Designing a starship...

[Warped9]

This isn't really about Trek, but I don't know where else to put it. I have an idea for something that could be fun and might also stretch mental abilities.

Designing a starship. Or more specifically elements of a starship. This is actually something I'm doing myself, but I thought it worthwhile to broaden available ideas for consideration.

So I'll just toss out some thoughts and see what folks think. Maybe someone's got better ideas.

Bridge
Since we're talking far future and having access to advanced computer systems and sophisticated A.I. is it really necessary or even desirable to have a human helmsman/navigator or pilot? Wouldn't it be more effective to have the ship's commander just tell the "ship" what he wants and where he wants to go? The A.I. could respond and react a lot faster and more accurately than a human pilot. Note that I still think it desirable to have human pilots in the event that the A.I. pilot were ever out of commission. This system could apply to shuttlecraft as well.

Auxiliary Craft
Is it really effective to have a large and empty flight deck that you have to depressurize and pressurize for departing/returning shuttlecraft. Depending on your ship design your auxiliary craft could be securely docked outside and you enter/exit via a hatch/airlock. If you do want to store your auxiliary craft inside then you could employ something like a plasma window (I believe this sort of thing actually exists, but on a small scale presently). It would look something like TNG and Star Wars where the flight deck doesn't need to be depressurized and you just fly through the forcefield.

These are only the first two things I'm considering. Perhaps others might think of something else.

 

[Santaman]

Bridge, I wouldn't want the A.I. steer the damn thing, else you'd just make a probe without any crew and thats exactly what we don't want..

A flight deck might seem a waste of space but makes making repairs a lot easier.

I think that if the people of the future are like us then they'd build ships Star Trek style (if thats technicaly possible) not because its effective or anything but its about us humans exploring, not the A.I. exploring.

 

[Wingsley]

This isn't really about Trek, but I don't know where else to put it. I have an idea for something that could be fun and might also stretch mental abilities.

Designing a starship. Or more specifically elements of a starship. This is actually something I'm doing myself, but I thought it worthwhile to broaden available ideas for consideration.

So I'll just toss out some thoughts and see what folks think. Maybe someone's got better ideas.

Bridge
Since we're talking far future and having access to advanced computer systems and sophisticated A.I. is it really necessary or even desirable to have a human helmsman/navigator or pilot? Wouldn't it be more effective to have the ship's commander just tell the "ship" what he wants and where he wants to go? The A.I. could respond and react a lot faster and more accurately than a human pilot. Note that I still think it desirable to have human pilots in the event that the A.I. pilot were ever out of commission. This system could apply to shuttlecraft as well.

Auxiliary Craft
Is it really effective to have a large and empty flight deck that you have to depressurize and pressurize for departing/returning shuttlecraft. Depending on your ship design your auxiliary craft could be securely docked outside and you enter/exit via a hatch/airlock. If you do want to store your auxiliary craft inside then you could employ something like a plasma window (I believe this sort of thing actually exists, but on a small scale presently). It would look something like TNG and Star Wars where the flight deck doesn't need to be depressurized and you just fly through the forcefield.

These are only the first two things I'm considering. Perhaps others might think of something else.

I think it all depends on how you're approaching your "starship" project. And your approach will frame how you define a starship.

If you are approaching this project from the standpoint of writing a sci fi/fantasy story or making a TV show or movie like STAR TREK, and if your starship is to be an FTL "ship of the line" reminiscent of the Constitution-class (whether it be in the TREK universe or in an entirely different one), I would suggest that if you are using TOS or TNG as a kind of guide then you will likely wind up with a manned helm/navigator console on a bridge for dramatic purposes as well as logical ones.

The way I see it, computers in shows like TOS, TNG, SPACE:1999, STARGATE SG-1, etc. do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of number-crunching and maybe analysis. They are typically not left to make decisions. So the machines require human input. The consoles on the bridges of the various starships named Enterprise are actually very automated. Look at the helm/nav console in TOS. They look quite simple. So much of the process must already be automated. The console itself must be a computer of sorts, to provide a top-layer interface for the ships' pilots to work with.

