Designing A Trek Ship

[USS Triumphant]

You're just not getting it AT ALL.

Actually, Tachy, I think kv1at3485 is getting it. The Ship=Q idea was actually something I almost posted earlier, too - only slightly more seriously, as I was going to suggest that the best ship would be no ship at all. Just us, evolved into what the Q believe we could become.

The problem with the thread is that you're leaving the parameters too open ended. Basically, the OP says, build the best ship you can with this box of parts. And then you look in the box, and everything is in there. Of course you can build a damn fine ship. And then, I can tack an extra warp nacelle on just to provide extra power to the ship's laundry, and boom, mine's better. Someone else comes along and adds Q-Cloaking, which actually hides the ship not just from equipment detection but also from The Gods Themselves, and they've one-upped me. It would never end.

So, how about this: let's limit the design to use things we have seen used onscreen by unassimilated mortal humanoids. (We'll sneak Tholians in, too.) And let's assign a maximum cubic volume to use, say, no more than 5000 meters on a side. And there may need to be some other constraints, too, but I'm not entirely awake yet, this morning, so I'll leave those to others to suggest.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

I see your point but I had faith that maturity might surface and posters would be more realistic with their designs.
I could have powered my own ship design with an Omega particle but I didn't.

 

[USS Triumphant]

I see your point but I had faith that maturity might surface and posters would be more realistic with their designs.

Excuse me for a second.



You do remember where you are, right? A website where grown men and women argue about whether or not green-skinned women are sexy?

Seriously, though, it isn't necessarily just a matter of "maturity". Some people feel like in order for a game to be worth playing, there has to be a way to lose. Since that was the whole point of what Kirk was saying to Picard in Generations while they were both in the Nexus, that's going to be especially true here. And what your "realistic" in this context and mine is might be different. A case in point:

I could have powered my own ship design with an Omega particle but I didn't.

Now see, why not? It is screen canon. It isn't like you just made something up from whole cloth.

Personally, I agree with you. But there may be some Voyager fans that have come up with a whole set of "realistic" attributes for Omega particles, in which case it might seem perfectly reasonable to them to use them.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

From what the response says, the ship sounds like it looks kinda like this:

_____Front View_____________Port View______

No, actually...

...Back of the napkin sketch looks a little like this:

Hmm... you're right, I was nowhere near what you meant.

Based off of your picture... which direction would this ship fly? You know, which way is forwards?
Would it fly ^ or would it fly >

^ Thataways.

That's what I meant about the impulse engines taking the load off artificial gravity. Acceleration is ^ way, with the decks arranged ____ way, so all you have to do is adjust gravity and inertial dampeners so the downward force is always exactly 1G. More efficient this way.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I see your point but I had faith that maturity might surface and posters would be more realistic with their designs.

I was, at first. Unfortunately you seem less interested in "realistic" designs than you are in uberships and kewl pictures.

 

[Kross]

The thing that must be kept in mind is aesthetics is important in ship design. True 90%+ of all ship designs in science fiction are unrealistic or silly, but they do serve a purpose. Take the Imperial Stardestroyers from SW, these are ships designed to look intimidating not only to other ships but to anything thinking of crossing their paths. The Romulans build big grandiose ships like the D'Deridex to project that same intimidation and illusion. Starfleet designs their ships to be elegant and graceful, with curves and smooth lines.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Yeah, and Starfleet (At least used to) build with fair amounts of modularity and function in mind as well as style.

newtype_alpha's design is a slight bit ugly (or at least lacking in a heroic look), but in a practical sense, it's far superior to the vast majority of canon designs.

 

[Kross]

Practical and Star Trek do not belong in the same sentence.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Tell that to Matt Jefferies and Andrew Probert.

 

[Tom Riley]

From what the response says, the ship sounds like it looks kinda like this:

_____Front View_____________Port View______

No, actually...

...Back of the napkin sketch looks a little like this:

Hmm... you're right, I was nowhere near what you meant.

Based off of your picture... which direction would this ship fly? You know, which way is forwards?
Would it fly ^ or would it fly >

^ Thataways.

That's what I meant about the impulse engines taking the load off artificial gravity. Acceleration is ^ way, with the decks arranged ____ way, so all you have to do is adjust gravity and inertial dampeners so the downward force is always exactly 1G. More efficient this way.

Oh I get it, that's actually kinda cool, I'd never thought of anything like that.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

[..] what you think would make the most efficient ship design?

