www.ditl.org

Well, not the absolute limit, given the size of starbases like Spacedock and Starbase 74, but likely the limit of their shipbuilding capability, seeing as even the future ships we've seen have all been smaller than the Galaxy.

That was the point I was trying to make, but I see I could have worded it better.

Bigger more advanced ships = lots of space, but bigger target, more blindspots, less maneouvrability, more power requirement

Smaller more advanced ships = less space, but smaller target, less blindspots, more maneouvrability, less power requirement

Isn't it pretty obvious to have the smaller ones? If technology gets smaller (which it does, as it becomes more advanced), why should the casing of the technology get bigger?

Hi, I'm a few days late.

From a strictly logical standpoint, she seems such a natural progression. The whole idea of various blind spots is inherent on most Starfleet vessels, no? And truthfully, it is so well armed, that I don't see a lot of ships being able to avoid. As for its size: Yes, 2 smaller vessels might be more useful, but a small number of these as deterence explorers makes sense, if for nothing than its grandeur.

Teaos wrote:They try to move out of your main firing arc you try to bring them in. You pretty much will get shots in at them from all angels adventually.

As far as trek ships go the Soverign in my opinion is the best. Not just because she is the newist but because she makes the most sense.

Isint that what a tractor beam is for...

i love it..

Has anyone noticed that the Soverign is to the Galaxy as the Excelsior was to the Constitution. In some future series I would love to see an old Galaxy being stolen and a brand new Soverign with a new Transwarp drive chases it out of spacedock, mirroring the chase scene in Star Trek III.

I don't think most ships are capable of using the tractor beam effectivly in combat. Needs special circumstances to be used.

And I agree that this size may be the most practical size for ships at the moment.

Captain Seafort wrote:They're probably secondary arrays, for taking out BoP-sized ships while the main arrays focus on enemy capships.

And they expected there to be so many of these coming from that direction that they needed to be able to fire on six at a time?

It just seems excessive to me. Not a major deal, but it niggles at me.

Captain Seafort wrote:We've only ever seen the Defiant and the Ent-E use Q-torps, and the DS9 TM suggests that they're more difficult to manufacture, so the PTs are there for general use, while the QTs are for either finishing an enemy off, or for taking on priority targets.

But those difficulties aren't going to last forever; for now it makes sense to use a mix perhaps, but when the torps are easier to make and there are volume discounts on resources or whatever, we should see ships with pure quantum loads. And that's what I would like to see on the Sovereign.

It also bothers me that the ship is smaller than a Galaxy. Every Enterprise had been the biggest, strongest and best of her day... until the Sovereign. I'd rather have seen it scaled up 25% or so to give twice the volume.

We've never seen any Fed ship bigger than a Galaxy - it may represent the upper limit of their shipbuilding capabilities.[/quote]

On the size thing, no matter how much better the tech is in the Sovereign, the fact remains that if you took a Galaxy sized frame and put that same tech in, you would have a more capable vessel. Bigger has always meant more room for more equipment to do more stuff.

And the upper limit of their shipbuilding capabilities? In all those cases, my argument isn't really that these things can't be justified from an in-show point of view. More that it just doesn't FEEL right to me. In my mind the Enterprise should be the biggest and best. And the upper limit of Federation shipbuilding capabilities are whatever the writers decide that they are...

Bigger more advanced ships = lots of space, but bigger target, more blindspots, less maneouvrability, more power requirement

Smaller more advanced ships = less space, but smaller target, less blindspots, more maneouvrability, less power requirement

More blind spots? I think we've seen how Sovereign has dealt with this problem.

More power requirement? Huge amoutns of more power available, due to the increased space availabel for the core - which means more power avialable for active systems, as I had mentioned earlier.

'Trek has always embraced the idea that bigger is better when it comes to ship designs. I had here and earlier tried to give some explanantion for this, but saying "well, they're wrong" is a moot point even if you can argue it. What's been shown on-screen is what we have to go on, and what's been shown is that bigger ships are stronger ships.

We can't assume that tech development in the 'Trek universe is the same as our own, but maybe some degree of miniaturization is coinicident with advancement - which would help explain why the Sovereign is smaller than the Galaxy. But in general we continue to see that the larger the ships, the better the performance - even on first sighting of an alien design, the awe and respect shown to it seems to be proportional to its size. E.g., Borg cube; Dominion battleship; Romulan D'deridex, etc.

Starfleet has more style than to just build a big ship and cram it full of as much stuff as possible. The Sovereigns design may have a very practical design we just dont hear about. Like movement or speed.

Starfleet has more style than to just build a big ship and cram it full of as much stuff as possible. The Sovereigns design may have a very practical design we just dont hear about. Like movement or speed.

While its possible that the shape may make it slightly faster than others, this does not outweigh the number of defeciencies such a design would naturally have.

P.S. Congrats' on the promotion!

Although it may be a real-world justification, we have heard a number of times that the sleeker look of the more modern ship designs does, in fact, help create a more efficient warp field.

Also there may a lot of people in the design department that are like Tom Paris and want a ship to look cool.

Although it may be a real-world justification, we have heard a number of times that the sleeker look of the more modern ship designs does, in fact, help create a more efficient warp field.

I think that was mentioned in one of the episodes. So it should be cannon.

Also there may a lot of people in the design department that are like Tom Paris and want a ship to look cool.

That wouldn't surprise me in the least...

Rochey wrote:

Starfleet has more style than to just build a big ship and cram it full of as much stuff as possible. The Sovereigns design may have a very practical design we just dont hear about. Like movement or speed.

While its possible that the shape may make it slightly faster than others, this does not outweigh the number of defeciencies such a design would naturally have.

Slightly faster? Speed is the best defence!
Also the maneouvreability could be vastly improved with varying ships.

I think they were pointing out the fact that we dont know for sure the shape helps the speed not that speed is unimportant.