Galaxy Class Modifications - DS9 S4

[Sidious]

Are you serious? They put a weapon on top of the fucking engine nacelle? You actually think that's impressive?

There were already phaser arrays on the engine pylons before the war mod upgrade. Adding arrays to the top of the nacelles hardly seems like more of a stretch. The nacelles are horribly exposed and vulnerable as it is with or without weapons on top of them.

Adding the phaser arrays probably eliminates a blind spot as well that wasnt covered by the small arrays at the top of the Galaxy's "neck"

At least the war mod upgrade seems to have solved the problem of "insta-warp core breach".


/edit: I forgot about the two small phaser arrays located between the nacelles. These would cover most of that blind spot. I guess they just wanted more weapons? The arrays on the nacelles might be more powerful then the small arrays on the neck, pylons, and between the nacelles *shrug*.

[Sidious]

So Ronald Moore wrote Generations? He's writing on the new Battlestar Galactica too. Hmm I sense that the Suck factor is going to go up.

Actually, in this IGN interview Moore talks about the problems he had with Berman and the "Generations" script in general. Time constraints placed by the studio, stupid plot elements the execs insisted on, etc.

Its a good read regardless, doesnt excuse the horrible death of the Enterprise-D but gives some insight into why the movie ended up the way it did.

[General Zod]

instead of adding the arrays on the nacelles they should have simply done away with the nacelles altogether. really lousy idea for engine placement, considering that any structural damage to the nacelles fucks up the ship, from what we've seen in the past.

[Lord Pounder]

instead of adding the arrays on the nacelles they should have simply done away with the nacelles altogether. really lousy idea for engine placement, considering that any structural damage to the nacelles fucks up the ship, from what we've seen in the past.

Where else could the nacelles go?

[General Zod]

instead of adding the arrays on the nacelles they should have simply done away with the nacelles altogether. really lousy idea for engine placement, considering that any structural damage to the nacelles fucks up the ship, from what we've seen in the past.

Where else could the nacelles go?

why would they even have to have nacelles period? we've seen examples of other races that use warp drive but don't bother with nacelles. the ferengi, for example. the defiant's nacelles are also nicely confined to the body of the ship, making them less of an easy target.

[Sidious]

Where else could the nacelles go?

Good question. Have we ever seen any Federation ship besides the Defiant that uses internal nacelles? I assumed the reason for the nacelle placement had something to do with the warp field.

Actually the Steamrunner and Norway classes also have housed engines. I cant recall any on-screen explanation for the importance of the nacelle placement though.

Seems to be a common design element with all the alpha quadrant powers with the exception of the Cardassians and the Ferengi. But theres been many freighters and what not shown that do not use nacelles.

Blegh too many contradictions!

[General Zod]

romulan and klingon ships have nacelles, but unlike federation vessels they're not quite as easy to target, since they're much closer to the ship's body than the other two (or in the romulan's case, are covered with the 'wings'). birds of prey, also don't use nacelles.

[Thag]

Where else could the nacelles go?

Good question. Have we ever seen any Federation ship besides the Defiant that uses internal nacelles? I assumed the reason for the nacelle placement had something to do with the warp field.

Actually the Steamrunner and Norway classes also have housed engines. I cant recall any on-screen explanation for the importance of the nacelle placement though.

Seems to be a common design element with all the alpha quadrant powers with the exception of the Cardassians and the Ferengi. But theres been many freighters and what not shown that do not use nacelles.

Blegh too many contradictions!

I think you mean the Saber, the Norway has fully exposed nacelles. Although, looking at the list you made, most of the ships with enclosed engines seem to be all single-purpose warship types. Would it be possible that warp engines in close proximity would screw up the high-end sensors/equipment of the multi-mission ships? Or simply the fact that they can afford better internal shielding since there isn't much extraneous gear aboard?

[El Moose Monstero]

I was under the impression that enclosed or 'not in the usual place' nacelles meant a lower maximum warp speed, cant remember where I read that though.

