive war, if it happens they'll fall back on their amazing technology and establishing defense perimeters with planetary defenses and whole fleets stationed to protect a planet.
Yes, they can make ships that can kick TRIBBLE. They did make one of the most menacing ships ever created - the Defiant class. Leave it to Sisko to design a ship that can throw a punch.
But even those Defiants were made with protection and establishing defence perimeters in mind. Could you imagine a Defiant class on a long mission in deep space? The crew would go mad.
Plain and simple - Starfleet does not make ships with the intent of going into an offensive war. There are other species in Star Trek that represent that philosphy. Starfleet will not make Vor'chas designed only with raw firepower in mind for conquering worlds and expanding the Empire like the Klingons.
So it's pretty plausible for the Galaxy class, if reffited with the latest technology, to be far more powerfull than the Sovereign and yet the Sovereign to be the flagship of the UFP. Because the UFP flagship is the one that represents the ideals of the Federation and serves as an ambassador to new species, not the one that hits the hardest. That's why the "D" with children on board was the flagship in her time.
At least I think so. All those vessels (Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador with a question mark since they never really produced many of those I think) are roughly one "weight class". I think the Sovereign is an attempt to streamline that entire "line" of heavy cruisers so that you can produce Sovereign Class ships in many shipyards and replace all of those aforementioned. The Sovereign class can easily be explorer, patrolcraft, diplomatic vessel and confrontation cruiser - this way you don't have to patch your taskforces together using (exaggerated) twenty ship classes.
If you think about it, Starfleet really has only three to four major lines of vessels: Light cruisers that are meant for short to mid range missions and supportive escort duty which are probably Miranda/Constellation (which do seem to get phased out eventually), Centaur, Steamrunner, Norway, Sabre Classes.
Medium cruisers like the Intrepid and possibly the New Orleans class or Caeger Class (maybe even Springfield, another one of those classes that never really "existed") that may have very special tasks (the intrepid being a deep-space long range vessel and the others... we don't know
Heavy cruisers like the Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador, Nebula and Sovereign, whereas the Sovereign could replace all of those except for the Nebula which still would have it's use due to the mission pod
All other ships are kinda specialized classes. Oberth, Olympic and Nova are not really suitable for combat and see scientific/humanitarian missions above all else, the Defiant and the Prometheus being dedicated battleships for tactical situations and the Galaxy being the "flagship"/command ship not only in a military sense but for example being in command of a whole colonization operation with it's huge storage capabilities and auxilliary craft.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
About Picard, he left his ship in a potential dangeous situation and let his first officer carelessly loose it. I think every military court would be right to degrade him and put him to a desktop office.
Giving him a sovereign was more than he deserved IMO, especially since he always was the most professional Captain of them all.
As stated many times here, the -D was just a demonstration of federation ethics, not on a exploration or military assignment. So having Families on board wasn't that much of a problem.
Later ships (especially at and after the DW) certainly didn't have families on board, it just wasn't practical at all.
Btw. i never stated that the GCS was build to be a battleship, it was build as a Multi mission ship which includes being a combat vessel, that's a difference IMO. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion would think that "real" Starfleet is something like Cryptics bizarre Starfleet travesty.
I just meant that the "real" GCS isn't nearly as toothless than Cryptics Galaxy -R. I mean how wrong can someone make a ship for a video game? Especially since just that ship is the best documented of them all...
I don't get it, really.
Another point is that the design of a Starship thake much longer than just a few years. The Sovereign cannot be designed and build to replace the GCS, that would be nonsense, since the GCS is still early in her life. Such a big project as the Galaxy Class won't be replaced in the next 80 years.
It makes much more sense if the Sov. was supposed to replace the Excelsior, heck they even look much alike.
Just look at Dontdrunks comparison graphics, it clearly shows that the GCS and Sov. aren't even in the same league.
So i think both ships have their place in Starfleet, one is a less expensive but mass production capable ship and the other a expensive and huge multi mission ship. I don't see any problem with that.
Don't missunderstand me, there is nothing wrong with the Sov. being a Excelsior replacement, i think making her next enterprise is much more handy for the writers, since it is always difficult to create situations where the most powerful ship is in danger.
That would be a appropriate arrangement for starfleet ships in STO, instead of Escort/Crusier/Science !
I agree with you that the GCS and the Nebula are exceptions. The Nebula a much more science oriented smaller/more compact version of the GCS and the Galaxy being almost a mobile Starbase.
I think Cryptic did the common mistake to fall into gigantism, completely forgetting that a ship like the GCS is HUGE and almost too big, creating a ship like the Odyssey is rediculus IMO. Especially so "short" after the GCS, if anything a ship the size of the Odyssey should be introduced in the late 25th beginning 26th century IMHO.
Actually, not only it's not nonsence in Star Trek terms, but something that Starfleet clearly was and is doing throughout the whole history of Star Trek. The U.S.S. Enterprise is the flagship of the U.F.P. in any of her incarnations.
