www.ditl.org

Now now, no fair using your own real life things like the presence or lack of a model while denying mine.

Actually wait a minute. Didn't first contact come out in '96, and Insurection in '98. Didn't DS9 go until '99? Actually I'm surprised. With nearly every other ship out there in those DS9 finale battles you'd think they'd have added in a Sov. Maybe it was a deliberate decision to keep the ship out of the fighting in RL as well as in universe.

And again if it were a battleship why short your torpedo loads to add in things like spacious quarters, libraries, extra holodecks, and large shuttlebays that don't help at all in battle. That would seem like criminal negligence. Ablative armor was around. Why not bring the design together to take advantage of it the way the defiant does. Why have rows of windows?


Also again. You are offering no evidence at all that it is a dedicated battleship. Nothing. You have no shred of evidence in cannon. I don't think you even have any evidence from semi cannonical sources like posters, Star Trek Magazine, tech manuals, anything. I don't think the word "battleship" appears anywhere outside of fandom, nor does any reference that this thing was built to be purely dedicated to war. You don't even have evidence that it was ever meant to be sent into battle. Just that it can fight should it get into battle.

I've got a pile of evidence for it's multirole use.

Give some evidence that this thing is a dedicated warship like the defiant not the next iteration of multirole ships that look like it.

I have as much evidence for my belief as for the fact that the Defiant is a warship too - not much. I just can't imagine arming an explorer that much without the intention of it being a warship. And, "not much" is how much unrefuted evidence has been supplied for it NOT being a warship.

Teaos wrote:Top brass may not be military master minds but they are not that stupid.

Yes they are. These are the same people who took the most advanced and destructive ship in the fleet - whether you want to call it a warship or an explorer - along with the man most uniquely qualified to fight the Borg, and purposefully KEPT THEM AWAY from a battle upon which quite literally hung the fate of Earth and possibly the Federation.

And I think the end-all, be-all of this debate is simply this: I don't care what you want to call it (even though its classification IS a military taxonomy!) - the Sovereign is the most heavily armed, most dangerous ship in the fleet. If you had to pick 5 Starfleet vessels, all of one class, with which to fight a decisive battle, wouldn't it be the Sovereign?

No it would be the Promethius.

The top brass wanted Picard away from thr Borg because they thought he might be unstable. A smart thing to do since he was still hearing them in his head. It worked out at the end but he could have just as easily gone nuts and started fighting on the Borgs side.

Teaos wrote:No it would be the Promethius.

Then the same number of Sovereigns would kick thos Prometheus' a**es.

The top brass wanted Picard away from thr Borg...

And that turned out to be sound strategy...

And that turned out to be sound strategy...

They had a reason and a bloody good one to. It would have been a shit load worse if Picard had shown up and gone nuts than just stayed away.

Then the same number of Sovereigns would kick thos Prometheus' a**es.

Kind of pointless to debate which ship would win. But the Promethius is 15 powerful ship vs 5 less agile Sovereigns. Considering a lot of the work in battle is done by humans and not computers sensory over load and being shot at from so many different angels would screw you. You could not keep your damaged side away from them.

Finally someone else supports the Prometheus! No one stands a chance against them.

Do you forget already that it was you and I against Rochey and Seafort for 12 pages of Promethius related fun.

I never compained about the Prometheus per se, I complained about MVAM in particular - the basic Prometheus design would make a good cruiser if they removed all the separation nonsense.

As for the Sovereign, it demonstrated the ability to withstand fire from the Borg, multiple Son'a BATTLESHIPS, and the Scimitar (a ship carrying more weapons than any other ship we've seen. It's described in FC as the most powerful ship in the fleet and "should be on the front line." In FC, while it was not sent against teh Borg, due to Starfleet concerns about Picard, it was sent to patrol the Romulan Neutral Zone, to prevent them taking advantage of the sitution. Such a mission implies that it can hold its own against Romulan forces. It's a warship. A badly designed warship (though a good deal better than the Galaxy) but a warship nonetheless.

