Linked contents
[JK] Octo Nacelles (Efficient Cruise: Warp 6.8-> 7, Maximum Cruise 7 -> 7.4, Maximum Warp 8 -> 8.4) (mass 220kt -> 380kt) [Cost 108]
I can't decide. Just mount everything. Turn on whatever set of nacelles is most useful at any given moment.
I can't decide. Just mount everything. Turn on whatever set of nacelles is most useful at any given moment.
darkstarling
Brilliantly Crazed
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio
- Pronouns
- He/Him
My thoughts on pirate interdiction for the Federation class is thus - you can run, but you can't hide. This ship shows up, and pirates just clear the sector because they can't fight it or stay long enough to raid. And, most importantly, you can't establish bases or drop points because they'll be blown to flinders. We have other faster ships to hunt individual ships, but this is a strategic cruiser. It should strategically cruise.
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
Because I am such a big nerd, here's a more accurate graph for the time to failure and the formula used so it can be accurately adjusted with different max cruise and top speeds. I've also included the time in days to get a better idea of the endurance:Here's a chart of the warp coil time-to-failure as the materials decay, from maximum cruise to maximum warp.
View: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TfdlkwY-KcKbCNhyTo5clFaio5ioEvv6/view?usp=sharing
To calculate it you only need the following variables to start:
Max cruise (Vc)
Top Speed (Vm)
Warp Factor at 10,000hrs endurance (V10k), currently 7.25
Warp Factor at 0hrs endurance (V0), currently 8.58
Then work out the following variables:
V1 = V10k * 10,000
V2 = V0 * 10,000
V3 = V2 - V1
Factoral (Vf) = 10,000/V3
Current Warp Factor (V)
Vc = V * 10,000
Formula:
Time to Failure = (V2 - Vc) * Vf
= (V2 - Vc) * [10,000/(V2 - V1)]
= (V2 - Vc) * [10,000/((V0 * 10,000) - (V10k * 10,000))
So, endurance time at Warp 7.85 would be:
[(8.58 * 10,000) - (7.85 * 10,000)] * [10,000/((8.58 * 10,000) - (7.25 * 10,000))
(85,800 - 78,500) * [10,000/(85,800 - 72,500)]
7,300 * (10,000/13,300) simplify the fraction = 7,300 * (100/133)
7,300 * 0.75188 (5dp)
= 5488.7hrs
=228.7days
So with this we can work out that the Enterprise doing that 3wk speed run, must have been doing about 8.5 to get there in only 3 weeks.
EDIT - I just went back to re-read that chapter and Pike did it in only 2 weeks. to make that time, warp 8.5355 has an endurance of 334.6hrs (13.94 days), doing 1.7 light years a day.
Last edited:
Huh, I had been under the impression that sprint was a significantly longer time. Holy shit, sprint is basically always the worst choice then.
[X] Cruise Nacelles (Efficient Cruise: Warp 6.8 -> 7) (Mass: 220kt -> 260kt) [Cost: 67]
Updating vote
Yes. The fact that we literally just built with this gimmick makes me significantly less inclined to do it again so soon.
I want Orbs, but I don't want every ship to be an Orb. That kind of thing.
Last edited:
- Location
- west
[X] Quad Nacelles (Maximum Cruise: Warp 7 -> 7.4) (Mass: 220kt -> 300kt) [Cost: 79]
- Location
- USA
[X] Cruise Nacelles (Efficient Cruise: Warp 6.8 -> 7) (Mass: 220kt -> 260kt) [Cost: 67]
As I understand it, if this ship is sprinting, it will already be faster than most of our enemies with just Cruise Nacelles. Sprint speeds are (usually) only useful for getting into emergencies if the ship is already a few hours away. Otherwise, as we've learned, you're going at Max Cruise to get there. While the Max Sprint of 8 will remain good enough for declining being destroyed, most of the time.
So with why I didn't choose Sprint out of the way, moving on to why not Quad. First, I'm only considering cost, speed, and speed related factors.
So, ignoring cost for a moment, Efficient Cruise will be the highest speed used most of the time regardless of acting solo or as a group. Since I expect most groups involving a Federation will have at least one non-Federation in the group, traveling as a group at any speed higher than Warp 7 isn't happening (even with other Warp 8 vessels), so higher Max Cruise will be wasted. Likewise, most solo traveling will be at Efficient Cruise, so the closer Max Cruise is to Efficient Cruise, the better. This ship isn't meant for rapid response. The way it's built, even Cruise Nacelles will allow for rapid enough response for most problems that a warship can be expected to help with. Cost is just the final nail for Quad Nacelles.
As I understand it, if this ship is sprinting, it will already be faster than most of our enemies with just Cruise Nacelles. Sprint speeds are (usually) only useful for getting into emergencies if the ship is already a few hours away. Otherwise, as we've learned, you're going at Max Cruise to get there. While the Max Sprint of 8 will remain good enough for declining being destroyed, most of the time.