[Arrow]

If I remember correctly, the DS9 TM says that internal nacelles have less efficiency. Might be other factors involved.

I like the nacelles, but I wish the writes had made it so that didn't blow off in with a fart. How about some armor and a strong structure for those things?!? (The same goes for Federation ships in general.)

[Sidious]

I think you mean the Saber,

You are correct, Saber was the other small class I was thinking of. Norway is also a smaller class but does have the defined nacelles.

Although, looking at the list you made, most of the ships with enclosed engines seem to be all single-purpose warship types. Would it be possible that warp engines in close proximity would screw up the high-end sensors/equipment of the multi-mission ships? Or simply the fact that they can afford better internal shielding since there isn't much extraneous gear aboard?

Your right, observed federation ships with housed engines have all been warships.(Defiant, Saber, Steamrunner). Federation ships with exposed nacelles have all been multi purpose explortation/defense vessels (Galaxy, Miranda, Excelsior, err all other observed federation ships basically).

I was under the impression that enclosed or 'not in the usual place' nacelles meant a lower maximum warp speed, cant remember where I read that though.

Which goes back to my warp field assumption. Which I now realize was taken from Voyager's moving nacelle concept. Raising the nacelles for warp flight supposedly created a more streamlined warp field allowing for a faster top speed. If thats true then the placement of the nacelles DOES impact overall warp performance.

[Durandal]

There were already phaser arrays on the engine pylons before the war mod upgrade. Adding arrays to the top of the nacelles hardly seems like more of a stretch. The nacelles are horribly exposed and vulnerable as it is with or without weapons on top of them.

In other words, they're lumping shitty modifications on to a shitty design.

Adding the phaser arrays probably eliminates a blind spot as well that wasnt covered by the small arrays at the top of the Galaxy's "neck"

And it also makes that area far more volatile when hit. You know, weapons have ammunition and all, which in the case of the engines, is sitting right on top of them.

At least the war mod upgrade seems to have solved the problem of "insta-warp core breach".

It does the opposite.

[Arrow]

Adding the phaser arrays probably eliminates a blind spot as well that wasnt covered by the small arrays at the top of the Galaxy's "neck"

And it also makes that area far more volatile when hit. You know, weapons have ammunition and all, which in the case of the engines, is sitting right on top of them.

So I guess that makes the Ticonderoga a bad design as well? After all, it does have a verticle launch system on the aft of the ship, right above its screws. Sorry, but we don't know enough about phaser design, the design of the mounts, safety procedures (if such a thing exists in trek) or the process that generates the beam, to make that statement (despite the technobabble and exploding warp-cores).

Edit: I do agree that placing phasers on engines adds risks, but my complaint is with "makes the area far more violatile" statement when fairly little is known about phasers. Personally, I'd be more concerned with the high energy plasma running through the warp coils, which is dangerous with or without the phaser mounts.

[Thag]

Short of a deliberately induced overload, has there been an instance where a phaser system of any kind has exploded?

[Aaron]

Short of a deliberately induced overload, has there been an instance where a phaser system of any kind has exploded?

Nothing comes to mind.

[Chris OFarrell]

Short of a deliberately induced overload, has there been an instance where a phaser system of any kind has exploded?

Not that I recall. Further, having those arrays would serve as some kind of armour at worst, they could take hits meant for the Nacelles. And they give much more power to the Galaxies aft arc, which has always been a bit weak.

And I think its mentioned that the external design of the Nacelles is for efficency and warp field dyanmics. The Defiant for example if you try to push about warp nine starts to tear itself appart, without diverting massive power to the ships structual integrity field. Birds of Prey in the TNG era / DS9 era start tearing appart at Warp 8+ from what I remember.

