So on the most recent TrekYards vessel they revealed / overviewed, it's a Commander Cockings (One of the two hosts) original design with input from 'Rick Sternbach' himself on making it fit into the continuity at the end of ST:Nemesis time line and continuing the ship lineage of design that was helmed by 'Rick Sternbach'. But the most interesting design aspect was the extra Warp Nacelles that function as "Warp Sustainers" / "Back-Up Warp Nacelles" / "Efficiently sized Warp Nacelles for endurance FTL Warp travel". Assuming the logic works within the context of the show's tech and fits in to the design idea of making a ship that is designed to handle USS Voyagers problem of being lost very far away, do you think it's a good idea as a feature for a ship designed to explore Deep Space, far away from the logistical / tactical support of nearby Federation territories / allies / ships? To me, it makes sense in that context as a "Deep Space" explorer that needs to survive on it's own and deal with a Voyager-like situation of being super far away. What are your thoughts on that feature?
There's a part two that hasn't dropped yet that I hope explains some possible separation features to necessitate all those engines. If it doesn't separate, I would have went with less, omitting the lower ones. I don't think they all need accompanying Bussard collectors either for a warp sustaining system. I do like the idea of high warp endurance. I'm impressed with the design.
I don't think it's designed for Saucer Separation or MVAM (Multi-Vector Assault Mode). I think it's a specialist ship for exploring Deep Space, basically the Voyager lost in Delta Quadrant Mission Profile, but intentionally getting lost in the Middle of Nowhere far far away. Ergo the numerous redundancies
A couple of other, onscreen Trek ships seem to have multiple nacelles in a variety of sizes without obvious separation functionality. * There's the early Nebula kitbash that has both scales of E-D kit nacelles, as (barely) seen in the Wolf 359 graveyard and (not much better) seen on various desktops, too. But if one squints, one might decide the small nacelles go with a separable spacecraft that just rides atop the Nebula... * There are "modern Eaves" nacelles at the lower corners of the bow of the ENT space truck Fortunate, and "classic" nacelles under the aft belly of the ship. Only the latter ones have the blue glow. What are the bow ones for? Impulse would be a bad idea if it's supposed to be rocket-like, as the nacelles would then blast right at the containers. * The Jem'Hadar seem proponents of multiple nacelles of varying sizes for all of their big ships... * And what are those mini-nacelles atop the D7/K't'inga? Timo Saloniemi
Watched part 2 last night. I get what he doing with the four nacelles with the line of sight arrangement. Whole design gets my two thumbs up.
Nice, so there's in Universe examples of other ships attempting the same design feature/process throughout history! This would be the first time that the Federation designs this as a base feature =D
not really feeling the 4 little lower nacelles, but the saucer section edge nacelles are a great concept.
I love the overall design of the ship, and the top loos fantastic, but the problem is that the warp sustainers, with the exception of the two on the saucer, are poorly integrated into the design, giving the impression of anemic, tacked-on warp engines. You either need to better integrate them into the hull or differentiate them from regular warp engines, perhaps by removing the Bussard collectors.
Well, for me, unless the ship was designed to separate and operate as 2 or more independent vessels like the Prometheus, then having a warp sustainer/nacelles in a saucer section is a bit pointless. First is the dead weight that will be carried around for probably its whole service life, and the associated maintenance. Would it be useful in an emergency? Possibly, a hull separation is used to make the saucer a big life boat in case the engineering section goes tits up. usually you would have warp capable shuttles, and the ability to call for help. Granted, on some long distance missions, help may be weeks ore even months away ( why I favor ships operating in pairs, or small fleet actions, as in, we have a mission to some nebula/cluster thats 3 months away at high warp ( take the USS Titan) well going alone makes little sense, because even if you have a warp capable saucer section, it would likely be a low warp, and almost useless to get back home. Now if you have say, an expedition group, say another ship a few light years away exploring another system, you wouldn't need a warp life boat. just call ur neighbor. Now for this ship, the saucer may have a seperation and useabliity, but the.. small ship thats stuck on its belly.. naa.. the design is Meh.. Nice lines, but to many warp nacelles.
Oh, I think warp sustainers would be very useful on a saucer after separation, because it would allow the saucer to continue on a significant distance before it dropped out of warp, allowing it to potentially clear the combat area at high velocity while the stardrive engaged any enemies. Furthermore, just because it would take a long time to get anywhere at low warp doesn't mean that low-power warp engines wouldn't be useful if you lost your stardrive. Better to take years to get back to the Federation than to not get there at all. That said, I'd rather see warp engine field grills integrated into the hull as warp sustainers rather than things that look like small warp engines. It's too visually confusing.
...Say, as already happened in "Encounter at Farpoint"? Although subsequently in "Arsenal of Freedom", LaForge thinks it's a good idea to separate at sublight and then let the saucer travel to a distant starbase, rather than to separate at warp so that a "sustainer" could keep the saucer at warp. So apparently the saucer engines can independently accelerate to warp after all. Agreed. And the blue squares on the aft top surface of the TNG saucer would seem to serve well for that purpose... Timo Saloniemi