Starfleet Design Bureau

[Golgotha]

I disagree. I don't want all my ships to spend multiple modules worth of space on fuel automatically, especially if it's something for interior work.
And had a passionate person been arguing up science it's entirely possible that those very excellent sensors could have won - six months of fuel probably means five months on the border after all, assuming no time at maximum warp speed. Discussions about pairing it with a secondary computer for faster analysis, the benefits of pushing our knowledge safely while still benefiting the colonies. This all could have been done. Perhaps it could even prevent being eaten by a negative space widget!

The only reason I'm not is because I lost the vote for the repair shuttles, and we were told that the cargo bays were sufficient for a years worth of aid. That's just too efficient to pass up. Instead of being away from the borders 20% of the time, more whenever there is an emergency to respond to, it can be on the borders actively helping 90% of the time.

To reiterate, two votes less and I would have been passionately arguing against the tanks you are saying would be better added automatically.

 

[Archduke]

I still think tanks deserve a vote, but as something separate from the modules. It's a useful enough that I'd always like to be given a choice between standard or expanded.

 

[Onionjones]

I think that something that may work is to have range displayed with the warp core or nacelle votes so that way it's incorporated there and would affect the vote there instead of a module or something like that.

Not sure if that would work really though
Otherwise make it its own thing to vote on

 

[TehChron]

The Freddy acting as the keystone to us holding the Federations borders is a thing very much worth investing more antimatter storage into.

It helps to obsolete the need for something like the Pharos on the frontier, and gives us the wiggle room necessary to be a bit more ambitious with the next space station design.

If fuel is being consistently shipped out from the core worlds by the Freddy and the Archer successor, then that means that in turn those same supply routes can be put towards keeping a much more militarized hard point well stocked in turn. For now it keeps the borders of the Federation much more unattractive for would be pirates and raiders to mess with, and that gives us space to key up the economy further when the time comes for our next generation Explorer...

Which means we can go all in on them, and still expect a respectable run of the design - much like the Excaliburs themselves got.

 

[A Slipspace Tree]

In the interest of seeing how many times that this thread has chosen a additional antimatter option I have searched antimatter pod and antimatter storage into the search bar. Note this does exclude
the option in the pharos to have a antimatter reactor instead of a fusion reactor that the thread didn't take, and I didn't bother to make sure that the projects are in chronological order. Apologies for that.

UES Curiosity.

[ ] 1: Astrometrics (+2 Science)
[ ] 1: Antimatter Pods (1 -> 3 Year Range) [+2 Civilian Industry]

Click to shrink...

[X] 1: Astrometrics (+2 Science)

Click to shrink...

0/1, the thread went for the non antimatter choice.

The Sagarmatha

[ ] 2: Miscellaneous Storage
[ ] 2: Secondary Computer Core (+1 Science, Capability: Advanced Computers, +1 Cost)
[ ] 2: Extra Antimatter Pods (+250ly Range, +2 Cost)

Click to shrink...

[X] 2: Secondary Computer Core (+1 Science, Capability: Advanced Computers, +1 Cost)

Click to shrink...

0/2, The thread went for the secondary computer core.

Archer-class

[ ] 1: Antimatter Storage (+70ly Operating Range)

Click to shrink...

[X] 1: Antimatter Storage (+70y Operating Range)

Click to shrink...

1/3, The thread went for antimatter.

[X] Excalibur-class.

Pick Two
[ ] Antimatter Storage (Range: 120ly -> 357ly)
[ ] Fabrication Workshop (+2 Engineering, Fabrication)
[ ] Shuttle Cargo Bay (+3 Cargo, +1 Engineering)
[ ] Hydroponics (+2 Science, Hydroponics)

Click to shrink...

[X] Antimatter Storage (Range: 120ly -> 357ly)
[X] Fabrication Workshop (+2 Engineering, Fabrication)

Click to shrink...

2/4, the thread went for antimatter.

Pharos-type Starbase

Pick One: Module [Rank]
[ ] Antimatter Reserve Production System [Logistics I] (Antimatter +1)
[ ] Antimatter Refuel and Production System [Logistics II: Cost+] (Antimatter +2)
[ ] Antimatter Fleetwide Logistics Complex [Logistics III: Cost++] (Antimatter +4)
[ ] Cargo Bays [Civilian I]
[ ] Mercantile Facilities [Civilian II: Cost+]
[ ] Scanning and Targeting Anti-Reconnaissance System [Tactical I]

Click to shrink...

[X] Antimatter Fleetwide Logistics Complex [Logistics III] (Antimatter +4)

Click to shrink...

3/5, the thread went for antimatter.

