Starship Design Bureau
- Thread starter Sayle
- Start date
- Sci-Fi
Linked contents
I'm a fan of 4 for this ship.Man this vote is close
So two, three, or four Nacelles?
Personally I would go for 2 or 4.
I agree with Tylonius that while speed is important for an explorer, steady and reliable is as important if not more important than sprint ability. Last thing someone on a five year mission is going to want to do is something that puts strain on the engines on a regular basis.
2339: Project Ambassador (Warp Core/Nacelles)
Order -> Spaceframe -> Warp Core/Nacelles -> Tactical -> Internals -> Prototyping -> Certification -> Retrospective
The secondary hull is enormous even in its smaller variant, trading height for a trailing aft that will house a shuttlebay and most of the critical engineering systems. The new deflector is enormous, protected by a concave dish and penetrating the secondary hull some forty meters. The warp core will provide a direct transfer of power to the dish in addition to the nacelles, allowing the highest energy investments in warp travel in Federation history. Whether it will actually move this behemoth of a starship at a record speed given all the mass it has to move, however, is an open question.
But before the warp core is installed you need to consult Yoyodyne, who are very happy to report that they have pioneered a new antimatter injector design and a number of adaptations to increase power output. The new nacelles used in the Renaissance-class can now be used without consequence, increasing both cruising speeds and maximum warp factors. But there have been improvements to the original design in the last four years - at least in theory, as the changes have yet to be tested.
Simply put, by elongating the nacelles and slimming down the warp coils, they can create a naturally distended warp field. Even a ship as large as the Ambassador could surf the wave of spatial distortion with unprecedented efficiency. While this sounds like a return to the previous paradigm, they assure you this couldn't be further from the truth. The shorter nacelles are here to stay, and they are simply still refining the design until it reaches the perfect balance between efficiency and speed. New subspace coil field morphologies and material sciences are constantly changing and advancing the field of warp dynamics, after all.
[ ] Renaissance-class Nacelles
[ ] New Nacelle Design (Prototype)
Project Ambassador must be capable of long-range exploration and independent scientific investigation. It must be able to provide diplomatic amenities and appropriate quarters for dignitaries. It will ideally be capable of engaging on equal terms the Klingon Vor'cha class.
Minimums:
Tactical Score: A (Requested)
Scientific Score: B+ (Required)
Comfort Score: A (Required)
Two Hour Moratorium on Voting, Please.
Vista
(Verified anomalous street lamp)
- Location
- appears to be in a containment cell
- Pronouns
- They/Them
we have a two hour mortarium
- Location
- Most likely California
Honestly, beyond technically being another prototype, I don't really see a downside to the New Design. From the sound of things, its more an iterative improvement than a completely new design, so it's less likely to backfire or cause problems.
I suppose it does affect the Ease of Manufacture, compared to just using the same production lines as the Renaissance-class Nacelles, but this is our new Capital Flagship design, so Quality over Quantity is a given.
I suppose it does affect the Ease of Manufacture, compared to just using the same production lines as the Renaissance-class Nacelles, but this is our new Capital Flagship design, so Quality over Quantity is a given.
[ ] Renaissance-class Nacelles
Actually I'm going to argue for this one. I'm fine cramming a bunch of prototypes on this, but it's probably better if they're in disconnected systems. Possible unpredictable prototype behavior feeding into other prototype failures seems like it could go wrong easier than disconnected systems failing individually, or at least be more likely for a failure to cause a chain reaction than otherwise.
We've already plugged in an experimental deflector straight into the warp system, lets avoid connecting any other untested systems into it too, for the safety of both of them.
Actually I'm going to argue for this one. I'm fine cramming a bunch of prototypes on this, but it's probably better if they're in disconnected systems. Possible unpredictable prototype behavior feeding into other prototype failures seems like it could go wrong easier than disconnected systems failing individually, or at least be more likely for a failure to cause a chain reaction than otherwise.
We've already plugged in an experimental deflector straight into the warp system, lets avoid connecting any other untested systems into it too, for the safety of both of them.
Last edited:
On the one hand, the configuration we prototyped on the Renaissance class already seems to offer a pretty big improvement in all areas, and we know it's safe. On the other hand... go new nacelles go zoom. Honestly the thing which might swing it for me is the aesthetics; more elongated nacelles look prettier to me, I think. But I could see a valid argument either way.
So I take it that the reason why the Renaissance is getting more production runs is because they hammered out how to fix the Nacelles then? nice to see our first ship getting more love. Given they JUST got the Engines up and running right i see little reason to slap on another prototype when it took years to get the other one fixed up. Sure, the efficiency would go up (which i assume means using less fuel for the same travel time, meaning more travel time) but speed is otherwise unaffected. If we didn't go for the Experimental dish i'd be down but two prototypes hooked into the warp core? That's asking for some unforeseen issues smashing into each other and causing headaches, or worse.
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
I'm happy to make Ease of Manufacture a dump stat for the ship design that will be used for the next Enterprise.
If this refinement of the design is only taking it and changing up the morphology, I think it's probably not as risky as a truly novel technology? The thing which caused issues last time was having to deal with much more heat in the coils than ever before, but these are actually slimmed down. There's no novel materials or completely new tech being used; it's a refinement by just stretching out an existing design as they refine their model of the warp geometry.
So there's probably still some risk; maybe it turns out that a stretched out warp bubble has some issues. (Although this also appears to be a well known thing, given we did something similar on the Reliant class?). But probably less risk than there was when we tried the new nacelle design on the Renaissance class.
So there's probably still some risk; maybe it turns out that a stretched out warp bubble has some issues. (Although this also appears to be a well known thing, given we did something similar on the Reliant class?). But probably less risk than there was when we tried the new nacelle design on the Renaissance class.
While I see the appeal of going for the Renaissance Nacelles since they just got those all worked out, I think it would be better to go for the prototype necelles.
This is meant to be the new flagship of the entire Federation fleet. We want to show off the latest and greatest innovations and ideas in this design. Already we have a lot of attention on our project, we want to be seen as pressing the boundaries of science, and putting the experimental and prototype technology into the starship will show that.
Is there a good possibility of the different technologies having unexpected reactions to each other? Yes, but we can't always play it safe. I think we really need to push the limits on this one as far as we can.
This is meant to be the new flagship of the entire Federation fleet. We want to show off the latest and greatest innovations and ideas in this design. Already we have a lot of attention on our project, we want to be seen as pressing the boundaries of science, and putting the experimental and prototype technology into the starship will show that.
Is there a good possibility of the different technologies having unexpected reactions to each other? Yes, but we can't always play it safe. I think we really need to push the limits on this one as far as we can.
- Location
- EcksEcksEcksEcks
I'm thinking the experimental nacelles for the ambassador, this is peak quality over quantity.
We can build a budget ambassador using the normal parts later as the modular cruiser Starfleet wants later.
We can build a budget ambassador using the normal parts later as the modular cruiser Starfleet wants later.
[X] New Nacelle Design (Prototype)
I imagine if the prototype nacelles work and are better than the Renaissance versions, we just won't get the old ones as an option next time the same way we aren't getting an option to not put in a isolinear computer, use the old type 8 phasers, or even use a nacelle design that isn't some form of the Renaissance design. It's just a question of if the prototype will work.
Besides all that about the warp core though, damn that's a lot of internal space. Even with the deflector taking up a bunch of it, I think that's something like 30 decks between the saucer and secondary hull?
This ship is gonna be a Beast. Isn't it great?
To go further than ever before
[X] New Nacelle Design (Prototype)
[X] New Nacelle Design (Prototype)
- Location
- California
your assuming that the warp core won't be experimental either