Starfleet Design Bureau

Firehawk242 · Jan 7, 2024

Lohjak said:
Does a cargo bay really add much capability, though? The tractor beam already allows us to hold the cargo and crew. The brig is useful if some of the crew needs to be separated. But in what circumstance are we going to need to separate the cargo from the other ship and the crew, but be happy to keep on our ship?

Ramble said:
Way I see it, if they're carrying enough contraband to justify a 10 kiloton cargo bay, they're carrying enough to justify taking the whole boat and crew to impound.

So the cargo bay was the last thing I considered cutting when coming up with the plan. I then asked myself two questions:

Question 1: What does it cost to include it?

Answer: Not much. It doesn't add enough mass to degrade mobility, and it's the cheapest option on the whole list.

Question 2: What does including it get us?

Answer: A much more versatile ship. A cargo hold can be basically anything, really. Even if it's not much use for the ship's main function, it's the sort of thing with a million and one ancillary uses.

Conclusion: It's basically a free addition that vastly broadens the ship's mission profile. So why not throw it in?

Golgotha · Jan 7, 2024

Lohjak said:
Does a cargo bay really add much capability, though? The tractor beam already allows us to hold the cargo and crew. The brig is useful if some of the crew needs to be separated. But in what circumstance are we going to need to separate the cargo from the other ship and the crew, but be happy to keep on our ship?

Any time the ship can continue, but a small part of the cargo can not.
I would argue this is one of the most common scenarios.
Customs and border patrol often confiscate something not allowed but still let the ship/person continue on their journey.

Getting into Australia for example, you can't bring a lot of living things, or products from living things. No fruit, no honey, no cultural stuff from a broad range of biodegradable categories.

Other things get held for a certain amount of time before being released to prove they are safe.

Cargo bay allows confiscation without destruction.

7th Hex · Jan 7, 2024

NexusEye said:
This isn't really a space cop car, it's a space coast guard ship and we wouldn't just be pulling over space cars, we'd be pulling over space ships including freighter ships which may contain large amounts of cargo we may want to confiscate.

I think this is a space cop car, people are just trying to make it into a space coast guard ship since that's the kind of multi-role style of designs we're used to doing with Starfleet ships. The only thing being asked for is an in-system enforcer capable of basic police duties and inspections.

Sayle said:
Now the question is what ship will be the first to mount the new nacelles. As it happens, you have a few options to choose from. First is a design competition tendered by Tellar, Benzar, and Denobula. They are interested in standardising their designs for an in-system enforcer, one capable of basic police and inspection actions. The increasing traffic and intra-Federation commerce means that their current designs are beginning to reach parity with well-equipped merchant and smuggler ships, and planetside incidents can rapidly escalate into spaceborne escapes that their current roster aren't capable of interdicting. The main requirement is that the design should be cheap with a basic tactical armament, designed for use by non-military personnel with standard training.

Strunkriidiisk · Jan 7, 2024

Honestly the cargo bay is fine. I could take it or leave it.

A shuttlebay and transporter though (for those voting for that) feels like a lot of expense for very little utility just to shore up some very strange edge cases. The arguments for shuttles instead of or as a supplement to transporters have included:

- getting to places transporters would be blocked from - except this is a customs vessel not an explorer, it shouldn't be running into places where transporters don't work since those tend to involve negative space wedgies; and any situation where the transporters don't work in the cutter's normal operation is probably a ship with shields up and I wouldn't want to send a shuttle into that because things are about to get blasty.

- greater convenience - lmao, transporters are faster than shuttles in literally every situation and the famous transporter accidents AFAIK are always due to weird things our explorers run into.

- people refusing transporters on moral/ethical grounds - then the ships can just be docked and they can walk through the airlock.

- greater presence in a system - what presence? A shuttle has no means of enforcing anything on any grounds except the honour system and if they run into trouble they'll have precious few means of dealing with it. Star Trek sensors also already seem to be system-wide so it's not like a shuttle is expanding the ship's detection radius.

