[X] Standard Length
-
Going forward, links to content from Twitter (now X) will no longer be embedded. Pre-existing links should not be affected.
Linked contents
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Okay, now I'm confused as fuck, because your numbers have better Max Cruise for Extended (best-case 6.4-6.6, worst-case 6.1-6.3) than Standard (best-case 6.3-6.5, worst-case 6-6.2).
I've been operating under the assumption that Extended was -0.1 Max Cruise; if it's actually +0.1 Max Cruise then thank you, you've made all my arguments an order of magnitude stronger, because emergency response time breakeven is well inside four flipping light-years and beyond that the Extendeds are faster.
The literally countless in-story comments every time a prototype roll went wrong about the necessity of keeping a separate production line open for spares for the flawed Block I <design> just for this <ship>, heavily implying that whether we use that <design> anywhere else or not, whether we use the de-bugged design at all or not, the de-bugged version will still be in production for quite a while for the Federation in general.
Also IIRC there was a passing mention in a propulsion vote about a previous gen impulse engine being recently out of production when Starfleet hadn't used it in like thirty years.
[X] Standard Length
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Ah, yes. The null set.
(Tongue firmly in cheek. Obviously almost all ships benefit at least somewhat from high sprint speed. I do genuinely believe that ships that benefit more from sprint than cruise speed pretty much don't exist until you can get from Earth to Vulcan in three days-ish- either the Warp 9.5 or 9.8 generation of drives, by the TNG scale. Once you get into the Warp 9.9, Warp 9.9X generation, sprint becomes just ridiculously powerful, because it can cover a tremendous amount of ground when it really matters. But I firmly believe that sprint is completely irrelevant to the Warp 7 and 8 drives, and underwhelming to the Warp 9 one.)
Last edited:
- Location
- Wörms, the half continent
It is -0.1 max cruise, that's fundamental to the maths. I don't want to recalculate how Ash got all those ranges, but presumably they made a transcription error somewhere or something. But Max cruise is the midpoint between Max Warp and Efficient Cruise, and that simply must decrease when you're reducing the high end by more than you're boosting the low end.
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Sprint speed is only useful at the tactical level. Outside of warfare, Starfleet cares far more about operational range and emergency response capability. So I think sacrificing sprint speed is plenty justifiable.
Statistically the higher cruise speed is hugely useful for utility purposes, but there will be combat actions, and to be blunt, if our ships can be run down by faster ships then they'll be choosing the terms of engagement more than us.
I've got a nagging feeling we're about to discover our oh-so-cordial neighbours' Klingon ships, and they'll have better weapons and shields, and they have a numerical advantage. If they can sprint faster then they've got another tactical advantage.
Remember the war with the Romulans played out quite differently because our weapons technology was years ahead of where it should've been, we already had a fleet of ships with phase cannons and enhanced torpedoes. We're still using early, weak phasers and shields, we should remember that.
I've got a nagging feeling we're about to discover our oh-so-cordial neighbours' Klingon ships, and they'll have better weapons and shields, and they have a numerical advantage. If they can sprint faster then they've got another tactical advantage.
Remember the war with the Romulans played out quite differently because our weapons technology was years ahead of where it should've been, we already had a fleet of ships with phase cannons and enhanced torpedoes. We're still using early, weak phasers and shields, we should remember that.
In our world there is *zero* overlap between military naval propulsion plants, aircraft jet engines, and armored vehicle engines and their civilian counterparts. The civilian fields benefit from spin-off technologies and applications pioneered and subsidized by military development but the designs are completely different.
All of these discussions are pointed at Starfleet applications that will still require the old designs, not civilian ones. Replacements, spares, refurbishments, lifecycle extensions… not civilian couriers and passenger liners.
At the current levels of maximum warp, each sprint for the Sagarmatha-class covers approximately 0.467 light-years. At Warp 7.4, a ship will cover 0.555 lightyears in the same 12 hour period. At Warp 7.8, that distance increases again to 0.650 LY per 12 hour sprint.
Edit to clarify: While sprint is tactically useful, it's also worth considering that, in terms of emergency response, a longer distance covered per sprint means you can start sprinting sooner to arrive at a target - which, in turn, reduces travel time overall assuming the same cruising speed, as the ship that starts sprinting sooner will be traveling at a higher average speed. While I don't want to start breaking down the math involved in figuring out where the breakpoint for that is, it's something that really should be taken into account when planning "how fast can this ship respond to an emergency".
Last edited:
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
Can't say I found any of the arguments too compelling one way or the other so I'll just vote on aesthetics. I like long nacelles.
Can't say I found any of the arguments too compelling one way or the other so I'll just vote on aesthetics. I like long nacelles.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
That's what I thought lol.
Let's see.
4.8/5.8/6.8 Old Baseline
currently: +0.2-0.4 cruise, +0.2-0.6 max, which is:
5.0-5.2 efficient cruise, standard (up to 5.4-5.6, cruise-optimised configuration)
7.0-7.4 current max, standard (up to 7.4-7.8, sprint-optimised configuration)
resulting in
6.0-6.3 current max cruise, standard (up to 6.2-6.5, for most configurations)
and applying the Extended modifier gets us:
5.4-5.6 current cruise, extended (up to 5.8-6.0, cruise-optimised configuration)
6.4-6.8 current max, extended (up to 6.8-7.2, sprint-optimised configuration)
resulting in
5.9-6.2 max cruise, extended (up to 6.1-6.4, for most configurations)
4.8/5.8/6.8 Old Baseline
currently: +0.2-0.4 cruise, +0.2-0.6 max, which is:
5.0-5.2 efficient cruise, standard (up to 5.4-5.6, cruise-optimised configuration)
7.0-7.4 current max, standard (up to 7.4-7.8, sprint-optimised configuration)
resulting in
6.0-6.3 current max cruise, standard (up to 6.2-6.5, for most configurations)
and applying the Extended modifier gets us:
5.4-5.6 current cruise, extended (up to 5.8-6.0, cruise-optimised configuration)
6.4-6.8 current max, extended (up to 6.8-7.2, sprint-optimised configuration)
resulting in
5.9-6.2 max cruise, extended (up to 6.1-6.4, for most configurations)
Which makes way more sense.
