Galaxy Class Multi Mission Cruiser

[Alyeska]

Galaxy Class Multi-Mission Cruiser (MMC)

Description: During the Dominion war it became painfully obvious that Starfleet was having more problems with the Galaxy class even with the War Galaxy modifications being made to make the ship more combat capable. To the surprise of some (but not everyone) the stardrive section of the Galaxy class proved to be a more cost worthy combat ship then the full Galaxy class. It retained more shield power then the full Galaxy because it was chanelling all that power into a smaller surface area. With only loosing two primary phaser arrays and no torpedo launchers this was seen as a possible solution to the Galaxy problem. Make cheaper and easier to maintain stardrive sections. Several even got the Venture modification with added phasers on the nacelles.

The lessons learned from the Nebula class also were not forgotten. A multi mission cruiser with the ability to change per mission made for a superior platform then the Jack of all Trades approach the Galaxy originally took. The Galaxy class was perfectly equipped to make the change over to the Nebula type configuration, it just took some lessons learned to figure it out. The core of the Galaxy MMC is the stardrive. All GCS MMCs have the same stardrive. This is the Venture standard which has 12 exposed phaser arrays (one will be hidden when the saucer is attached) along with the standard two photon torpedo launchers. What is unique about the GCS MMC is that it will attached mission specific saucers. The original Galaxy Saucer is proven itself to be an effective exploration and science module and it has been retained for those missions. Though with a large variety of new GCS MMC saucers entering service, the original saucer numbers are not needed. Because of this Starfleet is allocating several Galaxy I saucers to Nebula production.

With the new GCS MMC Starfleet can now get a mission specific ship on site with more functionality then the original Galaxy. Various combat support saucers, troop/transport saucers, carrier saucers, sensor/AWACs saucers. Furthermore the GCS MMC can still operate as a single stardrive section if the situation calls for it. If a GCS MMC is needed for a mission needing combat and the saucer is contrary to that mission it can easily detach that saucer and head for its mission.

Saucer Type Specs:

“Standard” Combat Saucer: This GCS MMC saucer holds its own warp core that it uses to power its own combat systems, shields, and if needs be to power the stardrive. It can act as a redundant power source on the stardrive if the stardrive power is knocked out. This saucer has 4 primary Type-12 arrays (each the size of the original GCS saucer arrays) and 8 medium/small arrays. They are equally spread between dorsal and venteral. Both the main bridge and the captains yatch (this saucer is mostly the same size and shape as the original) have been replaced with quantum torpedo turrets with full range motion. With each part of the ship indepently shielded and redundant capable power the Combat GCS MMC is capable of dishing out firepower near the level of a Sovereign with only part of the cost. It can also survive fairly major enemy fire on its shields. The MMC nature of the ship means that armor and endurance is not quite as good, but the ship itself still functions better then the original Galaxy.

Torpedo Combat Saucer: A saucer designed to house 20 torpedo launchers. 10 forward firing launchers (11 when you count the stardrive), 5 port and 5 starboard. 2,000 torpedo compliment for sustained fire. 4 medium sized type-10 phaser arrays. Saucer powers its own shields but relies on the stardrive for primary power on the phasers.

Carrier Saucer: A saucer designed for the carrier type mission to hold Peregrine Tactical Fighters, Venture class long range scout fighters, Delta Flyer Superiority Fighters, or Danube torpedo bombers. It can carry more then 200 strike craft into battle to support a fleet.

Troop Saucer: Designed to get Starfleet marines into battle safely and quickly. The saucer holds 4,000 marines as well as their heavy equipment. The saucer can detach and fly through the atmosphere to provide close tactical support over controlled battle fields with its anti-ground weaponry. This saucer holds more then 50 landing craft of various types to move troops to the battlefield in situations where transporters are not functional.

Sensor/AWACs Saucer: Designed as a massive mobile sensor platform and command & control for allied fleets. These saucers provide extremely long range sensor data on enemy fleet locations as well as detecting stealth and cloaked ships. They have the ability to be used as coordinating points for the fleet. They also have the ability to jam enemy sensors. Similar to the Nebula AWACs, but on a much larger scale.

[Howedar]

I'm not seeing a reason to keep the standard combat saucer so large. Certainly it's not necessary for the weapons fit you've specified.

Otherwise it seems like a sound idea.

[Natorgator]

How often will the saucers be swapped out? It seems like it'd be inconvenient if personnel had to constantly transfer their quarters and their belongings to a new saucer all the time, unless quarters were in the stardrive section.