Project Galileo/Kea

[ ] 0: Standard Antimatter Load (Range: 70ly)
[ ] 0: Extended Range (Range: 70ly -> 140ly)

Click to shrink...

[X] 0: Standard Antimatter Load (Range: 70ly)
[X] 1: Standard Shuttlebay (2 Shuttles)

Click to shrink...

3/6, the thread went for the standard option without any additional antimatter.

So as far as I can tell the thread has historically only gone for antimatter half of the time when it's available, and if you include the antimatter reactor option (which I personally don't) it's picked less then half the time.

Edit: If the Federation does go for the antimatter pods this shifts to four out of seven times choosing antimatter, or four out of eight of the pharos reactor vote is included. A final note is that of the times that antimatter didn't win (again not counting the reactor), twice it was for a science related option. The only other time was with the Kea which was to preserve module space that the antimatter option would have cut into.

 

[AntiSanity]

[X] Spectral Analysis (+2 Science)

 

[Fouredged Sword]

If Sayle wanted to really put the thread into a debate then every single module slot should have the option to turn it into a cargo storage area.

Just add a reminder every vote option that Starfleet ALWAYS wants cargo capacity during the story post each vote. Cargo synergizes with cargo. There is a world where the ideal ship is an empty saucer shaped cargo hold wrapped around a warp core. Everywhere stuff can be put stuff is shoved in.

Picking AM fuel, a medium cargo bay, or deflector enhancement sounds like a vote AM fuel could lose maybe.

But the thread would have to self justify the capability of every module vs simply carrying more cargo on their cargo ship.

 

[Onionjones]

You're probably being sarcastic here but, that really is a terrible idea - modules besides cargo don't need to be justified against cargo - some ships don't need it as an option, and it doesn't make sense in all locations

Always offering cargo makes cargo less interesting when it is offered I bet it'd be chosen less

Not really sure if you're serious here but based on your arguments for cargo on the federation I'm not sure

 

[darkstarling]

Yes, I've watched Voyager, also wasn't the intrepid class optimized for range or something like that

Click to shrink...

The variable geometry nacelles let it switch between what I THINK is (in this thread's terms) Efficient Cruise vs Sprint optimization. So basically it's a super-expensive and/or experimental option but they get to pick two optimums instead of one.

That's a terrible idea - modules besides cargo don't need to be justified against cargo - some ships don't need it as an option, and it doesn't make sense in all locations

Always offering cargo makes cargo less interesting when it is offered I bet it'd be chosen less

Not really sure if you're serious here - I'm not really a good judge of that

Click to shrink...

They're being sarcastic

 

[Onionjones]

The variable geometry nacelles let it switch between what I THINK is (in this thread's terms) Efficient Cruise vs Sprint optimization. So basically it's a super-expensive and/or experimental option but they get to pick two optimums instead of one.


They're being sarcastic

Click to shrink...

I figured but they have been trying to make the federation pure cargo

Also i thought the voyager's nacelles were about that one episode in tng where they had to limit warp or something

Also, I'm pretty jet lagged at the moment so the answers aren't really the best

 

[darkstarling]

In the interest of seeing how many times that this thread has chosen a additional antimatter option I have searched antimatter pod and antimatter storage into the search bar. Note this does exclude
the option in the pharos to have a antimatter reactor instead of a fusion reactor that the thread didn't take, and I didn't bother to make sure that the projects are in chronological order. Apologies for that.

UES Curiosity.


0/1, the thread went for the non antimatter choice.

The Sagarmatha


0/2, The thread went for the secondary computer core.

Archer-class


1/3, The thread went for antimatter.

[X] Excalibur-class.


2/4, the thread went for antimatter.

Pharos-type Starbase


3/5, the thread went for antimatter.

Project Galileo/Kea


3/6, the thread went for the standard option without any additional antimatter.

So as far as I can tell the thread has historically only gone for antimatter half of the time when it's available, and if you include the antimatter reactor option (which I personally don't) it's picked less then half the time.

Edit: If the Federation does go for the antimatter pods this shifts to four out of seven times choosing antimatter, or four out of eight of the pharos reactor vote is included. A final note is that of the times that antimatter didn't win (again not counting the reactor), twice it was for a science related option. The only other time was with the Kea which was to preserve module space that the antimatter option would have cut into.

Click to shrink...

Thank you for providing hard data to counter the whinging.

I figured but they have been trying to make the federation pure cargo

Also i thought the voyager's nacelles were about that one episode in tng where they had to limit warp or something

Click to shrink...

The nacelles do that too, so I'm extrapolating a bit. But yeah, they revealed a real problem parallel to global warming... and then because unlike us the Federation is good at this sort of thing they approached it as a technical problem and solved it.

But since in this thread where the nacelles are is an indicator of what it's good at, and if they're going to solve the technical problem of subspace damage from intense warp fields it's probably easiest to do at efficient cruise...

 

[Onionjones]

So here the voyager would be spec'ed for both cruise (which probably improves range) and speed - essentially we were both right I think

Is there actually and in universe reason the voyager style nacelles weren't used on other classes because I don't really remember any other ones that do

 

[KnightDisciple]

Voyager's Variable Geometry was basically an early iteration of "don't damage subspace at higher war"; the technobabble publications are pretty consistent on that. By the time of the Sovereign-class, it was built into the nacelles well enough they didn't need to physically move.

 

[Horologer]

[X] Antimatter Storage (Range: 314ly -> 628ly)

IMO, antimatter storage should only be a situational pick, so I don't love that it keeps winning. But this is one of those situations where it's genuinely a good option. This ship has very good cruise, so we should leverage that as much as we can.

 

[darkstarling]

Voyager's Variable Geometry was basically an early iteration of "don't damage subspace at higher war"; the technobabble publications are pretty consistent on that. By the time of the Sovereign-class, it was built into the nacelles well enough they didn't need to physically move.

Click to shrink...

I suppose so but I like the idea it gives them mode-switching at tactical speed. So we'd pick what it's worst at, not what it's best at. Big innovation. And physically moving them might be difficult at this early stage of the technology so it wasn't worth it later. Especially for bigger ships with much larger technical challenges. But I especially like it because...

So here the voyager would be spec'ed for both cruise (which probably improves range) and speed - essentially we were both right I think

Is there actually and in universe reason the voyager style nacelles weren't used on other classes because I don't really remember any other ones that do

Click to shrink...

It gives an actual REASON for the detached nacelles in the 32nd century. They still need to physically move the nacelles... and now, with sufficiently advanced technology, they can with ease and perfect fluidity.

Mind you they still should have done it with smart-matter and not force fields, but then again between structural integrity and interial dampers starships are mostly forcefield by volume anyway. And that means our 32nd century counterparts still have a tech tree choice to make, smart matter or force fields...

 

[Cold Dust]

The variable geometry nacelles let it switch between what I THINK is (in this thread's terms) Efficient Cruise vs Sprint optimization. So basically it's a super-expensive and/or experimental option but they get to pick two optimums instead of one.

Click to shrink...

That was my take too. It's kinda awkward and expensive, but the Intrepid-class was a very expensive, high-performance vehicle, you pay for what you get. We saw how amazingly capable Voyager was. Super-high output warp core leading to breakneck speeds, strong shields, downright scary firepower given the size and role of the ship, variable geometry nacelles leading to super-high cruise and sprint speed, bio-neural computer augmentations making all its systems so much more responsive and efficient etc.

My head-canon is that the variable geometry warp nacelles were quickly superceded by the ability to articulate warp coils inside the nacelles themselves, or maybe manipulate the warp plasma in a new and better way to get the same effect. Basically post-Intrepid designs stopped using articulated nacelles because they found new ways around the problem, but the Intrepid-class itself represented a generational leap in warp engine design.

Thank you for providing hard data to counter the whinging.

Click to shrink...

Amen. All of us have been frustrated when things don't go our way, but ultimately a large bloc of this thread are trying to make optimal decisions. We may not agree, we may think we're each making mistakes, but there's no need to be disparaging, especially in the absence of a proper analysis.

 

[Bedpotato]

It gives an actual REASON for the detached nacelles in the 32nd century. They still need to physically move the nacelles... and now, with sufficiently advanced technology, they can with ease and perfect fluidity.

Mind you they still should have done it with smart-matter and not force fields, but then again between structural integrity and interial dampers starships are mostly forcefield by volume anyway. And that means our 32nd century counterparts still have a tech tree choice to make, smart matter or force fields...

Click to shrink...

What are you talking about? There is no Star Trek depicting anything after DS9. How exactly would detached nacelles be a good idea? Thats just a little power fluctation away from your ship having no nacelles, probably the same stupid "geniuses" That designed the multi vector aussault mode or whatever it was called.

 

[darkstarling]

What are you talking about? There is no Star Trek depicting anything after DS9. How exactly would detached nacelles be a good idea? Thats just a little power fluctation away from your ship having no nacelles, probably the same stupid "geniuses" That designed the multi vector aussault mode or whatever it was called.

Click to shrink...

Dunno man, they sound like people who approach their favorite franchise with the intention of enjoying it and making features out of bugs.

