Since the thread moves quick and stuff can be buried. For the people worried about size the command configuration seems like it'll give us a ship smaller than a Kea (255kT). It doesn't really leverage the increases we get by making big ships. Before voting everyone was worried about making something too small (~260kT or below) and that we should be really aiming for 300-400. Either of the latter two options will do so. Command ends up far lighter.
Linked contents
Since the thread moves quick and stuff can be buried. For the people worried about size the command configuration seems like it'll give us a ship smaller than a Kea (255kT). It doesn't really leverage the increases we get by making big ships. Before voting everyone was worried about making something too small (~260kT or below) and that we should be really aiming for 300-400. Either of the latter two options will do so. Command ends up far lighter.
[X] Command Configuration (Mass: 140kt) [Cost: 27.5]
[X] Inverse Slope Configuration (Mass: 170kt) [Cost: 33.5]
Edit 3 go big or go home. No point in building an Excalibur v2 at this time.
[X] Rising Slope Configuration (Mass: 190kt) [Cost: 37.5]
Ugh, now we've shoehorned in heavy shields, the greater mass, which is required for better shields, weapons and utility, is becoming prohibitively expensive.
Edit: That being said, the whole point of this was to start building heavier ships for better shields, phasers and more modules. At this rate we're just building a slightly less anorexic Excalibur, which is positively tiny. We need something decently big for multiple reasons.
Edit 2: I'm also leery of what exactly the phaser placement benefit for saucer 1 is. If it just means we can position phaser firing cones more arbitrarily for maximum combat utility rather than compromising on engineering limitations, then it could be really awesome, let us get the maximum benefit from our hellishly expensive phaser emitters. But if it just means more phasers, then it's a waste of time, as phasers are going to be massively expensive going forwards if we're mounting more than just 2-3. I'd think at least 7 would become the standard, that's 28 cost. Not cheap. Mounting more than is required to deal with fast, numerous Klingon threat vessels will make this unfeasibly expensive.
Edit 3 go big or go home. No point in building an Excalibur v2 at this time.
[X] Rising Slope Configuration (Mass: 190kt) [Cost: 37.5]
Ugh, now we've shoehorned in heavy shields, the greater mass, which is required for better shields, weapons and utility, is becoming prohibitively expensive.
Edit: That being said, the whole point of this was to start building heavier ships for better shields, phasers and more modules. At this rate we're just building a slightly less anorexic Excalibur, which is positively tiny. We need something decently big for multiple reasons.
Edit 2: I'm also leery of what exactly the phaser placement benefit for saucer 1 is. If it just means we can position phaser firing cones more arbitrarily for maximum combat utility rather than compromising on engineering limitations, then it could be really awesome, let us get the maximum benefit from our hellishly expensive phaser emitters. But if it just means more phasers, then it's a waste of time, as phasers are going to be massively expensive going forwards if we're mounting more than just 2-3. I'd think at least 7 would become the standard, that's 28 cost. Not cheap. Mounting more than is required to deal with fast, numerous Klingon threat vessels will make this unfeasibly expensive.
Last edited:
- Location
- United States
[X] Inverse Slope Configuration (Mass: 170kt) [Cost: 33.5]
As well as performing some of the peacetime duties the destroyed/to be destroyed Excaliburs were meant to do pushing up size/mass now will allow us to go bigger quicker for future ships, like the Excelsior equivalent when we get to building that.
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
[X] Command Configuration (Mass: 140kt) [Cost: 27.5]
I want to keep the saucer smaller and have a chonky engineering hull. I'm hoping for a more blended connection like Voyager or at least a little more TNG style, I'm ready to move on from TOS or TMP style.
I want to keep the saucer smaller and have a chonky engineering hull. I'm hoping for a more blended connection like Voyager or at least a little more TNG style, I'm ready to move on from TOS or TMP style.
As Sayle has mentioned before, we won't be getting that kind of engineering hull until we enter the latter TMP era/TNG era. Closest we could get is the integrated and even that will probably leave the ship below 240,000 tonnes.
Exactly. Like I said in another reply here, if we can put enough modules in that these ships can take care of routine troubles rather than having to drag a Kea-class or Archer-class from their other duties to fix it, then the cost savings will be staggering, and it'll save lives because stuff gets done so much faster.
