Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Pharmacology includes Advanced Medical.
Workshops were deprecated because of the Excalibur, because people wouldn't stop banging on (incorrectly) about self-repair.
Linked contents
LuxemburgLover69
There are more things between Heaven and Earth...
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] 10 Phaser Banks (Type V) [Damage 32] [100% Coverage] [Cost: 149]
My thinking exactly. A pharmacology lab would be great. We've discussed large mobile hospital facilities before, but honestly they just don't get that much use. Much better to come up with a cure or vaccine and distribute rather than try to manage casualties on a ship that can't compete with a regular hospital and probably won't be where you want it.Seems to me like we should have enough space to balance all of the above; I'm angling for research labs for medicine and science each, astrometrics for range, loading bay for engineering and cargo, parlor for diplomacy and scoops, and then I'll go with the crowd on any additional slots
What are people's thoughts about general science labs? Have they ever been useful?
Astrometrics would be excellent if this thing does any exploring.
A nice big cargo bay would be excellent, as it lets us take care of little odd utility jobs rather than dragging in another starship.
Diplomatic suite? If that's the case we're definitely looking towards exploration, which implies a heavier science loadout and maybe less utility functions. We could go for a Dilithium prospecting suite, or something that searched for strategic resources if this thing's pushing outwards.
If starfleet can't setup computers or have helmsmen trained in formation flying then they're staggeringly incompetent. We've had dudes doing it here with biplanes forever. Setting up paths and programs where different ships weave and adjust speed in their own designated lanes semi-randomly should be trivial for them.
- Location
- Australia
I admit the picture panicked me for a second, but then i realised it was because of the scale.In 1v1 we can maneuver like a midweight cruiser. In a formation, the blindspots look like this:
Which are IMO probably too large given their location at the front of the flanks. The fields of fire don't overlap very well until our enemies are behind the main line of battle, which is probably not ideal.
If you draw that exact same picture but zoom out further it also shows they have to fly through fire zones to get to the part not covered.
Getting to the blue triangle means you are already hit, or moving so fast that you can't stay in it, because the Federation ships are actively flying forwards.
and you know, the formations aren't like set in epoxy
you're gonna adjust to defend yourself, the kea took torpedo shots that presented themselves, you coordinate with the mobile elements for target priority
you're gonna adjust to defend yourself, the kea took torpedo shots that presented themselves, you coordinate with the mobile elements for target priority
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
We have the option to cut science in favor of other capabilities. That doesn't mean we have to, it just means we have the choice to do so if we want to. Some people want science capabilities and that's just as valid a choice as any other.Oh my fucking god I cannot believe people are still arguing over whether Starfleet giving us permission to deemphasize science secretly means Starfleet really wants us to prioritize science.
- Location
- UK
- Pronouns
- He/Him
When does this ever happen? They uncloak once at the start of the fight and then they're committed, ships aren't blipping in and out of reality like ninjas, the cloak is only good for achieving strategic surprise it's a non-factor during battle.
The enemy has to be pointed at the Federation to fire its torpedoes - no one has broadside torpedoes. So they can't just strafe around to stay in the blindspot, they have to fly directly at the target at which point yes it is very easy to simply turn slightly and zone them back into the field of fire. They'd only be able to take advantage of the blindspots consistently if they're flying on a fully evasive pattern, which means they're not actually fighting back.
While I wanted like 20ktons more on this ship?
Heavy shields is like a defining requirement for the role Starfleet wants it for
The Excalibur has heavy shields
Note that the K'tinga, at 50 shields, is like two thirds of this ship's shields while only 60% of its mass
Both the Excalibur and a Bird of Prey were fast enough to dodge enemy energy beams at Andoria, and that was without blindspots to leverage
I really think you are underestimating the threat in play
I do agree that Heavy Shields are mandatory on this
You dont get asked for a tactical cruiser and skimp on defense
And if thats how it works, you might be able to convince people to vote for it
I would probably strongly consider voting for it
The point is that they're durable points of fire that other units maneuver around. It's not that they're physically incapable of maneuver, it's that they're not supposed to:
60% coverage isn't the end of the world and will still more or less work for this, it's just worse at it. Our smaller ships will have to do a lot more maneuvering to force the enemy into the fields of fire rather than just existing near our heavies.
Sure, any enemy will be within multiple fields of fire if they're far enough away or our ships are close enough together. That doesn't change that we have giant blindspots in front of the formation that can be exploited.
