www.ditl.org

Rochey wrote:Aye, it seems likely that the AM pods were breached, causing the blast.

Of course, then we just have the stupidity of putting the pods litteraly right below the hull.

Easier to vent the AM if containment can't be maintained?

The UFP has never heard of the mystical device known as a tube?

Rochey wrote: Of course, then we just have the stupidity of putting the pods litteraly right below the hull.

one could assume that the most efficient place to put them is at the end of the warp core, keeping the pods elsewhere on the ship would require transporting the antimatter along a counduit of some sort requiring more containment fields. then if they had to dump them, they would need to purge the antimatter via another long conduit requiring another containment field. which if you are venting the antimater you are already loosing containment so if the containment in the conduit fails then you are basically venting the antimater into the ship. IMO no star trek ships seem to be designed in a function follows form mentality. federation ships tent to be more like works of art than anything

Well, personally........I'd rather design functional and survivable ships as opposed to floating statues.......................but that's just me.

Mark wrote:Well, personally........I'd rather design functional and survivable ships as opposed to floating statues.......................but that's just me.

well, your right... however i don't think there are many ships in star trek that are functional.

I hate to disagree, but the Soverign springs to mind rather quickly.

Mark wrote:I hate to disagree, but the Soverign springs to mind rather quickly.

It's better than the GCS, but it's still hugely wasteful of space. The only truly functional TNG+ design I can think of is the Defiant.

Kevsha wrote:

Mark wrote:Well, personally........I'd rather design functional and survivable ships as opposed to floating statues.......................but that's just me.

well, your right... however i don't think there are many ships in star trek that are functional.

EXCELSIOR, Defiant, Connie (org and refit), Miranda, Nebula, Akira, BoP, Klingon Cruisers (AC, BC), Cardassian Galors.

All have proven themselves able and well built for their needs. To say a ship isn't functional is stupid. They may not be the best that they can be but that doesn't mean they don't work. You have to remember that most of the people in the STU make GWBush look like a fucking super brain!

Rochey wrote:Aye, it seems likely that the AM pods were breached, causing the blast.

Of course, then we just have the stupidity of putting the pods litteraly right below the hull.

You are right of course, much better to put them much further inside the hull so if something goes wrong at least the suffering is short .


No no putting the high explosive stuff close to the surface so that it might explode "away" from the ship is a sensible approach similar to the munition storage on mbt's.

If the AM storage was the reason for the destruction I do not know but looking at the picture I tend to dismiss this, the damaged area does not seem to reach that far. On the other hand you can never exclude this possibility as secondary effect.

As I stated the AM storage pods are probably designed to explode AWAY from the ship but having a massive hull breach the armoured deck protecting the ship from an AM explosion was probably damaged which lead to the explosion reaching inner decks.....etc.... .

It is very unfortunatly but not a design fault. Compared to Defiant, Intrepid and yes Sovereign I think the Galaxy is the most well thought out design which suffers more heavy than any other ship from "bad" writing. They obviously though they need to show the audience how badass the villain of the week is by threaten to or blow up the strongest fed ship. Having done this repeadatly it is small wonder that this ship class suffers a rather bad reputation which is truly sad since it is not only the most capable ships but also one of the most beautiful ever designed for trek.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Mark wrote:I hate to disagree, but the Soverign springs to mind rather quickly.

It's better than the GCS, but it's still hugely wasteful of space. The only truly functional TNG+ design I can think of is the Defiant.

And she is also one of the new "generic" sci fi ships. What I mean is if you paint her slightly different she would not look out of place in any other sci-fi universe because there is very little screaming star trek or federation on her.

I like the ship to a degree mainly because of the crew but I think the design seems rushed and it doesn't look like a fed ship at all. Also they obviously had no idea what the ship should be capable of, you got episodes where it outperforms galaxys and you have episodes where she looks barley on par with a bird of prey....... but that is okey because you can argue away bad writing but no script can change how she looks..... .

Also I find it rather sad that the only definition of functional seems to be the combat worth of the vessel. Considering diplomatical or scientifc missions the defiant is not a functional vessel at all.

Atekimogus wrote:
And she is also one of the new "generic" sci fi ships. What I mean is if you paint her slightly different she would not look out of place in any other sci-fi universe because there is very little screaming star trek or federation on her.

I like the ship to a degree mainly because of the crew but I think the design seems rushed and it doesn't look like a fed ship at all. Also they obviously had no idea what the ship should be capable of, you got episodes where it outperforms galaxys and you have episodes where she looks barley on par with a bird of prey....... but that is okey because you can argue away bad writing but no script can change how she looks..... .

Also I find it rather sad that the only definition of functional seems to be the combat worth of the vessel. Considering diplomatical or scientifc missions the defiant is not a functional vessel at all.

That is because she was designed to be a combat vessel, so in that regard she is quite functional.

Just some advice: your opening a huge can of worms here, I can't keep track of how many times the board has had this exact same conversation and it usually ends in a lock, agreeing to disagree (after 20 odd pages) or someone storming off.

Atekimogus wrote:Also I find it rather sad that the only definition of functional seems to be the combat worth of the vessel. Considering diplomatical or scientifc missions the defiant is not a functional vessel at all.

For some on these forums that is all that they measure a ship by. Science labs, diplomatic facilities, ect are just wasteful when you could have put more guns on it.

m52nickerson wrote:
For some on these forums that is all that they measure a ship by. Science labs, diplomatic facilities, ect are just wasteful when you could have put more guns on it.

That is quite false and I suspect you know that. There have been more than a few statements made on this forum that people have no problem with a purpose built science vessel.

Someday I'm going to do a list of all the times the science labs have saved the ship. One that springs to mind is ST VI, where they were able to improvise a weapon to defeat Chang because they happened to have gaseous anomaly sensors aboard.

Cpl Kendall wrote:

m52nickerson wrote:
For some on these forums that is all that they measure a ship by. Science labs, diplomatic facilities, ect are just wasteful when you could have put more guns on it.

That is quite false and I suspect you know that. There have been more than a few statements made on this forum that people have no problem with a purpose built science vessel.

Keywords in your post "purpose built science vessel".