I also edited my earlier comment a few slots up, what do you think of my thoughts re saucer 1's phaser placement? I'm leery it's a trap option that'll offer more useless, redundant phasers that would be prohibitively expensive, but it could actually be a great thing that just lets us optimize firing cones?
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
So heres some rough estimates of what shield and phaser power we could achieve for each of the designs. I've assigned the secondary hull & nacelles a mass of 60Kt, making it 42.9% the mass of the Command saucer hull:
Compared to the Command deck, the Inverse slope has a 12% increase in shields and the Rising slope has a 25% increase. They also have the same cost increase %.
So it turns out that there's not much improvement in weapon output, only a 4% & 7% increase. I consider this is a major motivation to plan for lot's of torpedo tubes.
| Emitter Type | Size | Shield Power/100kt | Cost/100kt | Base Cost |
| Type-1 Covariant | Heavy | 25 | 16.7 | 16.7 |
| Command Configuration (Mass: 140kt) | 200Kt Total | 50 | 33.4 | |
| Inverse Slope Configuration (Mass: 170kt) | 230Kt Total | 57.5 | 38.41 | |
| Rising Slope Configuration (Mass: 190kt) | 250Kt Total | 62.5 | 41.75 |
Compared to the Command deck, the Inverse slope has a 12% increase in shields and the Rising slope has a 25% increase. They also have the same cost increase %.
| Phaser damage | ship mass |
| 21 | 200,000Kt |
| 21.9 | 230,000Kt |
| 22.5 | 250,000Kt |
So it turns out that there's not much improvement in weapon output, only a 4% & 7% increase. I consider this is a major motivation to plan for lot's of torpedo tubes.
[X] Inverse Slope Configuration (Mass: 170kt) [Cost: 33.5]
Hey so that thing I figured was going to happen is in fact happening. We can't just dump infinite cost into a big ship and heavy shields, and if we wanted to max out shield size it would have been better to pick Standard. So much for all those arguments that we'd be "[compromising] on literally the main goal" or "If we cut corners here". Starfleet gets balky at the cost and thread reacts to it, and now we're going to be in halfway house land.
Hey so that thing I figured was going to happen is in fact happening. We can't just dump infinite cost into a big ship and heavy shields, and if we wanted to max out shield size it would have been better to pick Standard. So much for all those arguments that we'd be "[compromising] on literally the main goal" or "If we cut corners here". Starfleet gets balky at the cost and thread reacts to it, and now we're going to be in halfway house land.
- Location
- his hidden lair
[X] Command Configuration (Mass: 140kt) [Cost: 27.5]
I'm skeptical we can't drum up mass elsewhere, are people really going to tell me they wouldn't consider some crazy quad nacelle for peak warp speed after the success our Excaliburs had as raiders, and the need for a rapid responder to cover the Federation's immense volume? We were warned not to pursue mass for mass's sake, and now it seems there's a fear if we don't pad out mass for mass's sake now we won't ever get a chance.
We're already set to spend more time on this saucer than any before- why assume secondary hulls and warp nacelles will be afterthoughts afterwards?
I'm skeptical we can't drum up mass elsewhere, are people really going to tell me they wouldn't consider some crazy quad nacelle for peak warp speed after the success our Excaliburs had as raiders, and the need for a rapid responder to cover the Federation's immense volume? We were warned not to pursue mass for mass's sake, and now it seems there's a fear if we don't pad out mass for mass's sake now we won't ever get a chance.
We're already set to spend more time on this saucer than any before- why assume secondary hulls and warp nacelles will be afterthoughts afterwards?
Last edited:
A chonky ship doesn't guarantee that Starfleet will go for a small order, if we give it solid non-combat capabilities then it's possible Starfleet will begrudgingly order a bunch like how the Archer despite being a terrible combatant during a period of rising tensions with the Klingons still got a lot of orders both before and after the war due to how good it was as a logistics and construction vessel.
The Command Config is the worst for squeezing in non-combat functionality since it has limited space and that space is devoted only to serving as crew quarters.
Since we've already committed to chonk with the previous design choice being the chonkiest option backing out now isn't going to magically unchonk the ship and just leaves us with the worst of both worlds where our ship is too chonky to justify a large order based solely on it's merits as a combatant and doesn't offer enough utility to justify provide other justifications for it's chonkiness.