And clearly you would have voted against researching the inertially coupled nacelle technology. Which is fine, that's why we vote. But keep in mind that Inertial Compensators NEVER fail. You can tell because the crew of the starships don't turn into gravy from activating the thrusters. This is a well understood technology even by Kirk's day. So it's at least not implausible.

Also want to point out. If you're throwing out Voyager, Enterprise, Discovery, Strange New Worlds, and Lower Decks that's more than half the show and every movie after First Contact. So, you know, a solid majority of the series.

 

[Tank man]

The variable geometry nacelles are to minimise damage to subspace whilst at high warp speeds.

 

[KlavoHunter]

But keep in mind that Inertial Compensators NEVER fail.

Click to shrink...

Except for The Ship (DS9) where that totally did happen to a shipful of Jem'hadar.

 

[darkstarling]

The variable geometry nacelles are to minimise damage to subspace whilst at high warp speeds.

Click to shrink...

So it's exactly like the Intrepid except it needs more extreme measures because they're going at such ludicrous speeds?

I mean it's consistent. But I still like my version better.

Except for The Ship (DS9) where that totally did happen to a shipful of Jem'hadar.

Click to shrink...

Fair point. But it's a much less common fail state that the ships actually blowing up.

 

[Cold Dust]

The variable geometry nacelles are to minimise damage to subspace whilst at high warp speeds.

Click to shrink...

That's a common theory, yes, my head-canon also states they used the lady's theories, the one who figured out subspace was being damaged by conventional warp drive, to rejig the warp field, and could leverage that by having articulating nacelles.

Again, head-canon. But basically the Intrepid-class was midway through construction of the prototype hull when these theories came to light and proven to be at the very least substantially true. Construction was amended and possibly delayed to include articulated nacelles to avoid the problem. Along the way Federation engineers started milking the lady's theories, realizing her superior and groundbreaking understanding of warp and subspace physics enabled not only cleaner warp fields, but also better engines.

The Intrepid-class wasn't designed from the ground up for that system, hence the articulated nacelles that look a wee bit awkward because the ship was originally intended to have fixed nacelles. Some beta canon I read states the nacelles don't just shift from impulse to warp, they shift constantly by very small amounts based on local conditions, keeping the warp field crazy efficient and the ship blazing fast. Voyager's computers and sensors were part of this; the extra speed either enabled or further buffed that adjustment system.

Later on, that technique is refined so that later ships simply move their coils within their nacelles or manipulate the warp plasma more finely, and such nacelles don't look particularly different from "traditional" ones. Later on, when warp drives were further optimized, the nacelles were able to be moved around freely in any axis at warp, and I imagine the individual coils inside can be articulated in any dimension and the warp plasma manipulated in nigh-arbitrary ways to get even better performance.

 

[darkstarling]

*snip*

The Intrepid-class wasn't designed from the ground up for that system, hence the articulated nacelles that look a wee bit awkward because the ship was originally intended to have fixed nacelles. Some beta canon I read states the nacelles don't just shift from impulse to warp, they shift constantly by very small amounts based on local conditions, keeping the warp field crazy efficient and the ship blazing fast. Voyager's computers and sensors were part of this; the extra speed either enabled or further buffed that adjustment system.

*snip*

Click to shrink...

That's also a way to tie in the Bioneural Gel - they need lifelike intelligent 'reflexes' to make those nacelles into wings and let the Intrepid fly.

So yeah. This here is real solid headcanon.

 

[stakenbake]

I like both, but spectral analysis detects ghosts, and it's always good to keep track of warp ghosts when going FTL. It's the spoopy sensor. I won't say no to the spoopy sensor. It's a plothook generator. Always vote yes on options that let crews make more RNG rolls (imaginary though they may be), have we even had Khan yet? Did Khan get butterflied and I missed it?

On the more serious level, my meager understanding leads me to believe that in Trekverse, anomalies and shenanigans can lead to colony and civilian ship rescue and possible interceptions of pirates. Or finding literal ghosts. Y'all are

Yes, there are benefits and synergies that boring bigger gas tanks give us, I'm not gonna complain about it.

I'm just saying, the Federation Class fits well enough in the timestream that it could be the first captain's posting of one James T. Kirk. Y'all are slipping if you think I won't vote for Spock to deflect gravity beams and shiet.

 

[Bedpotato]

Also want to point out. If you're throwing out Voyager, Enterprise, Discovery, Strange New Worlds, and Lower Decks that's more than half the show and every movie after First Contact. So, you know, a solid majority of the series.

Click to shrink...

Let me amend my statement: Voyager reads like a drug fantasy retelling of actual event that happened to the ship(Or a psychotic dream) and Enterprise was Okay but discovery, picard and the other stuff you listed isn't star trek in the same vein that disney wars triology isn't Star wars.