Why did they take so long to make the Enterprise D?

[tim0122]

Just watched Yesterday's Enterprise. They mention how the Enterprise C was destroyed 22 years before the time of season three. That means it took the Federation 20 years to launch and probably near that to start constructing a new Enterprise. Not counting Archer's Enterprise, that's possibly the longest gap between active Enterprises. For such a prestigious line of ships, that seems odd.

I don't know the timeline for Ent. B being decommissioned and C launching. Was it also a longtime? The Federation may have wanted to give proper time to honor and mourn C's destruction and sacrifice before replacing it, but 20 years seems an awfully longtime to wait.

Is this gap odd to anyone else? Is it ever explained in a Trek comic or novel?

 

[HotRod]

I don't know the timeline for Ent. B being decommissioned and C launching. Was it also a longtime?

Nobody knows.

The Federation may have wanted to give proper time to honor and mourn C's destruction and sacrifice before replacing it

I think this is the most likely answer. The Galaxy Class was also probably already on the drawing boards by the time the Enterprise-C was destroyed. Starfleet probably wanted to save the name for when their massive and prestigious new class of ship was ready.

Is this gap odd to anyone else? Is it ever explained in Trek comic or novel?

The older I get, the more I've come realize that 20 years isn't a terribly long time.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Waiting on parts.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I think this is the most likely answer. The Galaxy Class was also probably already on the drawing boards by the time the Enterprise-C was destroyed. Starfleet probably wanted to save the name for when their massive and prestigious new class of ship was ready.

Galaxy class

The Galaxy-class was a Starfleet heavy capital ship class first introduced in the mid 2360s. It was one of the largest and most powerful Federation starship classes of its time, with many serving in the Dominion War. Starfleet had previously operated another type of Galaxy-class starship in the...

memory-alpha.fandom.com

Although the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual portrays a long, multi-decade design and construction of Galaxy-class ships, "Booby Trap" and "Eye of the Beholder" seem to suggest that this timeline was much faster, as the warp core design was finalized just one year prior to the launch of the Enterprise-D. The ship itself was still under major construction one year prior to "Encounter at Farpoint".

The Physical Construction probably didn't span the majority of the 20 years. It was probably the last few years.

It's the:
- R&D
- Virtual Design
- Independent components testing
- Figuring out the Supply Chain
- Figuring out the Construction Assembly Line
- Doing the integration of all components into one co-hesive package.
- Shaked down of the ProtoTypes to see if it meets basic working function.
- Testing of the ProtoTypes to see how far it can go & what are the limits, do they meet virtual predictions, or can it exceed them?
- Refinement of the ProtoTypes
- Working out any bugs in the system
- Numerous Miscellanoues Steps that I'm sure I'm forgetting.
- etc.

There's ALOT to do when making something that is the "Best of the Best" within the UFP / StarFleet at the time.
Especially a "Top of the Line StarShip". Gaining the institutional knowledge to build soimething like this could be a persons major life-time work.

Upon its launch, the Galaxy-class had become the most technologically sophisticated and complicated ship ever built by the Federation.

Look at IRL, the F-35 is the most Cutting-Edge in Stealth Fighter technology, it took a LONG time to get all the R&D, testing, validation, & integration going before mass production can start.
The JSF started in 1995, FRP (Full Rate Production) didn't start until 2021. That's 26 years before Mass Production starts.

So 20 years to make the "Galaxy Class" makes ALOT of sense given what it should be able to do & how it should be the "Best of the Best" at that time.

 

[knightgrace]

I don't think so. Looking at real world Artificial Intelligence, it should not have taken long. From the go order to the completion of the USS Galaxy, maybe, just maybe a few weeks. Transporter based replication is on the table. So A. I. Computer aided design to A. I. Based replication, the only real problem would be heat. This is the only thing that could slow down the whole process. Waste heat.

Going back to the NX-01 - vacuum based three dimensional printing should have completed the construction of the NX-01, in a matter of months at the worst. In this case, raw materials would have been the hold up. A problem with the fine details , like having doors just 3D printed in place having to be separated out from each other would have been a problem...
In other words an older system, would have caused problems for a check out crew of engineers... everything would have to be double checked to know if it would be operational.
By the time of the Galaxy class, this would have been eliminated from consideration.
Such that there was insufficient numbers of the NX-01 ships in dock awaiting crews. For a Galaxy class this should have been expanded to at least one hundred ready to go, turn key Galaxy class ships.

