16022a No.25
If you had a choice to serve on any starship class, what would it be?
For me it would be an Oberth Class
>Crew small enough that you actually matter
>Far more likely to get to know the crew rather than just being another redshirt
>Always tinkering with new tech
>Often used for research
>Actually far more likely to be the first to discover something
Seems like it would be both comfy and interesting
How about you anons?
3783e0 No.28
i like the klingon ships, they're small, simple and effective, no pointless holodecks wasting everybody's time
16022a No.37
>>28
I doubt Klingons would need holodecks considering they have more fun than the average race in Star Trek.
161427 No.57
To be honest all the smaller ships just seemed so much better and interesting. The big ships just all seem to lack character hell even was mentioned a lot in the series the Captains prefer their smaller ships
0e2519 No.71
The NX seemed comfiest. Nice and small, I liked the closed-in submarine feel, and you could get the crew all together and watch movies.
56f19e No.95
Ok, so maybe I'm a faggot but:
>Fully automated so I don't have to deal with people I don't like.
>Holoemitters. Holoemitters everywhere. The whole ship is a giant holodeck!
>Fastest ship in the fleet at the time.
>Armed well enough to handle most threats.
>Could hypothetically perform THREE simultaneous Picard Maneuvers.
Perfect for my autistic loner ass.
The only downside is the EMH is Andy Dick. Probably want to re-program that….
9df702 No.96
>>95
Tell me Major, if that ship is so great then how did it get taken over by Romulans?
56f19e No.97
>>96
If the Enterprise is so great, then how did it get taken over by… well… everything?
I mean, the Ferengi? Really?
3783e0 No.98
>>97
they had the element of surprise
9df702 No.99
>>97
Worf was chief of security.
56f19e No.102
>>98
>>99
Right, and the hijacked Prometheus was a prototype with what appears to be no crew.
Also, this thread is about the comfiest ship, not the most un-steal-able-est ship. I stand by my choice.
9df702 No.105
>>102
no luxury unless you reprogram the holograms to be Vulcan love slaves
56f19e No.106
>>105
I did point out there were holoemitters on every deck. What good are they if you only use them for treating boo-boos?
I'm already getting rid of Andy Dick. Might as well go full hedonism with it.
I christen this vessel; The Horga'hn.
a381a8 No.117
Like real life, what you find is that the most interesting ships to serve on are the smaller Frigates and Destroyers and even Light Cruisers. They tend to get to go more unique places and there is always something to do, plus generally see a lot of action. Big Carriers and Battleships are actually pretty dull to serve on.
b191e3 No.149
What about Cardassian ships? And ships considered non-canon but should be?
08ad9e No.160
>>149
What non-canon ships deserve to be?
13eee7 No.173
>>160
Quite a few based off the Starfleet Battles and Starfleet Command series are pretty good and not that retarded.
580c8d No.210
>>168
With or without the movable nacelle pylons?
47f024 No.211
>>149
Cardassian ships are top tier.
68c139 No.213
>>211
No what that is filth anon! Seriously spoiler that shit! Too lewd
546e47 No.320
What era had the best designs? I quite like the TMP/TLE designs, they have a sleek and advanced feel to it, more so than the TNG era and DS9 era where Starfleet realized it need to militarize
0e2519 No.323
>>320
Definitely the TOS movie era. So nice and streamlined. They looked beautiful on the big screen.
fbd115 No.352
>>323
Should see some of the Star Fleet Battles and Star Fleet Command ships.
f5cfef No.444
>>323
Movie era ships looked so streamlined and futuristic. By TNG they seemed to have downgraded.
cba9fd No.531
Romulan ships seem rather fat. Why is that?
0e2519 No.540
>>531
They look chunky, but the middle is mostly empty space. If the designers had streamlined it more, it might not have looked as menacing as it needed to against the Enterprise.
23c0fa No.561
>>25
>If you had a choice to serve on any starship class, what would it be?
My own stolen Runabout, the St. Lawrence. That'd be the dream: exploring strange new worlds without that pesky Prime Directive getting in the way.
>*weird beep*
>"Come!"
>"Greetings, Admiral."
>"Well, Mr. anon. What do you have to say for yourself?"
>"Whatever do you mean, sir?"
>"Are you seriously going to stand there and pretend you don't know anything about the sudden infestation of tribbles on New Mecca?"
>"What's a 'tribble?'"
ca71f9 No.896
>>561
Runabouts are for drug smuggling.
d40a13 No.910
So what are a list of /strek/ approved ships?
Canon or Non-Canon?
e40ba2 No.912
>>896
>Runabouts are for drug smuggling.
Don't be ignorant!
You can also smuggle contraband and people.
8884bb No.948
Small ships up to Cruisers are comfy. Anything bigger you're just a faceless cog in the machine. Why serving on a Galaxy class would be boring as shit. Actually goes true in real life, serving on smaller ships is a lot more interesting and comfy than serving on something like an Aircraft Carrier
ceecca No.990
>>948
As someone who was stationed aboard a U.S. aircraft carrier, I can attest to this.
4a3b9b No.992
>>28
I'm seconding the Bird of Prey. It looks like an awesome place to live and work raining fire and death upon the federation, and there's singalongs on the bridge.
e40ba2 No.1006
>>28
>no pointless holodecks wasting everybody's time
How are you supposed to get any exercise if you can't melee with Skeletor?
