Turn 3: Project Rapids, secondary hull vote results
-
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
- southborough MA
[X] Do not add secondary hulls [No Cost | Total Mass: 100]
Turn 3: Project Rapids, Shuttlebay configuration
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
> No secondary hulls.
The final matter which can substantially affect the geometry of the ship is the placement of the shuttlebay—on a ship of this size, a shuttlebay would almost certainly require some degree of blister to accommodate the required volume.
The first option is to place the main door in the aft centerline, extending forward through the center of the ship. This could reasonably accommodate up to two shuttlecraft or four shuttlepods.
The second option would be to mount a pair of bays on either side of the ship, accommodating either two or four capacity between them. This would allow the largest amount of shuttles, if desired.
Thirdly, a single bay with three total capacity could be extended from one side of the hull to the other laterally.
Both side options could be positioned with their doors either fore or aft; a fore positioning would preclude the ship carrying any heavy forward weapons, while an aft positioning would somewhat restrict the placement of engines and potential aft armament.
Finally, you could also decline to mount a shuttlebay at all, given the small size of the design.
[ ] Centerline Shuttlebay…
[ ] Lateral Shuttlebay…
[ ] Paired Shuttlebays…
[ ] Do not add a shuttlebay.
A/N: one thing you might note is the fairly large size of Shuttlebays in terms of volume---this is a natural consequence of the fact that I ensure that the shuttles are physically capable of fitting in the volume, with enough room to actually operate them, which imposes certain minimum volumes; especially on small vessels like this one.
The final matter which can substantially affect the geometry of the ship is the placement of the shuttlebay—on a ship of this size, a shuttlebay would almost certainly require some degree of blister to accommodate the required volume.
The first option is to place the main door in the aft centerline, extending forward through the center of the ship. This could reasonably accommodate up to two shuttlecraft or four shuttlepods.
The second option would be to mount a pair of bays on either side of the ship, accommodating either two or four capacity between them. This would allow the largest amount of shuttles, if desired.
Thirdly, a single bay with three total capacity could be extended from one side of the hull to the other laterally.
Both side options could be positioned with their doors either fore or aft; a fore positioning would preclude the ship carrying any heavy forward weapons, while an aft positioning would somewhat restrict the placement of engines and potential aft armament.
Finally, you could also decline to mount a shuttlebay at all, given the small size of the design.
[ ] Centerline Shuttlebay…
- [ ] …with 1 capacity.
- [ ] …with 2 capacity.
- [ ] …with 2 capacity.
[ ] Lateral Shuttlebay…
- [ ] …to fore.
- [ ] …to aft.
- [ ] …to aft.
[ ] Paired Shuttlebays…
- [ ] …to Aft…
- - [ ] …with 2 capacity.
- - [ ] …with 4 capacity.
- [ ] …to Fore…- - [ ] …with 4 capacity.
- - [ ] …with 2 capacity.
- - [ ] …with 4 capacity.
- - [ ] …with 4 capacity.
[ ] Do not add a shuttlebay.
Please Vote By Plan
Three Hour Moratorium
A/N: one thing you might note is the fairly large size of Shuttlebays in terms of volume---this is a natural consequence of the fact that I ensure that the shuttles are physically capable of fitting in the volume, with enough room to actually operate them, which imposes certain minimum volumes; especially on small vessels like this one.
- Location
- in between
As a reminder to everyone about what @Mechanis means;
The ship next to a Furious Wind
A Furious Wind with a shuttle.
These things are going to be a significant fraction of the mass of the entire ship. I'm calling this weight class corvettes for a reason - they are some tiny little bastards.
The ship next to a Furious Wind
A Furious Wind with a shuttle.
These things are going to be a significant fraction of the mass of the entire ship. I'm calling this weight class corvettes for a reason - they are some tiny little bastards.
Last edited:
I'll note that the single centerline shuttlebay does mean we're committing to mounting 2+ thrusters, but 2 thrusters has advantages in both giving our ship the ability to GTFO and in redundancy on voyages distant from our home system (and its repair yards).
And as I can't really recommend taking zero shuttlebays, a second thruster is much less of a tax than a second shuttlebay.
[ ] Centerline Shuttlebay…
- [ ] …with 1 capacity.
And as I can't really recommend taking zero shuttlebays, a second thruster is much less of a tax than a second shuttlebay.
[ ] Centerline Shuttlebay…
- [ ] …with 1 capacity.
Last edited:
- Location
- sweden
[X] Centerline Shuttlebay…Given all my planning has focused on 2 thrusters, I'll call that a feature not a bug.