[Alyeska]

How often will the saucers be swapped out? It seems like it'd be inconvenient if personnel had to constantly transfer their quarters and their belongings to a new saucer all the time, unless quarters were in the stardrive section.

Different crew for the mission specific saucer. The crew that run standard ship opperations would stay on the Stardrive. The crew who run the saucer opperations would stay there.

[The Silence and I]

Cool, I like this a lot, and am really wondering why I haven't seen this idea before... have you finished designing your SF marines, Alyeska? Not cost effective having a ship that can carry 4000 infantry unless they are worth it (by the by, keep up your work on SF phaser designs)

[Uraniun235]

The Torpedo saucer will require significant antimatter reserves in order to arm all of those torpedos.

The saucer can detach and fly through the atmosphere to provide close tactical support over controlled battle fields with its anti-ground weaponry.

Why not just fire on targets from orbit, rather than waste a huge amount of energy keeping the saucer flying in the atmosphere?

[SirNitram]

The whole point to flaming the Prometheus was because it relies on seperation.. So why would we want seperation on a Galaxy class?

[Alyeska]

The whole point to flaming the Prometheus was because it relies on seperation.. So why would we want seperation on a Galaxy class?

They seperated for different reasons.

[SirNitram]

The whole point to flaming the Prometheus was because it relies on seperation.. So why would we want seperation on a Galaxy class?

They seperated for different reasons.

One to create three less-than-optimal attack craft, and this does what? A big, slow, easy to-hit target for ground attack when you could simply drop rocks?

[Alyeska]

The whole point to flaming the Prometheus was because it relies on seperation.. So why would we want seperation on a Galaxy class?

They seperated for different reasons.

One to create three less-than-optimal attack craft, and this does what? A big, slow, easy to-hit target for ground attack when you could simply drop rocks?

I stated that it would be used for ground support when relative superiority is established. We already know of instances of enemy jamming making weapon targeting less effective, jaming transporters, etc... I am merely giving for the possibility of it providing somewhat close in support if its needed.

[SirNitram]

I stated that it would be used for ground support when relative superiority is established. We already know of instances of enemy jamming making weapon targeting less effective, jaming transporters, etc... I am merely giving for the possibility of it providing somewhat close in support if its needed.

And this counters the fact that it is a big, slow, obvious target how? And why is a warp drive shoved on there if it's simply for 'relative superiority support'? This thing suffers from feature creep that would make Windows seem streamlined. The Galaxy should be junked and replaced with dedicated craft.

[Alyeska]

I stated that it would be used for ground support when relative superiority is established. We already know of instances of enemy jamming making weapon targeting less effective, jaming transporters, etc... I am merely giving for the possibility of it providing somewhat close in support if its needed.

And this counters the fact that it is a big, slow, obvious target how? And why is a warp drive shoved on there if it's simply for 'relative superiority support'? This thing suffers from feature creep that would make Windows seem streamlined. The Galaxy should be junked and replaced with dedicated craft.

Did you even read what I was talking about? The idea is to take the Galaxy and make it useful. You get a dedicated design in the saucer while using the drive section to move it about.

[SirNitram]

I stated that it would be used for ground support when relative superiority is established. We already know of instances of enemy jamming making weapon targeting less effective, jaming transporters, etc... I am merely giving for the possibility of it providing somewhat close in support if its needed.

And this counters the fact that it is a big, slow, obvious target how? And why is a warp drive shoved on there if it's simply for 'relative superiority support'? This thing suffers from feature creep that would make Windows seem streamlined. The Galaxy should be junked and replaced with dedicated craft.

Did you even read what I was talking about? The idea is to take the Galaxy and make it useful. You get a dedicated design in the saucer while using the drive section to move it about.

So where does any of that excuse the silliness I just pointed out, Alyeska? If you want a better Galaxy, fuse the damn saucer on so it isn't a structural weak point, load her 'civilian' bays with more scientific equipment, and use her endurance to observe anomalies well away from battle lines. Warships, hell, you've got Defiants and Prometheuses and Sovereigns for that.

[Alyeska]

So where does any of that excuse the silliness I just pointed out, Alyeska? If you want a better Galaxy, fuse the damn saucer on so it isn't a structural weak point, load her 'civilian' bays with more scientific equipment, and use her endurance to observe anomalies well away from battle lines. Warships, hell, you've got Defiants and Prometheuses and Sovereigns for that.

