Redesign the Galaxy class.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » 2003-12-21 06:58pm

1. Rip out the centralized computer systems and make the computers more de-centralized.

2. Change the security so that it doesn't rely solely on voice for user authentication

3. Rip out ALL the holodecks. Want entertainment, watch a movie

4. Rip out ALL the replicators. Force everyone to eat rations

5. Reduce the sizes of all the staterooms and officer's quarters. They don't need to be that freakin big

6. Use the extra space in the saucer section to add an additional launch bay (or expand the existing one) to hold fighters and/or troop shuttles

7. Make the main bridge an observational bridge only. Have main C&C be well within the hull

8. Replace the warp core with something that doesn't blow at the drop of a dime. Probably require the most extensive change. Maybe have a cluster of smaller fusion reactors. They tend not to explode

9. Put phaser banks on the nacelles themselves

10. Get rid of all the stupid access tunnels and centralize all control functions in a few open, easily guarded spaces. That way, destroying one panel won't kill all the damn sensors on the ship!

11. Require all crew on the ship to have identification devices embedded within their bodies. That way, someone can still be tracked within the ship even if they take off their communicator.

That's it for now, I'm sure I can think of some more stuff.

EDIT: Modify #8. They obviously need the warp core to achieve warp speed(duh). But there has to be a way to make the warp core safer.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » 2003-12-21 07:01pm

I forgot something else,

1. On the main bridge, take out all those stupid Okuda-grams and make all the controls hard-wired and manual

2. Take out all the stupid plasma conduits so the panels don't explode like crazy when the ship takes damage

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-21 07:11pm

Defiant wrote:3. Rip out ALL the holodecks. Want entertainment, watch a movie

Pointless and stupid change. Holodecks can be used quite succesfully for a variety of things on a ship. They ca be used on break time for several crew to relax, they can be used for training, they can be used for most everything and take up relatively little space.

4. Rip out ALL the replicators. Force everyone to eat rations

And what justification do you have for this?

8. Replace the warp core with something that doesn't blow at the drop of a dime. Probably require the most extensive change. Maybe have a cluster of smaller fusion reactors. They tend not to explode

Its obvious that you haven't watched much of Deep Space Nine. The Galaxy class had a massive improvement on the warp core saftey. GCS class ships took a serious pounding and massive hull damage yet the cores did not detonate.

9. Put phaser banks on the nacelles themselves

Already done on one variant of War GCS.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-12-21 07:12pm

1. Structual reinforcement. Reinforce the neck and pylon areas of the ship. Add superstructure to the neck area or shorten it altogether to increase structual integraty. Reinforce all frame work until systems like the SIF are not needed.

2. Armor. Add armor to hull surfaces. Ablative if it is available but some sort of armor even if it is just a 'double hull' of what ever material is currently used for the hull.

3. Upgrade the warp core or at the bare mininum, add safty features.

4. Double secondary powersources in the Primary Hull.

5. Design a power converter system to step down EPS conduit power to electrical cable or other less hazardess power sources for consol's and other mundane gear.

6. Remove all luxuary suits and implement a more militaristic floor plan.

7. Replace all weapon strips with PP turrets to cover all arcs and give weapon systems their own power source with a aux tap into main power grid.

8. Decentralize computers.

9. Decentralize control systems and command systems.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2003-12-21 07:32pm

Defiant wrote:1. Rip out the centralized computer systems and make the computers more de-centralized.

That is rather clearly needed. I don't mind a big libary computer, but there should be independent smaller computers for the primary functions. With only direct two way lines to certian stations. The Navigation station for example should have a two way line to its relevent systems. The Tactical station a two way line to its systems. But none of the systems to be connected to each other. And none of the primary systems need to be accessable from any location.

2. Change the security so that it doesn't rely solely on voice for user authentication

This is realy a brainbug the writers ran with. It was GOING to be in TNG that voice would need bioscans to confirm for major things. They even did it a bit in season 1. Like when they set the self destruct in that Binars episode. The Defiant appears to retain that feature, needing a direct bioscan and voice / password authorisation. But events like when Data frigen Hijacked the E-D by impersenating the Captians voice should NOT be possible.

3. Rip out ALL the holodecks. Want entertainment, watch a movie

I disagree with this. Sure make some changes to negate the safety problems. But when you may have years between shore leaevs, the Holodeck is a VERY valuable tool. Not to mention for training uses. Everyone should have a certian number of holodeck hours per month to use for R&R but no more.

4. Rip out ALL the replicators. Force everyone to eat rations

Ignoring the rather large nutrititional problems with eating nothing but rations for years on end and the logistics problems of carrying around all those rations and eating up storage space, why? I can't see why you would want to remove the food replicators. Sure, take them out of the quaters and put them in wardrooms / messes with a computer program that monitors each crewmans nutritional needs. But remove them? Hardly.

5. Reduce the sizes of all the staterooms and officer's quarters. They don't need to be that freakin big

I agree. But I also don't think that you need to make them jail cells. You have the space and the crew is an investment of resources. Senior officers should get quaters like Datas in size. Junior personnel should get quaters like they have on the E-D in size, but with 8-10 people to a room. Groups via divisions around the saucer sections with communal lounges, holodeck, rec hall e.t.c.

6. Use the extra space in the saucer section to add an additional launch bay (or expand the existing one) to hold fighters and/or troop shuttles

I disagree. Have carriers for shuttle / fighter missions. I'd scrap the main shuttlebay entirely and combine shuttlebay two and three into one facility with the usual complement of shuttles and runabouts.

7. Make the main bridge an observational bridge only. Have main C&C be well within the hull

I'd scrap the bridge entirely. Its just too vunurable for any kind of boarding action.

8. Replace the warp core with something that doesn't blow at the drop of a dime. Probably require the most extensive change. Maybe have a cluster of smaller fusion reactors. They tend not to explode

Only the first flight of the GCS appeared to have this problem. The Dominion war varients have taken massive damage to the warp core sections and kept on going, blasting at everything without blowing up. They've clearly fixed this problem.

9. Put phaser banks on the nacelles themselves

The Venture varient of the Military GCS has these.

10. Get rid of all the stupid access tunnels and centralize all control functions in a few open, easily guarded spaces. That way, destroying one panel won't kill all the damn sensors on the ship!

True dat. Also put in REDUNDENCY so if said pannel is blown up, another one instantly kicks in.

11. Require all crew on the ship to have identification devices embedded within their bodies. That way, someone can still be tracked within the ship even if they take off their communicator.

Thats a little extreme and uncessary. And probably wouln't get past any Starfleet review board as an idea. And the idea IS to try and be realistic in this. Simply increase the internal sensor technology. And add secuirty cameras in all the approaches to major areas monitered by the computer.

That's it for now, I'm sure I can think of some more stuff.

I'm sure

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » 2003-12-21 07:49pm

Alyeska wrote: Pointless and stupid change. Holodecks can be used quite succesfully for a variety of things on a ship. They ca be used on break time for several crew to relax, they can be used for training, they can be used for most everything and take up relatively little space.

Why would that change be stupid. Everything that a holodeck supposedly does can be replaced by something that doesn't require as much power and isn't a potential death trap
-Break time: A good library, films, a common meeting area (like Ten Forward), and a good rec room would do the same thing
-Training: There is no need to have a holodeck to perform training for personnel on a starship. A starbase, sure. But not on a ship on active duty
-Space: I don't recall the number of holodecks on a GCS, but they're not small. And what about the power and computer resources they consume? Even if the holodecks are shutdown during emergency situations, they still consume fuel (when they're functioning) that could be better used to power other systems

And what justification do you have for this?

Same issues that I have with the holodecks. The Defiant doesn't have replicators, and the crew seems to do just fine with rations. The computer and power requirements for replicators to function are probably less than refridgeration and storage. Of course, I can see the need for replicators if personnel come on-board who have vastly different dietary requirements. I'm willing to compromise by saying that replicators could be used in these instances, but for everyday eating, rations would be more efficient.

Its obvious that you haven't watched much of Deep Space Nine. The Galaxy class had a massive improvement on the warp core saftey. GCS class ships took a serious pounding and massive hull damage yet the cores did not detonate.

Its obvious that the writers of DS9 didn't need exploding warp cores to advance the plot.

Already done on one variant of War GCS.

Good for them.

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2003-12-21 07:51pm

Basically i'd go with Alyeska's suggestions and i'd also incorporate the idea of a non-centralised computer core. Maybe a few computer cores that can take over the functions of the primary if it's knocked out.

Would a Quantim Singularity be any more stable than a normal Warp Core?

Laird · Post by **Laird** » 2003-12-21 08:29pm

Lord Pounder wrote:Basically i'd go with Alyeska's suggestions and i'd also incorporate the idea of a non-centralised computer core. Maybe a few computer cores that can take over the functions of the primary if it's knocked out.

Would a Quantim Singularity be any more stable than a normal Warp Core?

It's what the romulans use,well an artifical one atleast.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-21 08:48pm

Defiant wrote:Why would that change be stupid. Everything that a holodeck supposedly does can be replaced by something that doesn't require as much power and isn't a potential death trap

Incorrect. I would like to see someone go skiing on a ship. Or how about hiking? How about flying? How about combat training?

-Break time: A good library, films, a common meeting area (like Ten Forward), and a good rec room would do the same thing

When you have the room for something that would allow you to litteraly do anything, its well worth the investment.

