Remove ads

Starship Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
[X] Relevant Innovation
We're already squeezed for room terribly and the prototype deflector is a space hog and a half. Conversely if we didn't want to try out newer Impulse engines we'd have carved that divot into our hull. Since we didn't, why not try to make use of it since it won't eat up space and cause even more issues in terms of space? We might not hit warp seven, but as long as we're faster than average we can accomplish our duties easily enough.
 
[X] Prep for the Ambassadors
-[X] Type-7 Avidyne Impulse Engine (Prototype)
-[X] Enhanced Deflector Dish (Prototype)
 
Last edited:
[X] Prep for the Ambassadors
-[X] Type-7 Avidyne Impulse Engine (Prototype)
-[X] Enhanced Deflector Dish (Prototype)
 
[X] Prep for the Ambassadors
-[X] Type-7 Avidyne Impulse Engine (Prototype)
-[X] Enhanced Deflector Dish (Prototype)

I feel like we can afford to use this thing as a heavy prototype hull to test techs given its a small Hull and if it means we just make 1-2 hulls so be it.

We can then make a more 'standard' ship for a Frigate I'm a few years if this heavy experimental focus fails. Edit: especially since we are not really 'budget' constrained etc.
 
Last edited:
[X] Slow but steady march of Science
-[X] Type-5 Avidyne Dual Impulse Thrusters
-[X] Enhanced Deflector Dish (Prototype)
 
[X] Stick to the standards

I'm leery of both prototypes at this stage, the deflector dish is obviously bulky, and a prototype engine is probably going to require more maintenance and make the ship harder to produce. One means more crew requirements and more volume for engineering space/spares, the other prevents more of this workhorse from being built to begin with.

I disagree with some of the assumptions that we can sorta core for this design to be a failure because that seems to ignore the political optics. If we deliver a failed design because we tried to turn it into general test bed, we're going to get more restrictions on the next design to try and prevent another similar result. Delivering sub par products is a fast way to get more restrictive requirements.
 
Last edited:
[X] Stick to the standards
-[X] Type-5 Avidyne Dual Impulse Thrusters
-[X] Recessed Navigational Deflector
 
[X] Plan Scope Creep
-[X] Type-7 Avidyne Impulse Engine (Prototype)
-[X] Enhanced Deflector Dish (Prototype)

It actually feels appropriate that after designing the first new starship class to see wide adoption in over fifty years, the Starship Design Bureau would get a little ahead of themselves and try to cram everything in. It's also hilarious to me personally that we've been commissioned to build a small frigate to replace the Miranda, and have already arrived at a ship which is the same mass as the Renaissance class.
 
Skippy said:
[X] Plan Scope Creep
-[X] Type-7 Avidyne Impulse Engine (Prototype)
-[X] Enhanced Deflector Dish (Prototype)

It actually feels appropriate that after designing the first new starship class to see wide adoption in over fifty years, the Starship Design Bureau would get a little ahead of themselves and try to cram everything in. It's also hilarious to me personally that we've been commissioned to build a small frigate to replace the Miranda, and have already arrived at a ship which is the same mass as the Renaissance class.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You've the same plan as [ ] Prep for the Ambassadors. I don't know if it maters to the QM but maybe change the vote so it is easier to track?
 
Hey, maybe we'll get lucky, and somehow the various flaws and unforeseen technical issues of the different technologies we try to cram in will end up cancelling each other out!


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI0euMFAWF8

"The new impulse thrusters turned out actually be haunted, it turns out taking schematics from the sarcophagus of an ancient Promellian king has its downsides, but luckily this is balanced out by the new navigation dish undergoing harmonic resonance with subspace and attempting to send the ship to the Phantom Zone, which tends to exorcise the ghosts as they appear."
 
[X] Slow but steady march of Science
[X] Prep for the Ambassadors

I'm okay with either of these.
 
Jax said:
You've the same plan as [ ] Prep for the Ambassadors. I don't know if it maters to the QM but maybe change the vote so it is easier to track?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's the same vote and I was aware of that when I posted. I just wanted to choose a name which better-reflected my reasons for voting this way, no offence meant to @Void Stalker.

Given there's only two subvotes, I question needing plan names in the first place, and I expect that @Sayle should be able to manage with the tally. But if he'd prefer that we don't have multiple titles, I'm sure he can yell at me. 😅
 
Karugus said:
I disagree with some of the assumptions that we can sorta core for this design to be a failure because that seems to ignore the political optics. If we deliver a failed design because we tried to turn it into general test bed, we're going to get more restrictions on the next design to try and prevent another similar result. Delivering sub par products is a fast way to get more restrictive requirements.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'd agree with you on that, if it wasn't canonical that Starfleet genuinely makes dozens of 1 off designs in addition to the mass production models. Plus, we've recently delivered a very useable design. I feel the political risk is perfectly fine in this.
 
Objectively I think @Karagus makes a good point here, which is why in the previous vote I advocated for the more conservative option on the hull type which would not result in our frigate already massing as much as a light cruiser.

However, a strong counterargument: turning in an almost perfect design which neatly fulfils or exceeds every single requirement, and then going ahead producing an absolute trainwreck without skipping a beat would be hilarious.
 
Skippy said:
However, a strong counterargument: turning in an almost perfect design which neatly fulfils or exceeds every single requirement, and then going ahead producing an absolute trainwreck without skipping a beat would be hilarious.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, that would be really funny, honestly I don't care about the ship stats, I'm more interested in making the ship look unique.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top