Starfleet Design Bureau

Myself, I've always been a proponent of better armored and reinforced nacelle pylons. They're probably the most vulnerable point on many of our vessels, next to any neck from primary to secondary hull and the nacelles themselves. And in the event that shields fail for whatever reason, it doesn't even take an enemy vessel to take advantage of the relatively thin portion of the vessel to render a ship crippled. But they're also one of the iconic parts of Federation starship design, so I don't know how far that can really be taken.
 
Myself, I've always been a proponent of better armored and reinforced nacelle pylons. They're probably the most vulnerable point on many of our vessels, next to any neck from primary to secondary hull and the nacelles themselves. And in the event that shields fail for whatever reason, it doesn't even take an enemy vessel to take advantage of the relatively thin portion of the vessel to render a ship crippled. But they're also one of the iconic parts of Federation starship design, so I don't know how far that can really be taken.
So, I believe heavily armored nacelles are a fad that pops up in certain times and places where appropriate, like the Defiant and its spiritual siblings, which are pure short-range fighters, or something like very early low-warp Klingon Battlecruisers, who'd have legitimate concerns about an irreparable engine casualty permanently stranding the ship and crew far from Qo'nos.

The overall trend in starship design is faster Warp Speeds making the galaxy effectively smaller. A 'modern' ship with a destroyed engine can put out a distress call on subspace radio and expect Starfleet to send someone who'll arrive in the new few weeks/months. Therefore it's overall better to have everyone using faster nacelles...
 
So, I believe heavily armored nacelles are a fad that pops up in certain times and places where appropriate, like the Defiant and its spiritual siblings, which are pure short-range fighters, or something like very early low-warp Klingon Battlecruisers, who'd have legitimate concerns about an irreparable engine casualty permanently stranding the ship and crew far from Qo'nos.

The overall trend in starship design is faster Warp Speeds making the galaxy effectively smaller. A 'modern' ship with a destroyed engine can put out a distress call on subspace radio and expect Starfleet to send someone who'll arrive in the new few weeks/months. Therefore it's overall better to have everyone using faster nacelles...

Would it be possible to design them with structural hardpoints that armour could be mounted onto in time of war, increased tensions or if the ships task was likely to put it into harm?
 
Would it be possible to design them with structural hardpoints that armour could be mounted onto in time of war, increased tensions or if the ships task was likely to put it into harm?

If your question is " can we do y to gain the benefits of x without suffering the drawbacks of x" the answer is probably going to be no. The same reason why engineering doesn't let us engineer science, choices are meant to be impactful.
 
I never liked the whole exposed nacelle being so exposed, even tho its iconic the one ship I enjoyed really was the intrepid class, the nacelle design for that was good it didnt look like it can be cut in half by a stray shot, and I figure with current star fleet designs and focus on speed it can take advantage of it because it looks sturdy and wont snap off from high speed stress.

I also love how it moves its nacelles into a position when it goes into warp. Very fancy.


View: https://youtu.be/G3ov-cunw8A?t=6
 
For our next vessel a patrol/fast cargo light cruiser seems to be the thing most needed.

Whereas I think we need a colony medical ship like we were thinking of turning the Darwin into. Once which also lands and opens up, and unpacks a whole field hospital. Because why should you try to fit everything inside a starship when you've got a whole planet? You can pack equipment much smaller than you can install it.

And I like landers.

Maybe also give it some engineering capacity and cargo, so a general purpose colony support vessel that can also fight pirates. A great hero ship in other words, and our first prototype explorer?
It's a bit excessive to build a hospital ship tbh, I kinda agree when Sayle pointed out it's a niche, as it's a lot cheaper to send prefab modules somewhere and build the hospital facilities you need. A starship can't treat enough people for it to matter for a full-sized colony, what they can do is relieve other starships and small outposts, or bring state-of-the-art medical research facilities to you, to develop vaccines for plagues etc.

I know I've said this before, but honestly I think our most pressing need that'll sort out most of our current issues is a Newton-class v2, full warp 8 (pretty please let's do cruise optimization for once), equal or greater cargo and fab capacity, new shields (covariant or type 2), the ability to put at least 4 torpedoes forward and 2 aft, max out the agility, we'll be laughing.

We won't need ships dashing about as much if all our colonies have a solid foundation with their own infrastructure (reactors, hospitals, factories, sentry and orbital defense systems) set up as early as possible, and if we must dash a warp 8 ship can chew up those lightyears very fast indeed. It can do what the Newton does, helping patch up fleets when it participates in fleet actions if a yard facility or Archer-class isn't available.

It'll also deter pirates if they know we've got a bunch of warp 8(.5) ships prowling around, especially if they're more concentrated towards colonies and outposts that need stuff couriered to them.

