Star Trek Fan Games
http://bote2.square7.ch/forum/

concept future
http://bote2.square7.ch/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=472		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  jigalypuff [ 05 Jun 2005, 02:12 ]
Post subject:  concept future
i got bored and designed a new vulcan ship, i just kinda made it up :lol: still gotta finish her textures though.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 05 Jun 2005, 12:30 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Nice. 8)

What sort of era is it planned for? I'm assuming ENT - or is it later?
Author:  Scotty [ 05 Jun 2005, 12:32 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
I like it! The general shape reminds me of the fighters from Ep II & III of Star Wars, where the hyperdrive can dettatch from the ship.

Great work :)
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 05 Jun 2005, 12:36 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Know what you mean - it sorta looks like a Jedi Starfighter, or an A-Wing with a Hyperdrive unit (But they don't need them) - be careful about mentioning that though - some people tend to get touchy whenever SW is mentioned... 8O :roll:

And this isn't an insult of your work Jig! Heaven forbid that!
Author:  jigalypuff [ 05 Jun 2005, 13:02 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
i have no idea what a jedi starfighter looks like :lol: i fell asleep watching the new sw movies, they are so crap :evil: i was thinking of makeing it a tos era ship, like if the vulcans and humans had never met, how would vulcan design go?
Author:  Scotty [ 05 Jun 2005, 13:09 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
*laughs* Three was good, one and two were left a bit short.

I like the simplicity in the design, it would go well in the TOS era.
Author:  ftranschel [ 05 Jun 2005, 13:10 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
jigalypuff wrote:
i have no idea what a jedi starfighter looks like :lol: i fell asleep watching the new sw movies, they are so crap :evil: i was thinking of makeing it a tos era ship, like if the vulcans and humans had never met, how would vulcan design go?


I think it would go exactly that way you created since this is what we saw the vulcans designed in ENT and apparently no human engineers helped them ;-)
Author:  xir_ [ 05 Jun 2005, 18:13 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
i think that ship is very cleaver showing a gradual movement from one large nacelle to two smaller ones with more combat survivability.

keep up the good work jig
Author:  dabomb [ 06 Jun 2005, 21:59 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
but woudl splitting it actually help? i would think that it would reduce the effectiveness of the warp drive ? (i may be incorrect i dunno!) But those tiny little gaps would mean much difference if they hit or miss cos if u hit through that gap most likely ure gonan hit somethign else anyway..
Author:  ftranschel [ 06 Jun 2005, 22:26 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Since we all know nothing about warp physics, I think we should better call it "plot propulsion" ;-)

That means: The TV-Editors create (or let create) the ships as they want them. It has nothing to to with effectiveness or something =)
Author:  Winterhawk [ 07 Jun 2005, 05:24 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Excelent Design. Sleek, smooth, clean. Now My question as I do not know the Era that was mentioned above. Would this be more of a science type, or defenceive? Personally I see it as ( just my idea) as an Attack crusier , but only used (following Vulcan teachings) as a last resort.
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 07 Jun 2005, 11:00 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Even though Vulcan ships are typically Science-minded, we know that Vulcan ships are tactically extremely capable (At least in comparison to Enterprise)

I don't really think it would make much of a difference really on the class, although it would be nice to have several distinctly different ships.

And who knows? Perhaps Vulcan ships were still being built as test beds of new Starfleet technologies or something? Weren't they still in use in TNG times for the defense of Vulcan or something? I'm sure I heard something to that effect...? :?

...

Having two Nacelles IS better than having one. Having two Nacelles gives your Warp capability more redundancy, (So you can still use Warp, even if one of the Nacelles becomes damaged)

We also know from Enterprise that having multiple Nacelles increases the speed at which you can go. During a Xindi attack on Enterprise, one of the Warp engines gets totally destroyed, and the Chief Engineer states that their maximum Warp factor is way below their normal top speed. (Warp 1.7 instead of Warp 5 on the old scale)

This must mean that multiple engines gives you more power, so higher Warp capability. (Although it of course uses double the amount of fuel, since you have doubled the number of engines)

