Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
[ ] Cruise Configuration (6.6/7/8.2) [287c/343c/551c]
[ ] Sprint Configuration (6.2/7/8.6) [238c/343c/636c]

One of these two. Superiority of either strategic or tactical speed, since middle speed is the same for them all. Given how big the Federation is getting, I feel like there's a better case for cruise than has been the case with others.

EDIT: I'm tentatively going with Cruise Config, because comparing it with all the previous ships from the last half-dozen rounds of design shows that would make the Efficient Cruise higher than the Maximum Cruise of the next closer competitors (6.6 for this one to 6.4 of the follow-up)
 
Last edited:
Sayle said:
The Type-3 thrusters are allocated to the port and starboard of the main saucer, where the two engines will put out the equivalent thrust of three Type-2 engines without taking up as much space. While the initial run of the project will have to deal with increased costs, the second tranche will have the advantage of a more refined production line and correspondingly lower costs for the technology akin to a quartet of Type-2s.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is an important point to me, for ships that we expect multiple tranches the extra cost from prototypes might be more reasonable than a ship design we only expect a single tranche for. This way we might have better performance long run at a cost that gets more reasonable in the second or later tranches
 
I think it's got to be the Sprint configuration. Efficient Cruise speed is nice and all, but for tactical considerations these things are going to be going at Maximum Cruise for most of the time they aren't at Sprint, I think. Maximum Cruise being unchanging makes this easy.

...It's a little heartbreaking that our new super-engine we apparently almost wrecked the timeline getting and are actively compensating for right now is a bit of a dud, but them's the breaks.
 
It does feel like if any ship we make should go for the Sprint configuration on the warp coils this should be it.

Both in terms of taking maximum advantage of the warp geometry and in terms of 'tactical' speed being important to this kind of ship.

Warp 8.6 is also just no joke.
 
Last edited:
Sayle said:
Finally there is there is the sprint configuration, aiming to squeeze as much performance as possible out of the new warp engines. Warp 8.6 is halfway to Warp 9, compounding the natural improvement to the underslung hull's warp geometry to go as fast as possible. Being able to cover nearly a light year in the twelve hours the nacelles could handle before risking serious damage is not to be sneered at.

[ ] Cruise Configuration (6.6/7/8.2) [287c/343c/551c]
[ ] Linear Configuration (6.4/7/8.4) [268c/343c/592c]
[ ] Sprint Configuration (6.2/7/8.6) [238c/343c/636c]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Given the max cruise for the canon Connie was warp 6 we've done pretty nicely with our max cruise being a whole warp factor greater.

The canon Connie has a maximum velocity of warp 9, for 4 hours, this equals 0.3326ly compared to the 0.8707ly we could manage with warp 8.6 for 12 hours (we have an advantage of 0.5381ly).

Presently I'd say I'm a bit more in favour of sprint. Especially since we optimised for it with the secondary hull.

-
[ ] Sprint Configuration (6.2/7/8.6) [238c/343c/636c]
 
Last edited:
On the one hand, that linear config is tempting given how it'd keep the ship very compact, on the other hand, I really, really want the sprint speed so it can QRF D6s and D7s.

CanYouMeme said:
[ ] Cruise Configuration (6.6/7/8.2) [287c/343c/551c]
[ ] Sprint Configuration (6.2/7/8.6) [238c/343c/636c]

One of these two. Superiority of either strategic or tactical speed, since middle speed is the same for them all. Given how big the Federation is getting, I feel like there's a better case for cruise than has been the case with others.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We actually don't want a cruise config for once- this ship's job is bushwhacking Klingon Battlecruisers, and for that we want the ability to intercept the things readily.
 
Driven by Apathy said:
If the cost difference was something like 3 vs 15, I'd kind of see your point. It's not, though. The savings are miniscule compared to the disadvantages.

I must caution that IMHO going with the type 2s would be a serious mistake for which we'd pay dearly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Eh, it's about a ship worth if you're looking at 30 ships built (depending on batch sizes). Not amazing but an extra ship is an extra ship.
 
Sayle said:
[ ] Cruise Configuration (6.6/7/8.2) [287c/343c/551c]
[ ] Linear Configuration (6.4/7/8.4) [268c/343c/592c]
[ ] Sprint Configuration (6.2/7/8.6) [238c/343c/636c]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And now we get to the final garnish on the outward appearance of this cruiser. This one is actually remarkably tough for me, as I can see the benefits of all three. A cruise configuration means we have longer legs without having to push hard, and the sprint takes us over the halfway mark to Warp 9 (heck of a way to lap a Klingon cruiser), while the Linear configuration cuts rather nicely down the middle.

However, this is an extreme emergency situation, and we need to be able to go fast, even if that means straining components. Thusly, I'm voting for both a Linear or a Sprint configuration as my vote. This thing needs to get to battlefields faster than the competition, so a stately cruise speed just isn't in the cards at the moment.
 
Mechanis said:
We actually don't want a cruise config for once- this ship's job is bushwhacking Klingon Battlecruisers, and for that we want the ability to intercept the things readily.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Federation is orders of magnitude larger than it was the last several times we had this argument. Efficient Cruise is more valuable than it was then, because that simplifies strategic logistics and minimizes yard time for repairs and maintenance.
 
I'll probably go for Sprint or Linear.

Sprint for a fast response vessel, Linear because it's explicitly a new way to arrange nacelles and warp fields and would hopefully produce lots of interesting data.
 
Last edited:
Sayle said:
What has been limited is your maximum cruise, which has run up against the hard reality of warp coil metallurgy. Even with reduced plasma turbulence and the multitude of small improvements to the regulation of the warp transfer conduit, there's no way for the materials to perform at levels higher than Warp 7 without beginning to accrue wear and tear. It's still faster than any other ship can cruise, but it does make maximum warp more of a notable leap over maximum cruise.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Type-3 Nacelles are 47 years old now. Sounds like we need a new Nacelle type soon just to keep up with the Warp 8 engine.
 
I am going to vote for sprint. Gotta go fast. It turns battles that we win and turn the enemy to rout into crushing victories where we out speed them and tear them to pieces at warp.

There is a beautiful synergy between being dangerous enough enemy forces have to run but also fast enough they can't.

We win this war not by taking out the Klingon Empire, but by imposing too high a cost on them continuing the war. Breaking hulls rather than allowing retreat is a major factor adding cost.
 
Tank man said:
Given the max cruise for the canon Connie was warp 6 we've done pretty nicely with our max cruise being a whole warp factor greater.

The canon Connie has a maximum velocity of warp 9, for 4 hours, this equals 0.3326ly compared to the 0.8707ly we could manage with warp 8.6 for 12 hours (we have an advantage of 0.5381ly).

Presently I'd say I'm a bit more in favour of sprint. Especially since we optimised for it with the secondary hull.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think the canon Connie would be rated at Warp 8. Even that strained the engines in some episodes. Warp 9 is a crazy emergency thing that you can only get away with if your engineer is Scotty.
 
Tank man said:
The canon Connie has a maximum velocity of warp 9, for 4 hours, this equals 0.3326ly compared to the 0.8707ly we could manage with warp 8.6 for 12 hours (we have an advantage of 0.5381ly).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Pretty much.

Max cruise is the same anyway for when we need to be fast but can't just sprint, and that massive sprint potential is great, both to respond to threats and run down fleeing enemies. Or evading superior forces.

A better cruising speed would be logistically great, but for a big stick capable of rapidly responding to Klingon hostility, I think sprint is better.
 
Ohh sprint all the way, we are the speedforce! Cue horrified Klingons, "Honorably" after battle only for the Connie to overtake and finish them off later!
 
The fact the sprint config doesn't increase max cruise make me skeptical of it.

I don't think max warp is that useful for responding to emergencies because it only enables extremely short duration sprints. If the numbers in the update are representative, 12 hours for one lightyear doesn't even get you to the nearest star over. How are you responding to anything you're not already right on top of?
 
Tank man said:
Given the max cruise for the canon Connie was warp 6 we've done pretty nicely with our max cruise being a whole warp factor greater.

The canon Connie has a maximum velocity of warp 9, for 4 hours, this equals 0.3326ly compared to the 0.8707ly we could manage with warp 8.6 for 12 hours (we have an advantage of 0.5381ly).

Presently I'd say I'm a bit more in favour of sprint. Especially since we optimised for it with the secondary hull.

-
[ ] Sprint Configuration (6.2/7/8.6) [238c/343c/636c]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Don't you need to include the 8 hours the canon ship spends at max cruise?
 
CanYouMeme said:
The Federation is orders of magnitude larger than it was the last several times we had this argument. Efficient Cruise is more valuable than it was then, because that simplifies strategic logistics and minimizes yard time for repairs and maintenance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Except that in the particular case of this ship, its job is to run down and kill the D6 and D7, so an efficient cruise of 6.2 is *fine* for stratigic speed; especially since given the situation most of them are going to be running maximum cruise far more often (because existanel war is no time to be sparing the components for longer service life) but a sprint speed halfway and more to Warp NINE will let the thing land on a Klingon Battlecruiser much faster than it otherwise might, and that is what we need it to be.

Every consideration other than landing on a D6 or D7 as fast as possible with enough firepower to kill it and enough damage resistance to survive the process is secondary or not even in the running.
 
With max cruise hard capped to the same regardless of which option we pick, and given the ship's intended role, I'd say the cruise option is the least desirable option... Which is kind of weird given that this ship is explicitly a Cruiser, but them's the breaks, I guess.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top