-[X] …with 1 capacity.
Two thrusters like two legs
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Because my brain makes me focus on this instead of things I should be doing...
I made a spreadsheet where I listed the start and end square of every line of every ship on this table to count how many actual squares there are. I then compared it to the numbers that the formula gives. I also put GM notes on grid size on the vote for the two hulls I had that for.
I'm going to go back to my intense caution when doing early planning, using somewhere between 50%-60% of the theoretical number of spaces for a hull of that mass. Secondary hulls are closer. The 3 smalls of the Halberd rounded up to 3x3 so more squares then the formula gives in theory. The Iron Roads hull was 72/87 so about 82% of theory.
I encourage anyone else doing planning to temper their expectations accordingly.
Also - GOOD LORD the Star Seeker is a chonky boy.
| Ship | Counted Squares | Sq Root | Base Hull+Nacelle Mass | Theoretical Grid Size | Theoretical Squares | % of Theory | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Star Seeker | 1700 | 41.23 | 480 | 48 | 2304 | 73.78% | Ovid |
| Iron Road | 442 | 21.02 | 288 | 28.8 | 829.44 | 53.29% | [ ] Use Ovular Hull (29×29 grid) |
| Veiled Halberd | 572 | 23.92 | 315 | 31.5 | 992.25 | 57.65% | Conic |
| Furious Rebuild | 117 | 10.82 | 200 | 20 | 400 | 29.25% | Hemi |
| Project Rapids | 88 | 9.38 | 100 | 10 | 100 | 88.00% | 10x10 (Ovoid)] |
I'm going to go back to my intense caution when doing early planning, using somewhere between 50%-60% of the theoretical number of spaces for a hull of that mass. Secondary hulls are closer. The 3 smalls of the Halberd rounded up to 3x3 so more squares then the formula gives in theory. The Iron Roads hull was 72/87 so about 82% of theory.
I encourage anyone else doing planning to temper their expectations accordingly.
Also - GOOD LORD the Star Seeker is a chonky boy.
- Location
- west
The chonkiest yet.
- Location
- sweden
Makes sense honestly probably the first thing we would have voted on
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
...I gotta ask, given the size of the ship, is there an option of an 0.5-capacity bay? No shuttles, single shuttlepod?
Hmm. One thing I notice, looking over this - the Veiled Halberd is listed as having a base hull+nacelles of 315. It should probably be 295; the initial grid seems to be set before secondary hulls are added, so the extra 20kt to the nacelles to cover the secondaries hasn't been added yet. This also drops the Iron Road down to 268 from 288, and the Star Seeker to 440.
The Furious Wind is trickier, though; we didn't get to choose to change up its secondary hulls.
It's got what, a Medium inline secondary?
Edit: If we assume a Medium secondary with a [4x4] grid, that leaves 101 spaces for the original grid. Assuming a [12x12], that brings us up over 70% of theoretical. If it's [11x11] instead, efficiency is even better, which doesn't seem right for a hemicircle with an explicit penalty to internal volume.
Last edited:
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The full size shuttle has enhanced sensors and a warp drive. I feel having it is worth the two extra slots.
Though I was reminded that minimal transporters are included in the hulls, so the ship wouldn't completely lack the ability to get to ground. I'm still going for the single shuttle.
The final grid includes the full mass of the Nacelles. The Star Seeker didn't have any secondary hulls so the 480 mass is correct. See the quote below.
The Furious Wind doesn't have any secondary hulls. Either in the old or new version. Quotes from the threadmarks included below.
In other news I'm pretty sure the Iron Road's computer is twice the size it should be. It's 12 spaces, the same size as the dual core on the Halberd. It's larger then the computer on the Star Seeker.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
I mean, I agree. I'm still curious, though.
Anyway, since the moratorium's up:
[X] Centerline Shuttlebay…
- [X] …with 1 capacity.
That's where they carry the entire compiled knowledge of the Yennian peoples, so that any colony can be founded with a complete copy, and as an emergency cultural backup in case the home system is destroyed.
It's also good for gaming, on the long trips
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
Technically possible. Practically, no. the ship isn't really designed to deal with air resistance or major gravity sources outside its own grav plating, since Starships are generally built as pure blackfish. In extrimis even something like Star Seeker could enter atmosphere, but it would very much be something never done under normal circumstances. They're just not built for it.
- Location
- USA
But we COULD design specifically with atmospheric landings in mind?
[X] Centerline Shuttlebay…
-[X] …with 1 capacity.
-[X] …with 1 capacity.