[X] Loading Deck (4 Engineering, 16 Type-F Shuttlecraft, 6 Cargo]
Linked contents
darkstarling
Brilliantly Crazed
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
- Pronouns
- He/Him
So here's a question. Everyone is going on about the six cargo.
Isn't that compared to like 60 for the pod? That's ten percent at the most, compared to the 30 percent more shuttles or so.
Isn't that compared to like 60 for the pod? That's ten percent at the most, compared to the 30 percent more shuttles or so.
- Location
- his hidden lair
Okay, so we don't expect this ship to be performing deep space construction with the Pharos- despite us mentioning how useful that would be with the cargo pod. We don't expect to be seeding sensors along the DMZs given the Klingons are going to be substantially more aggressive and start making more use of cloaks during this period. The ability for an engineering ship to rapidly deploy dozens of teams on a planetary scale, to perform search and rescue in the wake of a climactic engagement with the Klingons, or even the ability for an Orb to operate and project capabilities around multiple locations in a solar system at once.
There's obvious utility in it, I'm not going to pretend its the end of the world if loading bays win- but yes, we can definitely find good uses for the shuttlebay complement.
I don't think it's actually as specialized as this implies. It's worse at piecemeal rapid delivery and is technically worse in terms of total cargo capacity, and likely worse at big engineering projects in space, spanning multiple locations, or just working on multiple projects in a solar system in tandem. To me that sort of rapid on loading-off loading is something a Newton's or even the Cygnus is still probably going to be decent at even if the ORB is suited for larger projects.
The big reason is see for the Cargo deck is if we're 100% committed to the idea of a modular ship rather than an engineering ship and we expect that integrate cargo capacity to serve that need when the cargo pod isn't in use. However- I'd argue we could still just incorporate a bit of cargo capacity into the modules we design to fulfill those roles.
Last edited:
StriderInCosmos
Wanderer in the Worldsea
- Location
- Somewhere in... Terminal Dogma? I think?
Yes, the comparative cargo weight next to the pod is smaller, but it is much more accessible than the pod during flight and for matters within the ship itself that don't require the pod. That, and it can be controlled to a greater degree than the pod (the pod only has general life support interlinks with the ship, while a cargo bay within would likely have much finer control of its internal settings).
[X] Loading Deck (4 Engineering, 16 Type-F Shuttlecraft, 6 Cargo]
With the exception of the deployment of dozens of teams around a planet simultaneously we can quite literally do all of this with the 20 the loading deck option provides.
- Location
- Seattle, Washington
[X] Loading Deck (4 Engineering, 16 Type-F Shuttlecraft, 6 Cargo]
- Location
- his hidden lair
You're going to be able to cover a much larger area in a minefield or sensor net with 36 shuttles than 20. It's something like a 10%-15% gain in cargo capacity in exchange for 80% more shuttle operating capacity. Any deployment that requires a lot of distributed teams, covering a lot of volume, or deep space engineering in general is going to be worse with the loading deck. Trying to equivocate the two is just wrong.
Now- that 10%-15% cargo capacity is more accessible, has finer environmental controls, and is more secure- but it's literally the exact same sort of cargo capabilities that any Starfleet vessel before this has had. The value in it is only in trying to combine it with the rest of the ORB's package, not in the intrinsic utility it offers on it's own.
Edit: As an example let's see what rapidly deploying teams after the Thunderchild's debut in the Earth-Romulan War at the Battle of Cheron might entail. You've got the Thunderchild's battle, the NXs' skirmish, and the actual Romulan station's wreck. Three sites. 30 UE ships, 36 Romulan warbirds. That's a lot of metal for search and rescue, salvage (primarily of Romulan tech/intel), or perform damage control on. Being able to deploy teams to the surface of a damaged ship to both inspect the damage and patch treat it is not something a conventional Starfleet ship is super well equipped to do but the ORB might be fantastic at.
Last edited:
- Location
- Actually pretty lost
The number of shuttles isn't going to make or break the ship in either direction, and both cargo space and engineering score are explicitly part of the tender.
The non-numerical tradeoff is having more shuttles to do shuttle-y things faster, versus having a space for high-value cargo that isn't incredibly exposed, at a time when we're expecting war to break out very shortly.
The non-numerical tradeoff is having more shuttles to do shuttle-y things faster, versus having a space for high-value cargo that isn't incredibly exposed, at a time when we're expecting war to break out very shortly.
[X] Shuttledeck [8 Engineering, 32 Type-F Shuttlecraft
A not particular massive penalty given we won't have to wait for a single turbolift's capacity to service 32 shuttles, instead having a 16 that can be serviced directly from cargo holds that have already been filled with their mission items.
Indeed for a given amount of time we may actually be able to get more done with less.
[X] Loading Deck (4 Engineering, 16 Type-F Shuttlecraft, 6 Cargo]
We added that big caboose for a reason guys.
Edit: Seriously, This is ENGINEERING option, and were nerfing it to adds somethign we already have.
