View Single Post
Old February 21 2012, 01:44 PM   #165
Ian Keldon
Fleet Captain
 
Re: My homebrew kitbashes

From "Jane's Fighting Starships" Communications to the Editor (October 2295 edition)

"A Response to: 'Aesir-class Battlecruisers: Soldiers that need to fade away' "
Submitted by Captain Sedak, Commanding Officer, USS Valhalla

With respect to Commodore Wainright's Communication to the Editor of August 2295, I find I must proffer the following rebuttal:

Waste is illogical. Decommissioning and scrapping the Aesir class would represent a significant sacrifice in terms of components, even taking recycling of components into account. The primary structural assemblies, particularly the hull frames, the reactor core bracings and the main plasma conduit supports are unique to this design, and unsuitable for use in any other class starship. Given that the average Aesir class hull has less than 10,000 hours flight time (out of a projected 173,000 flight hour primary endurance), it would be unfortunate to sacrifice hulls in such good condition when other options are available.

Down-powering the weapons configuration would place the ships within treaty stipulations, while retaining the "rapid response" capability represented by the Mark 6/PB-49 engine specifications. Multi-mission capacity could be enhanced by the substitution of a standard-size Type 9 primary hull in place of the Type 7 currently employed, with only slight modifications needed to the warp field configuration control software. The estimated loss of approximately .4932274 of one warp factor would be an entirely acceptable trade off.


From "Jane's Fighting Starships" Communications to the Editor (December 2295 edition)

"Regarding Aesir*-class refits"
Submitted by Commodore Augustus Wainright, Starfleet Plans and Policies Division

Captain Sedak's proposal, while admirable in it's intent, frankly does little to address the primary issues involved with the Aesir class program.

The substitution of a Type 9 saucer for the current Type 7 only exacerbates the mass situation, adding the better part of 17,000 metric tons to the ship. This would result in even further degraded maneuverability, and place additional strains on both the structural integrity and inertial damper systems, and exacerbating the power efficiency issue. Losing nearly 13% of it's sustained cruise speed and a reduced weapons capacity on top of all that makes even less sense than the proposal to retain the class "as is".

I must wonder if Captain Sedak's logic is "uncertain" where this issue is concerned.
Ian Keldon is offline   Reply With Quote