-Training: There is no need to have a holodeck to perform training for personnel on a starship. A starbase, sure. But not on a ship on active duty

Soldiers and sailors ALWAYS train. Security and Marines could use it for combat training. Bridge personel and egineering can use it to train while not tying up the actual facilities.

-Space: I don't recall the number of holodecks on a GCS, but they're not small. And what about the power and computer resources they consume? Even if the holodecks are shutdown during emergency situations, they still consume fuel (when they're functioning) that could be better used to power other systems

Holodeck power consumption is not a great problem. With added power sources a holodeck will be a minor problem. In combat they can simply be turned off. While holodecks are large to a degree, they take up no more then two floor spaces. With the size of a GCS you can fit half a dozen with little problem for space.

Same issues that I have with the holodecks. The Defiant doesn't have replicators, and the crew seems to do just fine with rations. The computer and power requirements for replicators to function are probably less than refridgeration and storage. Of course, I can see the need for replicators if personnel come on-board who have vastly different dietary requirements. I'm willing to compromise by saying that replicators could be used in these instances, but for everyday eating, rations would be more efficient.

Ahem, the Defiant DOES have replicators. Each stateroom has them. Rations are not more efficent and take up more space. Replicators use a "slurry" that can be stored easily and efficently unlike rations which require much more packaging. The replicators then convert this "slurry" into just about any food type that exists. With rations you have to worry about inventory to a larger degree, waste, and stock of certain types of foods.

Its obvious that the writers of DS9 didn't need exploding warp cores to advance the plot.

Red Herring. The problem is fixed so your suggestion is meaningless.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » 2003-12-21 10:02pm

Incorrect. I would like to see someone go skiing on a ship. Or how about hiking? How about flying? How about combat training?

I was referring to the general reasons for having a holodeck. Of course you could have numerous specific examples like the ones you mentioned and others. But just because the holodeck allows you to be able to do something like hiking or skiing, doesn't meen its not wasteful on a starship. Is the crew of a GCS repeatedly subjected to extended multi-year missions outside Federation space that don't allow for shore leaves and leaves of absence? Crews of modern naval ships aren't able to hike or ski on ship. If they want to participate in those types of activities, they can do them when they're not on the ship.

When you have the room for something that would allow you to litteraly do anything, its well worth the investment.

Why? If, to save fuel, you restricted the holodeck to training scenarios only, then why not create dedicated training facilities that do not rely on the stedy functioning of a holodeck. The ability to "do anything" is not required for the crew to perform their duties.

Soldiers and sailors ALWAYS train. Security and Marines could use it for combat training. Bridge personel and egineering can use it to train while not tying up the actual facilities.

Indeed, and there are ways to train them without using rooms that use complex technology and have high power requirements.

Holodeck power consumption is not a great problem. With added power sources a holodeck will be a minor problem. In combat they can simply be turned off. While holodecks are large to a degree, they take up no more then two floor spaces. With the size of a GCS you can fit half a dozen with little problem for space.

Those added power sources could be used for other applications. The space they take up could be used for other functions. And the machinery required to operate a holodeck is just one more system that the ship's engineers would have to maintain. They have to be at least as complicated as transporters. Oh, the creation of the physical objects would not be too difficult, but the equipment to maintain the scenario in a holodeck must be complex.

Ahem, the Defiant DOES have replicators. Each stateroom has them. Rations are not more efficent and take up more space. Replicators use a "slurry" that can be stored easily and efficently unlike rations which require much more packaging. The replicators then convert this "slurry" into just about any food type that exists. With rations you have to worry about inventory to a larger degree, waste, and stock of certain types of foods.

My bad, I wasn't aware that the Defiant had replicators. But even so, the slurry you refer to has to be routed to the replicator in some fashion. I'm assuming this uses something similar to transporter technology. If so, its just one more piece of equipment that can fail. True, a refrigeration unit could also fail. But which is easier to fix: a refridgeration unit, or the replication unit? Besides, if there was not some advantage in energy and/or space savings, then the Defiant would not have the need for rations at all.

Red Herring. The problem is fixed so your suggestion is meaningless.

I was making a joke.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-12-22 12:18am

Is the crew of a GCS repeatedly subjected to extended multi-year missions outside Federation space that don't allow for shore leaves and leaves of absence?

IIRC, that's what the GCS was originally designed around, but clearly Starfleet decided to use them in a completely different manner.

Drach · Post by **Drach** » 2003-12-22 12:41am

Even if the Defiant only had rations and not replicator...which it does have...you do realize that the Defiant is not designed as a long duration warship yes? Its always docked somewhere when not in use, unlike a GCS which stays out for months or years at a time.

