Linked contents
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
Sprint radius is still too short to be meaningful- half a lightyear or thereabouts. Extended does reduce Max Cruise, but I think this is one where I'm willing to accept being 0.1 Warp Factor worse in a crisis for being 0.4 Warp Factor better the other ninety percent of the time. We're not designing warships, we're designing peaceful explorers. Very dangerous ones if pressed, but.
Extended Length is an extra twenty-four percent ground covered by all the routine ships doing all the routine things. It's an extra twenty-four percent range on our explorers. Its- assuming we get the Connies this generation- it's a difference of almost the Sagarmatha's entire range on a five-year mission. (Well, half that, since you've got to get back, too.) It's almost a free extra ship every four ships for commerce, logistics, cargo, internal patrols, routine survey work, and so on. With all the knock-on economic and industrial effects you'd expect of that.
I'll take being 0.1 Warp Factor slower in emergencies for that in a heartbeat.
Sprint radius is still too short to be meaningful- half a lightyear or thereabouts. Extended does reduce Max Cruise, but I think this is one where I'm willing to accept being 0.1 Warp Factor worse in a crisis for being 0.4 Warp Factor better the other ninety percent of the time. We're not designing warships, we're designing peaceful explorers. Very dangerous ones if pressed, but.
Extended Length is an extra twenty-four percent ground covered by all the routine ships doing all the routine things. It's an extra twenty-four percent range on our explorers. Its- assuming we get the Connies this generation- it's a difference of almost the Sagarmatha's entire range on a five-year mission. (Well, half that, since you've got to get back, too.) It's almost a free extra ship every four ships for commerce, logistics, cargo, internal patrols, routine survey work, and so on. With all the knock-on economic and industrial effects you'd expect of that.
I'll take being 0.1 Warp Factor slower in emergencies for that in a heartbeat.
Last edited:
Crafter of War
The Dorf
- Location
- Bend
[X] Standard Length
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
I got convinced. If the size isn't a problem (or is already factored in) and given "Max Warp" is basically only viable if your already right fucking there. Basically burning out your engine for a drag race distances when space is contienental distances.
I got convinced. If the size isn't a problem (or is already factored in) and given "Max Warp" is basically only viable if your already right fucking there. Basically burning out your engine for a drag race distances when space is contienental distances.
Last edited:
I am not willing to reduce Sprint capacity that much for a lesser increase in Cruise. Going with-
[X] Standard Length
[X] Standard Length
Yes, but cruise speed is not the speed warships will be moving 90% of the time. Maximum sprint is and maximum sprint is halfway between cruise and max warp. If it was +.4/-.4 it would be a wash, but as it stands +.4 cruise for -.6 max warp means we go .4 faster when we don't care about going fast in exchange for going .1 slower when we actually care about going fast and .6 slower when we absolutely need to go fast.
That's a bad trade.
And maximum warp is a sliding scale. Sure we can only go half a lightyear at literally maximum warp, but we can go at maximum cruise speed virtually endlessly and the speeds between maximum cruise and maximum warp for some sliding scale of time. When you absolutely need to get from point A to point B in as little time as possible you look at the distance and calculate the highest warp speed you can sustain for long enough to get there. If our maximum warp is 7 then we can travel warp 7 for half a lightyear. If our maximum warp is 7.1 we can travel at warp 7 for more than half a lightyear.
Last edited:
Long range exploration, border patrol, strategic movement of naval assets,... Basically every situation outside of running away from the Borg, or responding to an emergency 2-3 ly away.
Tactical speed vs Strategic speed. Strategic speed is king because logistics wins wars.
We're talking about a +0.6 to +0.8 increase to cruise and a -0.6+(0.2 to 0.6) change to max warp.
Current minimum: Cruise 5; max 7 means max cruise is (7-5)/2+5=6
Current best case: Cruise 5.2; max 7.4 means best case max cruise would be (7.4-5.2)2+5.2=6.3
Best case: Cruise 5.6; Max: 6.8 means max cruise would be (6.8-5.6)/2+5.6=6.2
Worst case: Cruise 5.4; Max 6.4 means max cruise would be (6.4-5.4)/2+5.4=5.9
So absolute worst case, where we roll absolutely bottom for both increases, we wind up 0.1 warp lower for max cruise and absolutely highest rolls we wind up 0.2 Warp faster for max cruise. Before nacelle configurations.
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
Seems like a no-brainer to me. Our Explorers will appreciate significantly higher cruise speeds, so will our logisticians and strategic planners. About the only people who won't are the hot rodders who want to drag race their ships.
Last edited:
[X] Standard Length
There is a massive tactical advantage in being able to disengage and either reengage at will or drop onto a ballistic sublight course to hide and slink away for reinforcements.
I understand the economy advantages to cruise but fear policymakers will take that speed as an excuse to curtail building programs out of a misguided sense that the universe is safe. And to be frank the "max cruise" stat, which is the limiting factor for response times, will be little affected by this choice anyway.
I'd much prefer to build more hulls with better peak performances and similar ability to concentrate and respond in emergencies, even if slower when at a leisurely lope.
There is a massive tactical advantage in being able to disengage and either reengage at will or drop onto a ballistic sublight course to hide and slink away for reinforcements.
I understand the economy advantages to cruise but fear policymakers will take that speed as an excuse to curtail building programs out of a misguided sense that the universe is safe. And to be frank the "max cruise" stat, which is the limiting factor for response times, will be little affected by this choice anyway.
