www.ditl.org

As has been said before, other species' failings don't justify Starfleet's. Just because everybody else does something dumb doesn't mean it isn't just as dumb for Starfleet to do it.

But if everyone does something there is more chance of their being some in universe reason for it.

Like Nacelles sticking out, it would make sense to cover them up but since pretty much everyone has them on the outside we assume there is a reason for it.

Although in the case of single power supplies I cant think of a single good (or bad) reason behind it...

Every race has shittily designed guns, too. Should we assume there's a good in-universe reason for that? No. Why? Becuase there's no logical reason for it. The only answer that doesn't stretch credibility is "they're fucking retarded".

It's the same with everything else that's been levelled at the GCS.

The Bajoran guns didn't look too impractical. Klingons ones neither, even if they did look a bit like 18th duelling pistols.

Disruptors at dawn, that would be fun way to see a couple of Klingons sought out their differences.

Teaos wrote:But if everyone does something there is more chance of their being some in universe reason for it.

Like Nacelles sticking out, it would make sense to cover them up but since pretty much everyone has them on the outside we assume there is a reason for it.

Although in the case of single power supplies I cant think of a single good (or bad) reason behind it...

That was one element of 'Trek that I liked, that somewhere down the line the different races realized that dual nacelles seemed to be the most efficient way to develop a warp field.

The only reason I can see for a single power source is the amount of space a single one takes up. We see Engineering, but the warp core (I think) runs up and down the entire height of the ship in some cases. Although perhaps if there were dual warp cores perhaps they would not need to be as tall.

Two warp cores = double the chance of a core breach. Core breaches don't seem THAT uncommon, so I'd be leery about that.

It's the same with everything else that's been levelled at the GCS.

Of for god sake, you dont like the GCS, we get it. Don't paint the whole ship as retarded just because it has some retarded features.

The concept was just fine - it's the application and execution that were the problems.

Replace the Warp core and the Nacelles (which them seemed to have done on latter ones) and I would love to serve on a GCS, sure the computers and holodecks suck but thats the same on all SF ships.

I've made fun of the GCS, but I'd have no problem serving on one - as long as it were actually used as an long-range explorer like it was meant.

I agree that if some of the more glaring flaws were removed and it was used only as a long range explorer ship it would be quite good. My problem is that it tends to get thrown onto the frontline every five minutes.

Again, the problem is application, not concept... Starfleet's motto.

I wouldn't mind serving on a GCS.

The bottom line on it: It was not an amazingly well designed ship. True. It was mediocre, middle of the line design standard. It does its job well enough. But it aint perfect.

I would assume the first production run of a series USUALLY has some problems. I'm sure that by the time of Nemesis they were into a second or third run, with upgraded components and design flaws mostley worked out. Uprated Galaxy class ships wouldn't have NEARLY the number of proplems that first run ships had. It's amazing that the USS Galaxy herself survived as long as she did. Must have gotten her upgrades pretty quick.

How long did the Galaxy survive for?