This also explains why any single-Nacelled designs are limited to the ENT/TOS eras, as far as I know.
Author:  ftranschel [ 07 Jun 2005, 11:21 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
AFAIR the has nothing to do with "multiplication" of Engine, but with enhanced warp-field-geometry. So the efficency of the energy is much higher with two nacelles in comparison. For example, a two-nacelled ship would have to spend not half the energy, but far less than half the energy to reach warp 4 in comparison to a one-nacelled ship. Obviously you can even go faster with these two-nacelle designs, but *in* the limitations of the geometry. That's why the newer Intrepid-Class can go rather fast in Comparison to the Constellation, which has double the amount of nacelles. Another argument for that is that we've never seen configurations with more than 4 nacelles. If the count would multiplicate (or at least scale quasi-linear), why are there no 24-nacelled ships or 1000-nacelled ships? 8)
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 07 Jun 2005, 12:04 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Could you imagine BUILDING a 1000-Nacelle ship? :lol:

Yeah, the Warp geometry is the most important factor. The more finely you can adjust the Warp bubble to fit around your ship, the less energy you waste to subspace, the faster you can go.

Quad-Nacelled designs of ship have distinct advantages AND dissadvantages, which is WHY 1000-Nacelle ships don't exist.

The advantage the Constellation class had, for example was that not only did it have double the amount of redundancy, it was also able to maintain Warp speeds for a far long time than most double-Nacelled designs.

By simply using two of the Nacelles, you can achieve a high Warp velocity. When these two engines become 'tired', you simply have to switch to the other two Nacelles, and they carry on the work.

This sounds great, so why isn't the design always used? The reason is that the more Nacelles you have, the harder it is to get the Warp bubbles to overlap effectively (So you waste far more energy) and it is FAAAAAAR harder to make effective repairs to those Nacelles, due to the extra callibration of the engines needed.

I imagine the Constellation class was a test-bed for such ships, with similar classes planned, but once they entered service, the strain began to show. Starfleet probably had to shelve their plans for more Quad-Nacelled designs then. :(

This is likely why we have never seen other classes with multiple Nacelles - it simply isn't an effective combat design. :(
Author:  The_Logical_Man [ 07 Jun 2005, 16:10 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Except the prometheus :P

But then it only had 4 so that it could seperate and maintain warp speeds :D
Author:  ftranschel [ 07 Jun 2005, 17:01 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
According to the (semi-canon) documentation it indeed has five: The middle-section has one nacelle as well, which is hidden at normal travelling.
Author:  The_Logical_Man [ 07 Jun 2005, 20:21 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Top section has one located aft of the bridge which extends after seperation if you want to be predantic :P
Author:  ftranschel [ 07 Jun 2005, 20:25 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Thanks.
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 07 Jun 2005, 20:37 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Yes, but they don't function all at the same time, as part of the same ship, do they?

Because of this, even the Prommie technically still has only two Nacelles (Or one, if you count the Top Section, like you guys said)

Of course there are fanboy ships out there with more Nacelles...
Author:  Winterhawk [ 07 Jun 2005, 22:38 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
So what you all are telling me is Speed is the most important thing for you in a ships design? Speed is good, but I would also like a stronger sheild around mine, This would help for when one enters an orbit. Also a stronger canon (s) for longer range.
Author:  ftranschel [ 07 Jun 2005, 23:36 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Who said speed is what we want? The design of a starship truly needs to be adapted from the warp-field geometries to stay in canon trek terms. Since this is a limitation, everything else just depends on the sort of ship you want to get. Apparently I've never seen any Klingon ship looking like a fed ship, while the physics for them are the same. Thus, trek ship designers of course have a broad palette of configurationable "features" of a starship, but all have the same rules of warp to follow. That includes warships as well as scouts or science vessels, and if there is one culture preferring battlerships, give them battleships. The crucial point is: A stronger tactical potential comes with a more comprehensive warp geometry, thus making the ship a bit less maneuverable, so to say even slower.
Author:  Winterhawk [ 08 Jun 2005, 05:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
ftranschel;

Ahh! My Bad! I get ya. Sorry I'm not that techincal as far as the game goes. Guess you could call me the Dunce of the BOTF/Trek experiance. I used to be that way, but 25 years ago I had a lot lass worries and way more life! lol

You all keep up the great info though! I really enjoy reading the knowledge you all share here!
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 08 Jun 2005, 13:03 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
But if knowledge is power, then to be unknown, is to be unconquerable! :wink:

...

Another problem with having multiple Nacelles, would be radiation.

Federation starships tend to have Nacelles that are spaced relatively far apart.

However, if you look at a B'rel, the 'Nacelles' (If you can call those tiny things Nacelles) are very closely spaced together.

