Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
We could do an arrow secondary hull and a half-saucer primary hull, basically a Chibi Crossfield.
 
Remove ads
2185: Project Soyuz (Spaceframe)
  • Threadmarks
    • [X] Project Soyuz (Heavy Frigate)

    Before making your decision, you of course investigate the nuances of each request. What catches your attention in regards to the requested cruiser at least is the sensor readings of the new Klingon Bird-of-Prey. There isn't in-depth tactical data, but just captured sensor readings regarding it's accelerations and silhouette tell you a great deal. You're looking at a forward torpedo launcher in the nose and at least one heavy disruptor cannon at the tip of each wing. Maybe two medium cannons slaved together - it's hard to tell. The heavy single engine at the aft is probably a full fifth of the mass, although it seems tuned for sheer acceleration rather than maneuverability. With the impulse power it puts out you think the distinction is rather moot. If the ship's captain wants to slow down and turn on a dime, it can.

    The main downside is the sheer fragility of the spaceframe. Any major hit past the shields will almost certainly destroy it, which goes some way towards explaining how the Klingons can milk that kind of performance out of 150 kilotons of starship. The only real parallel to anything in the Federation arsenal is the Skate, which of course was an expression of the same ethos of "flying gun" that the Klingons appear to have made institutional policy. They might still be ahead technologically, but you might be able to produce something superficially similar and in the same mass range. The question is if you want to.

    Having decided to take up the task of designing a heavy frigate, the first thing to do is decide on the overall shape of the ship. The first option is to use a large saucer section, utilizing its large interior space and generous firing angles. This would be the heaviest-mass option, but you wouldn't have any budget left for a secondary hull. Instead any extra hull and the nacelles will need to be attached to the saucer itself rather than having a defined engineering section. It would be a first for this kind of design work, but may offer a guide towards reusing primary hulls for different mission profiles.

    The second option is for a half-saucer, which retains many of the firing advantages while still leaving you enough space for a secondary hull to contain the deflector and warp core. This would also allow you to fit different warp configurations, offering you the opportunity to more finely tune the Soyuz for the strategic or tactical role that best exploits its advantages. The removed parts of the full saucer section would mean you can't fit aft-firing phasers, however, reducing coverage of the port and starboard arcs with a standard phaser configuration.

    The final option is for an arrowhead design like the Skate. Much like the full saucer, this will commit you to use of the existing profile once the primary spaceframe is constructed. Unlike the full saucer, you will not be able to add much in the way of building out from the hull. This is the cheapest option and will be able to offer the most cost-effective tactical results, but there will be sacrifices to make regarding the limited internal space. Like the Skate, the Soyuz will very much be a pure warship. Whether that is actually a good thing is up for debate.

    [ ] Full Saucer (200,000 Tons, No Secondary Hull)
    [ ] Half Saucer (140,000 Tons, Secondary Hull)
    [ ] Arrowhead (160,000 Tons, No Secondary Hull)

    Hull ShapeMassPhaser SlotsEngine Slots
    Full Saucer200,00063
    Half Saucer140,00042
    Arrowhead160,00062

    Two Hour Moratorium, Please
     
    Last edited:
  • Threadmarks
    • Sayle said:
    The first option is to use a large saucer section, utilizing its large interior space and generous firing angles. This would be the heaviest-mass option, but you wouldn't have any budget left for a secondary hull. Instead any extra hull and the nacelles will need to be attached to the saucer itself rather than having a defined engineering section. It would be a first for this kind of design work, but may offer a guide towards reusing primary hulls for different mission profiles.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I actually kind of like the sound of that.
     
    I'd like the idea of an Arrowhead hull, but the lack of a secondary hull, even an inline one, makes me somewhat hesitant. The full saucer sounds like a fun flying saucer twist, and the half-saucer would afford us a secondary hull that might make up for the loss of phaser slots. Decisions, decisions...
     
    Sayle said:
    The final option is for an arrowhead design like the Skate. Much like the full saucer, this will commit you to use of the existing profile once the primary spaceframe is constructed. Unlike the full saucer, you will not be able to add much in the way of building out from the hull. This is the cheapest option and will be able to offer the most cost-effective tactical results, but there will be sacrifices to make regarding the limited internal space. Like the Skate, the Soyuz will very much be a pure warship. Whether that is actually a good thing is up for debate.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Given this is meant to be more or less a pure warship, and one we're meant to pump out in large numbers, I'd say this is probably the most suitable option.
    Though given the rapid advances that are going to be made in technology in the coming decades it's limited internal space may be a bigger downside than it first appears, as far as keeping the ship viable in the long run goes.
     
    I think a secondary hull on a small, lean, and mean escort is both unnecessary and aesthetically displeasing, so I'm fine with either the Saucer or the Arrowhead.
     
    Hmm, I'm thinking that as much as I like the Arrowhead shape I'd rather have this be a bit more than a pure warship. Say if this was being crash designed in a war like the Skate was I could get behind it, as well as a possible "wartime emergency" variant that drops non-military capabilities to reduce cost and build times. But right now even with tensions getting higher we can probably justify building more of these if they can cover some basic non-military duties as well. So either Full or Half Saucer IMO.

    In particular now that I'm thinking about it I wonder if we could possibly fit the deflector sensor arrays that we passed on in the Curiosity design process, the lack of which seemed to be the cause of the Curiosity-class being phased out of the general astrometric missions a while before it was fully decommissioned, and make this the ship the one that took over most of that duty.
     
    Last edited:
    Arrowhead or half-saucer. Unless a design actually needs all the space for extra capabilities, I will wrest every one I can from the clutches of the saucer mafia.
     
    I kind of just dislike secondary hulls, they are ok don't get me wrong (and they certainty don't look bad), but I think ships just look better without them there. The secondary hull just kind of acts like a big metallic extrusion meant to hold nacelles, when I personally prefer boxy more compact ships. So I'm probably going to vote for both full and arrowhead saucers.

    Like these:
    The Steamrunner-class : r/DaystromInstitute The Cyclone Intel Patrol Escort [T6]
     
    i like the idea of using the arrowhead again.

    keep the design ethos of our pure combat ships being no-nacelle. grandpa of the defiant.

    and this frigate is supposed to be mainly a combat ship. being as cost effective as possible is very, very valuable.
     
    Well, with the ridiculous mobility displayed by the Bird-of-Prey, our only viable options are either Full Saucer, or arrowhead. We either go all in on mobility and compete with the Klingons in their own arena, or we accept we can't match their mobility and retain our firing angles.
     
    The canon Soyuz-class seems to be a modified Full Saucer, since they just built off the back end of it and there's not even a bulge for a secondary hull. It's basically a chunkier Miranda, with no roll bar but with what sorta look like literal Phaser Cannons on a turret-thing up top and maybe down below.
     
    There's a particular Miranda variant that's in Star Trek Online (which I've recently fallen back into) that has the deflector over the ventral hull. It's the ShiKar.

    Photo for reference
     
    I think trying to expect more out of this design than combat duties might be asking a bit much, we're trying to make something capable of fighting the Klingon's Bird-of-Prey here, which is not only a ship fully focused on combat- it's also more technologically advanced. We're playing catch up here, and it's entirely possible a fully militarized design will *still* be outmatched by it's Klingon contemporary. The light cruiser was explicitly intended to be a match for the Bird-of-Prey, so the Soyuz is liable to be outgunned regardless, I have no desire to widen that gulf.

    We have flexible and multi-role designs, this doesn't have to be one, and arguably it shouldn't be one.
     
    Last edited:
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top