Don't worry, I did all that math. It was tedious but thankfully easily spreadsheetable. All of my response-time numbers were assuming 12 hours sprint and the rest of the time at maximum cruise.
Last edited:
[X] Standard Length
Double checking my math, I'd been leaving in the 0.2 from the Sagarmatha's nacelle configuration. I'll be correcting the original table.
Edit: As to clarify how I've been calculating maximum cruise, I've been operating under the assumption that maximum cruise is always at the halfway point between efficient cruise and maximum warp - ie., a 0.4 increase to Maximum Warp would drag the Maximum Cruise up by 0.2, to keep it evenly spaced between efficient cruise and maximum warp. Inversely, an increase in efficient cruise without a corresponding increase in maximum warp would decrease the gap between all three warp velocities (as an example, in the worst case for Extended Nacelles, Warp 6.4 is 1 Warp Factor above Warp 5.4, and thus the Maximum Cruise of Warp 5.9 is 0.5 above the base velocity.
Last edited:
- Location
- california
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
I think you should really think about the implications of this post.
But to give a brief idea, using worst case numbers and a vessel responding to an emergency on Vulcan after a given departure from earth:
Duration | Time from departure (Days) | Distance from departure (ly) | Cruise | Sustainable | Max
Extended Worst Case: 30.96 | 7.00 | 3.02 | 5.405.90 | 6.40
Extended Worst Case: 32.59 | 14.00 | 6.04 | 5.405.90 | 6.40
Extended Worst Case: 34.22 | 21.00 | 9.06 | 5.405.90 | 6.40
Standard Worst Case: 30.83 | 7.00 | 2.40 | 5.00| 6.00 | 7.00
Standard Worst Case: 33.78 | 14.00 | 4.79 | 5.00 | 6.00 | 7.00
Standard Worst Case: 36.73 | 21.00 | 7.19 | 5.00 | 6.00 | 7.00
Extended Best Case: 27.11 | 7.00 | 3.37| 5.60 | 6.20 | 6.80
Extended Best Case: 28.95 | 14.00 | 6.74 | 5.60 | 6.20 | 6.80
Extended Best Case: 30.80 | 21.00 | 10.10 | 5.60 | 6.20 | 6.80
Standard Best Case: 27.15 | 7.00 | 2.70 | 5.20 | 6.30 | 7.40
Standard Best Case: 30.21 | 14.00 | 5.39 | 5.20 | 6.30 | 7.40
Standard Best Case: 33.28 | 21.00 | 8.09 | 5.20 | 6.30 | 7.40
Extended Sagmaratha Best: 24.76 | 7.00 | 3.74 | 5.80 | 6.40 | 7.00
Extended Sagmaratha Best: 26.55 | 14.00 | 7.48 | 5.80 | 6.40 | 7.00
Extended Sagmaratha Best: 28.34 | 21.00 | 11.23 | 5.80 | 6.40 | 7.00
Standard Sagmaratha Best: 24.92 | 7.00 | 3.02 | 5.40 | 6.50 | 7.60
Standard Sagmaratha Best: 27.90 | 14.00 | 6.04 | 5.40 | 6.50 | 7.60
Standard Sagmaratha Best: 30.89 | 21.00 | 9.06 | 5.40 | 6.50 | 7.60
(sorry for the formatting, best I could do on the phone while dealing with 2 hungry babies)
Basically faster cruise will have more ships closer to the event on average, reducing the amount of time they need to spend at max sustainable warp. So you get shorter response times and better coverage on average.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I don't care for all these hard number-crunching posts on travel time and the like.
This is Star Trek, where you tell the helmsman "Maximum Warp," it feels badass to do, and you get there in the nick of time.
This is Star Trek, where you tell the helmsman "Maximum Warp," it feels badass to do, and you get there in the nick of time.
- Location
- Somewhere in the Ashes
- Pronouns
- She/Her
[X] Extended Length (-0.6 Maximum Warp, +0.4 Cruise)
It's an early TOS era design, long nacelles are part of the look.
I admit that a 0.6 loss to sprint is painful, but a 0.4 increase to cruise is really damn good.
It's an early TOS era design, long nacelles are part of the look.
I admit that a 0.6 loss to sprint is painful, but a 0.4 increase to cruise is really damn good.
The problem being that, for all we know, the nacelles on the Constitution are standard length by these standards. Which could mean that going extended length is how we wind up with nacelles closer to those of Discovery's ships (even if they have much more TOS styling).
It's an explanation I've seen quite a lot to explicate why ships like Voyager or the Enterprise will often be travelling at Warp 6, but only start to care about the amount of time they can sustain a very high warp factor like 9+ despite the colossal difference in speeds.
We hear a lot about famines on colonies and starships sending relief supplies, but I assume that part of that is "food now" and protein resequencers, and potentially also crops that are engineered to be resistant to whatever wiped out the last batch.
66 to 30, standard length it is.