Who does everyone seem to hate the Galaxy Class

[Sharp-kun]

To me the thing looked like it was about to snap in two, with the way the conennecting spar is shaped.

[Trogdor]

What bugged me about it was that it looked to graceful to possibly be a military ship, which is what it was, no matter how little the Feds wanted to acknowledge that.

Ah, Trek won me back when I laid eyes on the E-E for the first time. The Sovereign class just seems to scream "Don't fuck with me".

[Stormbringer]

It's pretty, but it's very badly engineered. HORRIBLY engineered, I should say.
Plus the fact that it's seriously under-armed for its class.
The Galaxy War Refit is a much nicer design though.

The Connie Refit is just about as bad engineering wise, yet many more people like that design.

Not hardly. When did the Enteprise-nil or Enterprise-A or for that matter any of the class demonstrate the absymal lack of basic engineering principles. Look at the canon database, it's riddled time and again why incidents of the Galaxy-class being threatened, crippled, or destroyed by simply moronic flaws.

And the War Galaxy is actualy not more heavily armed then the Galaxy. Only one particular model of the War GCS has just two additional phasers added. The War GCS is primarily a fix on the warp core and improves the Impulse drives. After that each War GCS is slightly different for the most part. Some War GCSs are still stock Galaxy's, just with the core fixed. Some have improved armor, some have added weapons, some have enlarged shuttlebays.

I still think the so called War Galaxy refit are more wishful thinking than anything. The idea that the class all got gutted and rebuilt from nearly scratch seems fishy; especially with newer more capable ships in the pipeline. But then again Star Fleet isn't always practical.

its poor showing in TNG was actually due to bad writing at times, like the "Cause and Effect" episode where a minor hit on the warp nacelles caused the explosion of the E-D. E-D was a good ship when the writing was good.

What I never understood was this moronic cop out. Of course it was a bad ship when the writing sucked; it's entirely fictional. If it's written shit, it is shit.

[Morilore]

The Galaxy is too curvy and warped. It looks like a shape formed out of the swirls of diarrhea.
Why is it that the original Connie makes me think of helicopters?

[Alyeska]

I still think the so called War Galaxy refit are more wishful thinking than anything. The idea that the class all got gutted and rebuilt from nearly scratch seems fishy; especially with newer more capable ships in the pipeline. But then again Star Fleet isn't always practical.

The ship was never gutted and rebuilt. War Galaxy typicaly means the fixed Warp drive problem and then whichever weapons variant you wish to discuss. As I pointed out, the War Galaxy refers to a variety of designs. The main thing they did with the Galaxy class shortly before the Dominion war was fix the warp drive stability issue and alter the impulse systems so the saucer engines are linked with the main impulse. This improved the Galaxies acceleration capabilities.

[Batman]

Personally, I rather like the Galaxy's lines. About the only potential structural weakpoint I see (apart from the stupid seperation idea) are the warp nacelle supports and those are nowhere near as bad as the Constitution/constitution refit ones (I flat out refuse to acknowledge the existence of the Ent-J),
If you take a closer look, the 'neck' connecting saucer and engineering section is a lot more massive than that one the Ent-Nil/Refit and Ent-A.
Call me weird, but I like the saucer/engineering hull/nacelles design. It gives the ships personality.
My personal favorite for the' ugliest starship ever' award used to be the Ent-E (yuck!) until Voyager took it away. Folding nacelles? Hello?

[Alyeska]

Personally, I rather like the Galaxy's lines. About the only potential structural weakpoint I see (apart from the stupid seperation idea) are the warp nacelle supports and those are nowhere near as bad as the Constitution/constitution refit ones (I flat out refuse to acknowledge the existence of the Ent-J),
If you take a closer look, the 'neck' connecting saucer and engineering section is a lot more massive than that one the Ent-Nil/Refit and Ent-A.
Call me weird, but I like the saucer/engineering hull/nacelles design. It gives the ships personality.
My personal favorite for the' ugliest starship ever' award used to be the Ent-E (yuck!) until Voyager took it away. Folding nacelles? Hello?

Voyager came first.

[Batman]

Voyager came first.

Doesn't mean I saw it first.

[Typhonis 1]

Interesting not in the book The Art of Star Trek they had a picture of an early model of Voyager. The nacells didnt fold on it they were plced downwards like on a Mirana or a D-7.