As I see it, the lowest common denominator of just about all space dramas on TV and/or movies in the last few decades has been to equip your hero-starship with some sort of general-purpose launch bay for embarked craft. Making the launch bay general purpose is dramatically necessary to allow for the possibility of unusual applications, such as recovering non-standard craft, space debris, etc. It also makes it possible to accept the visitation of alien craft that may not be able to "dock".

It's easy enough to imagine a TREK starship equipped with dockable "escape pods" that could serve as embarked craft, but what if the craft (or the mothership) has docking problems? Is it "open the pod bay door, Hal" time again?

Now if you are just designing a starship for conceptual purposes and you're not making assumptions for contingencies like combat, unusual cargo loading, alien ships, debris recovery, etc., you may be able to disregard much of this. It all depends on your approach.

 

[Warped9]

Much of the piloting even on a Trek starship has to already be done by computer since all the little variables and details would be too complex for a human to calculate within a reasonable period of time.So the helmsman is really just doing the most generalized of things while the helm/nav system is sweating the details. An A. I. pilot just eliminates the middleman. And we're talking about an A.I. that is interactive in much the same way as a Starfleet starship computer system. Actually more sophisticated.

 

[Captain Robert April]

I think you need to start off by figuring out what your power source is. If you're dealing with a big generator of some sort, then you build the ship around that generator.

 

[ngc7293]

One thought is WHERE is the bridge. If this is not Trek, then think of submarines where the bridge is inside. It sounds like even though you don't want this to be a Trek ship you are giving it a Trek type crew. You could very easily do something like the TNG ep. Tin Man where one person is in charge of the bridge.
Another idea is the show Andromeda where the A.I. took an Avatar form. You could have an Android directly connected to the A.I. as the ships Pilot.

About the shuttle bay. Decide on the size of your ship and then decide what to do about the bay. If your ship is big, then you probably have plenty of room for that maintenance bay. If it is a small ship, maybe you have a shuttle directly attached to the hull much like those on most trek ships. There is still room for maintenance, but maybe that area is not pressurized most of the time?

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think something to take into consideration is what kind of society your starship comes from or how it values its technology. In Trek, Federation starships seemed to be designed around the idea that extra space onboard is necessary and it isn't a problem to keep pressurized large areas that may be empty most of the time. What we might consider wasteful and impractical might not matter to a society that can afford that, IMO.

As far as the placement of the bridge is concerned, eh, it might actually be a moot point. While it would seem to be sheer folly to place a command center on the uppermost level of a ship like an oceangoing vessel, is there truly a really safe place anywhere on a starship? Just how much safer would it be for the bridge to be on deck eleven than on deck one from a natural or deliberate threat? Is it just as good to have an auxiliary bridge (or auxiliary control) located in the heart of the ship that could take over if the main bridge was knocked out?

Engine placement. One could design a starship where the engines are at the front of the ship rather than the back. As long as they're still outboard from the main body of the ship, they could really be placed anywhere.

Another thing to consider is the necessity for the decks of a ship to be aligned horizontal to the ship's flight direction. They could be aligned vertical to that too...

 

[SilentP]

Something else to consider is the purpose of your ship.

Does it have a specific mission in mind, i.e. construction, exploring, defense etc.?

Or is it a general purpose ship like most starships we see in Trek?

Or perhaps it might be able to alter itself to assume different tasks, for example, the Nebula-class can switch out it's top 'mission pod' for different missions.

 

[Warped9]

The crew will be about a hundred, give or take a few. The bridge isn't at the very top, but near that general area. I do lean towards having the auxiliary craft inside (for ease of loading and service) with something like a plasma window for launching. Of course when the fight deck isn't in use then there's a sold hatch in addition to the plasma field.

I was thinking of zero point energy for a main power source. Of course I'm open to alternative suggestions.

The ship is primarily for intensive planetary survey for classification and suitability for habitation for colonization and determining degree of terraforming required, if any.

 

[SilentP]

So a surveyor ship in essense? In that case, I'd definitely go for having auxilary craft as an option (for in situ surveys by personnel). For the type of extensiving investigation which you indicate is required, I'd aslo suggest a fairly large payload of (preferably reusable) probes/satellites to help set up a large field of 'eyes' to look planets over. This allows specialist sensors to be spaced around the 'net' so that whatever planetary specialists are aboard the ship are able to digest information as quickly as possible and also reduce having hog additional time on the ship's own sensors.

 

[Irishman]

This isn't really about Trek, but I don't know where else to put it. I have an idea for something that could be fun and might also stretch mental abilities.

Designing a starship. Or more specifically elements of a starship. This is actually something I'm doing myself, but I thought it worthwhile to broaden available ideas for consideration.

So I'll just toss out some thoughts and see what folks think. Maybe someone's got better ideas.

Bridge
Since we're talking far future and having access to advanced computer systems and sophisticated A.I. is it really necessary or even desirable to have a human helmsman/navigator or pilot? Wouldn't it be more effective to have the ship's commander just tell the "ship" what he wants and where he wants to go? The A.I. could respond and react a lot faster and more accurately than a human pilot. Note that I still think it desirable to have human pilots in the event that the A.I. pilot were ever out of commission. This system could apply to shuttlecraft as well.

Auxiliary Craft
Is it really effective to have a large and empty flight deck that you have to depressurize and pressurize for departing/returning shuttlecraft. Depending on your ship design your auxiliary craft could be securely docked outside and you enter/exit via a hatch/airlock. If you do want to store your auxiliary craft inside then you could employ something like a plasma window (I believe this sort of thing actually exists, but on a small scale presently). It would look something like TNG and Star Wars where the flight deck doesn't need to be depressurized and you just fly through the forcefield.

These are only the first two things I'm considering. Perhaps others might think of something else.

I think that any framework under which you design a starship is going to carry with it a certain set of presuppositions. Think of it as the foundation upon which it is built. What technology level does its builders' possess? What is the nature of their society? Economy(or have they made commerce obsolete?)

Is this a society that exists within a solar system? A part of a galaxy? A true galactic society?

Are those designing this starship also going to be using it? What are their biological requirements for life in space?

 

[BillJ]

Another question would be: Is the entire crew going to be awake for the entire journey?

 

[SilentP]

^ I think that would depend upon the technology level for the ship. Say if it's a barely FTL ship making long journeys, cyrogenic/stasis facilities are a must and thusly having a crew that's asleep for the majority of the journey, whereas ships that are capable of making somewhat decent time without using up all consumables such as food, water etc. could easily sustain having the crew awake for the journey.

Though long duration voyages might require additional considerations for crew recreation etc.

 

[BillJ]

Though long duration voyages might require additional considerations for crew recreation etc.

Hookers?

 

[Captain Robert April]

^ Pleasure droids. Fewer complications, easier to clean, etc.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Just a warning, for your safety:

 

[bryce]

It's all great to want to keep humans in charge of things - but first time you come across an enemy with ships that are piloted - and who weapons are *targeted* - by an computer...you are gonna be outmatched.

When your weapons officer takes many seconds to target weapons - and only after he/she has been ordered by the captain to - against a ship that has targeted and fired in the first *nanoseconds* it encountered you - you are gonna be toast. Your ship is gonna be a vapor cloud before your commanding officer can even say "fire." Hell, you are gonna be toast before your human crew has time to *think* "We need to fire weapons..."

And by then - assuming you *weren't* completely taken out - buy the time you target and fire back - the AI-piloted ship is gonna have anticipated and moved out of the way. Or seen the weapons coming - and moved before a mere human pilot's brain could even register "we need to move". Same for trying to get out of the way yourself when ultra-fast AI-targeted weapons have already been launched against you. And odds are they are smart weapons - and can follow you and adjust to any move a human (or other biological-based) pilot can make faster than the human pilot could make them.