Also remember we're not too far away from the v4 nacelles and warp 9 engine, and our warp 8 designs should be able to be retrofitted with warp 9 drives fairly easily. Build some decent designs now, we're investing in our future for a long time indeed. We know at the very least our cruise speed will rise a sizable notch with the new nacelles, it's possible sprint speed will rise too, and refitting nacelles has got to be easier than a full shipwide refit.

Edit: I also recommend, once we've got a new w8 utility cruiser and general science cruiser and/or explorer ship, an Archer v2 would also be a great idea. Think of the massive utility and benefit it's brought to us, strengthening our colonies and economy. If we build an Archer v2 with a w8 drive, really go full ham on max modules and max engineering and logistics once again, it'll be even faster with a v4 nacelle and can be retrofitted with a w9 drive later. Imagine an Archer-class that can sprint at warp 9(.5)! Its cruising speed has gotta be pretty impressive, that sort of thing would be able to tow vast amounts of materials for colonies, outposts, facilities and shipbuilding very, very fast.
 
Last edited:
I mean, most nacelles look...pretty stout? The only reason they aren't featureless cylinders is because they literally cannot be so. The Bussard Collectors need to be exposed in front, and the blue lines section is the emitters for the drive plasma/fields/technobabble and thus also needs exposed. Pylons aren't as thick as saucer sections because they don't need to be; they're mostly just metal and some plasma conduits. Adding more mass/weight there does little.

Note that Defiant is hella inefficient and not great for cruising, which is what most Starfleet ships need to do. Voyager's nacelle pylons are thicker, but the hinge is a vulnerability, and one they were able to sidestep with the Sovereign-class generation and later.

At the end of the day, to get the performance metrics that Starfleet wants and needs out of their vessels, you need Nacelles that generally obey the old-school rules from Roddenberry (work in pairs, majority visible to each other, can be seen from the front, etc). Which requires either pylons, or hull-mounts like a handful of classes. And said pylons are needed for the bigger ships. And the pylons will, again, not be the same thickness/width as the engineering hull or saucer, so they will look "thin" even when they're rather stout.

Armor does very little in Star Trek until we hit edge-case techs later on. If shields are down and your enemies are shooting your ship with guns that disassociate atoms, you're having a bad fucking time and there's no escaping it.
 
I mean, most nacelles look...pretty stout? The only reason they aren't featureless cylinders is because they literally cannot be so. The Bussard Collectors need to be exposed in front, and the blue lines section is the emitters for the drive plasma/fields/technobabble and thus also needs exposed. Pylons aren't as thick as saucer sections because they don't need to be; they're mostly just metal and some plasma conduits. Adding more mass/weight there does little.

Note that Defiant is hella inefficient and not great for cruising, which is what most Starfleet ships need to do. Voyager's nacelle pylons are thicker, but the hinge is a vulnerability, and one they were able to sidestep with the Sovereign-class generation and later.

At the end of the day, to get the performance metrics that Starfleet wants and needs out of their vessels, you need Nacelles that generally obey the old-school rules from Roddenberry (work in pairs, majority visible to each other, can be seen from the front, etc). Which requires either pylons, or hull-mounts like a handful of classes. And said pylons are needed for the bigger ships. And the pylons will, again, not be the same thickness/width as the engineering hull or saucer, so they will look "thin" even when they're rather stout.

Armor does very little in Star Trek until we hit edge-case techs later on. If shields are down and your enemies are shooting your ship with guns that disassociate atoms, you're having a bad fucking time and there's no escaping it.
I admit I kind of assumed that the variable geometry nacelles of the Intrepid still WORK, they're just a bit of a pain in the neck. So they decided, as a rule, to just make ships that fit a single warp field optimization. You could build a Sovereign with the variable geometry, to switch between cruise and sprint as needed, but it wasn't worth it.
 
Armor does very little in Star Trek until we hit edge-case techs later on. If shields are down and your enemies are shooting your ship with guns that disassociate atoms, you're having a bad fucking time and there's no escaping it.

Note that I never said armored; I said damage resistant. A useful warp factor with a nacelle and 3/4s of one is a nice feature, even if it's not gonna win a race, though that depends on the tradeoff (and what options Sayle puts on the table.) Another possible upgrade that we could see is something that gets more fuel efficiency, probably an improved Bussard Ramscoop.
 
The nacelles in the NuTrek movies are mostly just undifferentiated grey cylinders, which to me feels like the endpoint of Voyager's blockier 'less exposed' ones. They are boring to look at.
From a picture they dont look like cylinders? they got some depth to them sure, lots of pretty lights from the look at it, but its not to bad.