The majority of our cargo will always be in the arse end, even if we get a tiny cargo hold inside the ship have you seen the size of that damn thing? Its like we added a semi-truck cargo container to the end of our cool spaceship. (ORB!) Adding a tiny cargo space inside so people can hide their beer isn't going to change that.
I see a lot of people throwing the argument that 'if we get attacked they will attack our weak point and stop our engineers. But like. That will probably be the case no matter what, because this thing isn't a mainline fighter.
You know what could change that tho? Attack shuttles. Angry Wasp mode. (Not bees. Wasps. Wasps are meaner.)
Again Halfing the engineering contribution (8->4) for maybe a 10% increase in cargo, seems silly. We have our cargo option. Its a big chunky boi, and we did good on it. The ship is filled with Starfleet engineers, they can figure it out.
edit2: Any argument that it will be slower to load kinds gets resolved by the fact that we will be having more ships to do the loading. This is a scheduling issue, not a loss of capability.
Last edited:
This is incorrect, the only Starfleet ship with a similar capability is the Sagarmatha, which is slightly slower than this ship in both cruise flight regimes and owing to its role much less able to do general Starfleet cargo transport missions.
darkstarling
Brilliantly Crazed
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Also remember, people were giving an example of being able to unload the cargo in one week or two.
Consider what that means for us in a wartime situation, when we're delivering medicine and repair parts. Even if we're using the shuttles ONLY for the most obvious cargo transport things... those days count.
Again, I'm going to assume the engineers know what they're doing. If they say the cargo lift has the capacity to service the shuttlebay, it's got the capacity to service the shuttlebay. Get a good high speed high volume turbolift that can run continuously, maybe even be rigged for assembly line operation, and we'll be set.
That 'with the exception of' is doing a lot of lifting though.
Last edited:
- Location
- his hidden lair
I mean in terms of the more secure and more fine control of the environment the cargo is held in- I don't know the capacity of our various past ships off the top of my head but nothing tells me these cargo bays installed in the ORB itself would be fundamentally different.
That 6 cargo is a rounding error for general purpose Starfleet cargo transport. It's for things like trying to shift strategic stockpiles of antimatter fuel, incredibly finicky medicine, or things of that nature. I'm not convinced Starfleet previously had no capacity to do these sort of things prior to the Sagamartha, or is lacking in that capacity given the Pharos are each major AM refineries.
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
My main thinking was - yes unloading/loading as quickly as possible is very important because when it's docked it's not working; it's the logic in sea cargo ships. But the main delay is ALWAYS going to be moving stuff from A to B. Given how big Feddie space is, what Starfleet can predict it will grow to and what we as the outside viewer KNOW it will get to (there was a DS9 episode where Sisko mentioned there was a planet that still played baseball, but it was a year journey away - And then said how it would be worth it). While there was no mention of distances or the speed of the transport, I could easily see a similar timescale playing out at our current smaller size & slower ships. I'm less concerned about the unload/load time and focused on "if it's going to be doing trips that WILL take weeks or months, I want as much cargo space as possible to increase the effeciency of scale and reduce the chance that a large order can't be done in a single go".
Finally as I've mentioned several times, it's a secure location to put mission critical stuff in that HAS to get there, even if the cargo pod has to be sacrificed as long as that thing gets there (emergency medical/food delivery perhaps), It will be considered an acceptable cost. We know commerce raiding will happen and across the expected lifespan there will be at leat 1 Captain who will have to do this. But what if it was in the cargo pod? At that point the entire ship & crew is being risked on possibly a very low chance of success; crew dead, ship lost/captured and the colony dying under a plague/famine must do so for much much longer, with a rapidly rising death toll.
This gives us slightly more flexability in what we can do.
They relied on ships like the Cygnus to do it, or relied on much slower civilian transport. It was doable, but it involved ether a lot of time or diverting extremely valuable ships to move cargo.
The way I see it cargo is a speed multiplier in terms of logistics. Starfleet will almost always be happy to ship 10% more stuff in the same time. It means we move 10% more cargo per unit time and fuel. It means we move more cargo per space frame.
Sometimes having an extra 16 shuttles will matter, but I can't imagine a mission where having an extra 10% cargo doesn't at least make it easier.
Sometimes having an extra 16 shuttles will matter, but I can't imagine a mission where having an extra 10% cargo doesn't at least make it easier.
60 is a random number a poster made up, not something ever stated by Sayle.
Again, that's based on a made up number not anything grounded in Word of QM. Cargo 6 is twice what the Cygnus could carry.
Last edited:
[X] Loading Deck (4 Engineering, 16 Type-F Shuttlecraft, 6 Cargo]
The cargo pod is explicitly mentioned as being detachable. This option allows us to haul cargo even when not carrying a cargo pod. And it allows us to carry cargo that'd require more protection than being in an exposed cargo pod.
The cargo pod is explicitly mentioned as being detachable. This option allows us to haul cargo even when not carrying a cargo pod. And it allows us to carry cargo that'd require more protection than being in an exposed cargo pod.