Mikey wrote: And I think the end-all, be-all of this debate is simply this: I don't care what you want to call it (even though its classification IS a military taxonomy!) - the Sovereign is the most heavily armed, most dangerous ship in the fleet.

I was going to say nobody would argue the last part, but I guess they do.

Regardless it is a big powerful ship. And at the time of First Contact was the most powerful ship in starfleet just as Seafort says.

However in the Galaxies time it was also the fastest and best armed ship in starfleet. If you want to call the Galaxy class a warship, then fine, the Sov is a warship too.

However what we're (at least I'm) talking about is that a number of people seemed to think that the Sov was a PURE warship. More like a big brother to the defiant. Its role to be purely as a combatant without making concession in cost or combat capability in order to accomplish the multirole mission profile of a Galaxy.

That's what is incorrect. The ship is a multirole Galaxy type ship built right not a larger promethius/defiant type ship built wrong.

And Mikey there is plenty of evidence that the Defiant is meant primarily/exclusivley as a warship. There are piles of dialogue to that effect. Also there is a range of extra evidence such as the lack of posh quarters etc etc. Even the Promethius, with its limited screentime, is explicitly described as a ship designed to fight.

However despite multiple movies nothing even vaguely like that ever surfaces for the Sov.

All the evidence points at it being multirole, with at least its supply of torpedos comprimised to allow for multirole facilities like the posh quarters, fighterless multiple shuttlebays, large dinning hall, and other luxuries.

And as all the propenents of the pure warship side of things state its overall layout is stupid for a dedicated warship. However it makes sense from a multirole perspective.


It even looks rather like a modified Galaxy, as opposed to the Promethius and Defiant.

And again while they did chose to send it to the Romulan boarder to get it out of the way of the borg cube. The dialgue from Insurection shows that have been spending their time engaging in multiple long diplomatic missions and archeological expiditions.

Not, you know, getting involved in the dominion war, despite the ship being availible to both starfleet and apperantly the design teams in real life.

And of course there are the statements by the real life people who wrote and designed the thing.

Sovereign > Prometheus.

End of debate.

However in the Galaxies time it was also the fastest and best armed ship in starfleet. If you want to call the Galaxy class a warship, then fine, the Sov is a warship too.

By dictionary definition, yes they are.

Also there is a range of extra evidence such as the lack of posh quarters etc etc.

I believe I already wrote quite a large post which clearly showed this was due to size constraints. If the Defiant was the size of a Galaxy, it would likely have similar sized quarters.

That's what is incorrect. The ship is a multirole Galaxy type ship built right not a larger promethius/defiant type ship built wrong.

And yet we never see it checking out local stars, or spatial anomalies.
The only non-military function we have seen it do, is host a diplomatic function. As I pointed out before, this is hardly unheard of for warships.

However despite multiple movies nothing even vaguely like that ever surfaces for the Sov.

Such as what? The fact that no one ever says 'this ship is purely for combat'? No one ever stated it was a multirole vessel either.

All the evidence points at it being multirole,

What eveidence? The fact that it held a party?

with at least its supply of torpedos comprimised to allow for multirole facilities

Proof of this?

the posh quarters,

So? Every Starfleet ship has these quarters. Its just a stupid design.

fighterless multiple shuttlebays,

So? We have never seen a ship with fighter bays. Does this mean Starfleet has zero warships?

large dinning hall,

Again, simple stupidity on behalf of Starfleet.
And how does having a dining hall preclude the possibility of it being a warship?

and other luxuries.

Modern warships also have luxuries. Does this mean they are not warships?

And one other thing. Where are all the extensive science labs, and other large non-combat areas on the ship? We've never seen any...

And as all the propenents of the pure warship side of things state its overall layout is stupid for a dedicated warship.

Why do you insist that the fact it has a stupid design precludes it from being a warship? The phaser is a ridiculous design for a sidearm. Does this mean it is not a weapon?

However it makes sense from a multirole perspective.

No, it dosen't. That design makes no sense at all.

It even looks rather like a modified Galaxy, as opposed to the Promethius and Defiant.

