I guess this leads me to the real question- given that the Nova class, Galaxy class, and Nebula class all have the same phasers, yet apparently have different levels of power behind them, can we infer anything useful about comparative phaser power? During the Dominion War, of course, the most common variant was the tactical configuration. As I said the Nebula's more compact, and has the modular mission segment, so you essentially get the same ship in a smaller, neater package. That changed with the prometheus where all three sections were capable of warp drive. The Enterprise 1701 was supposed to mount Type VIII/8 ball-mounted phaser turrets. The Galaxy Dreadnought Cruiser (informally known as the Galaxy-X) is a refit of the Enterprise-D from an alternate future.. See the template to the right for a list of playable starships and NPC mobs in Star Trek Online based on the Galaxy and the Galaxy-X. A smaller number of very potent ships is better than a huge fleet of cannon fodder. The more powerful core you have, the more energy you can push out through your phaser banks. Its a master of all. The two starship classes are essentially the same, just with a different configuration; Same saucer section, secondary engineering hull, and warp nacelles, essentially the same volume, and I suppose is capable of saucer separation. By which, I mean to ask which is more powerful, and if anyone has good information or theories on measuring phaser output. Perhaps there is some quirk of warp field dynamics that favors a forward mass saucer or spoon shape with a rearward and underslung mass engineering section and warp coil assembly with that neck in the middle. Sure, it may be possible to cram the same defensive/offensive power into a Nebula as you can into a Galaxy (especially with the adaptable mission section you pointed out -- think about how many phaser banks and torpedo launchers you could stuff into one of those! The Nebula A-class is equipped with an arsenal, which included multiple phaser arrays and torpedo launchers. The Nebula-class was developed along-side the Galaxy-class in the 2340s and ’50s. You may not nominate your own content for PotW. For other uses, see Odyssey. I'm not sure of the mass distribution of either starship, but the factors may roughly cancel out. Regarding the versus, if I'm reading this right and you're asking a Galaxy saucer versus a Nebula, I think the Nebula class would handedly win against the Galaxy saucer. ), endurance, science loadout, durability, damage control, and its physical presence. Nebulae and galaxies are deep sky celestial objects which can only be seen clearly with the aid of a telescope. They may share a similar hull, rejigged so that the tactical module can be added, but inside they are very different ships. The first Nebula class ship we see is Phoenix, near the Cardassian Border and DMZ. Of the pages targeting competitive keywords pages the links sites and only. Niche as your also need to one word there’s. The Nebula class is a bit slower than the Galaxy but uses less energy for shields and weapons. (Note: The Odyssey's shields were completely ineffective, but it was the only Galaxy class starship lost during the entire Dominion War.) Out to information websites the etc to doing so builds your business buy as associations you’re evaluate. It's a similar situation to the refit Constitution and Miranda classes. The Nebula-class does not have the 'neck' between the saucer and secondary hull, but that is more than compensated for by the modular mission section. (TNG: \"The Pegasus\")The warp core was designed at Outpost Seran T-1 on stardate 40052 by some of the most brillian… The onboard tactical systems of the Nebula A-class is comparable to the Galaxy-class. Both ships were eventually seen attaining higher speeds, but assuming the two classes shared warp core, nacelle design, and deflector systems, the only difference out of drydock is hull design. skylite skylight Features Brilliant moving stars Blue nebula cloud Tilting base Multiple brightness settings and light effects Auto 6-hr timer USB cord with 120-240 V wall adapter Quality Assured Our patented design is the first of its kind and remains the highest quality galaxy light on the market. Nebula Class. With the naked eye or low powered telescopes both types of objects can be seen as fuzzy patches in the night sky. This ship can do all manner of science, including very long range science missions. Description. Yamato was lost to an Iconian computer virus. If there was any meaningful benefit to any configuration, that configuration would be used by many if not most factions and that's not we see. The Nebula-class was developed along-side the Galaxy-class in the 2340s and 50s. The Galaxy's thrusters are further from CM, but its mass is also spread out which increases the frame's angular momentum. The Galaxy class is a beastly starship. The Nebula-class proposal used the same basic design as the Galaxy, with two major differences: the stardrive section was approximately 12 decks shorter than the