Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
[X] Three Nacelles (Warp 3.8, 15 -> 27 Industry) [Experimental]

Two nacelles is not round - it is a line. Four nacelles is not round - it is a line squared. Three nacelles, though - three is how you begin to plot a curve, and everyone knows circles are curved.
 
Experimental means two more prototype rolls. I don't think we want to take too much risk on this when the ship is going to be faster than the Stingray anyway
 
We should probably save the experimental tech and massive industry costs for things that are more important for the role. A ship like this isn't going to be running from a fight, and it will never have strategic mobility in mind as a priority. I'd rather save the Industry and the risk for when we'll actually need it.

[X] Two Nacelles (Warp 3.6, 15 -> 23 Industry)
 
[ ] One Really Really Big Nacelle
Nah, kidding. Wonder if it would be possible, though.

[X] Two Nacelles (Warp 3.6, 15 -> 23 Industry)
I'm cheaping out here, because a) resources are tight in wartime, b) I don't want to have to lug around twice the weight in realspace, the engines will be overtaxed as is, and c) I don't want to gamble on the ship exploding, nor do I want to have to deal with prototyping rolls. However, if the majority goes with three, I will gladly change my vote. I'm just not getting a very 'fuck it, we ball' vibe from the thread.
 
[X] Four Nacelles (Warp 4, 15 -> 31 Industry)

Why shouldn't strategic mobility be a concern for this ship? IIRC we aren't going to be building a lot of them, so the faster it can the move places a single one of these can cover.

Also I just really want to build a quad nacelle ship.
 
Uh, I'm not sure what's going on here? What's written down here is saying "Two Nacelles is 10% slower than the Stingrays", and people are going "It doesn't need to be faster than them?"

Which, well, yes.

But also, it's slower. What the triple nacelle setup tries to do is do a gimmick to compensate for that reduced strategic speed, but it's chancy. While four nacelles makes it faster but costs a fortune.

I mean, at the end of the day, while tactical speed is one thing, our DNs should not be strategically the slowest thing in our arsenal. It should get to its destination at the same time as the rest of the force with the option to sprint if it has to.
 
Alectai said:
Uh, I'm not sure what's going on here? What's written down here is saying "Two Nacelles is 10% slower than the Stingrays", and people are going "It doesn't need to be faster than them?"

Which, well, yes.

But also, it's slower. What the triple nacelle setup tries to do is do a gimmick to compensate for that reduced strategic speed, but it's chancy. While four nacelles makes it faster but costs a fortune.

I mean, at the end of the day, while tactical speed is one thing, our DNs should not be strategically the slowest thing in our arsenal. It should get to its destination at the same time as the rest of the force with the option to sprint if it has to.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The written numbers for the warp speed on the ships say different while it is 10% faster than the stingray if you look at the numbers, though it might be 10% slower than the nx but it's escorts are the stinraus and that's what's matters.


Also 2 nacelles are at multiple times in the post listed as 3.6 cruise while the stinray is a difniteive 3.4 cruise
 
Alectai said:
Uh, I'm not sure what's going on here? What's written down here is saying "Two Nacelles is 10% slower than the Stingrays", and people are going "It doesn't need to be faster than them?"

Which, well, yes.

But also, it's slower. What the triple nacelle setup tries to do is do a gimmick to compensate for that reduced strategic speed, but it's chancy. While four nacelles makes it faster but costs a fortune.

I mean, at the end of the day, while tactical speed is one thing, our DNs should not be strategically the slowest thing in our arsenal. It should get to its destination at the same time as the rest of the force with the option to sprint if it has to.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Actually, part of the problem with the latest update is that even two nacelles ISN'T slower than the Stingray-class. The Stingray-class, as of its latest refit, cruises at Warp 3.4 - meanwhile, the 2 nacelle option cruises at Warp 3.6, the three nacelle option at Warp 3.8 (the same speed as the NX-class), and the four nacelle option at Warp 4 (faster than literally every other ship in service at cruising speed).

EDIT: As noted above, the Dreadnought is already .2 faster than its most likely escorts when cruising with two nacelles (and if .2 warp factor is enough to make the Warp 5 engine have conniptions when trying to run it for anything longer than sprinting, I'll be really surprised, so it could hang with a pure NX squadron if desperately needed), so going faster doesn't provide much in the way of immediate benefit - and even if it might prove useful for "future proofing", it could run into the problem noted with the Constellation class in the previous thread (namely, not being able to run something as basic as hull polarization and its high warp cruising speed at the same time).
 
Last edited:
7th Hex said:
[X] Four Nacelles (Warp 4, 15 -> 31 Industry)

Why shouldn't strategic mobility be a concern for this ship? IIRC we aren't going to be building a lot of them, so the faster it can the move places a single one of these can cover.

Also I just really want to build a quad nacelle ship.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Because our territory is small, and this thing is a big battleship--if the Romulans are going to be fighting it, then they'll either come to us or be defending a location we choose to attack. If they aren't fighting it, then the extra bit of cruise mobility isn't meaningful.

Either way, having more cruise ability than its escorts isn't very useful, and certainly not worth the massive industry costs.
 
Then that sounds like an error to me, and it needs to be straightened out before we all start voting.
 
Last edited:
[X] Two Nacelles (Warp 3.6, 15 -> 23 Industry)

Four nacelles are pretty expensive, and three nacelles are better tested in peacetime, so two is my bet.

There's still the pulsed phase cannons and photonic torpedoes to test out, so better allow some leeway in that.
 
Guys, four nacelles is MASSIVELY more costly, and three nacelles is still more expensive while also forcing us to take a risk roll that may blow up in our faces...all for a capability we don't even need.
 
[X] Two Nacelles (Warp 3.6, 15 -> 23 Industry)

I was going to push for three or four until the hard numbers came up. If Sayle amends them i might change my vote. As it stands this ship is more than fast enough for what we need.
 
Iridium Flare said:
[ ] One Really Really Big Nacelle
Nah, kidding. Wonder if it would be possible, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Saturn Scientist Dishes on New Trek Film

Yup entirely possible in canon.

So is a zero Nacelle ship, the whole outstretched cylinders is just how Starfleet usually arranges it for some reason.

This thing (which is an ENT era Starfleet ship) presumably still has the two engines, but they aren't in the typical wing style. I hope we get to design something like it, at least one oddball ship.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top