DerechteNikolaus · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Ranger

Nyvis · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

ava2607 · Jan 7, 2024

NexusEye said:
This isn't really a space cop car, it's a space coast guard ship and we wouldn't just be pulling over space cars, we'd be pulling over space ships including freighter ships which may contain large amounts of cargo we may want to confiscate.

but if the freighter ship has lots of contraband, it simply won't fit in the small cargo bay in a tiny, one-warp-nacelle ship, and you'll have to take it in anyway. the cargo bay's only good for a very limited number of scenarios, imo.

Firehawk242 said:
Or transporting equipment somewhere. Such as, say, setting up a listening post at a known criminal rendezvous point, or delivering small shipments in-system. Or even out of system for that matter, as these would make decent courier ships as well.

why on earth would you use a police cutter to move cargo??? you can just use a freighter for that, in-system—you'd almost certainly have so many more of them that it'd be negligible.

Firehawk242 said:
Question 1: What does it cost to include it?

Answer: Not much. It doesn't add enough mass to degrade mobility, and it's the cheapest option on the whole list.

Question 2: What does including it get us?

Answer: A much more versatile ship. A cargo hold can be basically anything, really. Even if it's not much use for its main function, it's the sort of thing with a million and one ancillary uses.

Conclusion: It's basically a free addition that vastly broadens the ship's mission profile. So why not throw it in?

I disagree, on both counts. firstly, among the costs: cargo bays are large (in volume) for their unloaded mass, so it will very significantly increase the cross-sectional area of the ship, making it easier to hit. also, you have to add more complex inertial compensators to fix the cargo down, and the extra mass isn't free even if it doesn't bring the mobility down a full level. we might even want to use those 10kt later—this isn't the last step of construction for this ship. and I've already explained why I don't think it's useful above.
I don't think adding a cargo bay would be horrible but I do think it's unnecessary.

Briefvoice · Jan 7, 2024

I am annoyed that everyone is voting by plan, when again, there is nothing in the post that says "vote by plan" and past votes of this type have not been by plan. So I will refuse to vote by plan as a protest, even if it means my vote isn't counted.

KarmaA · Jan 7, 2024

If I'm an organization I don't want to have to call another group of people and request they gear up and fly a ship out to meet me when I could just have the capability on-hand. Plus if I work for a smaller system I'm not going to always have another ship (or five) that are empty just chilling all the time. If I had the money to have a spare freighter sitting all the time not earning money then I wouldn't be looking for this kind of police craft. Drop two of these (with cargo bays) in any system and they'll cover the needs of a large majority of colonies. Drop one of these with no cargo bay and a freighter in system and you're setting yourself up for a lot of headaches.

Firehawk242 · Jan 7, 2024

ava2607 said:
why on earth would you use a police cutter to move cargo??? you can just use a freighter for that, in-system—you'd almost certainly have so many more of them that it'd be negligible.

I'm not talking about the equivalent of loading up a shipping container, I'm talking the equivalent of putting some special purpose equipment in the trunk of a police cruiser.

I disagree, on both counts. firstly, among the costs: cargo bays are large (in volume) for their unloaded mass, so it will very significantly increase the cross-sectional area of the ship, making it easier to hit.

Why does that matter? This isn't a warship. If it runs into a situation where that would matter, you call in a Cygnus instead.

also, you have to add more complex inertial compensators to fix the cargo down,

Lolwut? This is already dealt with by the compensators that keep the crew from being turned into salsa. Humans are more fragile than 99.999% of cargo that the ship could end up carrying.

and the extra mass isn't free even if it doesn't bring the mobility down a full level.

So it's free.

we might even want to use those 10kt later—this isn't the last step of construction for this ship.

It pretty much is.

and I've already explained why I don't think it's useful above.

I find myself unconvinced.

I don't think adding a cargo bay would be horrible but I think it's unnecessary.