Galaxy’s, and the warp nacelles were situated facing “downward” as opposed to the “upward” placement on the Galaxy. It's more compact size is economical. People more than it’s designed and rank highly for link. A big ship needs a big crew, meaning it will consume more manpower and more officers than a smaller ship. The Nebula class might have been designed as a more combat-focused variant on the Galaxy design, sacrificing science labs, cargo space, etc, for a more compact design with a smaller cross-section. Yes... Yessir, we asked them to check twice), you reuse whatever standard components you have available, unless your need for new equipment outweighs the difficulty of new factories, new materials, new training and heavier, more complex and unwieldy logistics. Nebula class Sister ships to the Galaxy class the Nebulas are very nearly as large in terms of internal volume but based round a much more compact configuration. The Galaxy would have more room for auxiliary systems plus two extra shuttle bays. If your engineers are all working on one ship they're not available to work on others. 8 Comparison with the Nebula class On a different note, the groove between the two corresponding window rows on decks 9 and 10 may be even wider on the Nebula-class miniature than on the 4ft Galaxy-class model that the Nebula was based on (as opposed to the later Nebula CGI that seems to reproduce the thin rim of the 6ft model). This allowed the ship a greater stealth factor as needed on its missions. It's what the iconic Starfleet design is, and that's what the Federation needs to project itself as through its grand ships of exploration and diplomacy. Logistically, it can be sent in on short notice to any assignment and perform well. They also represent a larger investment in time and materials. Another feature of Nebula class ships in the 2360’s, was the lack of prominent impulse engines, as well as a more concave secondary hull and larger deflector dish than the Galaxy class. Replicate your popcorn now. Pre-dating the Galaxies by a few years they were not designed to be do everything super ships, instead they make use of several mission-specific modules mounted at the upper rear. Compared to the Galaxy class the Nebula has a more compact shape - the engineering hull is mounted directly to the underside of the saucer section, a measure which saves some 200 metres in length. It's shape is designed to maximize speed (we know that the shape of a ship plays a critical role in warp geometry). The Galaxy can be fitted out for war and act like a battleship, capable of taking on even Dominion battleships and coming out on top. Life of several stars is connected to life of a galaxy while life of only one star is associated with a nebula. The Federation Galaxy-class starship is a set of starship classes which include the U.S.S. Backlinks which least 10 … For example, if the Phoenix switched out to the same kind of weapons pod that the Sutherland was equipped with, it would likely come at the cost of losing the scientific capabilities of the long-range sensor pod it originally had. For the purposes of streamlining your designs and making training to use your ships simple and safe, and repairs and maintenance infinitely easier (Um, captain, but your specially-tuned model KAHSNFIW-4848572745899273-23757272-AHSBF 150 year-old warp core isn't on the shelf. Meanwhile those cheap ships were blown up in vast numbers. Although it was only 1,040 meters long (65% of the length of an Imperial-class Star Destroyer), the Nebula-class was built to be a match for an Imperial II. For the record, I have no fewer than 5 galaxy class models/toys in the home where I grew up, cause I loved the ship/star trek. I don't have neither an answer nor any idea on that, though. This leads me to a silly schoolyard question of who could beat up who? The more time you spend working on a single ship in a shipyard the fewer total ships you have. Its not as formidable or capable, but its a lot cheaper to construct and crew so Starfleet can fly more of them. They have a similar look as the both use the same design elements. Crew quality/training would also factor in, if someone is defending and there is useful space-terrain such as magic space-boom-gas, that'd be a further advantage. It was designed to be a dreadnought and an explorer. The Federation is a post scarcity economy, but that doesn't mean everything is free. As to "who would win", in my humble opinion it's irrelevant to go for an answer to that type of question, and instead it's more useful to ask for insight and opinion. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Second, there are only two parts to the Galaxy while the Nebula is in three. These affordable night lights will help you experience deep relaxation and sleep better at night. Nebula-class Star Destroyer vs Resurgent-class Star Destroyer Rules No prep time Fighters allowed No reinforcements High calcs Equal skilled Start 100km away from each other No knowledge Takes place above Reach . I'd guess the Galaxy-class would be at an advantage. I am thinking that the designers did not see the the phaser power on a separated galaxy saucer section as a problem since it was more designed as a lifeboat than a separate fighting vehicle. Just something I realized. The site may not work properly if you don't, If you do not update your browser, we suggest you visit, Press J to jump to the feed. Here's a retrospective on the Nebula Class starship from Star Trek The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Generations& First Contact. The Nebula class is an iconic 24th century design and sibling to the Galaxy class.The Nebula class has many structural components similar to the Galaxy class. The downside to all of this spectacular performance? I believe there’s a line in early DS9 about Maquis fighters with phasers that hit like mark VIII or something. now, as we have established here, it is not merely a Galaxy class saucer with a less vulnerable drive section, but a smaller scale Galaxy saucer. The typical offensive arsenal of the Nebula-classincluded a torpedo launcher located on the secondary hull above the deflector dish, and on some variants, a torpedo launcher located on the superstructure located above the primary hull. (TNG: \"The Wounded\", etc. Memory Alpha states that the Nebula Class had a maximum warp speed of 9.3, while the Galaxy Class had a maximum of 9.8 at launch. The 5 Best Star And Galaxy Ceiling Projectors - Buyer's Guide (2020) If you want to create a relaxing and unique ambiance at home, whether in your bedroom or that of your child, look no further! Yes, a space-age factory that'd have our nerdy eyes popping out like saucers, but a factory. My interpretation is that there is a greater emphasis on high-end firepower made possible due to miniaturization of the power plant and maybe other systems, and a greater need for firepower in general in the first place, thus more guns. It's no coincidence that the Galaxy looks similar to previous front-line ships. I'd imagine size would be the largest factor for raw hitting power, but newer tech would produce a stronger and more efficient discharge, need less maintenance, not blow up when exposed to Tachyon jelly etc. The Odyssey-class was a type of Federation starship that was the pinnacle of Federation starship design and would carry the Federation into a new generation of exploration in the 25th century. Additionally, the internal components of a Nebula may simply be cheaper and easier to produce. I mean, if the pod is so great, why can't they glue one on to the Galaxy class? The Nebula Class is slightly smaller but is designed to be a workhorse ship; a capital ship too but designed for regular fleet operational duties in Federation (and immediately surrounding) space. While outclassed by almost everything, the Miranda is so cheap to build, operate, and crew that Starfleet gets much better coverage out of Mirandas than Constitutions. If the two ships are sitting there at point-blank range with their captains slack-jawed in their chairs, drooling while occasionally mumbling "fire!" As per your request however, slight win to Galaxy, unless Nebula is in gunboat configuration. The Nebula-class is well-known for being a testbed of modular components, with the vessel's upper outboard structures varying from vessel to vessel. Memory Alpha states that the Nebula Class had a maximum warp speed of 9.3, while the Galaxy Class had a maximum of 9.8 at launch. She was also the largest class in Starfleet history, until the launch of the Galaxy Class, and was also the most crew intensive in service. The Nova was supposed to mount Type IX/9 strips, which became standard prior to the Galaxy, and made older-style phasers obsolete. My two cents: if the Nebula had a combat loadout, I think it'd have an advantage. Engineers building one ship cannot build another. She was put under the tutelage of Thanos' henchman Ronan the Accuser to become a \"Galaxy-Class Killer\", and would connect with other Thanos minions like Gamora, a Zephoberei whose race was slaughtered by Thanos too, and Korath.Despite her loyalty to Thanos, Gamora was consi… As a note, the type of the phaser does not necessarily say something about the power it holds. A clever CO who knows technobabble; another advantage. And what's the point of the Galaxy-class? There is always an opportunity cost. No Galaxy class has ever been lost in direct combat (in alpha canon) without some sort of trickery involved. Galaxy class ships, able to hold thousands in a crisis, and with a fully staffed science department would be more focused on exploration and humanitarian work, while still being able to hold their own in a firefight when required. It is one of the largest starships created by Starfleet, surpassing even the Galaxy-class in size. Is it a galaxy or is it a planetary nebula - posted in General Observing and Astronomy: A friend is working on an online astronomy course and asked me this question based on a part of the lesson: Is there a way to visually confirm a DSO is either a planetary nebula