Then a new Enterprise-E is comissioned.
Is suceeded by Enterprise-B.
Starfleet is not a military organization, therefore I'm not sure a military court would apply, especially for the circumistances during the loss of the "D". Starfleet has a different angle on dealing with things.
Now, first of all I'll say that only the first part of my post was a reply to the part of your post I quoted. I say this because I think that there's some communication issues following.
That's what I said as well. The "D" was the flagship and was configured like that so it represents the Federation philosphy, ethics and beliefs.
Configured for pure raw combat it's probably the most powerfull (except the Odyssey in STO terms, but I don't know where and how that one fits) ship in Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that she would neccessarily must be the flagship.
Ok, now I'm really feeling like I'm falling into a parallel universe.
Because I never came to the conclusion that Starfleet is something like what Cryptic is portraying it to be in STO, quite the opposite actually.
Ofcourse it's not. My Renault Megane has more teeth than Cryptic's Galaxy-R. :P
You get no argument from me there, based on everything that we've seen in the shows and the tech manual, the Galaxy's interpretation in STO makes little to no sense.
True, the Sovereign was probably not designed with the intent of replacing the Galaxy class. However, circumistances allowed the Sovereign to bear the name Enterprise and become the next flagship of the Federation, due to the loss of the Enterprise-D.
If the "D" haven't been lost, she probably would continue her jorney as the flagship of the Federation, she was created with a lifespan of 100 years anyway.
But after that, Starfleet probably reevaluated their position on civilians and families on board ships and taking that into consideration, they decided to make the new, more advanced and more compact Sovereign the next Enterprise and give it to Picard and his crew. Now, I'm not saying there are no holes in the theory or the writing of Trek, but this can easily be explained by - without the excees need of space and facilities on board because of civilian personel, Picard's crew will do a good job in the smaller, more fitted to the number of crew and it's intended role - Sovereign.
I never said that the Sovereign was designed to replace the Galaxy. That would be stupid taking into consideration that a Galaxy class is suposed to be the most modular design in Starfleet with a lifespan of over 100 years.
What I'm saying is that the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy as the flagship of the Federation. Not replacing the ship or class itself, but the position of flagship. Starfleet obviously doesn't consider the flagship the most powerfull one, or the largest one, etc. They probably have a different thing going on there regarding that. For ex. - look at the Excelsior. It was better than the Connie in every possible way, it was better than the Connie Refit and yet the flagship Enterprise remained a Constitution class, only slightly refited rather than fully going Excelsior. (I'm obviously talking about the "A", since the "B" was an Excelsior)
Well, I can't quite agree with this simply because they had no problems creating situations with the most powerfull ship in danger during the entire TNG.
What I think happened is they wanted something new and shiny, to breathe in a bit of the new visual efects tech. and refresh the look of the TNG movies, so they came up with a ridiculous way to dispose of the "D" as soon as possible, so they can introduce the new shiny and refreshing Sovereign as the new Enterprise. Purely for marketing reasons if you ask me. Remember we are Trek fans, but the writing for Trek was less than stellar on quite a few ocassions.
Anyway, there is absolutely NO canon indication whatsoever that any other Enterprise besides the -D was starfleets Flagship, ever.
Please check some reliable sources if you don't belive me.
You just assume the others where flagships too, but in canon there isn't any clue that would confirm that.
My thoughts exactly.
No, but your statements indicated that you where thinking i would belive Starfleet was a primary militaric organisation, similar to Cryptics Starfleet.
Ah, i must have missunderstood something. sry.
Outside ST universe:
In my opinion they just got rid of the GCS, because they wanted a new ship that resembles more Kirks Enterprise more.
For me, the Sovereign has much more similarities to a Constitution refit than a GCS. So i think they just wanted to show the audience a more familiar ship.
If they would have been ok with the Style of the GCS, they easily could have updated the Design in the next Movie without problem. (maybe something like STOs venture Class but without the ugly engineering section and the too close pylons)
They reworked Kirks ship too, at TMP.
A completely new ship but they kept the general design. But ST:8 showed a completely different design than a Galaxy Class.
I run a cannon/180 Q-torp/turret Fleet Excel, it can "punch back", but only in a limited manner. If a person uses beams, BO3 might give a good single hit punch, but the power drain (even with engineer bonus's, EPTX, Aux2batt, etc.) makes the following shots weak. CRF2 is helpful, but more for critting' and procs' than actual "balanced" pain giving. If Beam Overload wasn't such a drain to the system, I would be more inclined to agree with you.
The bane of cruisers is that the Engie' Boff skils, especially damage/debuff skills are much weaker than the other two Boff classes.
Akira though in from succeds Mirada but funtion replaces Excel. Galaxy still had use and did well in DW but she's a peace leaning multi mission ship. Sov is tacitcal leaning ship. but like most ships Starfleet makes can function in peace or war.