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
How about this - instead of working out an economy based on the GDP. Have a "target budget" which is what it would cost if you took the middle cost option every time. (When there's only 2 options use the mid-point. When there's a 4th option use the highest as an extra "very expensive" choice).
Here's the data for the Darwin:
| Darwin | ||||
| Low | Middle | High | Very High | |
| shields | 7.9 | 9.9 | 12.0 | |
| Primary Hull | 32 | 36 | 54 | |
| Deflector | 0 | 1 | 2 | |
| Warp Core | 0 | 2 | 4 | |
| Theoretical cost | 27.9 | 36.9 | 60 | |
| Actual Cost so far | 40 | |||
| Engines | 5 | 7.5 | 10 | |
| Phasers | 8 | 10 | 12 | |
| Theoretical cost | 40.9 | 54.4 | 82 | |
| Actual Cost so far | 53 | |||
| Torpedoes | 4.5 | 9 | 12 | 16.5 |
| Theoretical final cost | 45.4 | 63.4 | 94 | 98.5 |
| Actual Final cost | 69.5 | |||
| Target Budget: | 109.6% |
As you can see, The actual cost of 69.5 is only 9.6% over budget of the theoretical 63.4.
Here's the data for the Federation so far:
| Federation | |||
| Low | Middle | High | |
| Shields | 11.4 | 14.05 | 16.7 |
| Primary Hull | 9 | 15 | 22.5 |
| Hull Slope | 5 | 11 | 15 |
| Warp Core | 4 | 8 | 17 |
| Engineering Hull | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Nacelles | 11.5 | 17.5 | 23.5 |
| Engines | 8 | 12 | 16 |
| Theoretical cost | 64.9 | 93.55 | 126.7 |
| Actual Cost so far | 99 | ||
| Target Budget so far: | 105.8% | ||
| Phasers | 18 | 30 | 50 |
| Theoretical cost | 82.9 | 123.6 | 176.7 |
| Theoretical Actual Costs | 117 | 129 | 149 |
| Theoretical Target Budget: | 104.4% |
So far, we are at 99/93.6 = 5.8% over budget. If we went for the 30 cost phasers it would be 129.6/123.6 = 4.8% over and the 50 cost phasers would be 149/129 = 15.5% over.
The cost rating could then be based on what the ship cost/"target cost" is:
S: 80% - 90%
A: 90% - 100%
B: 100% - 110%
C: 110% - 120%
D: 120% - 130%
So the 30 cost would make it B class, while the 50 cost would make it C class. And there are still the torpedoes to be fitted.
Our other units are more maneuverable and can still be flying around while these are the less maneuverable anchors that are still moving. They're not going to park in space they'll be flying in long arcs that'll shift relative to each other as a normal part of a battle.
If the enemy has to go through fields of fire to get to the "blind spots" then it's a lot harder to exploit. Plus once again, is it 2 ships vs many or is it many ships vs many (which would make exploiting the "blindspot" even more difficult).
Point of order:
I cant swear to it, but I think plasma torpedoes have off-axis aiming ability, unlike photon torpedoes. Not broadside, but they dont have to point their ship directly at you. Which is presumably one of the reasons that certain factions prefer to carry a single plasma torpedo launcher while Starfleet is massing multiple photon tubes in its forward arc
@Sayle can confirm or deny when they are around
KlavoHunter
THOU SHALT WORSHIP NO GODS ABOVE ENTERPRISE!
The Kea required 100% phaser coverage because it had Low Maneuverability. (Also it was dead easy to slap on 6 wide-gimbal Type-II phasers and call it a day back then.)
The Federation can wiggle 22 degrees to bring a phaser into arc and service any target.
In a single-ship fight (versus multiple opponents, let us assume), that's not a horrible problem, and anyone getting cheeky and clinging to the Federation's tail will get serviced with movie-type photorps, ceasing to exist in an audience-pleasing antimatter detonation.
The imperfect coverage seems like more of a problem in another big brawl, that the historical retrospective suggests wouldn't be happening. So I'm uncertain if it's best to please Starfleet by giving them the capability they ask for (but won't strictly speaking need), or to cut costs by going with 6 phasers, to make this beastie more affordable. I can definitely see a 6-phaser Federation competently laying a beating on future ships that outmass her!
