How Would You Refit The Galaxy Class (Lifted From Elsewhere)

Raoul Duke, Jr. · Post by **Raoul Duke, Jr.** » 2003-08-24 08:02pm

Alyeska wrote:
Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote:
Alyeska wrote:Nope. You see what is possibly the hulk of one GCS after the Breen use their weapons for the first time. Besides that single instance, no GCS has even been shown destroyed on screen. The USS Galaxy took a beating in one episode, but we know it survived thanks to Nemesis.
Sorry, but what about the Odyssey early on in the war? Maybe that's not the correct name of the ship, but it's the one that got rammed by a bugship and exploded.
That was before the war and the Odyssey was not a War GCS. Therefor it is a red herring.

My bad -- by "GCS" I didn't realize you meant the War GCS; thought you meant the standard model.

Rubberanvil · Post by **Rubberanvil** » 2003-08-26 07:50pm

Howedar wrote:But the thing is, an extensive refit can actually be a lot more expensive than rebuilding from the ground up.

It partly depends on how long the refited ships would continue to be in service and for what use.

Galaxies refited for either or combination of: troop transport,
cargo hauling, hospital ship, and carrier duties is relatively inexpensive to the dedicated phaser and missile boats Galaxies and they're of limited use.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-08-26 08:50pm

Hence "can", not "will always be".

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-08-26 10:57pm

The best way, as has been mentioned, is to simply stop using them as a jack of all trades. If you want an explorer with the ability to defend herself then simply fix the warp core and build in some of the necessary system redundancy and security.

For a war ship, go with the War Galaxy, they seem to be tough enough to last it out in battle and dish it out in return.

The worst of the Galaxy-class's problems simply stemmed from them being ill suited to the combat role they were so often forced into.

Moonshadow · Post by **Moonshadow** » 2003-08-27 12:47am

Considering the Galaxy's track record vs the Nebula's i'd say scrap the Star drive on the Galaxy class ships and use the saucers to build more Nebula class.

however since that Doesn't Count pretty much my idea has already been said. Split the remaining inventory of Galaxy Class ships into 2 types.

the Explorer which is the stock Galaxy with a much safer Wap Core( not the Giant M-80 they use) and use what weapons she has for Defence( since they still pack quite a punch)

And the Warship variant from DS9 with less labs and other non-combat facilities and more room for Troops, ammo, Fighters. etc. Also upgrade the Phasers if needed and Add some to what ever blind spot the ship has. Replace the Torp launchers with ones that fire all kinds of Torps available.Beef up the sheilds by adding redundant shield generators.

Kerneth · Post by **Kerneth** » 2003-08-30 01:00pm

Another potential use for the Galaxy class would be refitting as a fleet or task group flagship. It already has 2 bridges, one in the saucer section and one in the engineering hull--something that doesn't seem to be standard on Starfleet vessels--so it should be possible to refit one of them as a Flag Bridge, thus allowing Task Group or Fleet command officer to command from the Flag Bridge instead of commanding from the main bridge and being expected to both run the fleet and command his own vessel.

This seems minor but might--might--actually result in a serious performance improvement in major engagements.

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2003-08-30 01:47pm

Kerneth wrote:Another potential use for the Galaxy class would be refitting as a fleet or task group flagship. It already has 2 bridges, one in the saucer section and one in the engineering hull--something that doesn't seem to be standard on Starfleet vessels--so it should be possible to refit one of them as a Flag Bridge, thus allowing Task Group or Fleet command officer to command from the Flag Bridge instead of commanding from the main bridge and being expected to both run the fleet and command his own vessel.

This seems minor but might--might--actually result in a serious performance improvement in major engagements.

Are you talking about taking one of the bridges, equiping it with the latest communication gear and analysis computers etc making a mobile command centre out of it?

Raoul Duke, Jr. · Post by **Raoul Duke, Jr.** » 2003-08-31 01:20am

I'm not sure what you mean by 'mobile command center', DP, but I think he just means that during fleet engagements, the actual bridge crew and bridge functions would be reassigned to the Battle Bridge in the Stardrive section, while the Main Bridge on Deck 1 would become a fleetwide C&C. So if you meant using a GCS Bridge module as a standalone spacecraft to be used as an Ops Center, then, no.

Also, Kenneth, the Connies also had their own version of a "Battle Bridge". There were a few scenes with Chekov and a little Russian cutie on it during the TOS ep with Dr. Earlobe & The Space Hippies. ("Herbert! Herbert!")

Drach · Post by **Drach** » 2003-08-31 02:11am

Adding secondary warp cores here and there isn't going to do jack for the most part except cut her range. Where you going to store the fuel for these extra reactors? And if not any extra fuel, you cut the range. If the reactors stay off line the majority of the time, they waste space.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2003-08-31 03:22am

Drach wrote:Adding secondary warp cores here and there isn't going to do jack for the most part except cut her range. Where you going to store the fuel for these extra reactors? And if not any extra fuel, you cut the range. If the reactors stay off line the majority of the time, they waste space.

how about in the space freed up removing those Presidential suites that everyone on the ship seems to have.

Drach · Post by **Drach** » 2003-08-31 04:01am

You ever seen the blue prints to a GCS? The deuterium tanks plus the tank support (cryo chiller subsystems) take up several decks in the stardrive section, 26-33 if I remember

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-08-31 12:39pm

Drach wrote:You ever seen the blue prints to a GCS? The deuterium tanks plus the tank support (cryo chiller subsystems) take up several decks in the stardrive section, 26-33 if I remember

There is a fuckload of space opened up in the saucer section. Keep the normal anti-matter storage in the secondary hull for the primary M/AM reactor while you have more storage in the saucer section for the smaller defiant type reactors.

ClaysGhost · Post by **ClaysGhost** » 2003-09-02 12:50pm

Only one thing. Move the bridge to somewhere deep inside the hull. It's not even as if they have the excuse of wanting to look out of the window.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-09-02 03:06pm

Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by 'mobile command center', DP, but I think he just means that during fleet engagements, the actual bridge crew and bridge functions would be reassigned to the Battle Bridge in the Stardrive section, while the Main Bridge on Deck 1 would become a fleetwide C&C. So if you meant using a GCS Bridge module as a standalone spacecraft to be used as an Ops Center, then, no.

The command ship idea is a good one i think. With wasted space consumed by staterooms, holodecks and family crap removed i would imagine all manner of electronic warfare equipment could be held. Subspace jammer-doohickeys. wide area ECM AND ECCM systems. interfleet comms. subspace 'listening' equipment. improved sensor eqipment. Reduce the weapons loadout, beef up the shileds and actually give it some decent armor. It would have to be escorted.

Rubberanvil · Post by **Rubberanvil** » 2003-09-06 12:29am

Col. Crackpot wrote: Reduce the weapons loadout, beef up the shileds

Other than reducing the overall number of torps. the GCS would carry, which phaser strips would you suggest be remove?