I'd much prefer to build more hulls with better peak performances and similar ability to concentrate and respond in emergencies, even if slower when at a leisurely lope.
With that math, the extra cruising speeds works out extremely well. It gains 25% operational range over the current model, and only loses out like 9% in 12 hour emergency response but is dead even in 3-day emergency response against the new Sprint model.
Cruise is king.
Last edited:
Wut? Cruise is literally the speed most warships spend the vast majority of their lives at. Sprint is max warp and it's only really used in emergencies and for short periods. For any long distance travel you're going to cruise at either your regular efficient cruise or your high cruise.
StriderInCosmos
Wanderer in the Worldsea
- Location
- Somewhere in... Terminal Dogma? I think?
My, oh my. I have to admit, this was not where I expected to see so much contention, but... I'll have to make a choice, I suppose.
So, the standard length will preserve any advances we get in our warp ceiling (up to 0.6!). It would allow for the potential of a real quick ship to be able to go to and from someplace quickly, which is a boon to several mission profiles that don't rely on range (short-range or high-priority transport being the standout here, though internal patrol and response craft would benefit substantially from this as well).
However, many mission profiles would benefit from an extended nacelle's tradeoff of potentially all boosts to sprint for a better cruise speed. And, as far as I can tell, there's a far greater amount of mission profiles that benefit from greater cruise speeds (medium to long-range cargo or personnel transport, exploration missions, border patrol vessels, and scientific vessels, to name just a few mission profiles).
So, as challenging of a decision as it is to make on a single nacelle, I'm going to have to go with:
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
As @Fouredged Sword implies, reduced sprint speed is somewhat bad for warships, but right now, at least, we aren't in the business of building warships. The Romulan War is now 2 decades behind us, and our stated focus is on building ships of peace; scientific vessels, explorers, and trade vessels. These are not ships that are going to be spending any great amount of time at warp.
I will make an addendum that it feels like we could easily make a standard-length 'version' of this by simply chopping the extension off a copy of the blueprints and offering that as another option for those vessels concerned with a higher warp sprint.
So, the standard length will preserve any advances we get in our warp ceiling (up to 0.6!). It would allow for the potential of a real quick ship to be able to go to and from someplace quickly, which is a boon to several mission profiles that don't rely on range (short-range or high-priority transport being the standout here, though internal patrol and response craft would benefit substantially from this as well).
However, many mission profiles would benefit from an extended nacelle's tradeoff of potentially all boosts to sprint for a better cruise speed. And, as far as I can tell, there's a far greater amount of mission profiles that benefit from greater cruise speeds (medium to long-range cargo or personnel transport, exploration missions, border patrol vessels, and scientific vessels, to name just a few mission profiles).
So, as challenging of a decision as it is to make on a single nacelle, I'm going to have to go with:
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
As @Fouredged Sword implies, reduced sprint speed is somewhat bad for warships, but right now, at least, we aren't in the business of building warships. The Romulan War is now 2 decades behind us, and our stated focus is on building ships of peace; scientific vessels, explorers, and trade vessels. These are not ships that are going to be spending any great amount of time at warp.
I will make an addendum that it feels like we could easily make a standard-length 'version' of this by simply chopping the extension off a copy of the blueprints and offering that as another option for those vessels concerned with a higher warp sprint.
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
We've built internal surveyors and cargo/utility ships in the past. Those are going to do a lot of flying across more or less safe space and cruise speed is important for them.
Anything travelling very far would also benefit, at the opposite end of things. A good cruise speed on that kind of ship would let it go further in the same maximum time in space. But we already did our explorer.
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
Honestly neither cruise speed nor max speed seem relevant for that?
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Well, there's your answer. I'm not designing warships.
Like, sure, warships exist and matter, but they don't matter enough. I'm designing the warp drive for an entire civilization for a generation. I care about (A) its explorers cruising range, and (B) a massive buff to its internal logistical and economic efficiency (with some side bonuses to routine warship patrols and scientific surveys and so on) far, far, FAR more than I do our warships' flank speed.
If you think over the next forty years we can't swing enough entire extra explorers worth of budget out of the economic and industrial knock-on effects of twenty-four percent more interstellar shipping capacity before economies of scale kick in, to be worth 4.7% flank speed per explorer, then I literally don't know what to tell you.
Last edited:
Cruise is the speed you spend most of your time in because fuel is more important than speed.
But when speed is important you can sustain maximum cruise until your fuel runs out, and so that's the speed you go when you actually care about speed. Maximum cruise is halfway between efficient cruise and maximum warp.
And the long nacelles actually hurt our maximum cruise. We are slower except when we don't care about going fast.
- Location
- Wörms, the half continent
[X] Standard Length
- Location
- Louisville, GA
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
Go go cruise mafia.
Go go cruise mafia.
- Location
- Somewhere and somewhen in time and space
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
StriderInCosmos
Wanderer in the Worldsea
- Location
- Somewhere in... Terminal Dogma? I think?
And, going out of universe for a moment, we won't be worrying about the Klingons (canonically, at least) until the mid to late 2270s, nearly a century away. Granted, this being an alternate timeline, they might decide to pop us in the jaw sooner, or hell, they might even defer while they build up strength.
And again, the debate of extended vs. standard seems like it could be solved by just making an A and B version with one being the standard length for higher sprints while the other is the extended version.
And again, the debate of extended vs. standard seems like it could be solved by just making an A and B version with one being the standard length for higher sprints while the other is the extended version.