That is a very ambiguous phrasing; efficient can be interpreted in multiple ways. Most importantly, no matter how many parts you have or how great your technology is, the most important thing is it's goal; what does it need to accomplish? A different goal means a different ship.

If it's a matter of power, of energy, any ship will consume some energy, if only for the onboard systems. So the most efficient ship is no ship at all.

That looks like a squid. Do the nacelles flap when it moves?

 

[All Seeing Eye]

That is a very ambiguous phrasing; efficient can be interpreted in multiple ways. Most importantly, no matter how many parts you have or how great your technology is, the most important thing is it's goal; what does it need to accomplish? A different goal means a different ship.

LINK

 

[sojourner]

^ "Most efficient" != "capable of doing everything". I will take a specialist at a job over someone who is a Jack-of-all-trades anyday. And based on the post you linked, why not use the timeframe of the U.S.S. Relativety or the Ent-J? Or something 10,000 years later?
If your not going to set any parameters on this hypothetical "most efficient " ship, you might as well draw a circle and label it "U.S.S. Fanboi"

 

[All Seeing Eye]

^ "Most efficient" != "capable of doing everything". I will take a specialist at a job over someone who is a Jack-of-all-trades anyday.

You're assuming the jack of all trades doesn't have the same level of expertise as the so called specialist. Just because someone is a jack of all trades doesn't mean they're not experts and specialists in each field.
Comparing people to building starships is stupid anyway.

And based on the post you linked, why not use the timeframe of the U.S.S. Relativety or the Ent-J? Or something 10,000 years later?

Feel free to do so. I don't recall saying that you couldn't so what the heck is your problem?
If you wanna design a ship with 29th century tech then do it, don't piss and moan about the fact you can do that.
You're not making any sense. But do keep in mind I said tech we've seen, I don't recall seing tech from 10,000 years into the future. If you check my own starship design you'll see it has sub-atomic disrupters, those weapons were only seen on a time agents ship. So what are you trying to say like? you can use 29th century tech so ya know WTF???.

If your not going to set any parameters on this hypothetical "most efficient " ship, you might as well draw a circle and label it "U.S.S. Fanboi"

We've already been through this further up the thread, maturity goes a LONG LONG WAY!
As I said to another poster if all you're here to do is flame, troll or generally just piss and moan about the thread then please dont post in it. If you're not here to add something of substance then just why the hell are you posting in it? This is Trek Tech not TNZ so take your bad attitude over there.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

You're assuming the jack of all trades doesn't have the same level of expertise as the so called specialist. Just because someone is a jack of all trades doesn't mean they're not experts and specialists in each field.

No, that's impossible. The better something (or someone) becomes at doing one thing, the less good it becomes at doing other things. In the case of people, the limiting factor is time: Nobody's immortal. In the case of machines, the limiting factor is technology: Not everything is possible.

It's always a triangle, you see. You can go for 2 of the corners, but never all three. In it's most simplest form it's applicable to any sort of project. In that case, it comes down to time, cost and quality. You can have something with high quality in little time, but it'll cost you the extra manpower. You can have something in little time with little cost, but the quality will suffer. And you can have something with high quality with little cost, but you'll spend an eternity doing it.

It's the same with starships. If you want an efficient starship, you'll have to design it to do one -- and one only -- specific job. It'll be great at that singular job. If you want it to be a multi-role vessel, you'll have to make due to the limitations (size, technology, costs, time, etc.) and it'll be somewhat good at anything but never great at something.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

^ Completely and utterly wrong

By the time of the 24th century time and resources do not matter, the Feds can design whatever they want and build whatever they want they have NO limitations.
The Galaxy Class was one of the most if not THE most efficient ship in Starfleet due to the fact it was multi purpose. What were the limitations of the Galaxy Class?? none whatsoever. What could other ships do that the galaxy Class couldn't??? NOTHING!

Take a Galaxy Class ships basic requirements, add to it another warp core and lots more weapons and defences, give a new better design and you've got the most efficient ship possible and you have zero limitations and it can do whatever any other ship can do.
You could even have a ship as efficient as a Galaxy but nowhere near as big, the Galaxy was for carrying families so build a ship that doesn't carry families and you probably cut the size of it by one third and make it a more agile ship.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

By the time of the 24th century time and resources do not matter

Not true. It does matter, the Federation has a limited territory with limited amounts of materials and energy.

the Feds can design whatever they want and build whatever they want they have NO limitations.

Not true. They have every limitation. Their technology level, the amount of materials and energy available, the amount of manpower, you name it.

The Galaxy Class was one of the most if not THE most efficient ship in Starfleet due to the fact it was multi purpose.

Not true, it wasn't. It was power-hungry, didn't do any of it jobs as good as a dedicated vessel could have (which is why most starships are not multi-role at all) and was more of a statement then a tool.

What were the limitations of the Galaxy Class?? none whatsoever.

Not true, it's limitations where multifold. For example: The space used up for science labs made the amount of firepower it could dish out less. And the other way around; on multiple occasions we've heard mention of science vessels dispatching, especially designed for taking the best scans; those that the galaxy class couldn't.

What could other ships do that the galaxy Class couldn't??? NOTHING!

Not true. Escorts could dish out more firepower for their size. Science vessels could scan and analyse better and further. Carriers like the Akira could bring more fighters to the battlefield. Hospital ships could care for more wounded. Everything the Galaxy class could, another vessel could do better. It's only the fact that it could do everything in a basic capacity, that it was useful for exploring; so you don't have to move a whole fleet of vessels. As such it was efficient in only two things: materials and manpower.

Take a Galaxy Class ships basic requirements, add to it another warp core and lots more weapons and defences, give a new better design and you've got the most efficient ship possible and you have zero limitations and it can do whatever any other ship can do.

Not true. If you did that, you'd simply have a Galaxy Class ship with a new design (which, in effect, makes it another class of ship), more weapons and defences (and thus either more volume and energy-consumption or less science labs) and it's limitations are even bigger then the original.

You could even have a ship as efficient as a Galaxy but nowhere near as big, the Galaxy was for carrying families so build a ship that doesn't carry families and you probably cut the size of it by one third and make it a more agile ship.

That is the only thing you've said that has any basis in truth. But then it wouldn't be as multi-purpose anymore. Strip away things like that and you'd simply have a specialized vessel, which is unsuitable for exploring by it's own.

Give it up; in order for your question to make any kind of sense is to define that question. "Efficiency" isn't an overall concept, it's applicable to any number of things; choose one. If you don't, this is not a real discussion; it becomes a fanboy wank dream. And I'd rather wank on my girlfriend then on some silly boy fantasy.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

^ Completely and utterly wrong

By the time of the 24th century time and resources do not matter, the Feds can design whatever they want and build whatever they want they have NO limitations.

Only the limitations of logic, Tachyon.


What you're speaking of in terms of generality is a matter of percentages. A "Jack of all trades" as 100% of his abilities to devote to all of his skills. IF he has five skills, then that's 20% for each skills. It so happens that Jack is a master of all trades compared to Jill, whose 100% is equivalent to Jack's 20%. Compared to an EQUAL, however, Jack's 20% in one area is inferior to a specialist who devotes 100% of his effort to that skill. You see this with children all the time; the world's most casual adult basketball player is still superior to the world's best trained eight year old. Why? Because though the eight year old may be a specialist, he's on equal terms with an adult generalist in most respects.

It's no different in the 24th century. The Galaxy class is a generalist which makes it superior to most alien's specialist designs. It is NOT, however, superior to specialists of any equivalent race; as 24th century starships go it is not the optimal freighter, nor is it the optimal warship, or the optimal medical ship, or the optimal colony ship, or the optimal towing ship, or the optimal survey ship, or the optimal high speed scout, hell it's not even the most effective Borg killer. As a generalist it's versatile enough to take on all of these tasks reasonably well, but beyond that, the ship relies 100% on the skills of its CREW to make up for its lack of specialty.

And to use your own post as an example of your flawed logic:

What could other ships do that the galaxy Class couldn't??? NOTHING!

The point being, the Galaxy class could do everything that any other ship could do; it could not, however, do them AS WELL as any other ship. It couldn't spit out as much firepower in a single volley as a Vorcha class, nor could it manuever like a bird of prey or a defiant class. It can't evade detection or perform sneak attacks as well as a warbird, and it can't perform long-duration low-profile survey missions as efficiently as the Oberths or Mirandas. It apparently can't carry as many shuttlecraft as an Akira class (and is therefore ill-suited for landing oeprations or evacuation missions). All in all, these are things that shouldn't have to be explained to you; there's a REASON Starfleet maintains more than one type of ship, and it's the same reason the Galaxy Class hasn't replaced every one of them. Generalists can do everything, and they can sometimes outperform an inferior specialist, but the world's best generalist will never be superior to the world's best specialist.