>>992
>It looks like an awesome place to live and work raining fire and death upon the federation
And the Romulans. And the Ferrengi. And Orions. And the Tellarites, and the Tribbles, and the…
>and there's singalongs on the bridge.
They ARE pretty badass, those singalongs.
3be68a No.1010
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>992
>>1006
>Singalongs on the bridge
I need to webm this some time.
066e1b No.1015
Well made a list of potentially "comfy" canon ships to choose from with less than 100 crew. Also from TNG era upwards.
Federation Ships
>Constellation Class
>Defiant Class
>Merced Class
>Nova Class
>Oberth Class
>Saber Class
Klingon
>Bird of Prey
Romulan
>Scout Ship
Cardassian
>Hideki Class
Dominion
>Jew'Hadar Fighter
May need to heavily rethink how I do this or widen the range a little.
e40ba2 No.1061
>>1010
>I need to webm this some time.
Here.
cd8e3b No.1069
>>1015
>Jew'Hadar Fighter
Someone has been spending too much time on /pol/
e40ba2 No.1074
>>1069
Or possible not enough.
3c7fdd No.1114
So if anons got together aboard a ship it would be no bigger than a Frigate, maybe a Destroyer?
f6617b No.1130
Does anyone have a strong appreciation for the Miranda Class?
I always pictured her a good workhorse design that can do the job of the fancier Constipation Class yet cheap enough to be churned en mass
Plus I thought she looked sexier and well balanced
e4b6d6 No.1131
>>1130
The Miranda and Nebula classes are two of my favorite Federation designs to be honest. Though I also like the Luna-class.
7cbb0c No.1132
>>1131
They seem kind of modest and well balanced designs.
Frankly any ship with this configuration looks better than the "Upper" nacelles.
e40ba2 No.1165
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1132
I dig the Nebula class one. And I love that pic 3 is the Thunderchild. It's what I always wanted to name a ship (sea or space) if I ever got one.
>>1131
>filename
c915b4 No.1200
>>1165
Nebula always seemed like to the Galaxy what the Miranda was to the Constitution Class. I.e. a cheaper but almost as capable design that is modular.
acd75a No.1284
>>1130
>>1131
They're riced up pieces of shit with a spoiler. It's the 24th century, space faring equivalent of this.
e40ba2 No.1290
>>1284
No, friend. They are the noble Yaris. Fuel efficient, can fit into motorcycle parking spaces, and have a surprising amount of maneuverability and room inside.
>mcw I only pay $35-$40 Canadian to fill 'er up and it lastw me nearly 4 weeks
98d8ce No.1303
>>1284
What sort of commie loving hippy are you?
f9661d No.1350
>>71
This tbh fam. I liked the submarine feel, also they still have a chef.
009393 No.1351
>>1350
Just have to put with Porthos barking orders at you.
f9661d No.1352
>>1351
>not building a transwarp beaming device to send Porthos elsewhere
e40ba2 No.1358
>>1351
>Just have to put with Porthos barking orders at you.
Better than Archer mildly suggesting courses of action to you.
>>1352
You monster!
e4b6d6 No.1394
>>1284
>he doesn't like a ship that can have a specific section switched out for things such as
>more torpedo launchers
>a literal fucking AWACS dish
>two more warp nacelles
I bet you don't even know about the gemini effect function.
ddcf48 No.1561
>>25
Probably the Varro Generational Ship (VOY S5E17: 'The Disease'), it just looks really comfuu
e8f11d No.1573
Is the Miranda Class the Starship equivalent of a Redshirt?
0aab24 No.1894
>>1561
Looks like a bug sex toy.
a51161 No.1938
>>25
ENT - NX Class
TOS - Daedalus Class
TNG/DS9/VOY - Nebula Class
e40ba2 No.1943
>>1938
>NX Class
Are they all NX? I thought NX denoted a prototype, like the Defiant which is NX-74205.
e0aa67 No.1960
>>1943
I don't have anything else to call it
0c8b18 No.1961
>>1943
NX does denoate a prototype. However the NX Enterprise was part of the NX Project so it is called an NX class. Seems Starfleet adopted the naming for prototype ships as a sort of "tradition" but honestly who fucking knows.
e40ba2 No.1974
>>1960
Fair enough.
>>1961
Thanks
79c244 No.2020
Are there any programs out there to help design Federation style ships?
73904b No.2021
>>2020
we've got this, >>1675
but it's only 2d, so it's kind of fucked. mods help a bit
e40ba2 No.2022
>>2020
Lego Digital Designer, maybe? It's free.
1af0bd No.2023
>>25
I'm seconding Oberth Class, for all the reasons OP listed. I've also always loved the fact that half of the ship is a giant sensor pod.
8e6e30 No.2026
If you join any navy try to not get put on anything larger than a destroyer. You will be bored shitless otherwise.
e40ba2 No.2068
>>2026
>If you join any navy try to not get put on anything larger than a destroyer. You will be bored shitless otherwise.
Not enough to do or too large to make friends?
b73a5c No.2239
>>1394
I really wish they'd gone this direction, like the Nova-class sketches (the slices of pie out of the saucer one and the flying wing tug with the freight cars hanging off the back of it) in the TNG technical manual, which iirc never got further fleshed out or statted even by fans.
