www.ditl.org

Reliant121 wrote:The Lakota class is awesome. Thats just itt. Compared to the god ship Defiant class, it drew? A hundred year old hulk of a ship beating the best starfleet has to offer? Thats a testiment to the Excelsior class hull.

It's solidly designed, and the Lakota-refit gave it some much-needed punch, but it certainly isn't capable of one-shotting V'ger, as Deep would probably argue if he got a bit carried away.

Captain/Commander Benteen took on the best starfleet has to offer (worf, sisko and the rest of them) and drew! You cant tell me thats not bloody fantastic for a ship that is so aged.

Being the best that TNG-era Starfleet has to offer isn't exactly the greatest of compliments.

I dont mean to say that either the Defiant or the Lakota are absolutely almighty. Both have their faults. What i'm saying is that the Lakota, for a hundred year old design, did fantastically well against such a powerful ship.

In truth to say someone out did someone else is ST isn't saying much. But, in universe against those persons and ships... its another story.

In real life I could flush my toilet and a GCS goes BOOM but IU they were the best of their time. Thats just cannon no matter how badly it makes me want to bash the writers heads in.

To go back on topic, i've had a little revelation on what i'd pick. And it'd probably be a Miranda Refit class starship. She was practical, cost effective, pretty capable for her size and the hull was 150 years old by the 2370's...yet she was still in front line service. She is the most practical ship they've fielded.

Reliant121 wrote:To go back on topic, i've had a little revelation on what i'd pick. And it'd probably be a Miranda Refit class starship. She was practical, cost effective, pretty capable for her size and the hull was 150 years old by the 2370's...yet she was still in front line service. She is the most practical ship they've fielded.

I'm not at all convinced by the argument for a "TOS Miranda". If the configuration we've always seen was a refit, and the Miranda was a contemporary of the Constitution class, why were the Mirandas still in widespread service during the Dominion War while the larger and more capable Connies weren't? It's more likely that the Mirandas came into service in the late 2260s, in the configuration we've always seen them.

As for the actual design, it's certainly one of the best Starfleet has - compact and resilient. At the time of their introduction they were the approximate equal of Starfleet's front-line capital ships (the Connies) despite being quite a bit smaller. The design proved adaptable enough to spawn several subtypes (Sisko's Saratoga and the Bozeman being the most prominent). Nonetheless by the time of DS9 they were cannon fodder, and probably shouldn't have even been deployed on the front lines - they were simply too old and too vulnerable.

Reliant121 wrote:I dont mean to say that either the Defiant or the Lakota are absolutely almighty. Both have their faults. What i'm saying is that the Lakota, for a hundred year old design, did fantastically well against such a powerful ship.

oh come one, accusing the lakota of being a hundred your old design is the equivalent of accusing the refit constitution of being built in 2245!! they swapped out the old phaser banks, upgraded the power distribution system, the computers and sensors, upgraded enhanced and added extra phaser banks, upgraded the torpedoes launchers and torpedoes added armor .... about the only thing that is probably original are the warp coils and framework. The Lakota underwent MASSIVE change, on a par with if not exceeding that of the Constitution Refit. So stop calling it a hundred year old design. A refit that extensive practically qualifies it as a redesign.

The technology cant be there without the frame work or the warp core. And using the SAME hull on the lakota qualifies it as a refit. It is one hell of a refit, i admit. basically all of the systems are gutted and changed. But its still the same ship. Enterprise being refitted to the Refit version was the same. it changed almost everything. But it was still the same ship

ultron2099 wrote:oh come one, accusing the lakota of being a hundred your old design is the equivalent of accusing the refit constitution of being built in 2245!! they swapped out the old phaser banks, upgraded the power distribution system, the computers and sensors, upgraded enhanced and added extra phaser banks, upgraded the torpedoes launchers and torpedoes added armor .... about the only thing that is probably original are the warp coils and framework. The Lakota underwent MASSIVE change, on a par with if not exceeding that of the Constitution Refit. So stop calling it a hundred year old design. A refit that extensive practically qualifies it as a redesign.

My emphasis.

Yes, the Lakota is a far more capable ship than the original Excelsior. That does not change the fact that the basic design is almost a century old. There's only so much upgrading you can do before you start to severely stress the hull. As an analogy, the Queen Elizabeth class battleships were given an extensive refit between the wars - they were given improved torpedo defences, thicker deck armour, a much better anti-aircraft armament, and the range of the main 15" guns was improved. They came out far superior to their earlier incarnations, and about as recognisable as QEs as the refit-Connie.

Nonetheless, they were inferior ships to modern battleships, even those they outgunned. They were slow, their armour scheme wasn't designed to protect against air attack (despite improvements), their subdivision left something to be desired and their hulls were decades old. The four survivors (Barham was sunk by a U-boat in 1941) we all scrapped immediately after the war, as they were completely worn out.

Reliant121 wrote:The technology cant be there without the frame work or the warp core. And using the SAME hull on the lakota qualifies it as a refit. It is one hell of a refit, i admit. basically all of the systems are gutted and changed. But its still the same ship. Enterprise being refitted to the Refit version was the same. it changed almost everything. But it was still the same ship

however you wouldn't refer to its design anymore by the original launch date of the class, but by the launch date of the completely new refitted class.
that's my point about the lakota.

Personally i would. But thats just me.

ultron2099 wrote:however you wouldn't refer to its design anymore by the original launch date of the class, but by the launch date of the completely new refitted class.

Wrong. HMS Queen Elizabeth was launched in 1913. She was refitted in the late 30s, but her return from refit was never considered to be her launch date in any way, shape or form.

I think he meant the Connie class

You would refer to the ship as...

Launched stardate ******
Refited for service stardate ******

Its still an old ship. The fact that you don't like that doesn't matter. Its cannon. The GCS is the best ship ever built through TNG, but go ahead and ask Rochey how he feels about that.

Deepcrush wrote:The GCS is the best ship ever built through TNG, but go ahead and ask Rochey how he feels about that.

Not quite. It was certainly the most powerful, but whether it was the best is dependant on the mission. If the mission is a short-term one, requiring a 2-4 person crew and minimum resources expended, the the Danube class is far better than a GCS. For full-scale starship missions, a Nebula class with appropriate pod would probably be more capable than a Galaxy. It's only the power and flexibility of the GCS design that makes it the best from Starfleet's point of view.

Ultron - the idea of the Excelsior is that the spaceframe allowed for such an extensive refit, meaning that the 100-year-old design is praiseworthy in that regard. A '32 Ford deuce that's got a blower sticking out of the hood and a Hurst shifter is still a '32 deuce.