Daystrom Institute Technical Library
https://mail.ditl.org/forum/
Funny, I was going to suggest the evidence is worse for the same reasonsMikey wrote:I think the evidence from "Conundrum" is BETTER for having been mentioned by amnesiacs. As has been shown, all the crew's skills and professional knowledge were intact, but their assessment of the ship couldn't be colored by Starfleet's general attitudes of appeasement or deception about the role of a vessel.I'd like to hear it from a SF crew that isn't under alien control of the week.
No, Mikey's right - stripping out all the Federation brainwashing means a far more honest and accurate appraisal of the ship than would otherwise be the case. These are after all the same people who honestly believe that genocide is less harmful to a species than cultural contamination.kostmayer wrote:Funny, I was going to suggest the evidence is worse for the same reasons
The E-D was frequently seen patrolling the Romulan Neutral zone - a battleship's role. It was also rountinely sent to investigate possible hostile incursions. It was never pulled out of a battle line to go and look at an interesting star or nebula. It's a battleship.I don't think it was built as a battleship, or that its main role was as a battleship, hence - despite similarities to one, it isn't a battleship.
What Starfleet likes to call it is utterly irrelevent. What matters is its armament and what it's used for. The Invincible class aircraft carriers are technically "through deck cruisers" - but I doubt anyone would consider them anything but aircraft carriers in practice.Deepcrush wrote:Ok, there are enough good points on both sides of the GCS battleship v not battleship that now I'm not sure anymore... Though the crew calls it a battleship, the idea of SF building a battleship is bad score.
On the contrary, they have identical design ideals - a balance of firepower, mobility and protection.Also, being that ships in space don't have the same design ideals as one on earth would...
Correct. What's this got to do with anything?Sidenote.
Seafort, the Vor'Cha is called the Vor'cha class attack cruiser.
Thats probably why this argument won't be won by eitherside. I'd say what Starfleet calls it is very relevant.Captain Seafort wrote:What Starfleet likes to call it is utterly irrelevent. What matters is its armament and what it's used for. The Invincible class aircraft carriers are technically "through deck cruisers" - but I doubt anyone would consider them anything but aircraft carriers in practice.
It may have been the most powerful ship class in the fleet, but it was also (and probably still is) this ship class with the greatest diplomatic facilities. It also had extensive scientific facilities. It was sent on many diplomatic and scientific missions as well. And they're hardly likely to pull a battle ready ship out of a battleline to go look at a nebula that isn't going anywhere - regardless of the ships function.Captain Seafort wrote:The E-D was frequently seen patrolling the Romulan Neutral zone - a battleship's role. It was also rountinely sent to investigate possible hostile incursions. It was never pulled out of a battle line to go and look at an interesting star or nebula. It's a battleship.
I'd say it's relevent in terms of what Stafleet wants the ship to be considered as, and possibly what they they consider to be its primary role, even when this is contradicted by its actual use.kostmayer wrote:Thats probably why this argument won't be won by eitherside. I'd say what Starfleet calls it is very relevant.
Nobody's disputing the fact that the GCS has extensive scientific and diplomatic facilities (although the latter isn't really relevent - the Atlantic Charter was signed aboard HMS Prince Of Wales, and the Japanese surrender aboard the USS Missouri). What's being pointed out is that a ship's primary role is defined as the one that it drops everything else to go and do. In the case of the Galaxy that's war, and since it's both the strongest ship in the Federation fleet (at least prior to the Sov) and one of the strongest ships in the Alpha Quadrant, that makes it a battleshipCaptain Seafort wrote:It may have been the most powerful ship class in the fleet, but it was also (and probably still is) this ship class with the greatest diplomatic facilities. It also had extensive scientific facilities. It was sent on many diplomatic and scientific missions as well. And they're hardly likely to pull a battle ready ship out of a battleline to go look at a nebula that isn't going anywhere - regardless of the ships function.
And its points like this that leave me so stuck.kostmayer wrote:Thats probably why this argument won't be won by eitherside. I'd say what Starfleet calls it is very relevant.Captain Seafort wrote:What Starfleet likes to call it is utterly irrelevent. What matters is its armament and what it's used for. The Invincible class aircraft carriers are technically "through deck cruisers" - but I doubt anyone would consider them anything but aircraft carriers in practice.
It may have been the most powerful ship class in the fleet, but it was also (and probably still is) this ship class with the greatest diplomatic facilities. It also had extensive scientific facilities. It was sent on many diplomatic and scientific missions as well. And they're hardly likely to pull a battle ready ship out of a battleline to go look at a nebula that isn't going anywhere - regardless of the ships function.Captain Seafort wrote:The E-D was frequently seen patrolling the Romulan Neutral zone - a battleship's role. It was also rountinely sent to investigate possible hostile incursions. It was never pulled out of a battle line to go and look at an interesting star or nebula. It's a battleship.
Because this is the ship we most often see the GCS faced with... along with the D'D. The Vor'cha is a cruiser and I'm not sure what the D'D has ever been called. So we have the equal of the GCS being titled a crusier... Also, how many civs were on the Iowa class again?Correct. What's this got to do with anything?
Wow, the stuck up brit firing a chakat comment after you did just that very thing with GK... Nice... If it were possible, I would think less of you...My eyes are just fine. Yours, however, seem knackered. Or you're copying Blackstar's stunt of ignoring every bit you don't like. Read the sentence you quoted, along with Rochey's post.
Ah-HA! The determination was only made when Picard was informed about the armament. Going purely by the armament stats, yes the GCS is a Battleship, he was not told, "We're armed with X Y Z but our mission statement is "To seek out new life and new civilizations"etc. ect. If you were told only that your ship had X Weapons and they were obscenely powerfull, you'd assume the same thing. The statement is made without necessary other information.Rochey wrote:I'm not 100% certain, but I think the exchange went something like:Wasn't it Worf who decided that they were a Battleship...? Again, someone speaking with no understanding of purpose isn't really a good form of judgement. Until I hear a NOT MESSED UP crewman stat the GCS is a Battleship then its not.
Worf: "We are armed with X Y Z."
Picard: "We're a battleship."
Worf: "It apperas so."
I'll try to find exact quotes in a little while.
"Faced"? When did we ever see a GCS fight a Vor'cha? Without the information provided by an actual engagement, "facing" a ship means nothing. The E-D also "faced" Galors several times, and could rip them apart in seconds flat.Deepcrush wrote:Because this is the ship we most often see the GCS faced with... along with the D'D. The Vor'cha is a cruiser and I'm not sure what the D'D has ever been called. So we have the equal of the GCS being titled a crusier...
None. This is because the Iowa wasn't designed or controlled by idiots.Also, how many civs were on the Iowa class again?
The crew were indeed in full possesion of their abilities - their professional knowledge had been left completely intact. Get that through your thick skull.The point is that the crew was NOT in full use of their abilities which is rather important when making a judgement call on what a ship class is. The Connie was a Battlecruiser yet we never hear of the Excelsior being called a battleship... The point behind this is to add some common sense. Granted, not your strong suit but we'll have to live with it.
No, the information was made with all the necessary information, and the crew realised that they were aboard a battleship. Starfleet's idiotic habit of using battleships as science vessels doesn't change the nature of the beast. As for the mission statement, the RAF's motto is Per Ardu ad Astra - through adversity to the stars. It doesn't mean they fly spaceships.me,myself and I wrote:Ah-HA! The determination was only made when Picard was informed about the armament. Going purely by the armament stats, yes the GCS is a Battleship, he was not told, "We're armed with X Y Z but our mission statement is "To seek out new life and new civilizations"etc. ect. If you were told only that your ship had X Weapons and they were obscenely powerfull, you'd assume the same thing. The statement is made without necessary other information.
Faced with, not against... also it's been stated and shown that a GCS can eat up a Galor, no one has said otherwise."Faced"? When did we ever see a GCS fight a Vor'cha? Without the information provided by an actual engagement, "facing" a ship means nothing. The E-D also "faced" Galors several times, and could rip them apart in seconds flat.
Agreed, they were idiots, who I would love to hang from one of the trees in my back yard and stab and beat them till I couldn't stand anymore... but the GCS was built with combat, s/e and civil concerns all in one. This isn't the mark of a battleship.None. This is because the Iowa wasn't designed or controlled by idiots.
Hey! I need this think skull to help bash that jumbo stuck up ego of yours! Its not easy work you know... the pay sucks and worse I have to leave here and go home to the Government...The crew were indeed in full possesion of their abilities - their professional knowledge had been left completely intact. Get that through your thick skull.
Evidence...?No, the information was made with all the necessary information, and the crew realised that they were aboard a battleship. Starfleet's idiotic habit of using battleships as science vessels doesn't change the nature of the beast. As for the mission statement, the RAF's motto is Per Ardu ad Astra - through adversity to the stars. It doesn't mean they fly spaceships.
It's the mark of a badly designed battleship, but the fact that it's got battleship-scale firepower and protection, coupled with the fact that it is routinely used as a battleship, means that that's its primary role, regardless of what else Starfleet uses it as.Deepcrush wrote:the GCS was built with combat, s/e and civil concerns all in one. This isn't the mark of a battleship.
Their professional knowledge was intact, as was their understanding of their stations - Ro and Worf instinctively used their controls immediately after the mind-blanking thingy was used. If you were suddenly dumped onto an Iowa and told you were one of the crew and had been for years, you'd still be able to tell it was a battleship from its armament and armour, regardless of whether or not you knew what the ship's specific mission was.Though, back to topic, they had all their knowledge... minus their mission, or understanding of their ship, or duties, or crew, or purpose, or etc... I'm not going to bug with it... you get the point. They had a lot missing. Too much for me to trust their call on it. When I hear someone who isn't messed up then I'll call it a battleship... until then, I'm just going to stick with GCS...
Wrong, its the mark of a ship built for war just as much as something else. That doesn't make it a battleship. The Sov is a battleship as I see it. The Excelsior is a battleship (of her time of course) as I see it. The GCS just doesn't carry it. Not by what you've shown.It's the mark of a badly designed battleship, but the fact that it's got battleship-scale firepower and protection, coupled with the fact that it is routinely used as a battleship, means that that's its primary role, regardless of what else Starfleet uses it as.
Again, what the f**k does the Iowa have to do with the GCS. Stick with something that atleast comes close to compare. If I popped up on a ship that had a bunch of weapons and then a room filled with kids and a zoo and a dance hall. Battleship wouldn't be my thought. Though, trek doesn't inspire much thought to reason really, but thats not the point. The point is there is as much reason for the GCS not to be a battleship as there is for the GCS to be a battleship. We are asking you for a reason to declare it a battleship. If you can't find one or need time to do so, then just say so. The thread isn't going anywhere.Their professional knowledge was intact, as was their understanding of their stations - Ro and Worf instinctively used their controls immediately after the mind-blanking thingy was used. If you were suddenly dumped onto an Iowa and told you were one of the crew and had been for years, you'd still be able to tell it was a battleship from its armament and armour, regardless of whether or not you knew what the ship's specific mission was.