732cc0 No.2250
>>1394
>two more warp nacelles
Why would need two more, don't all TNG era designs basically all top out at Warp ~9.5?
What's the basic design requirements for a starship anyways, and why all the variations, everything seems random conceptual looks cool over function.
Two nacelles, a deflector dish. Why need the nacelles to be extended on thinly attached wings?
I think a hubcab would be sufficient.
56b907 No.2264
>>2250
Warp nacelles power more than the warp drive.
784aa7 No.2298
>>2250
>Why would need two more, don't all TNG era designs basically all top out at Warp ~9.5?
It's not about speed, you'd need to upgrade the warp core itself for that. But there are two reasons I can think of off the top of my head. They have those Bussard collectors on the front (the red bits). So more nacelles means a greater volume of particles gathered to fuel the ship. The nacelles are also what emit the warp field around the ship, so more nacelles means a more stable field, less likely to be disrupted by external forces.
d0f4d0 No.2303
>>2264
My understanding is that the warp core generates plasma which powers other parts of the ship in addition to the nacelles, but the nacelles themselves don't power the ship; they just use the power to generate warp fields.
So strictly speaking, the nacelles don't power anything, the warp core does via EPS conduits.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Electro-plasma_system
652863 No.2317
>>2303
I always presumed the warp nacelles stored a lot of energy?
66929c No.2501
>>2317
No, they are a converter by which the energy from the engines are changed into the warp field and then are used to manipulate the warp field to move the ship at super-luminal velocity.
e40ba2 No.2504
>>2303
>>2317
>>2501
If I recall correctly, in ''Starfleet Battles," the more nacelles you have, the more power you have. It's not canon or anything, but it causes a lot of confusion in discussions like this because it's become lore for some and not for others. I've always believe the more nacelles = more power thing, but now that I think about it, that's probably not true. The nacelles are there to open the warp… thingie. I seem to recall the saucer can only do impulse on its own, but I'm not sure if the saucer provide impulse for the rest of the ship.
e4b6d6 No.2518
>>2501
>>2504
They provide power to the warp drive, and additional nacelles have diminishing returns which is why the most you ever see is 3 or 4.
Also the Melbourne subclass of the Nebula has the extra nacelles as being smaller than regular Galaxy-class nacelles.
7fa6d0 No.2521
>>2518
Already knew about the smaller nacelles and such, still the triangular pod is the best module for the Nebula, hands down.
51281b No.2522
>>2521
It's a cute little bow for an adorable little ship
e94606 No.2531
>>2522
Nebula is anything but little.
732cc0 No.2535
Did the model makers forget to put impulse engine on the Nebula class?
>Comfiest Ship?
<kicks back in the Captain's Yacht
e94606 No.2538
>>2535
It's on the tower in the aft section
Kind of funny how the contents of triangle tower section varies insanely from each rendition of the ship.
e4b6d6 No.2540
>>2538
The most official version of that section involved additional torpedo launchers with their own torpedo storage.
e94606 No.2564
>>2540
That's a big torpedo launcher.
e4b6d6 No.2566
0c8b18 No.2608
>>2605
That would make a great banner if it cut to the Nebula ship model.
ee8ca6 No.2811
Interesting that Picard said that he preferred the Stargazer to the Enterprise.
732cc0 No.2823
>>2811
>Picard said that he preferred the Stargazer
Fond memories of running over Antifa trash
e40ba2 No.2852
>>2823
>Fond memories of running over Antifa trash
Man, I'd love to see what a starship could do to them.
Antifa piss me off, but not for the reasons they'd probably assume. It's because they're so fucking stupid. They never think, they just feel, and what they feel has been programmed into them by their masters. They are repeatedly lied to, and not one of them questions why they're fighting "literal nazis" with literal nazi tactics.
50 years ago they'd all be shot for treason. Hell, even 40 years ago. If they'd tried this shit on Reagan, they'd find themselves banished to Alaska or something.
cca1c1 No.2901
d79825 No.2940
>>2823
I think there are a few scenes that could be shaped in this.
fcb457 No.2979
>>2538
I just remembered that the official schematics that you see aboard ships often have wee Easter eggs if you can spot them.
0c8b18 No.3309
This thread got me thinking what would happen if we got anons from /strek/ aboard a starship. it would be an interesting shtishow
e80058 No.3356
I always liked the Typhon-class carrier even if I thought the idea of fighters being used in the Federation to be highly fucking retarded. It would be nice to see its design re-purposed as some sort of heavy armoured dreadnought designed to fight the Borg or something, especially with that fortress-mode (like the top-tier ships in that cancelled battlefleet that produced the Defiant-class).
732cc0 No.3360
>>3356
Looks a lot like a battlestar than a Star Trek ship, but I've always been of the opinion ST ships look ridiculous in general. The nacelle placement defeats the purpose as one of its primary functions is to collect hydrogen from space, so tucking it behind midsection disrupts that function.
e80058 No.3364
>>3360
>The nacelle placement defeats the purpose as one of its primary functions is to collect hydrogen from space
Hydrogen collection was not the primary function of the nacelle, and the hydrogen collectors just happen to always be put on the nacelles by Starfleet (for who knows what reason). The collector could be placed anywhere.