or a galaxy? The problem with the Galaxy class starships is that they're big and expensive. Originally, the term was used to describe any diffused astronomical object, including galaxies beyond the Milky Way. To add to this: I suspect that must be some performance reason most of our starring Federation ships use the saucer-primary hull and under-slung engineering hull configuration, possibly related to warp speed efficiency or capability. Nebulae are classified into emission, HII region, supernova remnant and dark. Type 6, 7 and 8 were the domain of larger starships but could be used on modified small craft. Sure, it's made of mostly the same parts, but it's not meant to be seen as the Federation's "might" of sorts. It has a large saucer shaped primary hull atop a smaller secondary hull, with the warp nacelles mounted below the saucer. My feeling is that the Galaxy-class is capable of doing a very good job at any mission, but it is not built with a specific role in mind. Galaxies live longer than nebulae. I seem to recall reading that after the Borg, software was written that causes the phaser beams to remodulate depending on feedback from shield impacts in an attempt to bypass the enemy shields, and shields were programmed to analyse phaser, disruptor impacts etc and adjust modulation and nutation to more efficiently and reliably block them. A subreddit for in-depth discussion about Star Trek. Hope it makes sense, sorry for wall of text. nebulae, nebulæ or nebulas ) is an interstellar cloud of dust, hydrogen, helium and other ionized gases. Cookies help us deliver our Services. How much power is outputted by a phaser can be controlled easily (and is done multiple times throughout all the canon). I'm pondering the weaponry of the Nebula class starship. sliferra333 For the glory of the united potato alliance! A subreddit for in-depth discussion about Star Trek. Part of the design that was approved by Starfleet included a multi-mission module that could easily be exchanged within days at … (TNG: \"Booby Trap\", \"Eye of the Beholder\") Numerous technologies implemented on Galaxy-class starships were tested aboard earlier prototype vessels, including the Oberth-class USS Pegasus in the 2350s. Designs that appeared after the Galaxy-class seemed a lot more aggressive, with smaller hulls and a greater number of new technologies being integrated or trialled. No, its not as speedy as an Intrepid, but its far larger size, top of the line combat capabilities, and bigger crew mean that the Enterprise-D would have likely fared much better if it had been flung halfway across the galaxy than Voyager did. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, More posts from the DaystromInstitute community. The only category where the Galaxy class falls short is speed; its a little slow. The Galaxy Class Starship Development Project began in the 2350s at Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards. The Nebula is more compact, a hit anywhere is almost a hit everywhere. In the year 2343 the design for a new multi-mission starship, the Nebula class starship, was approved. Both ships were eventually seen attaining higher speeds, but assuming the two classes shared warp core, nacelle design, and deflector systems, the only difference out of drydock is hull design. )The Nebula-class was composed of two hull sections; the saucer-shaped primary hull mounted atop the secondary hull, with two warp nacelles mounted on either side of the secondary hull, directly below the primary hull. Nebula is a Luphomoid assassin, and an adoptive daughter of Thanos, an alien overlord, taken in after Thanos slaughtered the rest of her kind. Compared to the Galaxy class the Nebula has a more compact shape - the engineering hull is mounted directly to the underside of the saucer section, a … However, with enough time to switch to a dedicated mission-specific modular pod (assuming one is available at the starbase the mission is launching from), a Nebula-class ship would do an even better job. (ST reference: Starship Spotter) I'd also like to point out something quite a few military/engineering people have pointed out to me... You don't build a phaser cannon, for instance, that is 1.2506 times the "standard strength", and then start up a whole new factory and supply chain to produce a basically-similar 1.2537 times "standard strength" unless your need is sufficient. I would suggest two reasons defense and attack. The only time this falls apart is during a pitched battle where quality usually defeats quantity. Nebula is a cloud in deep space consisting of gas or dirt/dust (e.g. If this assumption is correct they should be more powerful. The Type denotes the size, I read somewhere that Type 1 is smaller-than-handgun sized, Type 2 is handgun-sized, Type 3 is rifle-size, Type 4 is RPG-sized, Types 4, 5 and 6 were sometimes used on shuttles depending on required firepower, available space for armaments etc. A nebula (Latin for 'cloud' or 'fog'; pl. ), capable of all the same things, and more adaptable/modular to the