[Stormbringer]

I still think the so called War Galaxy refit are more wishful thinking than anything. The idea that the class all got gutted and rebuilt from nearly scratch seems fishy; especially with newer more capable ships in the pipeline. But then again Star Fleet isn't always practical.

The ship was never gutted and rebuilt. War Galaxy typicaly means the fixed Warp drive problem and then whichever weapons variant you wish to discuss. As I pointed out, the War Galaxy refers to a variety of designs. The main thing they did with the Galaxy class shortly before the Dominion war was fix the warp drive stability issue and alter the impulse systems so the saucer engines are linked with the main impulse. This improved the Galaxies acceleration capabilities.

To rebuild something like the warp and impulse drive, and fix the multitude of moronic flaws, would require a hell of a lot of rebuild. There's no real way around it; and the more extensive variants are all the more problematic.

And I still find the actual canon support for it as being somewhat shaky.

[Alyeska]

[El Moose Monstero]

Ugh! I'll never complain about Voyager again, that's truly awful on an aesthetic point of view, looks strong, but that's a terrible kitbash of previous components, the engineering section looks like half of a runabout, the nacelles look like an awful cross between TNG, DS9 and TMP, and the saucer section doesnt have a lot going for it either...

EDIT: Although the slightly more rugged look might have held better on a journey back through the Delta quadrant, but there we are.

[Alyeska]

To rebuild something like the warp and impulse drive, and fix the multitude of moronic flaws, would require a hell of a lot of rebuild. There's no real way around it; and the more extensive variants are all the more problematic.

And I still find the actual canon support for it as being somewhat shaky.

Actualy its no such thing. Replacing the warp core itself is an example of simplicity. The whole system is designed to be able to be ejected if needs be. The issue on the impulse engines merely meant adding more power to that subsystem. These are minor issues compared to some of the more obvious changes in certain Galaxy variants.

And the canon support is actualy very obvious. We have repeated examples of Galaxy's in the Dominion war taking damage that would have caused TNG era Galaxy's to explode. We also see every single GCS using all three Impulse engines rather then the main one as in TNG.

[Alyeska]

Some other Voyager concepts.

[El Moose Monstero]

Interesting stuff, thanks Alyeska. I could almost have gone for that top design, it's got a certain squat bulkyness that is actually quite appealing, still not quite right, but not bad. Different, anyway.

[Stormbringer]

Actualy its no such thing. Replacing the warp core itself is an example of simplicity. The whole system is designed to be able to be ejected if needs be.

And you can remove reactor rods, that doesn't mean rebuilding reactor is simple. The warp drive has a myriad of faults and I don't at all buy that fixing part of it elimnates the problem.

Especially since I don't ever recall a canon statement that the Galaxies have improved their entire warp drive?

The issue on the impulse engines merely meant adding more power to that subsystem. These are minor issues compared to some of the more obvious changes in certain Galaxy variants.

Proof of that?

And the canon support is actualy very obvious. We have repeated examples of Galaxy's in the Dominion war taking damage that would have caused TNG era Galaxy's to explode.

Which doesn't mean that the ships are materially superior. Simply having a crew that isn't incompetent would improve a lot; the Ent-D's crew proved that.

We also see every single GCS using all three Impulse engines rather then the main one as in TNG.

Goody for you. Where's the proof that it's the result of a refit rather than simply ignoring safety factors.

[Alyeska]

And you can remove reactor rods, that doesn't mean rebuilding reactor is simple. The warp drive has a myriad of faults and I don't at all buy that fixing part of it elimnates the problem.

For Trek its more akin to outright removing the reactor and replacing it with an upgraded one.

Especially since I don't ever recall a canon statement that the Galaxies have improved their entire warp drive?

We have seen examples of the ships suffering damage far in excess to what happened in TNG. Explicit statements are not needed when we have other supporting evidence.

Proof of that?

The hull modifications would be harder to work on then merely popping out an engine and putting in another.

Which doesn't mean that the ships are materially superior. Simply having a crew that isn't incompetent would improve a lot; the Ent-D's crew proved that.

Incompetence by the crew did not specificaly have to do with the warp core breach examples in TNG era Trek. It often had to do with getting into the situation, but not the sitution itself.

Goody for you. Where's the proof that it's the result of a refit rather than simply ignoring safety factors.

