Galaxy Class 'Venture Refit'

posted on January 15th, 2010, 9:40 pm

Is the Venture refit planned for a later version?

posted on January 16th, 2010, 1:19 am

Yes

posted on January 16th, 2010, 5:53 am

Hey that's great!

  Can someone explain to me the origin of the Venture Refit?

posted on January 16th, 2010, 5:57 am

They were "introduced" in the Dominion war, but basically they're just upgraded and more battle-capable Galaxy class vessels.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 5:59 am

Are there Canon references to it or is it Fanon?

  I mean I'm fine with it either way.  I've only heard about Galaxy's having a War Refit.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 6:05 am

The U.S.S. Venture was mentioned as "being refitted" in some DS9-episode if I remember correctly. And the so-called Venture-class subtype is basically that "war" refit.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 8:37 am

Standard Nacelle/Venture Refit Nacelle

Certain Galaxy-class ships, such as the USS Venture, were refitted with additional phaser strips on the dorsal surfaces of their nacelles by 2372.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 9:40 am

Judging from those images, the Galaxy Ventures going be a god damn war machine 

[RedEyedRaven]

posted on January 16th, 2010, 9:50 am

Last edited by RedEyedRaven on January 16th, 2010, 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Not really. You can strengthen up an older design limited by technological capabilities, but you'll barely get it away from its original purpose. And since we know the Galaxy never was a warship in the way the Defiant is, it's more logical to assume that the Venture refit is going to be the replacement for the Veteran Galaxy class. And the Venture refit just has additional phasers and probably stronger energy systems to deliver more power with each shot.

The only War machine ever made out of a Galaxy was the (I assume, already very old then) Enterprise D in the future-part of "All good things" which actually never happened because it was just possible future and no present tense.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 1:18 pm

Well actually, the Galaxy is listed as a battleship, at least for its time.

[RedEyedRaven]

posted on January 16th, 2010, 2:27 pm

Last edited by RedEyedRaven on January 16th, 2010, 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"listed as" due to size. In fact, if the saucer is seperated and flew away, the stardrive section has more firepower since the energy cost reduction (two impulse engines less, two major phaser arrays and a big part of the deflector grid less, laboratories and main and secondary sick bay less etc.) so it has much more energy to intense phaser fire to its maximum and also maximise shield density due to size compression without the saucer. The side effect of the size compression is also that it's harder to hit.

Before Defiant's introduction, the seperated stardrive was what starfleet considered "the closest to a warship we have right now".

At least this was stated in the so-called "official fact files".

posted on January 16th, 2010, 2:38 pm

where the power comes from in star trek has many problems

there are 3 sources we know of:

warp core in the stardrive section (requires matter and antimatter, probably hydrogen and anti-hydrogen, and dilithium to regulate the reaction so they dont explode)

fusion reactors next to the impulse engines, sometimes called impulse reactors. (which requires deuterium for nuclear fusion, something we are trying in real life.)

and batteries lol.

now sometimes you see that when the ship isn't at warp that the warp engines power the weapons and shields.

other times we have seen that the impulse reactors power everything BUT the warp engines. this is evidenced by deuterium shortages being very bad, even though by then, if they can replicate water, why cant they replicate deuterium.

then there's the fuel for the warp engines. the matter is collected by the bussard collectors from space. the antimatter and dilithium come from somewhere else. we heard of dilithium mines, but never heard of where the antimatter comes from.

if the enterprise saucer separated, then the stardrive wouldnt have the power from the 2 impulse reactors in the saucer.

in battle perhaps they could turn off all the stuff in the labs to conserve power for weapons. the big phaser arrays on the saucer also seem like a lot to lose. i prefer to think that the saucer separation was to save the civilian population that was so foolishly allowed to live on the ship. like a giant escape pod.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 3:10 pm

other times we have seen that the impulse reactors power everything BUT the warp engines. this is evidenced by deuterium shortages being very bad, even though by then, if they can replicate water, why cant they replicate deuterium.

I think that would result in a cruddy cyclical generator, as it takes energy to replicate stuff, so taking energy to replicate deuterium to make energy would actually probably take more energy in the first place as replicators cannot be 100% efficient.

posted on January 16th, 2010, 3:12 pm

i meant they could replicate the deuterium with the warp power, when power isnt a problem, should have been clearer, my mistake  i'm presuming warp power is many many times more powerful than impulse/fusion

posted on January 16th, 2010, 3:15 pm

Yeah, Warp Power has to be much more powerful - interesting idea, but since when was Star Trek necessarily consistent  . Didn't the episodes where they ran out of deuterium occur in Voyager?