-
Going forward, links to content from Twitter (now X) will no longer be embedded. Pre-existing links should not be affected.
Department of Starship Design (Trek-ish)
- Thread starter Mechanis
- Start date
- Sci-Fi
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX
[X] Plan Halberd standard parts
Is there any program to sell off older military vessels and equipment to civilian or private security companies?
Is there any program to sell off older military vessels and equipment to civilian or private security companies?
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
We don't have much to sell off. The Defiant Blaze are already being used for asteroid watch, and the Silent Hammers are only good as training ships.
Besides any ship of this scale can be a WMD, and the Stellar Union has had... bad experiences with such things. So I suspect that private military companies with military grade starships are not going to fly.
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
Sorta. Most of the Gold Roads are actually in private service, and some of the early Planet Wars stuff like the Defiant Blaze is getting used for de facto civilian purposes like Asteroid Watch (AKA, "those guys who go deflect/deorbit/vaporize assorted microdebries so it doesn't put inconvenient holes in people's pressure hulls")
But yeah, the fact that "any idiot can strap some engines and a guidance package to a rock" is a lesson that Yenna learned very much the hard way means the Union tends to keep a pretty close eye on even the civilian stuff, let alone actual military craft. After all, if someone wants to be a mass murdering a-hole, dropping a rock is uncomfortably easy. Especially if the target doesn't have any pesky atmosphere to throw off your aim.
chaotic-logic
possible impossibility
- Location
- unknown
i think that something that can be done is to pick a system of ours that is closes to the center of our space and have it act as a giant boneyard for old military ships for when we either need parts for new ships or they need to be pushed back into service.
the us military boneyards are good examples of this because they don't throw out ANYTHING!!
up until a few years ago the us still had BIPLANES in one of the boneyards.
the us military boneyards are good examples of this because they don't throw out ANYTHING!!
up until a few years ago the us still had BIPLANES in one of the boneyards.
The issue is that we are going to have several cases of the dreadnought effect. Aka we get tech so transformative the tech before it isn't worth keeping in military service.
chaotic-logic
possible impossibility
- Location
- unknown
would still be worth keeping them around incase the worse case scenario happens and we need ships.
the boneyard keeps us from needing to rush to build new ships.
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
We don't have anything to put INTO a boneyard, and clearly have a culture the never throws anything away. You do remember that the Furious Winds are 100 years old and currently being refit, and the other ships are even older but still in limited service? They are also too slow to go to another system. Space is really, really big so if we want a boneyard we can just keep it at home and be able to make sure no one walks off with anything.
I've been going back and forth on the weapons mix and I'm feeling pretty good about using 2 mounts of either 3a or 4a Disruptors. The mix of space and power means we can get 4x the BD and 25x the SD regardless of which we use. The 3a are a bit more awesome to me, but the 4a leave enough power for an extra pair of PD weapons. It really comes down to taste.
The 4b is just bad if not in a battery, so let's ignore that. The 3b just doesn't give us much over just using the small 3a or 4a models.
The end result is a ship that isn't the same kind of independent operations monster of our other ships but probably isn't going to be stuck to a tender either.
Last edited:
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
After a certain point, it's faster/cheaper to just design and build a new ship from scratch, than it is to modernize. Even if the new ship is basically the old one, but with current tech.
[X] Plan Halberd standard parts
I should have posed this question last vote, but is it normal for the design bureau to decide which ship gets refit? I thought the admiralty would want to dictate which ship to keep.
I should have posed this question last vote, but is it normal for the design bureau to decide which ship gets refit? I thought the admiralty would want to dictate which ship to keep.
Gameplay thing, not how it would work RL.
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
In this case, that's how the responsibility is divided, because it was decided that the people who actually know how hard a given ship is to refit, should be the ones deciding on whether to refit or build a new ship.
Now obviously De facto the Admiralty still has a great deal of influence on the subject, because they can absolutely play games to keep things in service and sideline the replacement if they want, but all the office politics involved there are going on "in the background"/"off-screen".
(This division of responsibility is so the department can tell the Admiralty "no, refitting that is impossible/prohibitively expensive" and make it stick)
- Location
- Canada
You know I think it would make for a great interlude chapter if we can see some of the off screen elements being put on screen, if nothing else we get a few names and a peek at the politics happening, oh and see the reactions of new ships being made and their opinions for the future.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Under normal circumstances, not just no but hell no. But right now, at this moment in history, when the boffins have just entirely upended "what to build and how to build it" with simultaneous order-of-magnitude advances in offense and defensive state-of-the-art, to the point a single new-build can- confidently, though not trivially- solo the species?
The admiralty is going to very politely ask the boffins, "So we've got this much budget and this many slips free; what's your professional recommendation for the existing fleet?" and then sign on the dotted line of whatever the hell the boffins come up with.
