Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Bear in mind that we need this thing to cruise, and for that we need modules.

Zulaq said:
While more internal space normally means more capabilities, more capabilities are not called for in the design brief.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But we're trying to build a Cruiser, and cruisers need to do Cruising jobs. Long range scouting, independent patrolling, deep raiding, commerce protection, etc.

For that, you need self-sufficiency, and that means modules.

Considering we didn't even get the "extra frontal space" that people were crowing about for the half-hull vote, we need those modules.

For the design, 10k tons is not going to produce any kind of cost savings. Nor is 0.2 sprint going to produce any reasonable benefit. Maybe the ability to chase down a retreating Klingon, but other than that, it's basically nothing.
 
Last edited:
[X] Integrated Secondary Hull (200,000 Tons) [2 Forward Launcher Max]

Double rapid fire will still cover our torpedo needs, and as was just pointed out a cruiser needs to do cruiser things. That means long independent missions, which means modules. That also means increasing the lifetime of the ship. And, frankly, it just looks cool.
 
It'll still be able to do cruiser things, the sort of modules that are conducive to a long range fast striker are also conducive to heavy cruiser work in peacetime. It's just that it'll have say 0.5-1 average module less of space.
 
[X] Underslung Secondary Hull (180,000 Tons) [3 Forward Launchers Max] [+0.2 Sprint]
 
Tank man said:
It'll still be able to do cruiser things, the sort of modules that are conducive to a long range fast striker are also conducive to heavy cruiser work in peacetime. It's just that it'll have say 0.5-1 average module less of space.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That module will still be useful, especially if we find ourselves arguing over hospital support for fleet actions vs antimatter for long cruises.

And I want my retro-intrepid darn it! If not this one, then the next actual explorer we build.
 
Ramble said:
For all we know, it could actually look like this
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Unlikely, whilst the Oberth underslung is useful in some areas (namely lab isolation) the specific hull form (not being held on by anything other than 1.5-2 deck thick struts) is godawful for a combat ship. A sufficiently high velocity turn would probably take it off, to say nothing of combat.
 
[X] Large Secondary Hull (190,000 Tons) [Canon: Constitution-class] [3 Forward Launchers Max]
 
Even if this doesn't end up as a direct Constitution analogue given the fact it's meant to be churned out in decent numbers one of the ships is probably going to end up to Kirk what the Farragut was.
 
[X] Underslung Secondary Hull (180,000 Tons) [3 Forward Launchers Max] [+0.2 Sprint]

Briefvoice said:
[X] Large Secondary Hull (190,000 Tons) [Canon: Constitution-class] [3 Forward Launchers Max]



A lot of people may have just given up and decided there will never be a Constitution-class Enterprise. We already killed it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But we are building the Constitution class just now? Its just a different ship with different prioreties. That doesn't make this vessel any less important. If they wanted a canon ship they could watch TOS or the Remake Movies.
 
Bedpotato said:
[X] Underslung Secondary Hull (180,000 Tons) [3 Forward Launchers Max] [+0.2 Sprint]


But we are building the Constitution class just now? Its just a different ship with different prioreties. That doesn't make this vessel any less important. If they wanted a canon ship they could watch TOS or the Remake Movies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Being the Enyerprise doesnt mean being Constitution Class, it means being the great heroic explorer of the 23rd Century. A low budget warship won't do that.
 
[X] Large Secondary Hull (190,000 Tons) [Canon: Constitution-class] [3 Forward Launchers Max]
 
Last edited:
Tank man said:
Unlikely, whilst the Oberth underslung is useful in some areas (namely lab isolation) the specific hull form (not being held on by anything other than 1.5-2 deck thick struts) is godawful for a combat ship. A sufficiently high velocity turn would probably take it off, to say nothing of combat.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We don't actually know if that's the case though, not until the component is actually drawn up and put on the LCARS diagram.

mastigos said:
According to Sayle's warp physics, that design is incredibly suboptimal because it has a bunch of mass between the nacelles
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, but it could be bolted to the top of the saucer like an inverse Miranda, which would be even worse.

Bedpotato said:
But we are building the Constitution class just now? Its just a different ship with different prioreties.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This design brief is actually very similar to what was asked if the canon constitution. Constitution was a pretty bog standard heavy Cruiser.

darkstarling said:
Being the Enyerprise doesnt mean being Constitution Class, it means being the great heroic explorer of the 23rd Century. A low budget warship won't do that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It just needs to be a decent workhorse cruiser for it to do some decent exploring. It would just need to be followed up by actual science ships for in depth work.

The problem will be if we decide to cheap out on the "cruising" jobs which cruisers are supposed to do and which everybody is abandoning for Shiney but worthless nominal sprinting speed.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top