I'm really torn and can't decide. I have the slightest personal lean towards taking 6 phasers, but Starfleet Command's opinion is what really matters... Can't let those SanFran bastards win!!!
The Federation can wiggle 22 degrees to bring a phaser into arc and service any target.
In a single-ship fight (versus multiple opponents, let us assume), that's not a horrible problem, and anyone getting cheeky and clinging to the Federation's tail will get serviced with movie-type photorps, ceasing to exist in an audience-pleasing antimatter detonation.
The imperfect coverage seems like more of a problem in another big brawl, that the historical retrospective suggests wouldn't be happening. So I'm uncertain if it's best to please Starfleet by giving them the capability they ask for (but won't strictly speaking need), or to cut costs by going with 6 phasers, to make this beastie more affordable. I can definitely see a 6-phaser Federation competently laying a beating on future ships that outmass her!
I'm really torn and can't decide. I have the slightest personal lean towards taking 6 phasers, but Starfleet Command's opinion is what really matters... Can't let those SanFran bastards win!!!
If there we could go back and redo a decision knowing the full vote options I would really like to have gone back and selected the flight deck secondary hull knowing that the roll bar would allow us to get back the photon torpedo tube slots without actually costing anything.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Well, it still would have resulted in an opportunity cost re: warp speed and internal volume, so not 'nothing.' But on the whole I do agree with you that it would have been nice to know that the rollbar pod would have been an option. There was a primary hull option that got voted against because of a lack of torpedo capability.
The blindspots will exist regardless of how many ships we have, because they exist in between each pair of ships. It's not the end of the world, it's just an awkward place to have such a large blindspot.
And if our anchors keep shifting their fields of fire, it becomes much harder for our lighter ships to actually know what to do at any given moment.
If there's more than a pair of ships, then other ships can also help to sweep potential blind spots. But an enemy ship needs to go through places that initial pair can hit them, then try to hang out in a spot that is moving backwards relative to them (not counting any wiggling or weaving our Federations are doing). The only spot this wouldn't affect would be where we have torpedoes to light them up.
3D fleet movement is what a fleet engagement is about. The federation and their computers should have practice and different formations which help the lighter ships know roughly where they should be. Constant movement, shifting coverage arcs, and different ships getting good shots at enemies from different directions all are kind of the goal. Fighting our fleet should be like trying to fight a hydra instead of a single head it's easy to focus down. If the enemy isn't sure if they'll be getting RFLs from their left, Type V phasers from the front, or Type 4 photons from the right they won't be able to prioritize their responses. Since all of our platforms are packing serious heat it's hard to imagine any enemy that could hang out in a blindspot during a fleet vs fleet battle.
That's not how our doctrine works, nor as far as we know is Starfleet planning on adopting a more fluid doctrine in the future. Our goal is this:
However, since the Newton was a light cruiser, they took horrendous casualties in this role. We're hoping to address that issue by making this ship ginormous, but it also needs to have good fields of fire so that it can properly support the ships fighting around it. 60% is not the end of the world, but if it has to keep shifting around it's going to make life difficult for our lighter vessels.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/They
Yeah, but there's quite a difference between "Starfleet gave us permission to deemphasize science, but we don't have to deemphasize science if we think we know better" and "When Starfleet gave us permission to deemphasize science they actually meant the exact opposite and they secretly want us to emphasize science".
I'm a longtime defender [1|2|3] of the Design Bureau's ancient and inalienable right to twist, fold, spindle, mutilate, or occasionally even outright ignore the design brief should we think it misguided. I am not, however, a fan of the desperate, deceitful, and/or delusional claiming loudly and at length that the design brief means the opposite of what it says. It's pathetic, disgusting, and/or irritating behavior, depending on what motivation it's attributed to, and it's significantly impacting my enjoyment of the quest in general.
We've never been given a proper field of fire that I can recall. Close enough to dead ahead / dead aft as makes no functional difference, as far as I can tell. Like, obviously it's literally not 0-1°, but for maneuver purposes the difference between "getting the nose absolutely dead on centered for the dozen milliseconds it takes for a fixed spinal phaser to fire" and "keeping the nose close enough to centered on the target for the second or two it takes to lock on, charge, and fire a torpedo" is basically interchangeable, so it might as well be a fixed phaser mount for comparison purposes.
It more literal terms I suspect it's somewhere in the vicinity of 6-8% coverage, since it's a substantially narrower field of fire than even canon Connie's phaser traverse, and that was 18%. So whatever that works out to in degrees, I'm too tired for math right now.