One area where we could aim for is Dilithium survey capabilities as Starfleet has lost a ton of combat capable Dilithium survey ships due to the Saladin's taking a ton of casualties while being obsolescent and the Kea's dropping their Dilithium survey capabilities for torpedoes.
While the Atwater mentioned in the Attenborough retrospective might be able to perform that role since it's a geophysics oriented ship it got an even more limited production run than the Attenborough at 4 hulls and while the Attenborough is a respectable combatant for it's size it isn't fighting big capital ships or raider wolfpacks anytime soon which limits it's ability to secure contested territory.
Having the Federation-Class be a big stick that can operate in dangerous environments on it's own while having the facilities that let it identify what territory is useful to claim should give it a solid niche that will keep it relevant even after it's no longer the chonkiest ship on Starfleet's roster.
[X] Inverse Slope Configuration (Mass: 170kt) [Cost: 33.5]
[X] Rising Slope Configuration (Mass: 190kt) [Cost: 37.5]
Last edited:
We don't need much module space for a dilithium survey ship, though. The survey suite itself only takes up what, the space of two torpedo tubes? Some extra antimatter fuel, crew quarters and a dilithium suite will probably only take up half the module space even on the command saucer.
In terms of capabilities that will help justify the ship Cargo is one of the ones I'd highlight. The Archer exists yes and is better for bulk cargo, but with heavy Newton losses and the Archer's slow speed, Starfleet has no ship that's really able to deliver cargo fast. Same goes for engineering.
Dilithium is one and Medical is another capability that is aging out or has been lost in the present fleet. I'd generally say we should have a broad swath of capabilities so the ship can justify itself as a generalist responder with good capabilities for most problems. That helps it be a ship that can be dispatched for anything and be useful, along with being a squadron flag that can fit into any composition of ships.
About 8-10 phasers is what we need for full/as close to full coverage as we can get from saucer exclusive placement (or 8x saucer and 2x engineering hull, I guess for the neck dead zone/potential third nacelle dead zone). The vertical axis is probably the only place that will benefit from the command saucer, and outside of perhaps the Tholians during web weaving were not going to need that kind of fire.
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
The size of the saucer limits the maximum size of the engineering hull. We can't make up for going smaller here.
A thicker saucer naturally being better for this. The Excalibur can do some light/fast cargo (looking at the retrospective) but that detracts from its other duties, like exploration, so having this ship able to zoom about during fast and moderately heavy cargo runs as well as whatever else we outfit it for will give it quite a bit of utility, which will lead to a longer service life and more orders.
- Location
- Australia
The real problem is Command Configuration sounds so much cooler than the other choices it's going to win on the basis of that, even before you say the words "optimal phaser"
To have a chance the others needed equally cool names, or command a much less imposing one.
To have a chance the others needed equally cool names, or command a much less imposing one.
Excalibur can't really do cargo, outside of its own supplies. Tarsus required tapping into those to feed the colony and some clever work on the part of the crew to make things work. That probably wouldn't work for a bigger colony or issue where something other than food or whatever supplies a warship normally needs to carry was necessary.
That's because your ship final mass totals are significantly low for the second two options based on a percentage scale. For everyone who said 60 shields also wasn't enough command configuration also looks like it'll struggle to achieve it (at 250k max ballooning).
- Location
- Australia
At the moment my thoughts on mostly towards giving it a combined shuttle cargo Bay as large as the archer's which I think we can do because of the three deck thickness. I would also love if we took the idea from the radiant but instead of optimizing the maximum sprint speed we optimize the maximum cruise speed. That would give us massive cargo that can move incredibly quickly for a variety of purposes which is also incredibly important for an anchor class warship.
There is no need for maximum sprint. That's for the Excaliburs, hit and run, wolf pack. Cruise is for getting to a target quickly, like a station, planet or fleet battle. That's the role of this ship. We have seen we can make smaller deflectors at the cost of warp speed, I wonder if we can make an oversized overpowered deflector to improve Cruise speed.
Speech to text.
There is no need for maximum sprint. That's for the Excaliburs, hit and run, wolf pack. Cruise is for getting to a target quickly, like a station, planet or fleet battle. That's the role of this ship. We have seen we can make smaller deflectors at the cost of warp speed, I wonder if we can make an oversized overpowered deflector to improve Cruise speed.
Speech to text.
Last edited: