Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Well, experimental is Right Out given the risks and plan to prototype lots of things at once (along with cruise speed over and above the new, higher warp, engines not being of any great advantage to this ship's role), but the prototype's advantages make it seem like something that would be good precisely because it's a prototype: it's of some benefit to this ship And whatever ship we build next. It boosts sprint and cruise both, if not by as much as the more specialized alternatives.
 
Last edited:
Conversely remember that the NX-class failed to breach the Warp 5 barrier because the bonus to Max Speed wasn't taken. We may want to go with the Sprint configuration to insure it can actually hit Warp 7 for sure this time, and with no risk of a bad roll doing so.
 
Cavalier said:
Conversely remember that the NX-class failed to breach the Warp 5 barrier because the bonus to Max Speed wasn't taken. We may want to go with the Sprint configuration to insure it can actually hit Warp 7 for sure this time, and with no risk of a bad roll doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Are we actually super concerned about that on this ship, though? Fair enough if we are, mind you.
 
Sayle said:
Option one is to use the same style as the Thunderchild-class, drawing out a short secondary hull to act as a nacelle strut and integrated shuttlebay.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A shuttlebay is very much in keeping with this ship's mission of surveying. Not to mention this adds the same amount of mass the Parallel option does, and faster sprint speed is good for escaping dangerous situation.

Given we're going to be putting a bunch of important prototypes on this ship, I think I'd like to skip prototyping here and go with the option that gets us a bonus shuttlebay.
 
Derpmind said:
A shuttlebay is very much in keeping with this ship's mission of surveying. Not to mention this adds the same amount of mass the Parallel option does, and faster sprint speed is good for escaping dangerous situation.

Given we're going to be putting a bunch of important prototypes on this ship, I think I'd like to skip prototyping here and go with the option that gets us a bonus shuttlebay.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If I understand correctly, Parallel also comes with a shuttle bay, so that's not strictly an either/or choice. It is possible that I do not, of course.
 
Last edited:
Derpmind said:
A shuttlebay is very much in keeping with this ship's mission of surveying. Not to mention this adds the same amount of mass the Parallel option does, and faster sprint speed is good for escaping dangerous situation.

Given we're going to be putting a bunch of important prototypes on this ship, I think I'd like to skip prototyping here and go with the option that gets us a bonus shuttlebay.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The key element, though, is that the parallel nacelles also have a secondary engineering section between them, which can also house a shuttle bay.
 
We fucked up our warp 5 release and for morale reasons I think we really want a peacetime win so I'm disinclined to pick an option without a boost to max speed.

On the other hand this is our opportunity to do some testing with prototypes we will use for bigger ships.

I'm inclined to go with the middle option as one that's still helpful in hitting warp 7 while still trialling something potentially useful later.

I also think the first two options get the aft shuttlebay and that's a solid argument for them since that's very useful to a survey ship. So I favour those over the last option quite a lot.
 
The only reason Vertical is tempting to me at all is because it hasn't been done before; getting the experiment out of the way makes it much less risky for a follow-up ship that would really need the boosted cruise speed.

I think I value having the shuttlebay more, but as someone noted, this ship is going to spend months at a time in-system doing surveys. Its warp characteristics aren't as important, so failing the success checks wouldn't be as big of a problem here.

It's a relatively safe platform to do this experiment with.
 
I want to do some real tinkering with the nacelle profiles of our ships and really make some interesting looks. I'll vote for the vertical profile on Project Brahe because A) we've already established that this is as much a test-bed ship as it is a peace-time project, making it much more reasonable to give it some leeway due to not having to worry about it going into a fight and B) it gets the debate on whether or not it works in this timeline out of the way quickly so that we can move on to other nacelle profile ideas.
 
Enthusiast#117 said:
The only reason Vertical is tempting to me at all is because it hasn't been done before; getting the experiment out of the way makes it much less risky for a follow-up ship that would really need the boosted cruise speed.

I think I value having the shuttlebay more, but as someone noted, this ship is going to spend months at a time in-system doing surveys. Its warp characteristics aren't as important, so failing the success checks wouldn't be as big of a problem here.

It's a relatively safe platform to do this experiment with.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Agreed, this is a platform that should never be in any real danger unless things have gone very wrong, so this is the best platform to try this kind of experiment on.
 
Parallel would be having the nacelles in line with the main disk, which usually isn't allowed as the field does wibbly stuff to the people inside it.
 
while I would love to go with vertical nacelle's having a shuttle bay on this ship is really useful for sending down ground crews where the transporter would be otherwise unable to penetrate some kind of interference. as such I think parallel is the best option.
 
I think either of the two options with an integrated shuttlebay is ok, though I would prefer the one without a prototype. We're going to be prototyping a lot of new equipment on this ship, so I don't see much reason to also experiment with the warp field arrangement when we're prototyping the core.
James Poopert said:
@Sayle could we get an option for one nacelle like the otl salad in class and the archer from strange new worlds or are we not advanced enough for that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I suspect we're not there yet. The Hermes and Saladin designs are pretty unique to their time period.
 
Cavalier said:
Running away from space pirates is helpful with a high sprint speed. Whereas a high cruise speed is wasted if the ship isn't going to many places in a given unit of time, which given months-long system surveys are its job it won't be.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A fair concern, though if Warp 7 pirates were much of a thing locally, I do think everyone would be in a lot more trouble then they seem to be. I'm not sure anyone aside of some of the bigger names like the Vulcans, Andorians, Romulans and Earth are capable of it currently.
 
[X] Parallel Configuration (+0.2 Cruise/Maximum) (Prototype) [1 Success Check]

Our warships make a lot of use of max speed to make a dash to their targets, but I expect a science vessel will spend more time at cruise. Although they might need to run away from a weird space anomaly sometimes.
 
After thinking some more, I've also realized that while perhaps a survey ship would stick around a fairly long time in each system, we are talking about sending it to the borders of future Federation space. That's some pretty big distances to travel, especially as the Romulan war ended more favorably, so they're even further out on that side.

So actual real world transit times that a survey ship needs to take from the core Federation worlds to the borders will probably impact how many places they can actually survey each trip.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top