It's likely
>the collectors are somewhere else on the ship and red tips of the nacelle are just aesthetic
>the ship can collect hydrogen from any direction without a literal scoop motion anymore
>give that the ship is design to deploy then seal itself up and not move, it doesn't need too much to begin with
>given that it's also a "mobile outpost" according to Picard it probably carries plenty for itself and a small fleet since space stations had plenty of stores
Or a combination of any or all.
Most factions' ships don't have nacelles yet, presumably, use the same technology somehow. The Tosk had their own version of bussard collectors that scoop up fuel for their ship but it lacked nacelles. It's also possible that the technology has been supplanted by something else entirely.
43fd96 No.3371
The chairs on the Enterprise D look pretty comfy. All they need is a recline function.
bb65c4 No.3373
>>3371
Yeah, I'm all about the exterior design of the Sovereign class ships, but the Galaxy class interiors are mad comfy.
>taking that first pull of a cold one in Ten Forward after a long day.
640c50 No.3380
>>3360
>Jeri-curl Geordi
I don't have the words.
>>3364
>Troi with motorboatables
Want.
e80058 No.3444
File: 3fe104dde0129ae⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 591.82 KB, 800x1296, 50:81, 2070714 - Deanna_Troi Star….jpg)
File: c9a0b6450990baa⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 672.11 KB, 1131x1600, 1131:1600, 2081901 - Deanna_Troi Star….jpg)
e80058 No.3445
>>3444
I didn't upload that third image what the fuck
bbfd1f No.3491
640c50 No.3522
>>3445
>I didn't upload that third image what the fuck
It's the first image that's a blight on your record, anon.
38f867 No.3524
>see "Comfiest Ship" thread on frontpage
>get excited
>it's on /strek/
>never been, don't know how feel
>objectively comfiest ship ever has nothing to do with Star Trek
>post it anyways
Ban me if you must, mods. I have already won. It's like you don't even flying Winnebago/comfy family home/adventuring base.
38f867 No.3525
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>3524
Homey, sleepy, nostalgia-inducing background track essential.
0c8b18 No.3526
>>3524
You kind of described a runabout honestly.
e76f17 No.3528
>>3524
>Can't go into space
>Stupid squished proportions
Horrible taste. Pic related is comfiest ship.
e80058 No.3559
>>3491
No, not really. I love me some Klingon girls make no mistake, but I'm only posting big tiddied troi right now.
>>3522
You're a blight on your everyone's record.
640c50 No.3599
>>3524
>flying Winnebago
Spaceballs: The Post
640c50 No.3600
>>3559
>You're a blight on your everyone's record.
Oh yeah? Well the Blight Store called! They're outta you!
e83303 No.3617
I submit for /strek/'s approval, the Raven class. It's a pretty comfy ship. It's a bit shorter and about as tall as the Defiant, much more narrow, and not designed as a warship. It needs hardly any crew, two can operate it comfortably, and it comes with a small shuttle bay. It's essentially a flying suburban home complete with two-car garage.
>>3524
>>3525
Great taste! Had a lot of fun with those games.
>>3356
What's comfy about an armoured carrier? It's cool and all, but having to be on a dedicated warship full of hotheaded pilots doesn't seem all the comfortable to me. Surely any other federation ship would have better crew amenities?
0c8b18 No.3618
>>3617
I thought the designers hated that ship?
e83303 No.3620
>>3618
That's their problem, frankly. I like it. It's got a utilitarian feel like the Danube runabout and has all the creature comforts I could want. But if they want to redesign it I'd be open to the change so long as it's still about this size.
e80058 No.3663
>>3617
>What's comfy about an armoured carrier?
>but having to be on a dedicated warship full of hotheaded pilots doesn't seem all the comfortable to me
Imagine all the sex you could have with those hotheaded suicide jockeys.
The Typhon is one of the most armoured ships in the entirety of Starfleet, phasers, disruptors, and torpedos just softly 'bwam' off that armour. It would be soothing, like a white-noise.
f5cc8c No.3669
Intrepid Class. Simple, smooth lovely lines. No dork ass proportions or random bits sticking out at dumbass angles. Powerful, fast, not to large, but also never cramped. Clearly designed for long range cruising while again, not overly huge. The Sovereign class is nice too, no tard proportions.
But Id like an Intrepid.
8bd8e4 No.3759
So anons have recently meme'd their way into the Trek Universe, what kind of ship do we steal for our own use and what sort of adventures do we go on?
b552db No.3775
>>3759
I feel like galactic shitposters would be most likely to steal a timeship and go fucking around in history. Why settle for space adventures when you can have time adventures as well?
8bd8e4 No.3784
>>3775
Temporal Shitpost Directive?
f8589e No.3861
>>3775
To be honest I think that's all what the Temporal Ships do all things considered.
640c50 No.3867
>>3617
>It's essentially a flying suburban home complete with two-car garage.
Kinda want, actually. Parking it with those nacelles might be tricky, though.
640c50 No.3868
>>3775
>Why settle for space adventures when you can have time adventures as well?
Because humanity has proven time and again that it can barely handle starships without fucking something up.
0c8b18 No.3902
I really think anons here would have a B'rel. Small and comfy yet powerful enough to get shit done.
e80058 No.3920
>>3902
>Klingon ship
>comfy
You're Klingon'ing wrong.
