Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
[X] 0: Standard Antimatter Load (Range: 70ly)
[X] 1: Standard Shuttlebay (2 Shuttles)
 
[X] 0: Standard Antimatter Load (Range: 70ly)
[X] 1: Standard Shuttlebay (2 Shuttles)

Extra antimatter wouldn't be that useful for its scientific mission but could be useful for its combat role, extending its ability to prosecute wars beyond the Federations borders. However ultimately I don't think it's worth it. Likewise shuttles could be useful for looking at some scientific anomaly from multiple angles simultaneously or pulling some weird trick with interferometry both of which would benefit from extra data points but again I think it ultimately isn't worth it.

Also @Sayle just so you know there's an error with the Galileo's saucer, It's supposed to be identical to the Sagarmatha but as you can see here it's forward-back symmetrical
While on the original Sagarmatha it had a bump on the rear of the top of the saucer.
 
Skippy said:
Kinda surprised at the vote honestly, I'd have thought more people would have gone for the shuttles, normally the quest loves shuttles.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's really more that when the choice is "no shuttles" and "some shuttles" we usually pick the latter, but this is a vote between "some shuttles" and "more shuttles", on a ship where the things shuttles get us is the tertiary function, so we're fine with having a modest amount for greater mission capability.

Basically, the capability gain going from two shuttles to four is a lot less than going from no shuttles to "at least one".
 
While I don't think it's something we necessarily need to do with this design, I think we could look at increasing our definition of "short range" in the near future. Sure doubling the range from 70 to 140ly is a massive jump compared to all our other 70ly non-long range designs, but that's still just barely over half the range of last generation's Explorer, built with tech almost 3 decades old by this point.

Even if we don't get the same kind of explosive capability growth like we got between the NX and the Sagarmatha, with the ~25 years between those two making a jump from 108 to 250ly I would be unsurprised if the similar time gap between the Sagarmatha and now leads to our next Explorer pushing out to 300-350ly or more of range.
 
[X] 0: Standard Antimatter Load (Range: 70ly)
[X] 1: Expanded Shuttlebay (4 Shuttles)
 
I know I'm just another player here, but there's something I feel the need to bring up. I think we've got a very serious problem in that we're producing too many uber-expensive ships. We seriously need numbers, not everything needs to be huge or a warship (this is making our fleet awfully expensive), and once we've got our science ship done, I think we need to make a new version of our economical survey ship before we move onto the next moneysink.

We're outnumbered, stretched thin, half our fleet are shiny but monstrously expensive, and the other half are antiques, and this is making me nervous. Especially, I think we need to focus on the needs of the moment, and not over-rev on the Klingon war. After all, the ships we're making now will be retiring when the Klingon war kicks off, so overspending on fripperies now isn't going to help later on unless we're pushing for infrastructure or economic bonuses, or better industrial or military technology.

Just my 2 cents.

Also @Sayle, let's say we go for the new hull alloy and get a bad roll, will those maluses disappear after a few generations or are they set in stone? Is that alloy always gonna suck or will it level out after a couple designs? Ditto for bonuses please?
 
Last edited:
I see the shuttlecraft slightly differently to everybody else. The shuttles are going to require maintenance, just like any other complex machine, so basically two shuttles is the bare minimum to have one operational at a moments notice going by the maxim 'Two is one and one is none.'

Two ships guarantees you have one available while the second bird is getting serviced/repaired. Four means you have two available at all times.
 
Cold Dust said:
I know I'm just another player here, but there's something I feel the need to bring up. I think we've got a very serious problem in that we're producing too many uber-expensive ships. We seriously need numbers, not everything needs to be huge or a warship (this is making our fleet awfully expensive), and once we've got our science ship done, I think we need to make a new version of our economical survey ship before we move onto the next moneysink.

We're outnumbered, stretched thin, half our fleet are shiny but monstrously expensive, and the other half are antiques, and this is making me nervous. Especially, I think we need to focus on the needs of the moment, and not over-rev on the Klingon war. After all, the ships we're making now will be retiring when the Klingon war kicks off, so overspending on fripperies now isn't going to help later on unless we're pushing for infrastructure or economic bonuses, or better industrial or military technology.

Just my 2 cents.

Also @Sayle, let's say we go for the new hull alloy and get a bad roll, will those maluses disappear after a few generations or are they set in stone? Is that alloy always gonna suck or will it level out after a couple designs? Ditto for bonuses please?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The hull vote already ended, we went with the cheaper option.
 
Cold Dust said:
Also @Sayle, let's say we go for the new hull alloy and get a bad roll, will those maluses disappear after a few generations or are they set in stone? Is that alloy always gonna suck or will it level out after a couple designs? Ditto for bonuses please?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That stats are set in stone. If you want superior performance you have to risk the negatives as well.

In other news, I've been rationalising the mass numbers. The "gold standard" is the Sagarmatha saucer with a base mass of 200k, and everything else is calculated from a comparable volume. Beforehand things had been in reference to the same saucer, but in a gutfeel sort of way. The retroactive mass numbers are only in the stats page so far, not diagrams - but it does mean that the secondary hull will have a much more sane mass and the Galileo will probably be settling down at around the 250k mark.
 
Last edited:
Man, it's been so long since we designed the Zheng He. Wouldn't mind designing a new Starfleet/member government operated cargo ship.

Edit: Now damn, that's an amazing visual, one that really puts the scale of these ships into perspective. Are you going to be adding every new ship we design to that graphic?
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top