Finally something we agree on. It IS unnecessary. But I put it in because I couldn't come up with a cogent reason not to put it in. It costs us nothing and gets us something. There's no reason not to throw it in.

Golgotha · Jan 7, 2024

People are using the other two submissions as a prompt about what we need to fulfil.

The entire existence of the Tellarite submission shows us that the cargo bay has a use, joke submissions don't exist when it takes years to produce a prototype.

I'm not saying that the ship will be a failure without it, of course not, your arguments have a basis in fact that the Denobula agree with.

But because of our single nacelle design and thruster strength I believe we can easily add that capability at minimal cost, where if the Denobula tried to do the same they would lose their advantage.

ava2607 · Jan 7, 2024

Briefvoice said:
I am annoyed that everyone is voting by plan, when again, there is nothing in the post that says "vote by plan" and past votes of this type have not been by plan. So I will refuse to vote by plan as a protest, even if it means my vote isn't counted.

consider: 46%(+trans-shuttle), 44%(+shuttle-trans), 10%(-trans-shuttle) would lead to neither a shuttlebay nor a transporter being included in the design, even though 80% probably want either one included. plan voting avoids this problem

Riggnarock · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

landcollector · Jan 7, 2024

Briefvoice said:
I am annoyed that everyone is voting by plan, when again, there is nothing in the post that says "vote by plan" and past votes of this type have not been by plan. So I will refuse to vote by plan as a protest, even if it means my vote isn't counted.

It's for convenience's sake. A five choice vote can be a massive headache if disparate options result in something no one likes.

Strunkriidiisk · Jan 7, 2024

Briefvoice said:
I am annoyed that everyone is voting by plan, when again, there is nothing in the post that says "vote by plan" and past votes of this type have not been by plan. So I will refuse to vote by plan as a protest, even if it means my vote isn't counted.

This feels like meaningless spite. What does it actually cost you to make and/or vote for a plan, beyond a few extra seconds of formatting?

Certainly it's not required, but it's also not banned, and in a project like this, where there are a lot of strong opinions about loadouts? A plan vote helps keep competing loadouts distinct.

Lavaflow · Jan 7, 2024

[X] 0: No Shuttlebay
[X] 1: Transporter (+10,000 Tons)
[X] 2: No Cargo Bay
[X] 3: Brig (+10,000 Tons)
[X] 4: Tractor Beam (+10,000 Tons)

This is a police vessel. If it's in a situation that would require a cargo bay or a shuttle, they can detain the suspect ship and wait until the appropriate friendly vessel arrives when called.

Golgotha · Jan 7, 2024

Sayle said:
Utilities being sought are shuttles, transporters, tractor beams, and cargo.

Sayle said:
what you need to do is pick features that will synergize or cover for each other and exclude others. The Tellaries have an inspection ship, the Denobulans a pursuit ship. Both have strengths and weaknesses, capability gaps that can be exploited to take the prize. What is Earth offering?

So to go back to these quotes, the cargo bay is explicitly considered something wanted.
Our job is to work out what things have synergy and allow us to cut back.

From this metric I think the only real losing condition is taking the transporters AND the shuttle bay.

Edit:
To expand, the Tellar went "who needs transportation when you can physically dock with the ships!" Massive malus to speed and ease of inspection, massive bonus to cost saving

The Denobula went "who needs a cargo bay when you can hold the ships in position and if the inspection fails, call in another ship!" This let's them keep the ship small enough that they can win on tactical ability, but requires calling another ship if inspection fails.

We went "why build two nacelles when you can build one really good one" and have a large amount of available budget left. We need to give the best capabilities we can while keeping in mind as much as possible that cheap and easy are the goal.

Horologer · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

No cargo bay is setting ourselves up for logistical problems. If you find a relatively small amount of contraband or restricted goods on a ship, but don't have a place to store it, then there's not really any great options. You could just drag the whole ship back to base, but that's a hassle and a lot of time that this ship will be spending escorting other vessels instead of doing something more useful. You could commandeer a freighter, but that's a legal can of worms. It might not be an option at all in some cases.