Gee, you point out one flaw in a single one of the variants I listed. My idea can create modifications for the Galaxy making it more useful and also superior then some of the warships already out there. The Stardrive section alone is a fairly good combatant when you factor in its weapons and size.

Bad as saucer seperation seems, we have never seen any indication that the weakness affects it. We already know that structural fields allow rather odd designs to survive the worst situations (like Voyager crash landing into a Glacier).

[SirNitram]

So where does any of that excuse the silliness I just pointed out, Alyeska? If you want a better Galaxy, fuse the damn saucer on so it isn't a structural weak point, load her 'civilian' bays with more scientific equipment, and use her endurance to observe anomalies well away from battle lines. Warships, hell, you've got Defiants and Prometheuses and Sovereigns for that.

Gee, you point out one flaw in a single one of the variants I listed. My idea can create modifications for the Galaxy making it more useful and also superior then some of the warships already out there. The Stardrive section alone is a fairly good combatant when you factor in its weapons and size.

As the War Galaxy shows. This kludge is, however, badly suffering from feature creep. Not only are you trying to make it a master of all trades, you're leaving a damned structural weak point in while most of it's roles are for combat. Why not just make the damn thing a dedicated science ship and avoid, oh, all the problems and costs here?

Bad as saucer seperation seems, we have never seen any indication that the weakness affects it. We already know that structural fields allow rather odd designs to survive the worst situations (like Voyager crash landing into a Glacier).

And the Prometheus kicked ridiculous amounts of ass despite seperating, yes, I myself have pointed this out, only to be contested by you and others. If you're going to be against seperation for the logical reasons against it, at least be consistant, even if the world we talk about isn't.

[Alyeska]

feature creep. Not only are you trying to make it a master of all trades, you're leaving a damned structural weak point in while most of it's roles are for combat. Why not just make the damn thing a dedicated science ship and avoid, oh, all the problems and costs here?

I am trying to take it and design the ability for it to be more useful. Its not like there will be a dozen saucers per Stardrive. Its likely Starfleet would only build a single saucer per Stardrive and they would fit the number they needed. You call this bad yet call the Explorer and War GCS version good? Thats hypocritical since they are the same thing.

And the Prometheus kicked ridiculous amounts of ass despite seperating, yes, I myself have pointed this out, only to be contested by you and others. If you're going to be against seperation for the logical reasons against it, at least be consistant, even if the world we talk about isn't.

What the hell are you talking about? I am against seperation when it comes to combat. Seperating into three smaller sections makes the ship less powerful. The seperation used by the Galaxy class does not fit this role.

[SirNitram]

feature creep. Not only are you trying to make it a master of all trades, you're leaving a damned structural weak point in while most of it's roles are for combat. Why not just make the damn thing a dedicated science ship and avoid, oh, all the problems and costs here?

I am trying to take it and design the ability for it to be more useful. Its not like there will be a dozen saucers per Stardrive. Its likely Starfleet would only build a single saucer per Stardrive and they would fit the number they needed. You call this bad yet call the Explorer and War GCS version good? Thats hypocritical since they are the same thing.

No, they aren't. The Classic Galaxy was a fucking disaster. The War Galaxy, for her mass, was a decent combatant.. But guess what? They've got better now. Of course, instead of making it useful for the choices she's probably suited for(She would be a great population carrier to new territories, given her size and quarters, and we know she's good with anoms), you are trying to make it a warship when there's far better and smaller designs availiable.

And the Prometheus kicked ridiculous amounts of ass despite seperating, yes, I myself have pointed this out, only to be contested by you and others. If you're going to be against seperation for the logical reasons against it, at least be consistant, even if the world we talk about isn't.

What the hell are you talking about? I am against seperation when it comes to combat. Seperating into three smaller sections makes the ship less powerful. The seperation used by the Galaxy class does not fit this role.

Uh-huh. Which is why you propose the Saucer flying around the atmosphere like a giant fucking skeet, waiting to be blown up.

[Alyeska]

No, they aren't. The Classic Galaxy was a fucking disaster. The War Galaxy, for her mass, was a decent combatant.. But guess what? They've got better now. Of course, instead of making it useful for the choices she's probably suited for(She would be a great population carrier to new territories, given her size and quarters, and we know she's good with anoms), you are trying to make it a warship when there's far better and smaller designs availiable.