It's at least possible that the significantly larger Type 4 torpedoes will have better tracking and thus allow for further-off-bore torpedo shots, but I wouldn't bet money on it.
Last edited:
KlavoHunter
THOU SHALT WORSHIP NO GODS ABOVE ENTERPRISE!
"a depth of capability in vital areas of interest" could be interpreted as Team Big Pharma making a ship that absolutely crushes the concept of frontier diseases so badly, that we end up with anti-vaxxers in 80 years denying that it was even a thing that happened...
- Location
- Massachusetts
First Time posting on this thread.
All of cool designs got me thinking about making one of my own version of a Warp 8 Drive Archer-Class.
I came up with this.
The Cyan Sphere is the Engineering Hull.
With the White Cylinders behind it serving as either Cargo Pods and/or Crew Quarters.
And the Lime/Yellow Cylinders are the Warp Nacelles.
The Lime Area covers all the components that require a direct line of sight.
With the Yellow Section functioning as a combination Strut/Bussard Collector Storage Area.
It would likely also have an inline Deflector but I don't currently have a model for one.
Mass: Unknown
Height/Beam: 120 Meters
Length: <340 Meters? -Edit- I basically see it being the diameter of the Sphere + however long the Nacelle ends up being.
That's actually really cool, cheers!
I've got some ideas and feedback here, sorry guys but I'm back with another wall of text.
Starfleet usually put the nacelles away from the habitable areas because they emit dangerous radiation. Still, something similar to your proposal is possible... If the nacelles were put back and to the side a wee bit more so the saucer, erm... Orb volume wasn't suffering so much from radiation.
Edit: Added sub-headings to organize ideas
Archer v2:
So I'm rereading the Archer-class threadmarks. Looks like we got a choice for a secondary hull deflector that would've also meant increasing the ship's mass and thus cost. There are ways to mitigate the cost, like light shielding, but I digress... We could make that work and increase internal volume even higher by using 1 of those white cylinders as an engineering area, raising or lowering it a bit so the deflector can peek out, widening it. It could easily contain a large amount of shuttlecraft and workbees, and tons of machine/repair shops, could be a +8 - +12 engineering module right there before we even get to the orb. Then the other white cylinder could be a detachable cargo pod.
Of course both cones could be used for detachable cargo pods with an inline deflector and the warp core entirely within the sphere, so long as there's a reasonably wide space between the cargo pods for the nacelles to see each other. That'd double the carrying capacity of the Archer v1, extremely valuable if we consider this hypothetical Archer v2 would have a warp 8 drive and possible be late enough to have v4 nacelles with higher cruise speeds.
Archer large cargo:
Another alternative branching off from that idea, is to have 1 white cylinder being an engineering hull as before, the other being a large cargo pod, which my math shows as ~120 kilotons of cargo as opposed to 30 kilotons. That'd drop its speeds by a whole warp factor, but that's large enough that Starfleet could use such a ship in its core and middle territories to transport virtually all the required materials to build an entire starship, outpost etc with a single transport. Assuming it's only transporting stuff like phaser emitters, warp coils or other highly technical, critical supplies that benefit could be staggering. With its speeds still being substantially better than civilian transports and a smidge higher than the Archer v1, the benefit of that speed and capacity is amplified further, since that's potentially doing something like transporting the warp coils for 2 entire sets of nacelles (not counting any interior cargo spaces, could easily be a half-dozen phaser emitters and a couple torpedo launchers etc stored internally) and them arriving in 2 months instead of 6, drastically increasing our military industrial efficiency.
Edit 2: (The Archer-class has an efficient cruise of warp 5.2 and maximum cruise of warp 6.2. If we take the canon Constitution-class as a conservative estimate of a warp 8 drive as opposed to ours, that yields efficient/max cruiser/sprint of warp 6.6/7/7.8. If we assume we take a -1 to all warp factors due to the large container, then we're looking at warp 5.6/6/6.8. Too slow to be tactically useful for retreat/evasion, but still faster than the original Archer-class in efficient cruise and slightly slower at max cruise.
I believe our warp drive/nacelles are optimized for higher speed for greater cost, so our hypothetical "Archer large cargo" probably is +0.2 warp factors higher overall, making it just as fast when time is critical on deliveries, and +0.6 factors faster when it's cruising in economy mode, meaning further advantages in operational range and day-to-day efficiency. Corrections from others gratefully appreciated, I don't have time to deep dive any more into this Quest's mechanics right now.