Last edited:
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I never did do a breakdown of my thoughts on the ship.
1 - Damn, she looks fine. The nose type 3c is a bit awkward, but in an endearing way. It really feels like the architecture of the ship was centered around making it fit. The forward view has just so many guns pointing at you. There is no doubt this ship is built to be a warship.
2 - Oh boy that science score. QUITE a bit better then the Star Seeker, at least until she is refit with Gen 2 labs and Type 2 shuttles. This ship is really going to live up to the multi-role title. Star Fleet would approve.
3 - That evasion score is minimum 40% better then the Star Seeker. I'm not sure what the variable means exactly, but I'm guessing the ship can roll for extra dodge. She can't out dodge an old Furious Wind, but I think people are not going to enjoy trying to take this ship out. The shield score is 107 higher then I calculated, and I am not complaining. The END is only 2 points higher so the hull form didn't help much there, but it could be that it helped with that better shield strength.
4 - ZOOM. Far faster at warp then I thought possible. She is almost as fast as the Iron Road just with her emergency power. With her twin cores thrumming she is almost twice as fast as our fastest sprinter to date.
5 - I am rather happy with the way the aft ventral T2 mount allows one turret on each side clear line of fire forwards. Early on I was thinking that the ship felt a little unimpressive compared to the BC-1 from the nebula. I no longer feel this way. The coverage of Type 1s is also quite pleasing.
Do the T2 turrets have armoured blisters? There was mention that going up to a 30m turret would make us lose them. I'm assuming the blisters are open to show off the terror that is 16 Type 2 turrets. Raygun Gothic is a go!
Last edited:
chaotic-logic
possible impossibility
- Location
- unknown
Turn 3, Refitting: Furious Wind II (Engines and Weapons 1/3)
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
It is decided, for both performance and parts commonality reasons, to use both a Tritium reactor and Dual Core computer on the Furious Wind refit. This should provide power enough for a substantial armament, while still allowing a reasonable amount of secondary function.
The next major changes to decide on are engines, primary forward guns, and torpedos. The original Furious Wind was light enough that the pair of engines it carried allowed it significant maneuverability for a ship its size; however, the increased mass of the new systems and structure would reduce this considerably. It would, therefore, potentially be desirable to bring additional engines to retain above average speed. There are three potential places to mount additional engines, with different strengths; firstly, a single engine could be fitted to the "tail" for additional thrust—while not as potent as other options, this would only slightly restrict potential secondary functions being mounted aft. The second option is to mount a pair of engines at the "tips" of the hull, improving maneuverability significantly—especially along the ship's vertical axis; this would, however, prevent mounting a Type Three or Type Four mount in those locations. The last option is to mount either two or even four additional engines in the "cheeks" of the ship—this would also preclude mounting aft facing torpedo launchers there, however.
For torpedos, there are a few options at this point: first, a single rear facing tube could be fitted to each side hull, though this would be mutually exclusive with mounting engines there. Second, a similar rear tube could be fitted to the ventral hull, opposite the ventral torpedo; alternatively, the ventral torpedo launcher could instead be increased to two tubes, matching the other two torpedo mounts and giving the ship a six tube forward battery.
Another proposal is to delete the ventral launcher entirely, and install a Type 3b Disruptor Beam or Type 4b Disruptor Cannon there instead. This would, obviously, preclude either of the other options, but there's definitely an argument for it—after all, that would still leave the design with a forward torpedo battery equal to the larger Veiled Halberd class.
And the final proposal notes that it could also be simply deleted without a replacement, to free up space for potential secondary functions, as well.
For forward guns, there are four options where either a Type 3a emitter or battery of Type 4a guns could be mounted centerline: firstly, on the dorsal and ventral hull-tips, though this would be mutually exclusive with putting an engine there instead, and secondly above and below the deflector. While it is recommended to mount such weapons in pairs, it is not required. You could also fit either a pair or two pairs of either in the side hulls, dorsally or ventrally, though this would preclude mounting either a potential second pass Torpedo extension or Type Two turret in the respective surface.
Engines:
[ ] Use a single extra Impulse Engine in the "tail"
[ ] Use a Pair of additional Impulse Engines…
- [ ] …in the sides.
Mutually exclusive with side-mounted aft torpedoes.
- [ ] …in the center.
Mutually exclusive with mounting Type 3a or 4a batteries to hulltips.
[ ] Use a pair of engines on each side.
Mutually exclusive with side mounted aft torpedoes.
Ventral Torpedo
[ ] Add a second tube forward
[ ] Add a second tube aft
- [ ] actually, just flip it around instead.
[ ] Replace entirely with a (Type 3/Type 4) Disruptor
[ ] Just delete it entirely to free up space.
Side Hull
[ ] Add an aft torpedo launcher
Mutually exclusive with side-mounted engines.
[ ] Add a (dorsal/ventral) (Type 3/Type 4) Disruptor
Will prevent mounting a Type 2 turret or torpedo tube in following stage.
Centerline
[ ] Add a (Type 3/Type 4) Disruptor (Above/below) the deflector.
[ ] Add a (Type 3/Type 4) Disruptor to the (dorsal/Ventral) hull.
Mutually exclusive with tip mounted engines
Current module arrangement (subject to revision):
Please Vote By Plan
One Hour Moratorium
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Can you please confirm if the Type 3a mounts are a battery of 2, and the Type 4a are batteries of 3? That's what my math shows but will inform my proposals going forward.
Assuming they are, here is my plan. Remember I mentioned that a battery of 2x 3a are a good match for the firepower of a 3b and take up a lot less space. We are quite power constrained, but the pair of 3a/4a mounts, a pair of T2, and ~6 T1 twin mounts should be quite doable with the power and runtime we have.
Removing the torpedo tubes in the center still leaves us with a good number, and enough room that we could put an aux reactor in there to help run more powerful weapons. Alternatively there are plenty of other things to fit in there.
I am going with 4 engines in total. Each one is stronger then the previous ones, and the mass hasn't quite doubled. Meaning the ship should be more maneuverable then it was before.
[X] Plan Quad 3a
-[X] Engines:
--[X] Use a Pair of additional Impulse Engines…
---[X] …in the sides.
-[X] Ventral Torpedo
--[X] Just delete it entirely to free up space.
-[X] Centerline
--[X] Add a (Type 3a) Disruptor (Above) the deflector.
--[X] Add a (Type 3a) Disruptor (Below) the deflector.
[X] Plan Hex 4a
-[X] Engines:
--[X] Use a Pair of additional Impulse Engines…
---[X] …in the sides.
-[X] Ventral Torpedo
--[X] Just delete it entirely to free up space.
-[X] Centerline
--[X] Add a (Type 4a) Disruptor (Above) the deflector.
--[X] Add a (Type 4a) Disruptor (Below) the deflector.
Last edited:
Oh they're chonky bois! Look kinda like angelfish, too.
[X] Plan Quad 3a
[X] Plan Hex 4a
I'm waffling on guns right now, gonna have to dig into the specs, but these both look like good options.
Last edited:
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Four more engines is seriously tempting, ngl, especially for what amounts to a system defense boat- even maneuverability aspects aside, realspace intercept speed is huge for them. Necessary? No, absolutely not. Optimal? ...occasionally, but not often. Bad? No, not likely that either. Awesome?
waiting on 3a/4a battery size confirmation before I vote, though.
waiting on 3a/4a battery size confirmation before I vote, though.
Last edited:
- Location
- in between
[] Plan Hex 4a + Doom Beam
-[] Engines:
--[ ] Use a Pair of additional Impulse Engines…
---[] …in the sides.
-[] Ventral Torpedo
--[] Replace entirely with a Type 3 Disruptor
-[] Centerline
--[] Add a (Type 4a) Disruptor (Above) the deflector.
--[] Add a (Type 4a) Disruptor (Below) the deflector.
Just a variant of Jalinth's plan with the 3b added. I just want the Doom Beam, alright?
-[] Engines:
--[ ] Use a Pair of additional Impulse Engines…
---[] …in the sides.
-[] Ventral Torpedo
--[] Replace entirely with a Type 3 Disruptor
-[] Centerline
--[] Add a (Type 4a) Disruptor (Above) the deflector.
--[] Add a (Type 4a) Disruptor (Below) the deflector.
Just a variant of Jalinth's plan with the 3b added. I just want the Doom Beam, alright?
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Space is going to be tight. I really want to mount a Type 2 on the side hulls to give us almost total coverage. Here is an image of roughly what I'm thinking about.
7 2x Type 1 Disruptor
2 Type 2 Disruptor
2 2x Type 3a or Type 4a Disruptor
6 Torpedoes
2 Aux Fusion Reactors
1 Small Science Lab (optional, but it's Star Trek so I want a bit of science)
4-6 Aux Sensors
1 Standard Workshop
1 Medium Cargo Bay
1 Small Transporter Bay
1 Small Medical Bay
1 Crew Lounge
As you can see we are going to be pretty tight on space for the two extra engines. It might be worth it but it's also going to cut down places we can put PD weapons and turrets. Of course I could be utterly wrong about where those side engines are going to go, but that orientation does fit with the possibility of the 'tip mounts' on the main hull.
47.8 SD, 148 BD (With Cloak), 19.4 PD.
That puts us crazy tight on power. I love the DOOMBEAM but assuming that there are not any surprises we can mount 4 of the smaller 3a in the space of a 3b. My broad plan is for our next generation of escorts to be built around a Plasma DOOMBEAM.