Warhead
I read about the "Warhead" on a website. I, however, am not certain if it's canon. Anyone? Ottens 18:39, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)
- The warhead is NOT canon in the strictest sense, because it was never even hinted at in an episode. The only place it was described in detail was in the DS9 Tech Manual. -- Dan Carlson 19:14, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)
- The DS9 Technical Manual is often considered "not exactly" canon. Should the information stay, or be removed? Ottens 19:15, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)
Defiant destruction
- Does anyone have a picture of the destruction of the Defiant from DS9: "The Changing Face of Evil"? I think this could be a good addition to this page, to complete the chronology of the ship. zsingaya 08:17, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- There are two pictures of the Defiant's destruction on the article "Second Battle of Chin'toka" and one on the page for the Defiant itself. Personally I don't think that there's much point putting a picture of the Defiant's destruction on the page for the Defiant class as that page is for the class of vessel, not an individual vessel.--Scimitar 10:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed --Gvsualan 10:19, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Deck 5?
- I just saw "The Way of the Warrior" on today and when the Defiant was being hit by the Vor'cha while attempting to evacuate the Prakesh, Dax said there was a hull breach on Deck 5. This should be addressed somehow --Gvsualan 23:06, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- There have been dialogue references to both deck 5 and deck 6 on the Defiant. The original cutaway, sometims seen in the turbolift, showed the additional decks on the ship, although later artwork and model effects maintain deck 4 is at the bottom of the ship.
- Some have theorized that Decks 5 and 6 are "sub decks" around the lower sections of the nacelle booms (the lowest points of the vessel, they extend below the deck 4 shuttlebay floor in the centerline profile) -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 02:05, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- There have been dialogue references to both deck 5 and deck 6 on the Defiant. The original cutaway, sometims seen in the turbolift, showed the additional decks on the ship, although later artwork and model effects maintain deck 4 is at the bottom of the ship.
Ablative Armor/Cloaking Device
- Is the inclusion of ablative armor accurate for this article? This question comes to mind after it was pointed out by Erika Benteen that, "We've been unable to stop the Defiant. Someone's equipped her with ablative armor and neglected to inform Starfleet Operations." This seems to indicate that it was not standard Defiant-class issue, and seemed to be an add-on, 'exclusively to the USS Defiant. I think that means that blanketing the whole class with this feature is a bit presumptious. The same can be said about the cloaking device. Afterall, this article is about the class as a whole and not a single ship which is not exactly a typical "representative sample" of the class as a whole. --Gvsualan 06:11, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
- The inclusion of the ablative armor is absolutely appropriate given the on screen evidence. There will be no attempt to justify the identical hull skin looks of Defiant, Valiant and Sao Paulo as anything other than production convenience, but there are important references in dialogue to consider. While The Way of the Warrior references the Defiant's new ablative armor, and Benteeen does indeed make the comment about the armor in Paradise Lost, we must assume that it was simply upgraded armor. This is necessary because in the season three episode Past Tense, Part I, Chief O'Brien references how chronoton particles had become lodged in the ship's ablative armor matrix. The idea that this is the same armor being referred to as new in The Way of the Warrior seems unlikely given that it was a good six to eight months after Past Tense. HaganeNoKokoro 00:45, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)
In The Wounded Picard easily got hold of the command codes for rogue Federation vessel, the USS Phoenix. I bring this up to illustrate how easy it was for a high ranking officer to get a hold of sensitive information about another Federation vessel. If ablative armor hull plating were a standard part of the Defiant-class specfification the captain of the USS Lakota (NCC-42768) would have known about it and probably be more prepared for it.(Paridise Lost) The captain of the Lokota made a point of saying that the armor was added without the knowledge of starfleet operations(probably against regulations).
Its clear that at least in 2372 ablative hull armor was not standard. Why would we assume it was an upgrade, the whole point of the word canon is that its an established fact. The captain of the Lokota didn't say "someone forgot to tell Starfleet Operations that the Defiant upgraded its ablative armor.
On the similar appearance of Defiant-class vessels one can not count out the tactical advantage of having extra armor that appears the same as standard armor(the overcoats worn by the president are kevlar-lined, but you can't tell by looking).
We only had the pleasure of seeing two other defiant class vessels. The Valiant which had neither a cloaking device or ablative armor, and the [[USS São Paulo] renamed USS Defiant (NCC-75633). The USS São Paulo was only involved in one battle, the battle for cardassia, and though i can't say with one hundred percent certainty that there was no mention of ablative armor I'm sure the vessel wasn't equiped with a cloaking device.
Even if the USS São Paulo had ablative armor its concieveable that it was added by starfleet (considering they were at war) or sisko had it added himself like he did the first time. Either way it wasn't mentioned on screen so we can't just insert our own opinion.
As a final note there was absolutely no mention of any other cloaking device equiped federation vessels. In fact, when Thomas Riker stole the Defiant the representive from the Obsidian order specificaly says that the romulans lent one cloaking device to the federation.--Illwill 01:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think the point has been missed here that there were references to ablative armor on the Defiant long before the very pointed reference to the "New" ablative armor in Way of the Warrior. Further, the matter of the appearance of different ships was clearly stated as non-evidence, but production convenience.
Missing appearances
Are there some appearances missing from DS9? -- Warp One 16:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)