640c50 No.3930
>>3920
Man, I'd stick my bat'leth in her vIghro', if you know what I mean.
e80058 No.3943
>>3930
She'd never let you, you autistic excuse of a failed warrior, and you know it.
e76f17 No.3948
>>3943
If Quark can get a Klingon, technically anyone can.
55ddd2 No.3951
>>3920
>Not singing songs and drinking as you raid the space lanes
You have a strange sense of comfy
f0ac72 No.3959
>>3943
>let you
>asking for consent
That's a Klingon turn-off.
>>3524
boatships are always comfy
e80058 No.3960
>>3959
>That's a Klingon turn-off.
So are you.
f6617b No.4142
>>3965
I just pictured a board called /klingontalk/
732cc0 No.4145
>>4142
>I just pictured a board called /klingontalk/
b74f0f No.4155
>>25
Orion Slave Barge
It's basically a flying Persian palace with guns.
>>4142
And all posts are filtered through a Klingon dictionary so nobody knows what the fuck everyone is saying because
<qaStaHvIS tlhIngan jatlh Hoch!
640c50 No.4161
>>4145
>"Juice, chicken, and gorilla."
Someone tell Tim Russ they've found his kid.
5a88c7 No.4384
I kind of forgot that the ships from the FASA Games were at one point considered canon and even appeared in the TNG as graphics on the computer screens.
9f802b No.4389
3e57ea No.4626
>>4155
Orion pimp wagon would sound rather nice.
2ff998 No.4638
I want a borg cube with the drones inside under my command.
d03ffc No.4642
deeae7 No.4645
>>4642
You're now Kirk surrounded by female drones :^)
fb6c29 No.4667
>>4645
You could get that on any starship that had a holodeck without the risk of other Borg coming to fuck your shit up and reclaim their cube.
f36443 No.4670
>>4667
Where is your sense of adventure anon?
fb6c29 No.4674
>>4670
Leading me to a ship that has beds, good lighting, air conditioning, toilets, food/drink replicators, and holodecks for when I get board.
cc7f7e No.4680
>>4674
How about one of those Vulcan ships from ST:E. They look pretty.
fb6c29 No.4743
>>4680
Those do look pretty.
c07345 No.4759
>>4680
>>4743
Downside is that they are full of Vuulcans.
9f802b No.4790
>>4743
I do like that rod-and-ring design.
f2eb4e No.4799
>>4790
I really like that current hypothetical FTL systems now utilize a similar configuration. Makes their ships seem the most believable, and they're quite aesthetically pleasing. I've never liked the general hull design of Federation ships. It just makes no sense, structurally, tactically, or in terms of propulsion. They're so much stress concentration and unbalanced thrust. Many Vulcan hull configurations are much more sensible and pleasant to look at.
I want a Vulcan hull configuration and Federation interior aesthetics.
ade461 No.4800
How autistic is this discussion permitted to get? I've put a fair bit of thought and effort into designing a TOS-era patrol ship, with "compact" and "comfy" being among my design goals. Would it be acceptable to scan and post my design?
>>2250
>What's the basic design requirements for a starship anyways
Gene Roddenberry and Andrew Probert laid out a few basic rules for the warp drive configuration on Federation ships when working on TNG (rules which, admittedly, were broken in a number of official designs.
-Warp nacelles must be paired (i.e. 2 or 4 nacelles arranged symmetrically).
-Warp nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight on each other across the ship's hull.
-The Bussard ramscoops (the glowy red end-caps) of the nacelles must be fully visible from a front-on view.
Source: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm
9ef729 No.4802
>>4800
>How autistic is this discussion permitted to get?
You're on 8chan on a board that is best described as /pol/trek. You can get as autistic as you want.
ade461 No.4823
>>4800
>>4802
Well, alright then. Here's USS Atalanta, a small Starfleet patrol ship. The crew compliment is somewhere around 50. It has "3.5" decks (deck 4 being in essence a large maintenance compartment) and a small shuttlebay large enough to accommodate a single Class-F Shuttlecraft. The class was commissioned in 2258 and began construction the following year. It incorporates many technologies proven by the Constitution Class, which had been in service for more than a decade at the time. While ships of the Minerva Class were frequently used for scientific survey missions, their foremost purpose was rapid-response and deterrence.
cc7f7e No.4832
Anyone else find it interesting that Vulcans built their ships more as art pieces than warships?
Its almost like their hat isn't logic, but rationalization.
fb6c29 No.4857
>>4832
Their ships went toe-to-toe with other ships of the era, they were designed to be fully functional.
fb6c29 No.4858
>>4832
Also, their ships consist of usually a large circle and a triangular hull which is suppose to be reminiscent of the Vulcan's symbol for Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
2eee8f No.4880
>>4800
>How autistic is this discussion permitted to get?
Welcome aboard, newfriend.
369acc No.4950
>>4823
Comfy as fuck. Would look right at home next to some Miranda and Excelsior class ships.
7f5e20 No.4952
>>4823
Did you design that ship yourself anon?
81d05c No.4956
I always thought the Constellation-class was the comfiest. Also dig all of the shuttle bays, like having a bunch of garages for personal shuttles (for when You just want to fap in piece)
I read somewhere that it only has a crew of 40, if so, that's pretty damn comfy.