 

[sojourner]

By the time of the 24th century time and resources do not matter, the Feds can design whatever they want and build whatever they want they have NO limitations.
The Galaxy Class was one of the most if not THE most efficient ship in Starfleet due to the fact it was multi purpose. What were the limitations of the Galaxy Class?? none whatsoever. What could other ships do that the galaxy Class couldn't??? NOTHING!

So the Galaxy class is God?

Take a Galaxy Class ships basic requirements, add to it another warp core and lots more weapons and defences, give a new better design and you've got the most efficient ship possible and you have zero limitations and it can do whatever any other ship can do.
You could even have a ship as efficient as a Galaxy but nowhere near as big, the Galaxy was for carrying families so build a ship that doesn't carry families and you probably cut the size of it by one third and make it a more agile ship.

No, you have a ship that would be bigger to fit in all the extra stuff you added. Or you have to remove things to make room for the stuff you added. Either way you are starting to specialize for a specific job - better combat ability.
No matter the technological level there are still limits within that level that will make specialization useful. Just as a Jack-of-all-trades ship will also find uses.

Think of it this way. Say we build ships based on points. Using an abstract 100 points, I build a ship specialized for combat spending all 100 points on weapons and shields and you build a ship where you spend all 100 points on things like science labs and family quarters, long range fuel cells, sensor gear, and some weapons/shields. Yes, your ship will be better suited for long term exploration, but mine will kick ass in a fight.
An "efficient" ship can only be designed when you know it's job. There is no such thing as a generalist ship that is as good as a specialist ship in it's respective field regardless of tech level.

Oh and in reference to the triangle mentioned above, NASA has a saying when designing missions, "Better, Faster, Cheaper - pick any two"

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Not true. It does matter, the Federation has a limited territory with limited amounts of materials and energy.

The Federation has more than enough resources to spare to build a new class of vessel. It's terrirtory is spread across 8,000 lightyears comprising over 150 member world and thousands of colonies. They have more than enough materials to build a new class of ship.

Not true. They have every limitation. Their technology level, the amount of materials and energy available, the amount of manpower, you name it.

You're thinking too much like we're stuck here on Earth and limited to current problems in the military such as budgets. Do you truly believe the Federation doesn't have the resources and manpower to construct ships? what do you think they're doing every damn year?

Not true, it wasn't. It was power-hungry, didn't do any of it jobs as good as a dedicated vessel could have (which is why most starships are not multi-role at all) and was more of a statement then a tool.

Power hungry perhaps but that could have been dealt with by having a larger warp core or perhaps even 2. The ship was power hungry due to a large crew compliment which with a redesign to not carry as many people could be dealt with. I've not once seen any indication another ship could make better scans than a Galaxy class.

Not true, it's limitations where multifold. For example: The space used up for science labs made the amount of firepower it could dish out less. And the other way around;

The Galaxy class was so huge due to the number of crew quarters, many of those could easily be replaced with weapons systems. When the galaxy was first deployed it was the strongest ship in the fleet by far, obviously since early TNG new ships came out like the Prometheus but during it's prime the Galaxy was the most power vessel.

Not true. Escorts could dish out more firepower for their size. Science vessels could scan and analyse better and further. Carriers like the Akira could bring more fighters to the battlefield. Hospital ships could care for more wounded. Everything the Galaxy class could, another vessel could do better.

Just where are you getting this information? your imagination? we saw the Enterprise on many occasions go help planets in need to huge medical assistance and I certainly never saw no Akiras launching fighters.

Not true. If you did that, you'd simply have a Galaxy Class ship with a new design (which, in effect, makes it another class of ship), more weapons and defences (and thus either more volume and energy-consumption or less science labs) and it's limitations are even bigger then the original

Why do you feel the need to assume you have to get rid of one thing to have another? There is no limit to what you can have on a ship, an efficient ship doesn't need to carry crewmembers families so you dont need a large ship to have superior fire power AND all the labs you need.

That is the only thing you've said that has any basis in truth. But then it wouldn't be as multi-purpose anymore. Strip away things like that and you'd simply have a specialized vessel, which is unsuitable for exploring by it's own.

You have no understanding of the subject at hand at all.