|
|
Acidpunk
Formerly 4 of 11
Offline
Posts: 1199
|
 |
« Reply #121 on: December 13, 2005, 09:36:02 AM » |
|
excellsiors appear in TNG and DS9 frequently way too frequently
im not sure if there was ever one in voyager maybe in the temporal episode where janeway goes back in time but i doubt it
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Casper
Commanding Officer, U.S.S. Griffin
Offline
Posts: 1421
|
 |
« Reply #123 on: December 13, 2005, 11:50:37 AM » |
|
when i said that 4 nebs could take on an ISD, i figured that everyone would assume that they would have a full screen of fighters. without fighters they would be slag. that was a major part of my last post. now as for the "this is startrek trivia". you'd think so, but i guess we have to many SW fans here.
as for why you'd need excellsiors in TGN or ds9. just because a ship is older doesn't mean it should be scrap when newer models comeout, if a ship can still hold it's own, why stop using em just because newer or bigger ships are used as well, i mean that's just wasteful. IMHO
and about that admiral, maybe that ship has some kind of sentimental value to her? that would be my guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Wind, Forrest, Fire, Mountain -Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" I am a modern student in the art of war! no army can stop me, no navy can contain me, and no man can kill me. who's head do i have to mount next on my wall ? -Me[b
|
|
|
Acidpunk
Formerly 4 of 11
Offline
Posts: 1199
|
 |
« Reply #124 on: December 13, 2005, 11:50:43 AM » |
|
because the show was low on cash but also they were proven vessels
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
teh-plaf
Offline
Posts: 140
|
 |
« Reply #125 on: December 15, 2005, 07:58:09 AM » |
|
just because a ship is older doesn't mean it should be scrap when newer models comeout, if a ship can still hold it's own, why stop using em just because newer or bigger ships are used as well, i mean that's just wasteful. IMHO
that is a terrific point. unfortunately military logic doesn't always fare well on the big screen, newer ships mean you can have longer names for their technology, and more flashing lights
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Casper
Commanding Officer, U.S.S. Griffin
Offline
Posts: 1421
|
 |
« Reply #126 on: December 15, 2005, 11:46:49 AM » |
|
well, i'm a big fan of military tactics myself. but i can see your point nontheless.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Wind, Forrest, Fire, Mountain -Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" I am a modern student in the art of war! no army can stop me, no navy can contain me, and no man can kill me. who's head do i have to mount next on my wall ? -Me[b
|
|
|
Rhaz
Offline
Posts: 567
|
 |
« Reply #127 on: December 15, 2005, 11:29:58 PM » |
|
In DS9 the most common federation ship class was Excelsior.
The Excelsior started life off as a Battlecruiser, in the age of the refitted constitution. (Enterprise-B)
Around the TNG Era they took the role of Heavy Cruiser (Being suceeded in dangerous jobs by Nebulas and Galaxies).
In the DS9 era they were the most common ship. There were TONS of them in the final battle, the battle for Chun'toka (Sp) Retaking of DS9 and alot of other skirmishes (Lakota).
The Excelsior in the DS9 era was a medium cruiser and general purpose line ship (They made up the meat of the federation fleet) and they could carry 500 personel (Good for troop landings, supplies ect) and were used in all manner of warfare.
I would doubt they are obosolete now as the class was very easy to refit, I believe it more likely that they were simply relegated to core federation systems or as part of larger task forces in specialized roles like communications ship or dedicated to a starbase in case of an emergency. They will soon be replaced by Nebulas, Akiras and more combat worthy classes if the need arises, but until then they are the meat of the federation armada.
ALTHOUGH
Can someone explain why we see so few ambassadors? But so many Excelsiors? I mean the ambassadors are better, and sure they were few...but wouldn't a few have survived to be in major battles?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 15, 2005, 11:31:34 PM by Rhaz »
|
Logged
|
"Everyone knows Decepticons can't ball!" 
|
|
|
Acidpunk
Formerly 4 of 11
Offline
Posts: 1199
|
 |
« Reply #128 on: December 16, 2005, 12:09:52 AM » |
|
yeah but wasnt the ambassador ship line pretty low compared because of the extra cost and the size compared to the excellsior
plus as you said the excellsior was really easy to refit **** some where used as fighter carriers
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Admiral Adama
have you done 127 in a jeep? thats right
Offline
Posts: 1026
|
 |
« Reply #129 on: December 16, 2005, 12:12:51 AM » |
|
If tou recall the excelsior was built to test transwarp .It was ahead of its time because then structure had to withstand transwarp focres but also because they used a lot of reverse enginering in it. it is the most eisily refited ship in the fleet.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Why battlestar galactica is better than star trek:  Can't do that in a Sov.
|
|
|
Acidpunk
Formerly 4 of 11
Offline
Posts: 1199
|
 |
« Reply #130 on: December 16, 2005, 12:14:16 AM » |
|
yeah that is true too bad it failed but ur right ahead of its time just like many other ships
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Admiral Adama
have you done 127 in a jeep? thats right
Offline
Posts: 1026
|
 |
« Reply #131 on: December 16, 2005, 12:34:42 AM » |
|
i think im gonna save that and use it against you one day
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Why battlestar galactica is better than star trek:  Can't do that in a Sov.
|
|
|
|
|
Casper
Commanding Officer, U.S.S. Griffin
Offline
Posts: 1421
|
 |
« Reply #133 on: December 16, 2005, 08:37:06 AM » |
|
i don't know if i'd go that far, but he must have been loaded.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Wind, Forrest, Fire, Mountain -Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" I am a modern student in the art of war! no army can stop me, no navy can contain me, and no man can kill me. who's head do i have to mount next on my wall ? -Me[b
|
|
|
Admiral Adama
have you done 127 in a jeep? thats right
Offline
Posts: 1026
|
 |
« Reply #134 on: December 16, 2005, 09:10:09 PM » |
|
The girls he mustve got
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Why battlestar galactica is better than star trek:  Can't do that in a Sov.
|
|
|
|