Starfleet Design Bureau

Honestly the only issue for me visually is just how long the struts are and how squared off they make the design look. Didn't much care for the look on the Curiosity either.

I actually like this one, and it would have been a good way to figure out how the struts attached to the secondary hull and put some bracing in there.
 
It's worth considering that at the moment this spacecraft design is probably still reasonable in cost effectiveness. The good hull material roll gives some stretch after all, and while that was some what expended in making a very large new generation craft, the extra systems that can be held with in it would probably balance that out and give a pretty reasonable rating overall.

Basically the current benefit of this design is that it's heading towards being a very tough bruiser, it's much thicker then previous designs while having a very tough hull material, making it much harder to destroy critical systems. For instance the big secondary hull means you have to punch through quite a bit of tough hull material to reach the warp core now. Also due to the quad nacelle arrangement, one of the few critical components that couldn't be hidden deep inside now has redundancy, making it basically even more capable of tough stand up fights. This all helps greatly offset any drawbacks in maneuverability in the current structure while greatly benefiting it in a prolonged battle. Combine that with enough space to make a good science craft as well, and you have a not bad outcome.



Of course making everything so big, is not cheap, but I at least think that the gained capabilities from it together with the good hull material roll let it average out to a highly acceptable trade off between an explorer and a battleship in current setup. And as such would have a good chance of having a reasonable number of ships made to fill those two tasks in the roster.


This is probably why a fair few people kind of want to hold off on further experimental work, as if you just finish up what you currently have it will most likely be a reasonable success. While any additional expensive experimental technology would create the risk of a failed roll, causing the current balance to breakdown and its cost effectivity to become less good.

Admittedly if one did manage to get the experimental engine tech to work well, the craft would likely reach S rating on tactical with out to big a cost increase and thus justify the craft becoming more expensive. But that's a pretty substantial if. It kind of depends on how much one feels on gambling further when one might already have a modest win on their hands.
 
Last edited:
I know suddenly everyone is feeling price adverse after spending big on the last option. However we now need to deal with the consequences of our previously weighty decisions.

We have a mass problem.

If you want to be able to hit with torpedoes, we need the good thrusters.
If we want to not be automatically hit by everybody's torpedoes, we need the good thrusters.
If we want to want to improve all our future ships, we need the good thrusters.
If we want to deal with unexpected space phenomenon better than a lumbering cargo ship, we need the good thrusters.
If we don't want other space powers to be able to dance rings around us during combat, we need the good thrusters.


On this decision, because of previous decisions, we don't have a choice unless we want to introduce another massive vulnerabilities to our ship design. Our cost score is sunk, but that doesn't mean we should tank our tactical score too. That just leaves us with a long range science ship.
 

If these were tucked underneath and extended directly out from the secondary hull I think it would feel a bit like a corvette (car). With it shown like this it makes me think of a B-52 or an Il-62 plane.
 
Honestly the only issue for me visually is just how long the struts are and how squared off they make the design look. Didn't much care for the look on the Curiosity either.
Yeah, if I had to put a finger on anything that felt "utilitarian ugly" about the ship as Sayle described it, it's not the nacelles or the struts, but just how overall square the ship looks from the top. The saucer looks like it's longer than the nacelles.

And the big part I think of that is the secondary hull. Despite going for the longest option we could between the deflector poking out forward and the rim covering rear of the neck over half of the secondary hull doesn't extend aft of the saucer, which pretty much forces the nacelle struts to be right up against the rear of the saucer, leading to a design that's not as long while still being very wide. If the saucer and the neck were moved forward a bit, and possibly a bit less angled to not lose that straight turbolift shaft, I imagine it would look a lot less square and the struts might not look as wide compared to the rest of the ship.
 
Last edited:
Alternatively, get guided torps online. We know it can be done at some point, since Spock and McCoy were able to on-the-fly field install sensor packages into a torp to have it fly itself at Chang's super BoP while it was under Cloak.
I would love this, please don't get me wrong. That scene was amazing. The way everyone stood still and just waited for the inevitable explosion in a check mate move was glorious.

Frankly though I think relying on us being able to replicate once off circumstances in the future made in a clutch moment right now as part of our base design is an unlikely occurrence.
 