This makes the ship incredibly maneouverable, since hardly any energy is wasted through the non-overlap of Warp fields. You also have to spend very little time on the maintenance of the Warp fields, so the Engineers can spend more time on the weapons etc. (It is a Klingon ship, afterall)

Close Nacelles increase the radiation exposure risk to the crew, however, which is why Federation ships tend to have these spaced-out Nacelle configurations. It is a trade-off between performance, ease of use, and maintenance.

There is also another down-side to close Nacelles. If one Nacelle is hit by weapons fire, it would be likely that the other Nacelle would also be hit, on close-space Nacelles.

The further apart your engines are, the harder it is for an enemy to take them out, so the better off you will be in battle. It adds further defensive capability to the ship, so the ship can always try to Warp away. Of course, it is still possible to loose both Nacelles, in which case, you have to rely on Impulse.

...

Increasing the number of Nacelles, would effectively increase the amount of radiation from such systems. You could argue that shuch ships would carry heavier radiation shielding, but that in itself is the problem.

Radiation shield generators would need a lot of redundant systems, to ensure that they do not fail, risking the lives of the crew.

They would need independant power sources, and would have to be shielded themselves, to minimise the risk of damage in battle.

All this extra equipment increases the mass of the starship, whilst decreasing the available space for other ships systems.

The amount of cargo space would also be inevitably be decreased, which in the case of Explorer-type vessels (Which would likely be the main use of such Nacelle configurations) would be disastrous.

These further limitations add extra weight to my ideas behind the demise of the Constellation class.
Author:  Winterhawk [ 09 Jun 2005, 08:05 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Matress,

Might I interject a bit?

Being that I have a 5 year background in Nuclear power, i understand your points. However ( basing my knowledge is similar to necelles) I can only slightly disagree about the shielding problem/ weight/space factor. Shielding and systems to operate them would be compact and ultralight weight. (This is just my view by the way, I'm not expert by any shape or means) Weight, I'm looking at the most being 1 metric ton per nescelle, provided we are talking that they are in seperate areas of the ship.

Now twin nescelles (within say 10 meters of each other) would weigh close to 3.5 metric tons (I'm not good at conversion from U.S. Standard to metric, out of pratice I guess)

The true probelm I see is distance from teh nescelle(s) to the ships outer hull and electromagnetic interference from both inner shielding and outer defenseive shielding.

Remember I'm only going by what I have knowledge of now. Your probably closer to the truth of it then I am.
Author:  ftranschel [ 09 Jun 2005, 11:04 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
The biggest mistake you can do is (IMHO) trying to put our real physics together with trek sci-fi-physics, which has some important backdraws such as sounds in the vacuum, lights coming trugh electromagnetic-shielding etc. pp.

This way I'd rather have doubts in your - rationally seen - very clear and very correct points the trek-way physics work.
Author:  Matress_of_evil [ 09 Jun 2005, 14:40 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
We have Science on one hand, and Treknoscience on the other.

Where possible, Treknoscience is actually based on current known fact. However, that science is then 'adjusted' to make a better storyline, etc.

On top of that, the writers themselves are NOT Nuclear Engineers or whatever, so we can't rely on Treknoscience being perfect. (Heinous crime to mention, but true :cry:)

On top of that again, the special effects, CG, etc. are all done by different companies, so differences in what we see/know/can guess will crop up from that too (An example would be the 'actual' sizes of ships like the Defiant or the size of a station like DS9)

Anyway, what i'm trying o say is that there isn't a right or wrong answer - there is only a Trek answer. If it 'works' and looks good, it likely Trek. :wink:

...

The radiation is from a canon source from what I remember (I just can't remember what that sourcem is! :roll: :oops:)

I have also mentioned this before elsewhere on the site. Anyway, like you said, Winterhawk, say the equipment was 1 ton. For a Quad-Nacelled design, that's four tons of extra mass, on top of the additional mass of the 'extra' Nacelles themselves, the panelling, equipment, conduits, Jefferies tubes, whatever.

Ok, four tons of mass on a Federation ship is nothing, but those extra things do add up. Any additional mass means either you need more powerful engines, or you're gonna be going slower, with less maneoverability than you want.

On top of that, there is the loss of space. Ok, from ENT, we know there is a lot of empty pace inside the Nacelles, but what of the Nacelles from VGR/DS9/Beyond?