All naclles in star trek look like cylinders with a starfleet logo stamp on it with a few stripes here and there and the ships serial number on it. So I dont know where your coming from, its like you hadnt looked at TOS era starships
 
Armor does very little in Star Trek until we hit edge-case techs later on. If shields are down and your enemies are shooting your ship with guns that disassociate atoms, you're having a bad fucking time and there's no escaping it.
Not in the current TOS era, no, but in ENT era and earlier, pre-Shields, with less powerful weapons, armor had its place.
 
2243: Project Darwin (Name) New
[X] Plant Sciences (+8 Science) [Specialisations: Exobiology, Biochemistry, Plant Sciences]

The addition of the biosciences and chemistry labs will synergize with the existing hydroponics and arboretum spaces to give the Darwin a truly comprehensive array of tools for use in evaluating planetary flora. Combining that with the landing functionality and shuttlebay means that a surprising amount of the crew will be able to undertake local investigation and sample collection duties at any one time. The areas in which the ship touches down will likely be the most comprehensively catalogued, so perhaps in future some colonies will be putting the first boots on soil right where a Darwin had been landed perhaps years or even decades before.

It's a rare opportunity to think that your work will be so closely linked with the lives of those outside the service, so that is a pleasing thought. With the main subsystems and auxiliary modules planned out the remainder of the work will be the fine-tuning and system tests that squeeze every bit of potential out of the spaceframe and the ship's internal operations, but with the shakedown cruise on the horizon (in design-time, at least), you have one final duty. The name of your prototype will define the class of ships that you are hopeful Starfleet will produce a decent handful of, even if internal concerns are likely to dominate the shipbuilding capacity of the Federation in the near future.

[ ] Darwin, after famous naturalists.
[ ] Attenborough, after famous conservationists.
[ ] Aspen, after trees.
[ ] Other

Two Hour Moratorium, Please

 
Not to mention the times we've seen space weirdness bypass or disable the shields of ships - the Mutara Nebula is an infamous canonical example, given it disabled the shields of the Reliant and Enterprise (part of the reason that battle did so much damage, AFAIK).
EDIT: After seeing the naming options, I'm inclined to name it either Darwin or Attenborough.
 
Last edited:
Reiterating some of my older suggestions for the bio ship names!


Assuming we do get the biosciences ship I'd like to suggest either Robert Koch or Anton de Bary (using the same shortening system as is used for Koch) as the class name.

Koch discovered the causatives agents of many of the bacterial diseases and is the father of modern (and medical) bacteriology, he also instituted a number of bacteriological test techniques that are still in use today and (amongst other things) invented the bacterial culture method using agar on glass plates.
Koch's postulates are the criteria used to establish a causal relationship between a microbe and a disease. They are as follows (the fourth being added by his assistant):
  1. The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease but should not be found in healthy organisms.
  2. The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
  3. The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.
  4. The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.
Heinrich Anton de Bary is widely regarded as the father of modern mycology and a father of modern plant pathology (disease in plants caused by pathogens), he is also the man to coin the term symbiosis.

Koch requires no further explanation, but Anton de Bary was chosen by me because as much as this ship would be there to deal with novel diseases infecting Federation member species members who have colonised a new place as the Tarsus IV references show us the impact of disease/fungi on not only crops but also refined crops/pre-food (and likely livestock too) on our frontier colonies and possibly even more interior ones if the disease doesn't show itself soon enough is a highly important concern.

Hopefully I'm not being too presumptuous with this, but microbiology is a topic dear to my heart.

@Sayle
 
Another good choice might be Hooker, founder of geographical botany and one of the most important botanists of his time.

Article:
Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker (30 June 1817 – 10 December 1911) was a British botanist and explorer in the 19th century.[1] He was a founder of geographical botany and Charles Darwin's closest friend.[2] For 20 years he served as director of the Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew, succeeding his father, William Jackson Hooker, and was awarded the highest honours of British science.[3][4]


He was also, alongside Darwin, responsible for the terraforming of Ascension Island.

Article:
In 1843, botanist and explorer Joseph Hooker visited the island. Four years later, Hooker, with much encouragement from Darwin, advised the Royal Navy that with the help of Kew Gardens, they should institute a long-term plan of shipping trees to Ascension. The planted trees would capture more rain and improve the soil, allowing the barren island to become a garden. So, from 1850 and years thereafter, ships came with an assortment of plants from botanical gardens in Argentina, Europe and South Africa. By the late 1870s Norfolk pines, eucalyptus, bamboo, and banana trees grew in profusion at the highest point of the island, Green Mountain, creating a tropical cloud forest.
 
Last edited:
when a name option is "name" after famous "name of a profession/job" does that includes famous people of that profession from other species than human ?
 
[jk] Monsanto, after the legendary geneticists of the 21st century

For an actual idea, how about
[ ] Mendel (the early proof of heritability)
[ ] Hooke (discovery of cells)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top