So why the change in design from, let's say the Probert Enterprise-C Ambassador class to the Galaxy class? More time for Artificial Intelligence to play games on the purposes of the Federation. But...

People also forget that at one light-year per hour space is still infinite. Such that no matter how many ships, you are still short of ships.

In other words, very old style antique construction methodologies had to be prevalent...

Illogical. Not believable.

 

[Ensign McNight]

Wasn't the Yamato (from S2) the exact same ship? They were talking about how they were new galaxy class ships, so knew that they were worried the problems were from design flaws. Maybe it's the tech that took forever.

 

[PatB1974]

The older I get, the more I've come realize that 20 years isn't a terribly long time.

This. 20 years doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to me for designing and building the Enterprise D. It was a big leap forward in technology from it's predecessor.

 

[Dukhat]

It wasn’t so much of a problem until we got to the point where Enterprises started being replaced almost instantaneously. We went from not having an Enterprise for 20 years to having three of them within 30 years.

And I don’t really buy the idea that there wasn’t another Enterprise for 20 years between the C and the D because they wanted to give time to honor the C’s loss. They certainly didn’t do that between the D’s loss and the E’s commissioning.

I think, at heart, it was a flaw in YE’s story to have such a huge gap in time between the two ships, because they wanted to show the immediate predecessor to the D, but they didn’t take into account the logistics of the situation despite making a great story. It actually would have worked better if the ship was the B chronological-wise, but then we wouldn’t have gotten the Ambassador class model. They would have just used the Excelsior model for the B.

 

[HotRod]

And I don’t really buy the idea that there wasn’t another Enterprise for 20 years between the C and the D because they wanted to give time to honor the C’s loss. They certainly didn’t do that between the D’s loss and the E’s commissioning.

The fact that most of the crew of the Enterprise-D survived her destruction, while the Enterprise-C was thought to be lost with all hands, might have an effect on how quickly a successor is launched.

 

[MikeH92467]

Wasn't the Yamato (from S2) the exact same ship? They were talking about how they were new galaxy class ships, so knew that they were worried the problems were from design flaws. Maybe it's the tech that took forever.

In today's U.S. Navy, even ships of the same class are never quite identical. Changes are made as techonologies advance and as trouble reports point to unsuspected design flaws. That's leaving aside the fine tuning and tinkering engineering geniuses might make on their own.

 

[somebuddyX]

I've figured that the Galaxy family of ships was already being considered or being developed, since the Nebulas and all the other Wolf 359 ships have lower registry numbers, and since they knew the Galaxy class was going to be a thing they just waited until that came around.

 

[David cgc]

I've figured that the Galaxy family of ships was already being considered or being developed, since the Nebulas and all the other Wolf 359 ships have lower registry numbers, and since they knew the Galaxy class was going to be a thing they just waited until that came around.

It’d seem that in the case of the Galaxy family, at least, the “derivative” designs were actually finished first, and may have been practice or prototypes for systems and techniques that went into the “masterpiece” that had all the bells and whistles. Based on the hull numbers for the FC ships, the same thing might’ve happened with the Sovereign, the shipbuilders working up to creating the flagship design in bits and pieces that went into smaller ships first.

 

[Jedi Marso]

Look at IRL, the F-35 is the most Cutting-Edge in Stealth Fighter technology, it took a LONG time to get all the R&D, testing, validation, & integration going before mass production can start.
The JSF started in 1995, FRP (Full Rate Production) didn't start until 2021. That's 26 years before Mass Production starts.

[/QUOTE]

That's a rough comparison given the fact that the F-35 is the product of a completely broken procurement system. From trying to work out a 3-in-1 design, from problems with the tailhooks on the C model, the radar overheat issues due to the size of the nose aperture, the delamination of the stealth 'paint' at top-end speeds, and the constant stop-and-go redesigns every time there was a new gadget invented that they wanted to add . . . it's a miracle the thing wasn't just cancelled midstream.

So 20 years to make the "Galaxy Class" makes ALOT of sense given what it should be able to do & how it should be the "Best of the Best" at that time.