Remember it's transporting more than 3x the cargo, and would benefit from enhanced tactical systems (covariant or type 2 shields, possibly v4 thrusters and possible improvements in near-future armaments) making it less helpless, and a greater willingness for Starfleet to actually deploy them, and if it's that useful can be retrofitted with the warp 9 drive and v4 nacelles, vastly increasing its lifespan and utility and saving us critical $$$ and time.)
Archer Q-ship:
If we go with a couple fore and aft photorps, light covariant shields (remember the amount of shielding scales with size, if it's a chunky ship that's actually quite a lot of shielding) and maybe give it a couple thrusters (or v4 thrusters, we actually debuted the experimental v3 thrusters on the Archer and they paid off and then some) and some better phaser spreads, that means it'd be non-trivial for an enemy to disrupt our supply lines. It starts getting to the point that a few Archer v2s traveling in convoy could take on cruisers without any escorts, and such a ship sitting over one of our colonies etc could actually be a deterrent against light threats like raiders or at least single current-gen BoPs, without requiring dedicated and extremely expensive escort ships.
Edit 3: Of course, we could accept that even an orb-ship must be able to fight and give it fore and aft RFLs. Combined with the latest shielding and other battle technologies, it might be enough to keep casual raiders and pirates away from core facilities where these will be deployed in larger numbers, thus decreasing the number of ships needed to provide internal patrols, and perhaps also providing a final reserve of martial strength in dire situations.
Science Orb:
Either way we'd still have the space inside the orb for a huge cargo area and/or massive machine shops, enlarged crew quarters. Other possibilities were brought up when we were designing the Archer, including geology and geophysics labs, general science labs, a triage deck etc. I'm opposed to those options, but they're there, and I could easily be wrong about their utility and they could be a great boon.
Another alternative occurs; instead of a transport ship, a mass-science ship. We could find out whether or not it's possible for Commotion$ocks' idea for habitation areas to actually happen (radiation concerns may be moot by distance from nacelles) and thus vastly increase the module space within the orb. Or, if not possible, use those spaces for engineering hull and extra utility/science modules. Then we could have a general science ship with a vast number of labs to service our colonies, including geophysics, pharmacology, general science and
Colonial Support Orb:
possibly the long-desired triage deck, and still have enough space for a large extra module, like huge cargo bays or machine shops to provide supplemental colony or emergency ship assistance. It could service all of our mid and outer-rim colony's scientific needs, providing plague relief, keeping our vaccinations up-to-date against any emerging bio-threats and emergency support while also providing a helping hand upgrading or setting up facilities on fledgling colonies.
Could also use a module to add extra range so it can putter around our colonies for months or years between refueling cycles.
Sorry for wall of text, hope some smarter and wiser brains get some inspiration, or at the very least someone gets some enjoyment.
Thanks again for the time you spent on those images, really got my brain spinning and spitting out ideas!
Apologies for the long time between replies. I have had quite a lot of of computer problems and I needed to rebuild the model again.
Here are some updated renders based on some new measurements I took from the Project: Federation MSD's.
TOS/TMP Era Linear Nacelle Sphere Ship v2
Length: >= 250.4 Meters
Beam: 120 Meters
Height: 120 Meters
Mass: ???
Decks: Between 30 and 34. -> Note: I do not know if the standard Deck Height is 4 Meters or 3.5 Meters.
Renders
Hot Pink: Shuttlebay
Light Gray: Archer-Class Cargo Pod
Deep Blue: Warp Nacelles
Light Tan: Bussard Collectors/Hydrogen Tanks/Nacelle Struts
Cyan and Yellow Cylinders: Shuttlebay and Cargo Pod Connectors
Ugh, It's been 68 Pages since the first post.
Strunkriidiisk
THE LEGEND
- Location
- Canada
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[Thousand yard stare from too much time at single-pixel scale] It's 3.5 metres. Three metres floor to ceiling, and half a metre for the deck plating.
Also, while it is still cool, I would suggest pushing the nacelles back (and probably out, unless you want to shave down the sides of the hull so as to not block the ramscoops) so they can get that 50 percent eyeline - it's not strictly necessary, but having the cargo pod would still likely slow the ship in warp, and I don't think Starfleet would want the further slowing from interference in the nacelles.
Last edited: