Spoilers 31st/32nd Century Ships Revealed

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I'm too old school for all these new designs.
I can live with an occasional weirdly placed 'hole' but the disconnected/floating parts just looks stupid to me.

Given that Floor Space / Volume is at a premium on a StarShip, why would you want to make inefficient Cut-outs in your StarShip unless it serves a technical purpose?

As for the modular / floating Warp Nacelles, I can find tactical use for that mid combat or out in the field.

If 1x of your Warp Nacelles is damaged, imagine an ally bringing you a replacement unit to attach to your pylon.
Real Time Swapping of Warp Nacelles in minutes, instead of depending on a Tow to drag your StarShip back to a Repair facility.

Or lets say you need to get back out into the field ASAP because of mission critical readiness and you're near your StarBase.

Having a quick swap Warp Nacelle would be a nice way to get back to FTL readiness.

A damaged Warp Nacelle can be repaired at base while a fresh new unit can be ready to go in minutes.

Having your Warp Nacelle be Floating for the sake of it doesn't make much logical sense.

StarFleet vessels are already pretty damn manueverable at SubLight.

And having to replicate an entire WarpCore System in each Warp Nacelle seems like a wasteful use of resources and only increases mass & complicating designs.

Ergo Warp Nacelles attaching back to the Pylon to get access to the Electro Plasma feeds to power the Warp Drive makes ALOT more logical sense.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Given that Floor Space / Volume is at a premium on a StarShip, why would you want to make inefficient Cut-outs in your StarShip unless it serves a technical purpose?

Because they like the way it looks.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Because they like the way it looks.

If this was your 'Personal StarShip' like the "La Sirena" or "Book's Ship".

Then yeah, you should do whatever you want; even if it's Form over Function.

But I have a hard time seeing StarFleet, a very practical organization going that route for the sake of Aesthetics.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

STO has established the F, and that the Universe-class J exists in any suitable timeline.

STO hasn't established anything at all. Whatever it says, is intended only for the game, and has no binding on anything outside the game's continuity.

Any Trek show (or, for that matter, novel) can and will contradict the shit out of STO.

 

[Tuskin38]

Picard has already contradicted STO, yeah.
The developer stance is they'll adapt any lore that don't contradict big parts of the game's existing story, and ignore anything that would invalidate entire storylines.

 

[fireproof78]

Given that Floor Space / Volume is at a premium on a StarShip, why would you want to make inefficient Cut-outs in your StarShip unless it serves a technical purpose?

Perhaps in early Starfleet I would agree. This Starfleet has "bigger on the inside" type technology which basically means space is no longer a premium, ships should increasingly automated, and crew demands should be minimized.

Cut outs are not just technical. Ship design is about speaking a measure to those who would be encountered by them, either potential friend or potential foe.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Perhaps in early Starfleet I would agree. This Starfleet has "bigger on the inside" type technology which basically means space is no longer a premium, ships should increasingly automated, and crew demands should be minimized.

Cut outs are not just technical. Ship design is about speaking a measure to those who would be encountered by them, either potential friend or potential foe.

They don't seem to be using TARDIS tech where it's bigger on the inside by the time we hit the 32nd century.

 

[fireproof78]

They don't seem to be using TARDIS tech where it's bigger on the inside by the time we hit the 32nd century.

Even if not, the cut outs are to convey a message. Design isn't just technical specifications but also appearance projection.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Even if not, the cut outs are to convey a message. Design isn't just technical specifications but also appearance projection.

So Vanity & "putting on a sense of Sophistication" instead of practicality.

 

[fireproof78]

So Vanity & "putting on a sense of Sophistication" instead of practicality.

Yes. Not everything is practical especially in a (near) post scarcity environment.

 

[Vale]

Watching federation starships be reduced to tiny pods that were bigger on the inside like the ship from 'future tense' would have been incredibly alienating and none of you complainers would have been happy with that either.

I'm an even bigger fan of Doctor Who than I am of Star Trek, I'll take that bet

 

[Vale]

I think my biggest problem with the "floaty nacelles" thing is that we've never seen it before, despite some races being significantly more advanced than Starfleet; and now suddenly it's everywhere. It's never been a logical design progression so much as hinted at before. And why do Earth ships suddenly look like blocky can openers when we know that the classic saucer-nacelles arrangement was originally an Earth design?

 

[fireproof78]

I would imagine it is an outcome from the burn to try and minimize some of the potential for damage. Developmental progression, especially in space future, is not logical and it definitely is not linear.

 

[137th Gebirg]

I think my biggest problem with the "floaty nacelles" thing is that we've never seen it before, despite some races being significantly more advanced than Starfleet; and now suddenly it's everywhere. It's never been a logical design progression so much as hinted at before. And why do Earth ships suddenly look like blocky can openers when we know that the classic saucer-nacelles arrangement was originally an Earth design?

We've jumped forward by 8-900 years in-show. I'm not sure there was anything "sudden" about it.

Also keep in mind that, only 100 years ago we were just beginning to explore electricity and commercial/military flight applications. Now we have the next generation of spaceflight being planned and quantum computing technology already a reality.

I agree with fireproof78 here. Technological advancement is definitely not linear. It's logarithmic and it's advancing rapidly. Faster than I think we are ethically or intellectually capable of handling, TBH.

 

[fireproof78]

Faster than I think we are ethically or intellectually capable of handling, TBH.

Ethically for sure because people treat it as inevitable with no regard for the impact it could potentially have.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Precisely.

 

[Vale]

I would imagine it is an outcome from the burn to try and minimize some of the potential for damage. Developmental progression, especially in space future, is not logical and it definitely is not linear.

What damage? Dilithium is in the warp core, which isn't in the nacelles in either the 22nd, 23rd, 24th, or apparently 32nd centuries. The only thing close to a canon explanation is that detached nacelles can "enhance manoeuvrability", though exactly how is never explained.

We've jumped forward by 8-900 years in-show. I'm not sure there was anything "sudden" about it.

931 years, and it was a pretty sudden jump. Also – as I said, we've met races and beings significantly more advanced than the Federation and Starfleet before, and never, not once, has anyone else used floaty nacelles. Now we know that certainly the Federation, Earth, and Vulcan at least are all using them in the 32nd century.

Also keep in mind that, only 100 years ago we were just beginning to explore electricity and commercial/military flight applications. Now we have the next generation of spaceflight being planned and quantum computing technology already a reality.

You're actually agreeing with me here, but you don't realise it. 32nd century starships are still using the same basic FTL drive technology as the NX-01 – matter/antimatter reactions moderated by dilithium crystals, which have to be mined and can't be replicated/substituted by anything else. There's not even any indication that the ships are substantially faster with conventional warp drive than anything we've seen up until the late 24th century. This is absurd.

I agree with fireproof78 here. Technological advancement is definitely not linear. It's logarithmic and it's advancing rapidly. Faster than I think we are ethically or intellectually capable of handling, TBH.

There's no evidence that "technological advancement" is logarithmic – or exponential, or geometric. Some, such as science historian James Burke and archaeoastronomer Gerald S Hawkins, argue that the rate of technological development is inherently unpredictable. There is in fact some evidence that the rate of technological development has been decreasing in recent decades.

Edited for spelling and grammar.

 

[fireproof78]

What damage? Dilithium is in the warp core, which isn't in the nacelles in either the 22nd, 23rd, 24th, or apparently 32nd centuries. The only thing close to a canon explanation is that detached nacelles can "enhance manoeuvrability", though exactly how is never explained.

Same damage that happens when nacelles are damaged, only in reverse.

 

[137th Gebirg]

931 years, and it was a pretty sudden jump.

Sudden for Disco’s POV. Very much non-sudden for everyone else in that timeline.

The Whale Probe had that detached rotating bit.

 

[TimeIsAPredator]

If ships are operating off of TARDIS tech in the 32nd century what happens if the power goes ?
Does everyone get squished or suddenly find themselves standing in an empty room ?
Also if power goes how do people move around a ship that is in multiple disconnected parts ?