Er, what? Nearly every Starfleet ship follows similar designs.
Also, the Prometheus looks a lot like the Intrepid. Does this mean it is not a warship?

And again while they did chose to send it to the Romulan boarder to get it out of the way of the borg cube.

Because they thought Picard couldn't be trusted.

The dialgue from Insurection shows that have been spending their time engaging in multiple long diplomatic missions and archeological expiditions.

Care to post examples?

Not, you know, getting involved in the dominion war, despite the ship being availible to both starfleet and apperantly the design teams in real life.

Er, wasn't all of the Sovereign films set after the Dominion war? It would be quite a feat to deploy a ship that dosen't exist yet.

And of course there are the statements by the real life people who wrote and designed the thing.

So? These same people probably think the Galaxy class is a good design...

However in the Galaxies time it was also the fastest and best armed ship in starfleet. If you want to call the Galaxy class a warship, then fine, the Sov is a warship too.

By dictionary definition, yes they are.

Also there is a range of extra evidence such as the lack of posh quarters etc etc.

I believe I already wrote quite a large post which clearly showed this was due to size constraints. If the Defiant was the size of a Galaxy, it would likely have similar sized quarters.

That's what is incorrect. The ship is a multirole Galaxy type ship built right not a larger promethius/defiant type ship built wrong.

And yet we never see it checking out local stars, or spatial anomalies.
The only non-military function we have seen it do, is host a diplomatic function. As I pointed out before, this is hardly unheard of for warships.

However despite multiple movies nothing even vaguely like that ever surfaces for the Sov.

Such as what? The fact that no one ever says 'this ship is purely for combat'? No one ever stated it was a multirole vessel either.

All the evidence points at it being multirole,

What eveidence? The fact that it held a party?

with at least its supply of torpedos comprimised to allow for multirole facilities

Proof of this?

the posh quarters,

So? Every Starfleet ship has these quarters. Its just a stupid design.

fighterless multiple shuttlebays,

So? We have never seen a ship with fighter bays. Does this mean Starfleet has zero warships?

large dinning hall,

Again, simple stupidity on behalf of Starfleet.
And how does having a dining hall preclude the possibility of it being a warship?

and other luxuries.

Modern warships also have luxuries. Does this mean they are not warships?

And one other thing. Where are all the extensive science labs, and other large non-combat areas on the ship? We've never seen any...

And as all the propenents of the pure warship side of things state its overall layout is stupid for a dedicated warship.

Why do you insist that the fact it has a stupid design precludes it from being a warship? The phaser is a ridiculous design for a sidearm. Does this mean it is not a weapon?

However it makes sense from a multirole perspective.

No, it dosen't. That design makes no sense at all.

It even looks rather like a modified Galaxy, as opposed to the Promethius and Defiant.

Er, what? Nearly every Starfleet ship follows similar designs.
Also, the Prometheus looks a lot like the Intrepid. Does this mean it is not a warship?

And again while they did chose to send it to the Romulan boarder to get it out of the way of the borg cube.

Because they thought Picard couldn't be trusted.

The dialgue from Insurection shows that have been spending their time engaging in multiple long diplomatic missions and archeological expiditions.

Care to post examples?

Not, you know, getting involved in the dominion war, despite the ship being availible to both starfleet and apperantly the design teams in real life.

Er, wasn't all of the Sovereign films set after the Dominion war? It would be quite a feat to deploy a ship that dosen't exist yet.

And of course there are the statements by the real life people who wrote and designed the thing.

So? These same people probably think the Galaxy class is a good design...

Rochey beat me to the punch, but here's a few extras -

We have stablished this before; no shipborne fighters =/= "not a warship."

I toured the battleship USS Missouri when I visited Pearl Harbor. It had a GINORMOUS mess hall - along with the distinction of hosting Japan's surrender to the US after WWII - and she didn't carry any fighter aircraft. By your definition, this would mean that she was an ambassadorial liner. Plus, she has quarters for marines - by your definition, this would mean that the Missouri was an amphibious assault craft!

Aircraft carriers were used to recover the capsules of the Apollo flights. Does this mean that (I believe they were, at the time, Essex-class) aircraft carriers are scientific research ships rather than warships?