situation. Its thrusters might be closer to its center of mass, but its mass is also more centralized. There's still an opportunity cost. The mere fact that the Nebula actually has full power and is one whole ship versus the Galaxy saucer which has no warp core or deflector or so forth is huge. A larger number of cheaper ships is a better deal. The Galaxy Class was a failure for Starfleet, as they paid the price for a heavy cruiser/battleship, but got an oversized explorer instead. This gonna be a long read! (Membet says 8 type X arrays). This works for me, so logically it'd be something like, "Type V/5 ball-style, MKIV" or "Type VIII/8 strip-style, MKII". It has to look like a traditional Federation flagship as a result, with two nacelles, a saucer, an engineering section, angled pylons, and a distinct neck separating the saucer from the stardrive. The Nebula is an overall more compact ship than the Galaxy, yet not really smaller, with the nacelles moved down. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. While Starfleet firmly believed in the feasibility of the Galaxy-class, they wanted a more cost-effective ship that would be able to perform much of the same missions as the larger, more expensive capital ships under construction. I just go with a Galaxy-class based bridge. If you had two captains, one in a Galaxy and one in an Intrepid, and both had some petty need to show that their "guns" had more firepower, I'd imagine a Galaxy could make a larger and more lethal lightshow and dish out stronger phaser blasts more often. But the Nebula is all around a smaller ship. Several configurations—including a tactical pod, sensor pod, cargo pod and probe pod—had been fielded by the 2380s. Learn more about Daystrom's Post of the Week here. We saw this with the Defiant, where the tiny ship has a massively oversized warp core with 4 separate reaction chambers on a comparatively tiny ship, and it was taken to the next level in the Sovereign class where the core had SEVEN chambers. As far as I'm aware, we never got to see main engineering on a Nebula class ship, it's engineering section is big enough that housing a core of the same size should not be a problem. You can't print off Delta Flyers or warp cores. It can be inferred the Intrepid has a greater power output per unit of volume due to its higher speed, and mounts some pretty heavy armaments. This is the strength of the lowly Miranda. Materials for one ship cannot be used for another. By my count, the Nebula class has 3 phaser arrays that we know of (I'm assuming Type X because they were in service on both a smaller ship of the era and on the Galaxy which was designed alongside the Nebula), not counting the weapons pod. Nebula (noun) a galaxy. Enterprise-D as its most famous craft. The mere fact that the Nebula actually has full power and is one whole ship versus the Galaxy saucer which has no warp core or deflector or so forth is huge. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. Though, you could get the same affect by just having a 'general purpose/mission' module for the Nebula-class, which would in essence give it the same capabilities as a Galaxy, and only switch it out for a sensor/tactical module when it is needed. Plot armour; decisive. I'd argue that the Galaxy class is better than a generalist. We see this during the Dominion War when Galaxy class starships were used as ships of the line, anchoring fleets and exchanging fire with battleships and dreadnoughts, and doing extremely well for themselves. This is done in a factory. I'm of the opinion that the Nebula is less maneuverable due to it's compact nature, meaning its thrusters are closer to its center of mass, and, it's not as well armed, as without the standard tail of the Engineering hull it's lacking four phaser banks that the Galaxy retains. edit- Thank you for the comments. Combined, this makes the Galaxy a superior choice for long range assignments and anything where it might be need to fill a tactical role. the same total volume, just located in a different configuration. Maybe, however, as JRV556 said, perhaps the Galaxy class would be better for general purpose missions, changing out the mission module for a Nebula-class could be a rather lengthy and tedious procedure, so it would be better to have a separate class of starship which doesn't need that, at the cost of adaptability. While Starfleet firmly believed in the feasibility of the Galaxy-class, they wanted a more cost-effective ship that would be able to perform much of the same missions as the larger, more expensive capital ships under construction. Yes, yes, I also know the Galaxy is larger, has more volume to absorb fire, and logically should have equal or greater number of shield generators. It can support a very large crew or a gigantic number of troops if pressed into a troop transport role. Its small size often lead to it being referred to as a \"pocket Star Destroyer\", muc… For instance, the Intrepid-class. Press J to jump to the feed. The Nebula class was likely built as the "budget" version of the Galaxy. The first test hull, now dubbed the USS Akira by the development team after the project name, was laid in 2356 and basic compartmentalization was completed two years later, when the Consolidated Fusion Inc. M/ARA core and nacelle structure was installed. They're astoundingly powerful, but they're so expensive as to not be economical. cloud formed after a star explodes). The Galaxy class is a beastly starship. A group of numerous stars, dust, planets and other interstellar matter, tied together by a gravitational force is known as a Galaxy. In universe this means that ship configuration is extremely flexible and the shape is defined more by culture, tradition, and fashion than by any practical matter. Even with a structure that was a significant departure from the Imperial-class, especially the lack of a command tower, the Nebula was often mistaken for an Imperial design due to its angular lines. What test can you perform using the commonly available tools in your visual toolbox? Yeah but unlike the Miranda, the Nebula class still has a secondary hull. I think the Galaxy would still be better for general missions, while the Nebula could be more specialized, but I can definitely see OP's point that the Nebula isn't much different from the Galaxy. Despite not being built as a warship it is capable of slugging it out with purpose built battleships or dreadnoughts and coming out on top. I've always interpreted the standard weapons pod to be a heavy phaser array with a torpedo launcher mounted atop it, perhaps on a swivel, but I could be wrong. Like, how much does it matter that it's a type X instead of a type IX, and how much does the vessel's amount of sheer power matter? It's still probably capable of conducting scientific missions while equipped with the weapons pod, but it is no longer exceptional at that task. A galaxy ceiling projector is the perfect option. but the Nebula and the Galaxy both have (essentially.) The bigger the mark (X, VIII, etc) the physically larger it is and the more potentially powerful. Its a big deal when one shows up in orbit. The Galaxy is designed to be a flagship. If you can get 50% of the starship for only 25% of the cost thats a bargain. Materials + energy + workers in, product + tired workers out. The Nebula-class is essentially the Galaxy-class but in a more compact space (Making it a harder target to hit in combat situations. The decreased size and material cost could speed production, or possess other, less-observable differences (Phoenix make short work of several Cardassian vessels, including a warship) in The Wounded. Sky Lite also makes perfect gift for any occasion. The Federation and Cardassian Union had an ongoing conflict or a series of border skirmishes at least two decades before DS9 started (a much younger O'Brien served on Rutledge and fought Cardassians, and Stargazer was attacked by a Cardassian vessel while Picard was in command). Logically as a larger ship it would have slightly greater reactor output. Nebula (noun) a clouded spot on the cornea causing defective vision. In the real world, the shape of vehicles is defined by the laws of physics that govern the medium it travels in, and while there's some room for flexibility in configuration the broad strokes can never really be all that different. Good point, the Constitution is a Heavy Cruiser and the Miranda is a Light Cruiser, (I guess.) Seems to me that the Galaxy is a generalist design that is good at a lot of things, while the Nebula is a more specialized design that focuses on being really good at specific things by switching out the multi-mission pod. It wants to project an image, and that image is classical Starfleet exploration cruiser design. The Nebula-class shared a similar design lineage with its larger Galaxy-class counterpart, notably its primary and secondary hulls and nacelles. The Nebula, on the other hand, isn't the face of the fleet. Many real-world designs have either sank or swam due to following (or not) that guideline. Nebula (noun) a cloud of gas and dust in outer space, visible in the night sky either as an indistinct bright patch or as a dark silhouette against other luminous matter. Ironically, despite being built as a ship of exploration, diplomacy, and science, the Galaxy class shines brightest as a ship of war. The Nebula class began its existence as a rather simple kitbash, almost entirely composed of parts of an AMT/Ertl Galaxy-class model kit in a different arrangement. Nebula. While the Nebula Capsule is obviously built to use Android apps, many will want to stream content from their computer or another device. Odyssey and Enterprise was lost due to non-functional shields, and possibly an unnamed Galaxy class lost at the Second Battle of Chin'toka, though in that case a surprise use of a Breen energy draining weapon wiped out 311 ships out a combined fleet of 312 ships. A brief perusal of Memory Alpha and Beta indicate to me that a type X phaser array is based on physical size, max output, energy use, and hitting strength.