Federation ships (with the exception of the Scimitar and thats just BS) have always been far faster then anything short of a Borg ship. Which is I guess why they have the Nacelles exposed the way they do. But its never been a massive problem. If people want to disable the engines of an opposing ship, if the shields are down, its been rather easy to do so on ST, regardless of if the engines are in or out

[Sidious]

And it also makes that area far more volatile when hit. You know, weapons have ammunition and all, which in the case of the engines, is sitting right on top of them.

If it was anything but a phaser I would probably agree. But we have no evidence that phasers even require "ammunition" in any conventional sense.

At least I have always thought of a phaser strip as nothing more than an outlet for an energy reserve somewhere else in the ship.

Having weapon arrays on top of the nacelles might cause them to be targeted more by an enemy ship....but then again its pretty juicy target as it is even without the arrays.

[Crazedwraith]

Short of a deliberately induced overload, has there been an instance where a phaser system of any kind has exploded?

Hand phasers can be overloaded and explode.

Never heard of a ship board phaser being set to overlaod though.

[Arrow]

Short of a deliberately induced overload, has there been an instance where a phaser system of any kind has exploded?

Hand phasers can be overloaded and explode.

Never heard of a ship board phaser being set to overlaod though.

Hand phaser explosions are probably the result of battery/power-cell overloading. Lithium and Lithium Ion batteries will explode (aka rapid vent) with a significant amount of force.

Ships phasers are (probably) powered by the warp core...

[Major Diarrhia]

Ships phasers are (probably) powered by the warp core...

In TNG I think ship's systems were mostly impulse powered. When the Dominion war roled in, they went back to warp power for their defensive/offensive systems. Not sure on that, I think Ayleska (sp) knows.

[Uraniun235]

Riker was concerned about needing power from the impulse engines on the Saucer when Shelby proposed Saucer Seperation as an attack plan against the Borg in BOBW.

There are systems that draw power from the M/AM reactor (the nav. deflector is one of them). The refit-Enterprise-nil was designed to "channel phaser power through the warp engines" for increased phaser firepower.

The best reconciliation I can come up with is that the concern wasn't necessarily with total power output, but with contingency planning in the event the Borg disabled the warp drive.

And it also makes that area far more volatile when hit. You know, weapons have ammunition and all, which in the case of the engines, is sitting right on top of them.

When have we ever seen ship-mounted phasers behave in a volatile fashion? Fuck, they'd probably be less volatile than the nacelles themselves.

Good question. Have we ever seen any Federation ship besides the Defiant that uses internal nacelles? I assumed the reason for the nacelle placement had something to do with the warp field.

Supposedly, the nacelles were originally something that you wanted to keep fairly separate from the rest of the crew... hence why so many of the TOS starships that we saw (the Enterprise, the Klingon cruisers, the Romulan BOP) had distended nacelles.

Obviously this rule got thrown away at some point, but that was (supposedly) the original reasoning behind it.

[Sidious]

Obviously this rule got thrown away at some point, but that was (supposedly) the original reasoning behind it.

Plus Roddenberry's rule about standard federation ship design. Which has obviously been bent then broken after his death.

[Howedar]

It does the opposite.

Demonstratably not, since we've never seen a war-mod Galaxy explode from light damage. We have, in fact, seen war-mod Galaxies take quite considerable damage without exploding.

[Sidious]

Demonstratably not, since we've never seen a war-mod Galaxy explode from light damage. We have, in fact, seen war-mod Galaxies take quite considerable damage without exploding.

The common consensus is that not a single Galaxy class starship was lost during the Dominion War.

[RedImperator]

Demonstratably not, since we've never seen a war-mod Galaxy explode from light damage. We have, in fact, seen war-mod Galaxies take quite considerable damage without exploding.

The common consensus is that not a single Galaxy class starship was lost during the Dominion War.

I have a hard time believing this. We never saw one go down on-screen, but they were deployed in large numbers and were the biggest targets in the Federation fleet. The Dominion had to have killed a few, or at least battered them so badly they were unsalvagable. Otherwise I have a hard time understanding how the Dominion was so formidable.