It's worth a little extra tonnage to spare everyone the trouble.

Tolack · Jan 7, 2024

[X] 0: No Shuttlebay

[X] 1: Transporter (+10,000 Tons)

[X] 2: No Cargo Bay

[X] 3: Brig (+10,000 Tons)

[X] 4: Tractor Beam (+10,000 Tons)

Derek58 · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Revenue and Customs
[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

LordEdric · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

CanYouMeme · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Feature Creep

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

Golgotha said:
So to go back to these quotes, the cargo bay is explicitly considered something wanted.
Our job is to work out what things have synergy and allow us to cut back.

Our job is to beat the competition. Nothing more, nothing less, and since the QM's control of the quest makes outright cheating not worth the effort, it literally does not matter how it happens as long as the points add up in our favor in the end.

If including all the utilities can be done without dropping the cost to the lowest rank (which it can, near as anyone can tell), then mathematically/narratively the correct action is to do that because all utility options synergize with all other utility options and add more functionality to a greater or lesser degree. Hell, even if we do drop in Cost rank, we can still do it because all 5 utilities still wins us the competition.

Anything else is people conjuring up speculation based on wildly varying shenanigans to convince other voters with clever (and not-so-clever) rhetoric. Indulge in that if it pleases you - Q knows I certainly have - but let's not get too invested in it, eh?

Derpmind · Jan 7, 2024

Briefvoice said:
I am annoyed that everyone is voting by plan, when again, there is nothing in the post that says "vote by plan" and past votes of this type have not been by plan. So I will refuse to vote by plan as a protest, even if it means my vote isn't counted.

Sayle is taking a very hands-off approach to line voting vs. plan voting, and allows both to be used for any voting. I don't agree with that, but it's worked out here as we've collectively decided to use plan voting.

Golgotha · Jan 7, 2024

CanYouMeme said:
[X] Plan Feature Creep

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

Our job is to beat the competition. Nothing more, nothing less, and since the QM's control of the quest makes outright cheating not worth the effort, it literally does not matter how it happens as long as the points add up in our favor in the end.

If including all the utilities can be done without dropping the cost to the lowest rank (which it can, near as anyone can tell), then mathematically/narratively the correct action is to do that because all utility options synergize with all other utility options and add more functionality to a greater or lesser degree. Hell, even if we do drop in Cost rank, we can still do it because all 5 utilities still wins us the competition.

Anything else is people conjuring up speculation based on wildly varying shenanigans to convince other voters with clever (and not-so-clever) rhetoric. Indulge in that if it pleases you - Q knows I certainly have - but let's not get too invested in it, eh?

I mean, sorta

Sayle said:
While taking First Place doesn't necessarily guarantee the design will be picked for production, the others would face an uphill battle in the procurement committees which will make the final decision. There are already rumbles that the Denobulans are altering their messaging to steal the prize afterwards, pushing hard on their superior tactical and warp capabilities for only a marginal cost increase. The Tellarites probably won't rule their way over local producers, but getting Benzar on their side would present them with two out of three: and there's nobody saying that Andoria and United Earth won't license or commission Denobulan shipbuilding for a superior product

But it's also told us explicitly that just "winning" might still mean that we don't get ship orders. It makes it massively more likely, for certain, but we want to make this universally used as much as possible.

One of our goals for Starfleet design was this

Sayle said:
More optimistically, spreading manufacturing across the member worlds and going some way towards standardizing parts will be to your advantage. If you win the competition and keep occasionally providing designs to the member fleets you may be able to slowly establish secondary industrial bases.

So that's my aim - get fleet technology widely accepted and used and standardised so when we need to build fast, we have the industry already prepared.

KNakamura · Jan 7, 2024

[X] Plan Feature Creep

[X] Plan Everything But The Mule

Starfleet Design Bureau

THE LEGEND

THE LEGEND

Incertae sedis

Rocket Punch is Best Punch