So with why I didn't choose Sprint out of the way, moving on to why not Quad. First, I'm only considering cost, speed, and speed related factors.
So, ignoring cost for a moment, Efficient Cruise will be the highest speed used most of the time regardless of acting solo or as a group. Since I expect most groups involving a Federation will have at least one non-Federation in the group, traveling as a group at any speed higher than Warp 7 isn't happening (even with other Warp 8 vessels), so higher Max Cruise will be wasted. Likewise, most solo traveling will be at Efficient Cruise, so the closer Max Cruise is to Efficient Cruise, the better. This ship isn't meant for rapid response. The way it's built, even Cruise Nacelles will allow for rapid enough response for most problems that a warship can be expected to help with. Cost is just the final nail for Quad Nacelles.
Sprint is very relevant in wartime, not for speed of response but for ability to force or decline battle.
Max Cruise is for coverage in emergencies and speed of response; Efficient Cruise is for coverage in standard duties and sheer range of operation.
They all matter, in different ways.
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
Check again, we launched that in 2175. Assuming it was the 70 year lifespan takes us to 2145. So it was decommissioned recently enough to still be on our minds.
Last edited:
KlavoHunter
THOU SHALT WORSHIP NO GODS ABOVE ENTERPRISE!
Sprint: Hahaha, Today is a good day for Klingons to die!
Max Cruise: Emergency Response
Efficient Cruise: Day-to-day duties
The Miranda is going to end up being a workhorse that Starfleet will want steady, consistent performance out of. She'll probably end up with +Cruise engine config.
The Federation-class, on the other hand, I envision as excelling at emergency-response of all types. Now while that certainly includes tactical response, let's make sure the classic scenarios for rescuing a colony from a plague/natural disaster/famine are all covered... And Max Cruise to get there seems ideal.
And the surviving Swords of Starfleet still exist to be menaces at Sprint Warp speeds.
Oh hey, since there's an Enterprise-A, but allegedly no further Excalibur production, I wonder what's up with that??? What ship got renamed, I wonder?
Sprint is extremely relevant in, and basically only in, determining if one starship can run away from another. If your sprint is higher you can disengage at will and your enemy can't as you can outrun them while they cannot out run you.
You survive fights you lose and the other side doesn't. That's huge in war.
This is part of what made the Excalibur so deadly, but it's really not needed for this specific ship.
Last edited:
??? What do you we mean 'we just built with this gimmick'? Sagamantha was 9 whole projects ago (both tech and ship designs). That project started in 2170 and now its 2249. Its been almost a century since we've last used a proper Quad Nacelle.
[X] Quad Nacelles (Maximum Cruise: Warp 7 -> 7.4) (Mass: 220kt -> 300kt) [Cost: 79]
- Location
- madison
[X] Cruise Nacelles (Efficient Cruise: Warp 6.8 -> 7) (Mass: 220kt -> 260kt) [Cost: 67]
I think faster base speed vs faster emergency response speed is a bit of a toss up, but one option is much cheaper so that's the one I'm going for.
I think faster base speed vs faster emergency response speed is a bit of a toss up, but one option is much cheaper so that's the one I'm going for.
- Location
- United States
[X] Cruise Nacelles (Efficient Cruise: Warp 6.8 -> 7) (Mass: 220kt -> 260kt) [Cost: 67]
I'm just not vibing with sprint and quad. But I like the idea of efficient and max cruise being one and the same.
I'm just not vibing with sprint and quad. But I like the idea of efficient and max cruise being one and the same.
Horologer
Incertae sedis
- Location
- a risen sea
[X] Cruise Nacelles (Efficient Cruise: Warp 6.8 -> 7) (Mass: 220kt -> 260kt) [Cost: 67]
I went back and forth a bit, but I've decided to go for cruise configuration. In a war, this ship's job is to anchor fleet elements. Those fleet elements, for the foreseeable future, are going to use our Warp 8 engine, and therefore will have their maximum cruising speed capped at Warp 7. So investing in a higher max cruise winds up being a little awkward: you want the ship to be traveling with the fleet, not faster than it. It's still useful, but I don't think it's worth the price.
I went back and forth a bit, but I've decided to go for cruise configuration. In a war, this ship's job is to anchor fleet elements. Those fleet elements, for the foreseeable future, are going to use our Warp 8 engine, and therefore will have their maximum cruising speed capped at Warp 7. So investing in a higher max cruise winds up being a little awkward: you want the ship to be traveling with the fleet, not faster than it. It's still useful, but I don't think it's worth the price.
Chargone
Invisable operator
- Location
- New Zealand
Pretty sure it was mentioned that the next nacelle that will remove the cap from new and refit ships will be our next project, or at least not far out, so while that's certainly true in the short term, I'm not sure that state of affairs will persist all that much longer.
- Location
- USA
Yeah the next project is a new nacelle that will almost certainly remove the 7 soft cap on cruise speed.