This still makes total sense given the size, complexity, and probably technological leaps of the Galaxy Class.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I like to think the Galaxy-class was a testbed for many new systems that would eventually become standard throughout the fleet. Quite a few of the technologies were probably already in existence within the Federation for many years, but the Galaxy-class may have been the first starship design to incorporate them into a Starfleet vessel perhaps. There may have been a number of system refinements along the way that added to the lengthy development, construction, and testing period.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

That's a rough comparison given the fact that the F-35 is the product of a completely broken procurement system.

I'd bet StarFleet's system is pretty broken as well, especially given how large of a organization it is.
Especially with the Supply Chain side since it needs to acquire a vast amount of resources to complete it's projects.

That involves getting co-operation from UFP Member Worlds along with approval from the UFP Council members & StarFleet upper brass.
Don't forget Team Leads & any personal job ambitions on top of that along with any individual parts designers.

This is not counting any individual companies or organizations that StarFleet may be dealing with for any parts / supplies / technologies it acquires or plans on implementing.

From trying to work out a 3-in-1 design, from problems with the tailhooks on the C model, the radar overheat issues due to the size of the nose aperture, the delamination of the stealth 'paint' at top-end speeds, and the constant stop-and-go redesigns every time there was a new gadget invented that they wanted to add . . . it's a miracle the thing wasn't just cancelled midstream.

And all those issues eventually got ironed out. It just takes time & engineering effort to solve all those issues.

I'm sure the Galaxy-class has similar issues.

This still makes total sense given the size, complexity, and probably technological leaps of the Galaxy Class.

Anything "New/Big/Complex" will have it's share of issues.

 

[Dukhat]

There’s also the possibility that when the Enterprise-C was lost, they recommissioned the Enterprise-B until the D was built. I really like this theory because of the sheer amount of old Excelsior class ships we saw still in service in TNG/DS9/VOY, and that there would have been no reason to get rid of a perfectly good Excelsior class ship so early in her career other than for political reasons. Of course this goes against the idea that the B was destroyed between 2293 and whenever the C was commissioned, but I’m honestly sick of Enterprises getting destroyed prematurely anyway.

 

[Jedi Marso]

... I’m honestly sick of Enterprises getting destroyed prematurely anyway.

Yes indeed. It started with TSFS, and then it became a plot device used for momentary shock value time and again. In FC, when Riker says 'So much for the Enterprise E; we hardly knew her.' and Picard replies: "Plenty of letters in the alphabet!" I just gritted my teeth and wanted to howl. The ship used to be a character unto herself- now she's no more than a hand phaser or tricorder for all the 'worth' assigned to her.

 

[ThankQ]

However long it took and when they started to develop the Galaxy Class doesn't have anything to do with how long it took to reuse the name Enterprise. They could have reused the name on the next ship ready to go after the Ent-C was disruptorized.

Launching an Archer Class two years after? Name it Enterprise! That's cuter than a bucket full of baby chicks.

 

[DarrenTR1970]

but I’m honestly sick of Enterprises getting destroyed

Yes indeed. It started with TSFS, and then it became a plot device used for momentary shock value time and again. In FC, when Riker says 'So much for the Enterprise E; we hardly knew her.' and Picard replies: "Plenty of letters in the alphabet!" I just gritted my teeth and wanted to howl. The ship used to be a character unto herself- now she's no more than a hand phaser or tricorder for all the 'worth' assigned to her.

But it wasn't just Enterprise-D that was destroyed. Of the first six Galaxy-class starships, three were lost within a few years of commissioning. The Yamato was lost after only two years of service (Contagion), the Odyssey after six (The Jem'Hedar), and the Enterprise-D after eight (Generations). That, to me, suggests a fundamental design flaw in the Galaxy-class that its designers hadn't anticipated/considered.​

 

[Nerys Myk]

But it wasn't just Enterprise-D that was destroyed. Of the first six Galaxy-class starships, three were lost within a few years of commissioning. The Yamato was lost after only two years of service (Contagion), the Odyssey after six (The Jem'Hedar), and the Enterprise-D after eight (Generations). That, to me, suggests a fundamental design flaw in the Galaxy-class that its designers hadn't anticipated/considered.​

Ford Pinto Class.