(To my knowledge) We haven't seen the inside of those Nacelles in any great detail, so any ideas would be purely speculation and conjecture.

However, I imagine that over time, more equipment is going to be packed into the Nacelles, so that even with miniaturisation, you're still gonna need all the space you can get.

How else do you explain the fact that if anything, Federation Nacelles have been slowly getting bigger, not smaller (Other than Gene Roddenberries' rule against 'stunted' Nacelles)

If you need something to be bigger, it's because you need it to be more powerful or have a higher capacity, afterall. :wink:

This is why I think that any such radiation shielding must be large/bulky.
Author:  Winterhawk [ 09 Jun 2005, 17:51 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
I must cuncur! *Hats off to you*

I went to my brothers home and look at a few of his hundred books and or papers on the specs of ships. sadly there really isn't much on that aspect other then Federation. Reguarding ship size vs nescelle sizes. If the ships demsions were accurate ( we know there not of course) but if they were, lets say the constellation class, there would only be room for crew and other items for about 7 to 8 members, but those puppies would be fast! like warp speeds surpassing the 20's. The power plants and adjoining supports would encompass 1/4 of the total size of the ship.


That it is I figured it correctly. Design is not my thing so I'm betting I'm way off.
Author:  Jarok [ 10 Jun 2005, 05:41 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Very cool design! I like it! 8O

As you have all said, the game is to be based on canon as much as possible. However, gameplaying logic must dictate a few concessions! Like the possibility of the Federation and the Vulcans not meeting for a long, LONG time, or the Vulcans being 'reunified' by certain, unnamed evil Matresses, or supposedly dead admirals. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Anyway, there need to be more later Vulcan ship designs. From what I understand of ENT(and it's not much, so help me out if I'm wrong), the human conception of warp drive was different from the Vulcan idea. I read that the Vulcans were extremely skeptical about the first human efforts to pass warp 2 in Cochrane-style ships. Their ring-shaped warp engine design bears this out. Eventually, of course, the success of the NX class forces them to quietly reconsider, and we see very few Vulcan ships after ENT. (nice little touch of B&B terra-centrism.... Good 'ol human (almost American, really) know-how obviously will defeat the ingenuity of a millenia-old, scientifically-oriented, logical spacefaring race....:roll:) Of course, those we do see (the T'Pau, etc.) still have the ring warp drive.

To make a long story short, the ring is part of the Vulcan design philosophy, and is as much a trademark as the twin-nacelled Federation design. I say go with it! :D
Author:  Jarok [ 10 Jun 2005, 05:52 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Matress, in one TNG episode (can't remember, though :oops: ) we see the inside of the Enterprise-D's warp nacelle. You are right, they are pretty much empty space. Basically, the entire space within the warp coils is empty.

I don't know how radiation shielding works post-ENT, but my understanding was that it was related to either the primary shields or the navigational deflector (or some other shielding system). If there was simply fixed radiation shielding, then shield failure in unpleasant places shouldn't have been a problem in TNG :lol: So anyway, my vote is for deflector shields of some kind.... that should free up some space, and explain how Klingon BoP personnel and Cardassians aren't 'oven-toasted' ..... very often.... :lol:

I also, like you, think it is interesting that nacelles have generally gotten bigger. But if you think about it, miniaturization doesn't necessarily effect everything. Your continent, for example, is building a generally very uber-cool new airplane. It has.....large....engines :D Perhaps, as you conjectured, the need to produce a larger stable warp field trumps the miniaturization of components.

I suppose that the real advances are in efficiency, while the size of the warp nacelles is generally dictated by the size of the ship. TNG and later ships are far, FAR faster than their TOS counterparts, etc. And they're more efficient, too. I guess the ASDB finally gave up on using GM to design their new engines, and settled for Honda. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Author:  ftranschel [ 10 Jun 2005, 10:06 ]
Post subject:  Re: concept future
Matress_of_evil wrote:
On top of that, there is the loss of space. Ok, from ENT, we know there is a lot of empty pace inside the Nacelles, but what of the Nacelles from VGR/DS9/Beyond?

(To my knowledge) We haven't seen the inside of those Nacelles in any great detail, so any ideas would be purely speculation and conjecture.


I believe there was a TNG-episode (one of them where Troi and Worf came together ?!) about a murder on a station located in front of the nacells, so to say in between the bussard collectors an the nacelle itself, where has been shown that there still is no *usable* space in the nacelles.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/