Computers are just faster. Much faster. (And Trek's clumsy 2-D flat keyboard-based interfaces, where you have to enter complex commands an moves by *typing* in numbers and letters...just seem horribly antiquated an inefficient compared to a machine than can just think it an the ship moves...)

If you want to keep a human in the loop - fine. But I would make the human crew cyberneticly enhanced (and when you consider that any future human starship crew is likely to be post-human, it seems likely that they *would* be) - and I would have a augmented human-linked to an AI pilot the ship and fire the weapons. That way you get the best of both worlds.

At the very least - I'd replace the clumsy keyboard interfaces with thought-controls. But even those will be slower than an AI-controlled vessel - or even a vessel where a cyberneticly-augmented human is linked to an AI. (I am assuming some sort of tech magic where the cybernetic enhancements would allow the human to think as fast as the computer...though that would probably mean that some of the human's thought processes are ran on or in the computer...)

 

[Crazy Eddie]

If you want to keep a human in the loop - fine. But I would make the human crew cyberneticly enhanced (and when you consider that any future human starship crew is likely to be post-human, it seems likely that they *would* be) - and I would have a augmented human-linked to an AI pilot the ship and fire the weapons. That way you get the best of both worlds.

I think it would be simpler--and for dramatic reasons, easier--to simply build a more coherent personality into the ship's AI so that the computer ITSELF is a person anyway. That way when your ship suddenly raises shields and goes evasive against that Klingon juggernaut it suddenly sensed attacking it, your computer can actually sit there and describe to the crew what the hell is going on in terms an audience/reader/crew can relate to.

Think of the HAL-9000 on the Discovery, and then download his personality into Daystrom's M5. Actually, every time this subject comes up I always think of Hal's speed and concise analysis of the Monolith-Jupiter phenomenon in 2010 and I think "If you don't have Spock..."

 

[SilentP]

If you want to keep a human in the loop - fine. But I would make the human crew cyberneticly enhanced (and when you consider that any future human starship crew is likely to be post-human, it seems likely that they *would* be) - and I would have a augmented human-linked to an AI pilot the ship and fire the weapons. That way you get the best of both worlds.

I think it would be simpler--and for dramatic reasons, easier--to simply build a more coherent personality into the ship's AI so that the computer ITSELF is a person anyway. That way when your ship suddenly raises shields and goes evasive against that Klingon juggernaut it suddenly sensed attacking it, your computer can actually sit there and describe to the crew what the hell is going on in terms an audience/reader/crew can relate to.

Agreed, having a characterful AI makes it a lot easier to relate to the action and also allows a sentient being to be the one in charge of the firing, rather than 'just' a programme.

Oddly enough, there's a webcomic (called Schlock Mercenary if you're interested) that has AIs essentially running the ships and their weapons. The matter of reaction speeds does come up, with one essentially saying to it's captain at one point, "Give me the authority in the upcoming engagement to act as necessary in the upcoming fight, the time I'd need to clear any course of action might be enough for us to get destroyed."

They're still fallible characters, in that they make mistakes like the rest of us, but in technobabble sense, are still fast enough to deal with the situations on a computer thinking timescale, rather that meatbag time scale.

 

[C.E. Evans]

If you want to keep a human in the loop - fine. But I would make the human crew cyberneticly enhanced (and when you consider that any future human starship crew is likely to be post-human, it seems likely that they *would* be) - and I would have a augmented human-linked to an AI pilot the ship and fire the weapons. That way you get the best of both worlds.

I think it would be simpler--and for dramatic reasons, easier--to simply build a more coherent personality into the ship's AI so that the computer ITSELF is a person anyway. That way when your ship suddenly raises shields and goes evasive against that Klingon juggernaut it suddenly sensed attacking it, your computer can actually sit there and describe to the crew what the hell is going on in terms an audience/reader/crew can relate to.

Agreed, having a characterful AI makes it a lot easier to relate to the action and also allows a sentient being to be the one in charge of the firing, rather than 'just' a programme.

In the often criticized Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda, the hero ship had a sexy female holographic avatar that served that purpose. She was essentially the starship and could run the entire vessel by herself.