Again warship has a few definitions, including "a government ship that is available for waging war " so Novas and Oberths are warships. So if you want to call it a warship fine. The discussion here is whether it is a multipurpose ship, designed to undertake a range of missions, some of which are not related to battle, or a pure warship designed purely for war.

Can we at least agree that the Galaxy is not a pure warship?

Also as for the quotes Rochey you're going to have to go back a couple pages where I posted them. They kind of stand out in the post. Ah what the heck I'll find it again.

RIKER
They need us to mediate some
territorial dispute...

PICARD
(frustrated)
We can't delay the archaeological
expedition to Hanoran Two. It
would put us into the middle of
monsoon season...

RIKER
(can't be helped)
The Diplomatic Corps is busy with
Dominion negotiations.

PICARD
(sighs)
... so they need us to put out one
more brush fire.
(beat)
Anyone remember when we used to
be explorers?

So what we have is the ship being assigned to multiple diplomatic situations. A diplomatic situation that is implied to require a lengthy expenditure of time, because it will apperantly push them from presumably a good time for an expidition to the middle of a different season.

If you skipped that post you also may have missed the part about Starfleet NEVER assigning the ship to combat duty. The closest being sending it to Romulan space temporarily when the Borg showed up to keep picard out of the way.

Rochey made a big deal about telling what a ships job is by the assignments it is given. By that logic the thing has fighting as a secondary or worse role because it is assigned to diplomatic duty twice, an archeological expidition once, transport duty once, and to investigate the positronic signal. All fighting that the ship has getten into has been due to getting jumped or Picard disobeying orders. Same as would have happened in a Galaxy.

Also rehashing from another post you missed in the Trek timeline the Enterprise E is launched in 2372, First Contact occurs in 2373, the dominion war goes from 2373 to 2375, Insurection occurs during the Final episode of DS9. In real life First Contact also occurs first. Coming out in 1996 while DS9 runs for three more years. Plenty of time to include the ship at least in one of the big fleet scenes if they really wanted to.

Ok enough rehashing for Rochey.

On the fighter things. Not having fighters doesn't make you a multirole vessel. Adding multiple large shuttlebays and not filling them with military vessels does.


So, for example, lets say the US made an aircraft carrier, but instead of having it full of fighter aircraft, they expanded the elevators and internals so it could launch things like Cessnas and lots of Helicopters. And then we sent the thing out to study Mayan ruins. Then I would call it a multirole vessel, because it had modifications not related to its capacity as a surface combatant, and it is obviously being used for a different purpose. Yes you could still call it a warship, it could still launch some fighters if the situation called for it, maybe in wartime you could kick out all the non-combat aircraft. But it's multirole. It isn't a pure warship.

I'd be even more suspicious of the thing if we got into a major war and it was still doing expiditions and the like instead of being deployed.


crap I want to say more but I gotta go.

If you're are going to speak in absolutes, then you have made the debate academic without any resolution - there has never been in the history of mankind a "pure" warship, and there never will be.

So, for example, lets say the US made an aircraft carrier, but instead of having it full of fighter aircraft, they expanded the elevators and internals so it could launch things like Cessnas and lots of Helicopters. And then we sent the thing out to study Mayan ruins. Then I would call it a multirole vessel, because it had modifications not related to its capacity as a surface combatant, and it is obviously being used for a different purpose.

So you're saying that this aircraft carrier can no longer be referred to as a warship? That's ludicrous.

On the fighter things. Not having fighters doesn't make you a multirole vessel. Adding multiple large shuttlebays and not filling them with military vessels does.

This argument would be perfectly valid IF there was any evidence of any other ship carrying fighters - of which there is none. You can't say a ship doesn't qualify as one thing or another because it can't do the impossible or the unheard-of; there is NO evidence that Federation fighters are capable of spaceborne operations, nor is there any evidence, if it were possible, that Starfleet ever used them thusly. To use a RL example I have used before, that would be analagous to saying that the Missouri wasn't really a battleship because it didn't fly through the air.