Who mentioned anything about putting these out in any great numbers at first? These were always going to be small-run ships from the first of the class, and as long as we kit it out well, there's going to be a much longer service run for the class, meaning more vessels in the long run. The Cygnus' retrospective had nearly thirty ships of the class serving for going on a century. Copernicus may not be as eminently practical or easily produced at scale at the moment as Cygnus' design was, but as long as it's capable, then the economy of scale will serve to make building more members of the class a more inexpensive affair.

Well yes but it'll be the smallest of small runs when it could have been a bit higher. There's in fact quite a bit of space in space so more ships to explore would have been useful and I'm not convinced all the additions were necessary to its success. But I think now that we're here it's so expensive already we really can't skimp on something like engines and lose the basket with all the eggs.
 
If this was simply a Prototype rolls this'd be a lock, but Experimental rolls are Dangerous. A whiff on those can cost you the item you're using or introduce massive flaws into the ship design if things go poorly. This is a difficult Choice.
 
Given all the space she's gonna have, even if they turn out to be underperforming it won't be too hard to simply retrofit in improved thrusters. And make the correction to the second batch of the class.
 
and whilst we don't know the exact number the NX-class probably had a similarly small run between the Connie and Galaxy numbers.

Probably smaller.

By 2151, we know there 4 more planned. NX-02 launched in 2154, and had a load of technical issues.

By 2161, the NX-Class was being decommissioned.

So the remaining 3 planned weren't launched before at least 2155, and the class was decommissioned in 2161...

*although* We have also seen the Refit-NX in both PIC Season 2 and 3... background information tells us it's Enterprise... in the case of S2 it's literally the Eaglemoss NX-01 refit model... but it's never actually confirmed on screen, and we know from ENT that... it did not have the refit by 2161 nor was Enterprise in service post-2161. Those ships are certainly NOT Enterprise.

Rather than the refit version being somehow Enterprise shoehorned in, it makes much more sense than the remaining 3 that were in development got the Refit upgrade.
 
If this was simply a Prototype rolls this'd be a lock, but Experimental rolls are Dangerous. A whiff on those can cost you the item you're using or introduce massive flaws into the ship design if things go poorly. This is a difficult Choice.

Does the double roll give more chances to bake in failure for the next design or two?
For some reason prototype seemed less likely to hose our efforts for more than just that ship vs. experimental where it could take the option or benefit away for 2-3 designs.
 
There will be a single roll for performance. And a single roll for cost.

Not two rolls for the entire thing.
Which can kill a design outright if both fail badly enough. We've outright lost access to things on experimental rolls. The Ulhaan was supposed to have Quantum torps and we just didn't get them due to a roll whiff, for example.
Does the double roll give more chances to bake in failure for the next design or two?
For some reason prototype seemed less likely to hose our efforts for more than just that ship vs. experimental where it could take the option or benefit away for 2-3 designs.
Experimental means that we're running off theory and hopes and dreams. Prototype means we're running on lab-based equipment in ideal conditions without real world seasoning. As such experimental represents a lot more risk comparatively. Which is why it gets double the rolls.
 
[ ] 0: Small Saucer (200,000 Tons)

[ ] Inline Secondary Hull (Long)

[ ] Quad Nacelles Sprint

Maybe a bit of topic but id love doing something like this next, a sleek and speedy boy.
 
[X] 3 Type-2 Thrusters (Maneuverability: Medium) [Experimental] [Two Success Rolls: Cost/Performance] (+Cost)

Naturally we're gonna have to go with the Type 2 thrusters. She's not just gonna be cruising about from point to point at warp after all. Even if they don't pan out for this class the great advantages they'll bring for all future ones is simply too much to overlook.
 
Last edited:
I guess we roll the dice again, no other viable course is left for us imo.

[X] 3 Type-2 Thrusters (Maneuverability: Medium) [Experimental] [Two Success Rolls: Cost/Performance] (+Cost)
 
[X] 3 Type-2 Thrusters (Maneuverability: Medium) [Experimental] [Two Success Rolls: Cost/Performance] (+Cost)
 
Back
Top