6d86c4 No.4965
>>4956
>I read somewhere that it only has a crew of 40, if so, that's pretty damn comfy.
That's a lot of deck windows and empty space, more like 440 at minimum.
fb6c29 No.4977
>>3356
Adding some more comfy ones since I've been looking for Federation ships. I think I've grown to like the solo nacelle more that duel nacelle style.
edabc2 No.5021
>>4823
That's really nice! It's a good size and a sensible design. I'd actually like to see even more details on it. What sort of amenities are available to the crew? Do they each get their own quarters? Do they have to bunk together? Is there a transporter room or a sickbay?
f2eb4e No.5022
>>4832
>Its almost like their hat isn't logic, but rationalization.
Really hard to have a rational species in a fictional universe written by irrational people. Vulcans were never logical; merely aloof, stoic, and arrogant. I mean, they have elaborate religious rituals where they talk about how logical they are, but I bet less than half of them would know a disjunctive syllogism from an inference.
Oh, you've attained the next level of initiation into logic, so have this shiny necklace that represents your advanced ability to look down your nose at everyone else and dismiss other species' insights when they fail to match your own. What? Premises? Consistency? The Vulcan Science Directorate says you can shut up about that while I do some forbidden-but-not-really brain magic.
Screw those self-absorbed knife-eared bastards. They can pon farr a Tarcassian razor beast.
34f731 No.5031
>>4956
>>4965
It's a crew of about 300 iirc. Think it was meant to be a replacement for the Constitution Class in terms of size and strength.
ade461 No.5132
>>4952
Yes indeed. I first sketched it out back in 2010 (which I used as the ship's registry until I realized that it didn't make sense, given that the Excelsior is NCC-2000. I also later learned that 2010 was the registry of Scotty's ship in that one episode of TNG). The ship was originally called "Aidos", an ancient Greek term which I understand to represent the spirit of modesty. I later decided that "Atalanta", a mythological huntress, was probably a better name for a more martially-oriented ship.
It seems like every couple of years I go back to the design and do a little work on it. Here's the earliest illustrations I could find. The biggest differences between the early version and now are in the top and back of the saucer. The bridge module is now more strongly integrated with the blended-hull, and the impulse decks have a smoother transition from the saucer rim (more similar to the shape of the Miranda Class' rear hull). I also did a TNG-styled version a couple years ago, but it just doesn't resonate with me the way that TOS' design style does.
>>5021
>What sort of amenities are available to the crew?
Certainly some kind of combined lounge/galley, and probably an exercise/rec room as well. Definitely more spare than what you'd find on a Constitution Class.
>Do they each get their own quarters? Do they have to bunk together?
Senior officers have small individual cabins. Junior officers and enlisted crew bunk 3 per 2-bed cabin (the understanding being that at least one member of each bunk will be on-duty at any given time).
>Is there a transporter room or a sickbay?
Yes and yes. The transporter room only has four pads, though (as opposed to the six standard on larger ships). Given that the class is designed to patrol potentially hostile borders, it's expected that these ships would be getting shot at somewhat more frequently than dedicated explorer vessels, so having a proper sickbay is a must.
17e19b No.5134
>>5132
Reminds me of the Okinawa Class a bit from Starfleet Command and Klingon Academy It funny enough is a remarkably similar vessel to what you have designed even to the point of role, engine and weapon arrangements
17e19b No.5137
>>5134
Forgot to add anon, got anymore ships? I think your fan design has the distinction of being the first non-terrible fan designed ship for Star Trek I have ever seen. It actually looks like it would fit in the universe
ade461 No.5140
>>5134
I'm afraid those games were just a bit before my time as seems to be the case with most worthwhile ST games. We have a vidya thread, right? I should check that out. The Minerva Class' basic hull configuration was actually inspired by the Archer Class scout. I wanted it to feel like it could be the Archer's bigger, beefier cousin.
>>5137
I've done a few sketches reinterpreting canon/semi-canon designs over the years (none recently, though), but the Minerva is the only original ship class I've put together. Pics related are from 2010, same time I started work on the Minerva Class.
17e19b No.5147
>>5140
>we have a vidya thread
Not as such actually I just noticed. There's several either based on themes i.e. Bridge Simulators or for specific games. I might just make a thread for that right now. After Klingon Academy is uploaded once again
>I've done a few sketches reinterpreting canon/semi-canon designs over the years
If those are your sketches as well they are also a damned sight better than your average fan designs of ships which are either:
a) Stretched versions of ships that are already canon
b) additional warp nacelles or pods for whatever reason
c) inverted warp nacelles
or d) a mix of all three of the above.
Post more honestly, it's nice to see Trek fan ships that isn't bad.
ade461 No.5258
All this ship talk actually got me wanting to work on something Trek. In the interest of keeping things comfy (and thus thread-relevant), I went with another scout/patrol design. In honor of our crippled overlord, I've named the ship U.S.S. Brennan, first ship of the Brennan-Class. It has 8 decks, and a shuttlebay capable of accommodating either two full-size shuttlecraft or four shuttlepods. I went with a mono-nacelle configuration as >>4977 is correct: there is something oddly endearing about single-nacelle designs. I've never been overly-fond of the TNG-era design style, but I think I made it work.
If anyone wants to write up some fluff for the ship/class, be my guest. I'm a designer, not a writer.