What safety factors would these be?

[SirNitram]

The hull modifications would be harder to work on then merely popping out an engine and putting in another.

Alyeska, do you actually realize why this seems like a ridiculous and absurd statement to people here?

[Alyeska]

The hull modifications would be harder to work on then merely popping out an engine and putting in another.

Alyeska, do you actually realize why this seems like a ridiculous and absurd statement to people here?

To be clear I am talking about the M/AM reactor, not the warp engines on the pylons. The M/AM reactor has to be fairly self contained and easy to remove/install for it to be capable of being jetisoned as shown in the series.

[The Silence and I]

The hull modifications would be harder to work on then merely popping out an engine and putting in another.

Alyeska, do you actually realize why this seems like a ridiculous and absurd statement to people here?

As I understand it Federation warp cores are an example of the word modular. If the safety issues are with the core itself, then fixing the issues is as simple as popping out the defective core, and popping in a new, improved one.
As long as the nacelles/plasma relays are fine, then there is literally no reason this should be hard, murphy aside, that is.

[SirNitram]

The hull modifications would be harder to work on then merely popping out an engine and putting in another.

Alyeska, do you actually realize why this seems like a ridiculous and absurd statement to people here?

To be clear I am talking about the M/AM reactor, not the warp engines on the pylons. The M/AM reactor has to be fairly self contained and easy to remove/install for it to be capable of being jetisoned as shown in the series.

But that's just the thing; problems were NOT contained to the reactor housing alone.

[Alyeska]

Alyeska, do you actually realize why this seems like a ridiculous and absurd statement to people here?

To be clear I am talking about the M/AM reactor, not the warp engines on the pylons. The M/AM reactor has to be fairly self contained and easy to remove/install for it to be capable of being jetisoned as shown in the series.

But that's just the thing; problems were NOT contained to the reactor housing alone.

Yes and no. It was damage elsewhere causing the warp core itself to go critical. We know that the the damage the caused the E-D core to go critical so often has also occured on other ships without them going critical. Its safer to assume that they replaced the core itself with something that wouldn't go critical so easily. Afterall we've seen a hulk of a Galaxy burning apart without it blowing up. We've seen the USS Galaxy herself take significant damage to the secondary hull and survive (more then we can say compared to the Enterprise and Oddessy).

The Warp Core is the central issue to the Galaxy design problem and reliability. Fixing that only requires popping out the old core and inserting a fixed design.

[Dennis Toy]

its poor showing in TNG was actually due to bad writing at times, like the "Cause and Effect" episode where a minor hit on the warp nacelles caused the explosion of the E-D. E-D was a good ship when the writing was good.


What I never understood was this moronic cop out. Of course it was a bad ship when the writing sucked; it's entirely fictional. If it's written shit, it is shit.

EVERYONE aknowledges that the ship flawed warp core exploding because of minor shit is because the writing staff doesnt have a shit of an idea of engineering or scientific principles.


I see that everyone is against the design of the E-D despite the fact that the ship is a literal fortress that has a multifunctional purpose

[CJvR]

The last Voyager design was rather unusual, but intesting, would have made the ship much smaller.

[Dennis Toy]

Yes and no. It was damage elsewhere causing the warp core itself to go critical. We know that the the damage the caused the E-D core to go critical so often has also occured on other ships without them going critical. Its safer to assume that they replaced the core itself with something that wouldn't go critical so easily. Afterall we've seen a hulk of a Galaxy burning apart without it blowing up. We've seen the USS Galaxy herself take significant damage to the secondary hull and survive (more then we can say compared to the Enterprise and Oddessy).

The Warp Core is the central issue to the Galaxy design problem and reliability. Fixing that only requires popping out the old core and inserting a fixed design.

The warp core wasnt really a deathtrap, i've seen instances that the ship actually been in battle and still the warp core didn't go critical.

canon episodes..


tin man: the ship is hit by romulan diestruptor fire and still doesnt breach, Tin man shoots a shockwave at the ship and it ROCKS! yet the core didnt explode.


Best of both worlds..... Borg uses slicing laser and cuts into the secondary hull yet the warp core doesnt breach,

Darmok: The enterprise it hit in the engines but doesnt breach.

Disaster: quantum filament hits enterprise, warp core doesnt breach.

descent: the ship is hit several times but the core doesnt breach