Better? Not exactly. Some of my designs are better then whats been shown or no other design like it exists.

Uh-huh. Which is why you propose the Saucer flying around the atmosphere like a giant fucking skeet, waiting to be blown up.

I left the option for it open under preconditions. Only a fucking idiot would fly it when it could be taken out. Maybe it can enter the atmosphere so it can land to let troops off if needed. I left the option open for potential circumstances it could be useful. Furthermore you condemed my entire idea on just this alone.

[SirNitram]

No, they aren't. The Classic Galaxy was a fucking disaster. The War Galaxy, for her mass, was a decent combatant.. But guess what? They've got better now. Of course, instead of making it useful for the choices she's probably suited for(She would be a great population carrier to new territories, given her size and quarters, and we know she's good with anoms), you are trying to make it a warship when there's far better and smaller designs availiable.

Better? Not exactly. Some of my designs are better then whats been shown or no other design like it exists.

Only they're alot bigger(Cost more) and have a glaring structural weakness.

Uh-huh. Which is why you propose the Saucer flying around the atmosphere like a giant fucking skeet, waiting to be blown up.

I left the option for it open under preconditions. Only a fucking idiot would fly it when it could be taken out. Maybe it can enter the atmosphere so it can land to let troops off if needed. I left the option open for potential circumstances it could be useful. Furthermore you condemed my entire idea on just this alone.

No, Alyeska. I have condemned the entire idea because it's fucking feature creep, and trying to turn a spaceframe far more suited for long transport or scientific work into a warship when superior warships exist. That you proposed perhaps the most moronic idea for a Seperation yet is merely icing(Honestly, what situation requires 'close support' from a Saucer if the opposition can't attack it? Your exact words.).

If you absolutely must try and transform the Galaxy into a warship, take hint from the real world and pick one design and focus yourself. You don't seen any Nimitz-class carriers with velcro-on 16" guns do you?

[Lord Pounder]

It seems a nice idea in theory. But isn't a Galaxy Class Saucer rather large and material heavy? For the cost of a new saucer i'm sure you could build a more specific ship like a Defiant or Intrepid. The carrier saucer has potential however.

[Ted C]

If you want a better Galaxy, fuse the damn saucer on so it isn't a structural weak point, load her 'civilian' bays with more scientific equipment, and use her endurance to observe anomalies well away from battle lines. Warships, hell, you've got Defiants and Prometheuses and Sovereigns for that.

A standardized power supply and propulsion system would probably provide an advantage in manufacturing efficiency. The ability of the stardrives to hold their own in combat against the usual threats to the Federation would provide a substantial improvement in combat readiness.

The only change I'd make to Alyeska's idea would be that these things need to dump their saucers before going on combat missions. Any combat-oriented saucer sections should be low in mass and volume to minimize stress at the join. They should preferably separate and fight independent of the stardrive, but that will put them at a disadvantage if the fight goes badly and they need to retreat: the saucer probably won't be able to keep up with the stardrive when running at warp.

[Isolder74]

This is not too bad of an idea. It takes the detatchable nature of the saucer and turns it into a way to optimise the ship from mission to mission. Would be cheaper too. You could build one cruiser for many missions and could base it around a fleet center with the option to quickly turn it into an attack craft. It would be like having a half dozen ships for the price of one.

[Howedar]

Point of fact: While the Galaxy saucer separation point is obviously not a good thing from a structural standpoint, to my knowledge we have never seen one fail. Whatever the reason (extra reinforcement, magical SIFs, etc) the saucer separation joint does not seem to be any weaker than any other part of the ship. If you're going to strengthen the rest of the hull then the joint would be an obvious area needing work, but unless you're changing everything then I see no particular need to do away with the joint.

[Alyeska]

No, Alyeska. I have condemned the entire idea because it's fucking feature creep, and trying to turn a spaceframe far more suited for long transport or scientific work into a warship when superior warships exist. That you proposed perhaps the most moronic idea for a Seperation yet is merely icing(Honestly, what situation requires 'close support' from a Saucer if the opposition can't attack it? Your exact words.).

If you absolutely must try and transform the Galaxy into a warship, take hint from the real world and pick one design and focus yourself. You don't seen any Nimitz-class carriers with velcro-on 16" guns do you?

Are you quite finished acting like an ass?

[SirNitram]

Are you quite finished acting like an ass?

That depends. Are you ready to discuss the innate problems with your proposal?