>>5147
>seven nacelled Galaxy-Class
What.
While I can definitely blame fan-designers for not exercising restraint and tastefulness, I can't lay all of the blame on them. I also blame DS9's (and to a lesser extent TNG's) lack of quality control in background ships for encouraging shitty kitbashes as a legitimate design philosophy. You see that other picture I posted? That's U.S.S. Yeager. That ship appeared on-screen multiple times in DS9. That sloppily-kitbashed-in-an-afternoon piece of shit is canon. A lot of the other background models in DS9 had all sorts of bolted-on bits and bobs and modules like you see on a lot of fan-designed ships. I get that they sometimes needed a lot of ship models on short notice, but I'd much rather they had come up with a few new pieces to glue together in different configurations, instead of just abusing the fuck out of retail Excelsior and Enterprise Refit/A model kits. To clarify, I'm not hating on kitbashing here. The Stargazer is an example of an excellent kitbash.
9f802b No.5267
>>5147
That second one needs more nacelles.
ed7ac2 No.5293
>>5258
Well you certainly pull off the style rather well, and it's nicely balanced compared to any other single nacelle ships I've ever seen. As a matter of personal preference though I can't stand anything with odd numbered nacelles, and having just one seems dangerous. If it fails, you have no warp capability and possibly no ability to stock up on useful gases too if the Bussard collector is also damaged.
fb6c29 No.5297
>>5147
>or d) a mix of all three of the above
God this is true. Back when I did 3d modelling I tried creating some Federation ships and I thought I was designing something cool until I realize that I had just made an upside-down Akira-class.
>>5267
I like to imagine there is a small fleet of ships that have like 10 nacelles for the sole purpose of flying through deuterium-rich nebulas, collecting it for storage on starbases. That, it's its got a few nacelles that are five times the width.
>>5132
>>5258
You're a really decent ship designer/artist. If you had told me these were scans taken from a design studio that pitch TNG ships I'd have believed it. Do you have a site you upload these designs to?
6d86c4 No.5318
>>5297
>I like to imagine there is a small fleet of ships that have like 10 nacelles for the sole purpose of flying through deuterium-rich nebulas, collecting it for storage on starbases.
Why doesn't anyone ever just take the standard pencil in space like 2001 and add a ring of nacelles to it?
Also, when a ship is a single nacelle, why stick it straight up on a fin behind the ship and just not run it through the core of the ship and build the saucer around it?
5210f6 No.5320
There are ships with lots of nacelles. Why are there no ships with lots of saucers?
82c7c7 No.5325
>>4977
>solo nacelle
How are those even supposed to generate a warp field?
81424f No.5326
>>5320
The Galaxy class, but the aft has another neck with another detachable saucer section. The saucers are taller in the middle, and a bit beakish on the farther ends. One has eyes (the bridge) and the other doesn't (because you don't need four goddamn bridges, alright?)
5210f6 No.5328
>>5326
Every Saucer has to have a bridge. Those are the rules. USS Saucer needs six saucers and six bridges and six nacelles.
81424f No.5330
>>5328
Or maybe you just stack six saucers on top of each other, and instead of having phasers or torpedoes, you just detach a saucer and lob it at whatever you want to die.
5210f6 No.5331
>>5330
No! USS Saucer is on a ten year mission to acquire more saucers.
6d86c4 No.5333
>>5328
>USS Saucer needs six saucers and six bridges and one nacelle
Needs a mockup, six saucers each on a fin radiating from a center saucer and it looks like a hex nut floating through space from afar.
5210f6 No.5334
>>5333
USS Saucer has six nacelles!
6d86c4 No.5335
>>5333
>Needs a mockup, six saucers each on a fin radiating from a center nacelle and it looks like a hex nut floating through space from afar.
Fucked that up, one nacelle.
>>5334
>USS Saucer has six nacelles!
Make them integrated like defiant but then they share the nacelle with the next saucer and it's offset at 60 degree angle, and they all come together in a space donut.
5210f6 No.5336
>>5335
USS Saucer is no doughnut! How would it integrate more saucers into its form to complete its ten year mission to acquire more saucers!?
6d86c4 No.5337
>>5335
>USS Saucer is no doughnut! How would it integrate more saucers into its form to complete its ten year mission to acquire more saucers!?
Give it six trailer hitches.
25e280 No.5339
What if instead of adding warp nacelles to ships, you made the ship one big warp nacelle?
6d86c4 No.5342
>>5339
I always figured you needed two for steering as riding on one is a bit like a aiming a bottle rocket.
fb6c29 No.5348
>>5318
>why stick it straight up on a fin behind the ship and just not run it through the core of the ship and build the saucer around it?
Tosk ships have that iirc.
>>5325
You don't need nacelles to generate a warp field, you need a warp drive and a warp coil, the latter of which are in the nacelle of Starfleet vessels. They don't need to be in the nacelle however, and you don't need two of them to be able to jump to warp.
>>5336
>How would it integrate more saucers into its form
duble thicc sauser
f2eb4e No.5392
>>4645
Yeah, I'm really not into that H.R. Geiger shit.
>>5333
>>5336
I unironically like this idea. Just make a circular chain of saucers until it can surround a planet. It's like building a Halo in installments.
>>5348
Looks like a pill case or something.
