Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
[ ] Ventral Secondary Hull (Engineering Section)

Yeah, I'm inclined to go for this too - we're making an improved proto-Connie here, and going out into the black as far as we're planning for this kind of ship means we're going to need to go big. Admittedly, this will push us to half a million tons of base mass - but honestly, it makes sense that "brand new ship meant to go very far into deep space" is going to be very chunky, and having our "limited run explorer" also capable of serving as a Thunderchild replacement isn't necessarily a bad thing, IMO. Especially considering how long in the tooth the Thunderchild design is, and the fact that only one Thunderchild survived the Earth-Romulan War.
 
I am in favor of one of the Ventral options, inline might be less mass but it also eats up an impulse engine slot in doing so. Also this is an explorer we want room for extra bits and bobs. And the Hull pick paid off quite nicely- discounted mass but extra protection helps alot.
 
This is definitely the beginning of the grand Starfleet tradition of never having capital warships (pay no attention to the capital-scale science and exploration ships being able to beat up other people's battleships 1v1 for lunch money).
 
[ ] Ventral Secondary Hull (Engineering Section)

Chonky part spotted! All the shinies:14 phasers, 4 Torpedoes and all the aux spots!!! Mhh his one will be a pretty lady.
EDIT:
pheonix89 said:
This is definitely the beginning of the grand Starfleet tradition of never having capital warships (pay no attention to the capital-scale science ships being able to beat up other people's battleships 1v1 for lunch money).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nah this one will be loaded down wih all the Cargo bays, science labs, and extra manufactory rooms we can stuff into it. That means quite clearly its not a warship! KEK.
 
Last edited:
Someone does need to do the math though on how pricey this will get. We want these capable absolutely, but we shouldnt COMPLETELY break the bank.

One extra aux slot and two phasers is a whopping 45k mass.

Remember, that was one of the main reasons we avoided quad nacelles on the Thunderchild.
 
Last edited:
Bedpotato said:
[ ] Ventral Secondary Hull (Engineering Section)

Chonky part spotted! All the shinies:14 phasers, 4 Torpedoes and all the aux spots!!! Mhh his one will be a pretty lady.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Hey there, Planet [insert name here]. We are representatives of the United Federation of Planets, exploring the galaxy searching for cool things to research and new civilizations. Wanna be friends? We sure do. If you want to throw down though, you will come to, sorely, regret that. So! Let's just skip all that unpleasant stuff, eh?"
 
Yes, the second aux slot with "Ventral Engineering" is to valuable.

EDIT: Through an inline hull with quad narcelles is nice as well. Through would it be a possible option?
 
Last edited:
At this rate we will never be able to afford more than 3 of these ships or to even put a full amount of guns on them. But each will be a hell of a ship.

I'm also excited the upgraded hull rolls turned out well, slight expense increase for increased defense and extreme weight savings is a big win.

Edit: If my math is right thanks to the new material ventral long configuration is 4000 tons larger than the original large saucer hull. So it'd give us similar chonk, Inline long would save us 16000 tons for (slight) maneuverability improvement.
 
Last edited:
KarmaA said:
At this rate we will never be able to afford more than 3 of these ships or to even put a full amount of guns on them. But each will be a hell of a ship.

I'm also excited the upgraded hull rolls turned out well, slight expense increase for increased defense and extreme weight savings is a big win.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
For the sake a saving mass, therefor easier to move + cheaper, and the extra thruster for additional movement, I'm gonna pick Ventral over The Big Chonker.

It will let help keep our torps on the more mobile things we want to launch 'probes' at, and I just love me mobilty.

I just love huge ships that can dance like small ones, it feels like showing off.
 
Last edited:
KarmaA said:
At this rate we will never be able to afford more than 3 of these ships or to even put a full amount of guns on them. But each will be a hell of a ship.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Perhaps. But I personally think that a relatively small number of well equipped and robust hulls that can always come home in more or less one piece is preferable to a large economized run where the potential exists for a number of them to go out and never be heard from again.
 
[ ] Inline Secondary Hull
[ ] Inline Secondary Hull (Long)

It worked for the thunderchild, and that was already the biggest we went. I don't think we need the extra space after choosing the maximum size for the saucer and all the options that follow will be more spending so it could easily balloon out of control.

landcollector said:
Perhaps. But I personally think that a relatively small number of well equipped and robust hulls that can always come home in more or less one piece is preferable to a large economized run where the potential exists for a number of them to go out and never be heard from again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is frankly an insane strawman. Not doubling down on extra internal space isn't going to make this a minimalist ship, we already picked the large saucer. This might be the difference between only investigating 3 situations or answering 4, though.
 
As the whole point of going for the large saucer was to pair it with a smaller secondary hull, I'm inclined to one of the inline options. Bonus points if we get to test the vertical nacelle layout for delicious long range cruising.

[ ] Inline Secondary Hull (Long)
 
Nyvis said:
This is frankly an insane strawman. Not doubling down on extra internal space isn't going to make this a minimalist ship, we already picked the large saucer. This might be the difference between only investigating 3 situations or answering 4, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not a strawman, thank you very much. I think maximum capabilities for going out in the total unknown is a good idea. You do you, though.
 
[ ] Ventral Secondary Hull (Engineering Section)

This is an Explorer in the post-enterprise Era, where we are decidedly NOT the big dogs in the yard, We're putting everything we can on this thing.
 
landcollector said:
It's not a strawman, thank you very much. I think maximum capabilities for going out in the total unknown is a good idea. You do you, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The strawman is the idea that not picking every single maximalist option is equal to sending ships to die.

Steven Kodaly said:
As the whole point of going for the large saucer was to pair it with a smaller secondary hull, I'm inclined to one of the inline options. Bonus points if we get to test the vertical nacelle layout for delicious long range cruising.

[ ] Inline Secondary Hull (Long)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is the problem of this vote structure, you can never vote for a maximal option that would pair with a minimal option because the thread will always also vote for the second maximal option :V
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top