Neither option really contributes to the ability to fight, although if a lower sprint has tactical detriments that would be a pretty good reason not to take the flight deck.
Thankyou for the clarification, much appreciated.
Well, a "carrier". The shuttles aren't going to have any combat utility, outside of Engineering and Tactical officers doing something highly unorthodox and against the regulations with them.
Would it be possible, if costly, to mount a small inline saucer deflector and small one in the engineering hull too?
[X] Large Warp Core (11 Deck) [Cost: 39.5] (Efficient Cruise: 6 -> 6.8)
The large warp core will allow the project to efficiently move from one side of the Federation to the other, but it does have its downsides. Several hull types have had to be excluded as a result, leaving you with fewer options that you would have otherwise found viable. As it stands there are two options with broadly similar exteriors but different internals.
The first option is a secondary hull of the usual type, though somewhat larger than usual to fit the project's inflated size. The long neck will create a hull with clear sightlines to the bow for an appropriately large main deflector, while the hull itself provides all the usual amenities for shuttles and storage spaces.
On the second option is to use the thicker saucer section to mount a reduced-power deflector and create a flight deck with aft and forward shuttlebay doors. This would allow a large fleet of small craft that would be useful in disaster relief, evacuations, and rapid cargo transfer. The cost would be the reduced maximum warp factors, but if you want to specialise the ship with a strong internal service role it isn't an awful idea since maximum warp is mostly applicable to tactical decision-making rather than long-term travel.
[ ] Conventional Secondary Hull (Mass: 220kt) [Cost: 55.5)
[ ] Flight Deck (Mass: 220kt) [Cost 55.5] (Maximum Warp: 8 -> 7.6)
Two Hour Moratorium, Please
Look at that chungus. I love how different it looks to everything we've made before.
Yes it did but the original one had the flight deck in the secondary hull this would be apart of the saucer
That's specifically for tactical scale stuff, this is an endurance tank
In theory with 4x nacelles we might be able to get to 260,000, but that's only 5,000 tonnes more.
I don't think this actually makes us any better at long-range operations, it just doesn't make us any worse. Being able to sprint is apparently useful tactically, so it might not be great to limit that on the ship that makes up our main line of battle.
We haven't mounted nacelles yet. We'll probably end up between 240-260kt.
Nacelle mass has been fairly wibbly. The last set on the Attenborough were only 10kt for the pair.
No, they won't. The flight deck uses the space that could have been a large cargo bay for an inline deflector instead.
It doesn't change our strategic speed, so by most measures the Federation will actually be faster than an Excalibur. We've got more limited tactical options but our brief was for a tank. It's job to to be the heavy support for agile dps.
For a ship that is also going to be a major combatant having that top speed is going to come in handy more than it wont
The deflector is mounted in the saucer, so unless the entire secondary hull and aft saucer sections are all deflector then there's plenty of room left.
The Newton was popular because it was cheap and it had good tactical, though. This ship will also have good tactical and engineering, but there's no way it's gonna be cheap.
That's very good to know, thanks!
