Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Void Stalker said:
[ ] Secondary Hull (Industry: 13 -> 17)

Also more space can be filled with science labs and other things we might want for ships that are pushing back the boundaries of our knowledge or a room to host diplomats for contact meetings or whatever else we want in these large, long range ships.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Vulcans, when discussing Earth's new science ship:


It's three full university campuses scooped up and welded together with fuck-off huge warp engines. The Vulcan's allowed themselves to feel a little bit proud of humans for that, as a treat.
 
Last edited:
So the real design question here is whether we want to introduce the canon ships' reliance on secondary hulls now or not.

As usual I'm going to vote for things to go differently. Didn't get my way with the half saucer but I think the saucer plus nacelles look without the elongated secondary hull is pretty cool too. Hopefully advances in warp fields let us keep that style.
 
I really do just want to make the biggest most impressive ship possible, screw the industry cost, I want this to be Humanity really entering the galaxy and making an impression.
 
NHO said:
Obviously, we need to call it NX-01 Buran.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I second the motion. Give us the beautiful blizzard that planetary weather control refuses to give us anymore because they "endanger travelers," "disrupt infrastructure" and "kill crops."

Also, with a secondary hull.
 
Last edited:
Nyvis said:
So the real design question here is whether we want to introduce the canon ships' reliance on secondary hulls now or not.

As usual I'm going to vote for things to go differently. Didn't get my way with the half saucer but I think the saucer plus nacelles look without the elongated secondary hull is pretty cool too. Hopefully advances in warp fields let us keep that style.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm all for dynamic hulls, but performance is something to consider here.

The Stingray is a good example. That hull design works well for a Proto-Escort Interceptor and I would like to see it perform well.
 
MS-21H 'Hawke' said:
I'm all for dynamic hulls, but performance is something to consider here.

The Stingray is a good example. That hull design works well for a Proto-Escort Interceptor and I would like to see it perform well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I see three real schools of ship design for the federation, The standard explorers.

Orb shaped utility vessels.

Then lighter, faster, combat ships that are smaller and have good firepower for their size like the Stingray.

I want all of them to have their place.
 
Unironically, let's make this as expensive as we can manage.
Nyvis said:
So the real design question here is whether we want to introduce the canon ships' reliance on secondary hulls now or not.

As usual I'm going to vote for things to go differently. Didn't get my way with the half saucer but I think the saucer plus nacelles look without the elongated secondary hull is pretty cool too. Hopefully advances in warp fields let us keep that style.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Going by Skippy's post last page, the Warp Field Regulator seems like the canonical choice for the NX class.
 
MS-21H 'Hawke' said:
I'm all for dynamic hulls, but performance is something to consider here.

The Stingray is a good example. That hull design works well for a Proto-Escort Interceptor and I would like to see it perform well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

For sure, but I don't think the secondary hull is necessary for this project since we already chose the saucer choice with the higher interior size.
 
Oooh, that's a fairly substantial boost in complexity which could cause it's own issues. We know the warp field regulator will work, but the possibility of having a souped up super-deflector when our of combat has its own upsides.

On the other hand, even more technical breakdowns on our top of the line prototype vessel seem non ideal.
 
I know its a few hours and threadmarks too late, but what exactly were Spatial Torpedoes anyways? I actually assumed they were surplus tactical nukes, given that they would eventually be replaced by freaking antimatter warheads, but the Investment post had nukes be an upgrade?
Were they really just regular, equivalent-to-modern-day, conventional warheads? That's kinda a let-down.
 
Model DC.14F said:
I know its a few hours and threadmarks too late, but what exactly were Spatial Torpedoes anyways? I actually assumed they were surplus tactical nukes, given that they would eventually be replaced by freaking antimatter warheads, but the Investment post had nukes be an upgrade?
Were they really just regular, equivalent-to-modern-day, conventional warheads? That's kinda a let-down.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think saying regular modern warheads is a bit of an understatement, they're probably far more advanced and have a very high yield, but looking at the wiki they do seem to be a "Conventional" Explosive.
 
NavySeel said:
I think saying regular modern warheads is a bit of an understatement, they're probably far more advanced and have a very high yield, but looking at the wiki they do seem to be a "Conventional" Explosive.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Wiki also quotes their yield at about 250 tons of TNT, but includes a picture of a naked warhead with glowy bits so you know it's advanced and stuff.
 
Last edited:
Nyvis said:
So the real design question here is whether we want to introduce the canon ships' reliance on secondary hulls now or not.

As usual I'm going to vote for things to go differently. Didn't get my way with the half saucer but I think the saucer plus nacelles look without the elongated secondary hull is pretty cool too. Hopefully advances in warp fields let us keep that style.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The canon ship didn't have the Engineering hull, so the anti-canon option would be to vote for the secondary hull.

Havocfett said:
Oooh, that's a fairly substantial boost in complexity which could cause it's own issues. We know the warp field regulator will work, but the possibility of having a souped up super-deflector when our of combat has its own upsides.

On the other hand, even more technical breakdowns on our top of the line prototype vessel seem non ideal.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Eh it's not Prototype labeled, though the deflector probably will be. But it also gives our engineers more engineering space to come up with solutions! And more room to house engineers to work on solutions.

Plus we've been warned that the Warp 5 engine still has some snarls when trying to hit top speed, so a better deflector (we know deflectors help warp performance) might help iron those problems out.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top