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2003-12-22 01:15am

Personally, I want to decrease the floor space on the holosuites, and use them for high intensity reality training. The concept is that you beam the person into the room while they are asleep, or fake away team missions, so thaat the individual being tested has no idea that what he is being put through isn't real. This would permit true assessments of officers' character and actions in a life or death situation, without the consequences to mission, ship, or individual's life expectancy.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-12-22 01:16am

Drach wrote:Even if the Defiant only had rations and not replicator...which it does have...you do realize that the Defiant is not designed as a long duration warship yes? Its always docked somewhere when not in use, unlike a GCS which stays out for months or years at a time.

Any GCS that is tasked with a mission that entails it to be out of the Federation or outside established supply lines, could be fitted with numerous replicators.

But why have them and waste the power when the ships are constantly visiting starbases, outposts, colonies, ect...

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-12-22 01:47am

Out of curiosity, what's the difference between 'holodeck' and 'holosuite'?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-22 02:01am

Uraniun235 wrote:Out of curiosity, what's the difference between 'holodeck' and 'holosuite'?

The name. Holodeck was used exclusively in TNG but after DS9 the name got changed. Although IIRC Voyager still called it a holodeck. On the E-E it said Holosuite.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-12-22 02:09am

Alyeska wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:Out of curiosity, what's the difference between 'holodeck' and 'holosuite'?
The name. Holodeck was used exclusively in TNG but after DS9 the name got changed. Although IIRC Voyager still called it a holodeck. On the E-E it said Holosuite.

For all we know there's no difference, that's not quite the same thing as no difference. There's always the possbility that there are technological advances/differences and performance differences we aren't readily aware of.

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2003-12-22 02:23am

I'm pretty sure the floor size vastly decreased for the holosuites in DS9. For one thing, who need a twenty five foot ceiling?

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2003-12-22 05:47am

Uraniun235 wrote:Out of curiosity, what's the difference between 'holodeck' and 'holosuite'?

'Holosuite' was what Quark named them. The name also implies an aura of delight or extravagance - you're more likely to enjoy a 'suite' if you're vacationing. Think: resort suite.

'Holodeck' sounds like something a military or naval organisation would name them. There are decks on a ship, this is a hologram-projection room; combine the two and you get: 'Holodeck.'

How much space did the Holodecks take up on the Enterprise? Was the entire level/deck taken up? The majority? That could be another reason why they're called holodecks by Starfleet - because they're large and require extra interior room; but I don't know how much room they take up.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-12-22 12:40pm

To those who say that the bridge has to be relocated into the center of the ship: Keep in mind that on EVERY Star Trek ship - even the explicitly designed-for-war ships of races like the Klingons, Cardassians and Dominion - the bridge is located in an area which is directly visible from space. From a realism standpoint there must be a reason for this (and extrinsically speaking, the Battle Bridge was a cruddy little set, which undoubtedly helped along the decision not to use it very often).

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2003-12-22 12:43pm

Because all ST races have a serious machismo problem, which causes them to go into battle saying "Here are my testicles, please kick."

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-22 02:23pm

Iceberg wrote:To those who say that the bridge has to be relocated into the center of the ship: Keep in mind that on EVERY Star Trek ship - even the explicitly designed-for-war ships of races like the Klingons, Cardassians and Dominion - the bridge is located in an area which is directly visible from space. From a realism standpoint there must be a reason for this (and extrinsically speaking, the Battle Bridge was a cruddy little set, which undoubtedly helped along the decision not to use it very often).

The Romulan and Dominion ships do not have the bridge located in obvious sections. Hell, we've never even seen their bridge locations.

As for the rules on bridge location. I don't give a flying fuck. My version and Chris O'Farrells version of the GCS still look like the original and thats good enough.

FYI, Starfleet ships do allow the ship to be controled from Main Engineering when the situation calls for it. This means Starfleet acknowledges the problems of having the bridge in one area. Using this reasoning we can state that the designs moving ghe bridge are done out of necesity.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-12-22 03:02pm

Uraniun235 wrote:Out of curiosity, what's the difference between 'holodeck' and 'holosuite'?

I was under the impression that the holosuite's in DS9 were comprised of two or more holodecks. Each seperate from the other but clustered for convienence sake.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2003-12-22 04:52pm

Alyeska wrote:FYI, Starfleet ships do allow the ship to be controled from Main Engineering when the situation calls for it. This means Starfleet acknowledges the problems of having the bridge in one area. Using this reasoning we can state that the designs moving ghe bridge are done out of necesity.

i believe that it was also mentioned somewhere it was theoretically possible to control the ship using a PADD (in the original next generation tech manual, i think), though i can't remember the precise source. however it also mentioned that doing so would have been extremely difficult.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-12-23 02:33am

Defiant, have you ever had an MRE? Not the sort of thing one wants to live on for even weeks, let alone years. There's a reason that every military ever has strived to cook as much food fresh as possible.