Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Yeah, I don't see the need for a bunch of extra systems. By picking the arrowhead, we've already committed to what's essentially a pure warship (even if there's no half saucer). No sense stepping back on that now.
 
I like in-line deflectors, but I think I like ventral nacelles more. I also like the idea of a ship that doesn't need a tender to do patrols so having a little extra space wouldn't hurt. Since weapon loadout doesn't sound like it'll be affected this is asking if we want an aux slot. I do want an aux slot and having one doesn't instantly make the ship multirole or have less firepower. If we get it without losing a maneuverability level then it's kind of a freebie.

If it was going to screw with torpedo launchers or firing arcs I'd lean toward inline. If inline was going to limit weapon slots I'd be more strongly for blister.
 
Given how cramped the Skate was and how the arrowhead is, we should avoid something that eats into internal space majorly like the inline, so it can actually have legs. 20kt isn't that much with relation to engine power at this size anyhow.
 
[ ] Inline Deflector and Nacelles (Reduced Space)

I must admit that keeping some internal space for utilities is tempting, but I want to see if we can put together a competitive and truly minimalist design.
 
[ ] Blister Deflector and Ventral Nacelles (+20,000 Tons)

The Arrowhead is the smallest design once you include the hypothetical secondary hull in the Half-Saucer. I just don't think we should reduce our internal space even more.
 
[X] Blister Deflector and Ventral Nacelles (+20,000 Tons)

Need room for accommodations and supplies. We're weeks away from anything and everything at maximum warp, logistics is king and crews that have reduced performance from living in Soviet conditions are going to perform poorly.
 
I'm inclined towards the blister, only so that if we're given the option of the type-1B phaser cannons (which need extra room) and the type-2 phaser cannons STILL haven't finished development yet, that we have the extra room available for them. It's already been mentioned that the type-1's firepower has become lacklustre against current shielding tech and I refuse to fit subpar weapons.
And if the type-2 design IS available, then we have room for something else- more torpedo tubes perhaps?

[X] Blister Deflector and Ventral Nacelles (+20,000 Tons)
 
[X] Blister Deflector and Ventral Nacelles (+20,000 Tons)
While I think both designs could work very well, I think that reducing the internal space may just make this vessel less combat effective
 
[X] Blister Deflector and Ventral Nacelles (+20,000 Tons)
We need room for accomodations, engineering, phasers and as many torpedoes as we can pack into this thing.
 
[X] Inline Deflector and Nacelles (Reduced Space)

The Blister is nice, but this very narrowly wins for me. But I wouldn't be disappointed in the slightest if the Blister option won.
 
[X] Blister Deflector and Ventral Nacelles (+20,000 Tons)

I like this, both because it preserves internal space, and also because aesthetically ventral nacelles would look closer to making a Miranda or Defiant look-alike. For the preserved space, I'm hoping that we can make this useful as a high speed courier or interceptor - ie., even aside from patrolling to prevent breaches of the borders by Klingon Birds of Prey or other light combatants, it can also run around shuttling VIPs or time sensitive cargo that needs to get somewhere faster than a Cygnus can manage (with the Type 3 nacelles, we're going to have a Maximum Cruise a full .2 warp factors higher than the Cygnus or Sagarmatha, and an efficient cruise on par with the Cygnus).
 
[X] Inline Deflector and Nacelles (Reduced Space)

The prospect of maximized maneuverability is just too good to pass up. Though I won't be too disappointed if the blister option wins.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top