34f731 No.5429
Surprised anons haven't been suggesting Cardassian Gaylord Class Cruisers.
6d86c4 No.5430
The last one reminds of that South Park episode where Randy gets ball cancer.
fb6c29 No.5431
>>5429
Only Federation starships are designed to be comfy, Anon.
638f35 No.5434
>>5431
Only if you are a degenerate Ferengi
38e96a No.5504
Right anons we need to either build a ship or steal one. What do we end up with?
fb6c29 No.5507
>>5504
>Right
Left.
>we need to either build a ship
None of us would have that knowledge, or the resources, to do that.
>or steal one
>What do we end up with?
Stealing a military vessel would be a suicide mission, so our best hope would be a civilian freighter or something. An Antares-class would be the best thing we could get our hands on most likely. What we'd do with a stolen freighter is beyond me. I guess we'd enlist with the Marquis or Ferengi and employ it as a cargo ship, smuggling vessel, and Q-Ship until we got something bigger and better.
728102 No.5514
>>5507
>Smuggler /strek/
I would want to do this.
ab6710 No.5527
>>5507
>Q-Ship
What does god need with a starship?
In all seriousness though, it would be possible to take one of the smaller federation ships. We'd all just need to arrange to be transferred to it. Beam out the crew that aren't our own onto a friendly starbase, then warp out to join the Maquis or Klingons or whoever else would have us.
fb6c29 No.5529
>>5527
>We'd all just need to arrange to be transferred to it.
You want us to study until we're smart enough to get into Starfleet Academy ahead of the thousands who trying and fail, then enroll in Starfleet Academy and pass all the tests, plus the psych tests, to then spend anywhere between 4 to 8 years in Starfleet Academy's courses learning, then work our way up to captain and, somehow, justify transferring all our old Academy friends to one ship, then head to a starbase and beam away everyone else and try to outrun their senors and any potential pursuit craft, and have to spend the rest of our days never being able to show our faces in the Federation due to their security and all the identification we left behind that was required to enter the Academy to begin with while simultaneously triggering multiple search expeditions every year to try to discover us while we're in a starfleet non-civilian, easily identifiable ship we'll never actually be able to keep unless we replace every molecule that has the ships registry imprinted on it or never fly the thing out of hiding?
All for a smaller Federation ship?
The Marquis take common civilian ships and refit them into military raiders for a very, very good reason, Anon.
f2eb4e No.5530
>>5507
>What we'd do with a stolen freighter is beyond me
Run enough smuggling operations to buy armaments from the Ferengi and upgrade the ship. I'd probably try to get a Xepolite freighter, since they use a sensor-reflective material in their hull, making it easier to conceal your cargo and the weapons you eventually install. Plus, they can hit warp 9.8, which isn't too shabby, though most full-size Federation ships won't have too much trouble catching up to you. With the interior space of a freighter, you'd have plenty of room to add things.
1bb460 No.5531
>>5504
I've got a genius plan.
First off we get all the homofags of the board together and set them off into Orion space.
Just play along with the slave thing, do whatever they ask like a nice pheremone addled straightfag. Then, mutiny, take over the Orion's ship, kill or jetison the women and pick the rest of us up for pirate hijinks!
Unless Orion men have the pheromone thing too but backwards.
fb6c29 No.5532
>>5530
Alright, let me ask you then what? Lets say we, we or you, get a ship, get some juicy latinum, upgrade her and make that girl comfy as, then what?
In a world where food, furniture, clothing, etc can be replicated, holodecks can make any fantasy come true, and there's endless free real estate in the Federation for its citizens, then what are we, we or you, working towards?
f2eb4e No.5536
>>5532
Being strong enough to defend myself while exploring the galaxy, without having a goddamned Feddie boot on my neck. Starting my own interstellar civilization. With blackjack. And hookers.
fb6c29 No.5538
>>5536
Might want to upgrade from a cargo freighter to an exploration vessel then.
f2eb4e No.5539
>>5538
That's pretty much what I said. Start off in smuggling, and upgrade as you can afford. No reason to stop smuggling, though. Keep that cash rolling in and make sure that very rich parties have an interest in keeping you around.
ab6710 No.5542
>>5529
To be fair, it would be worth doing just to know how to operate and repair the ship rather than just drifting in space when some critical system fails. Nobody would really need to get to captain rank either. The captain doesn't work in the transporter room after all. Why even bother returning to the Federation anyway? I'd much rather hang out with the Klingons or Ferengi or independent human colonies or absolutely anyone else that isn't a feddie. As far as pursuit goes, they'd only know the direction you travelled in when going to warp, not how far you went. We'd be as good as gone after one warp, two at most. In case you've forgotten, space is VERY big. The odds of being found by any search party, even if they mobilized the entirety of starfleet just for us, is slim to none. If they ever caught up to us, we'd have the whole ship completely overhauled by then and have way more tricks up our sleeves to escape with. Or we could have even scrapped and sold it for parts and switched to an entirely different ship at that point.
>>5538
Oh look, there's a small federation ship that would be perfect to start with. Posted a bunch of pics of that one earlier in the thread too.
fb6c29 No.5565
>>5542
>Nobody would really need to get to captain rank either.
In order to get the transfers, yeah you'd need a captain on board with your plan.
>Why even bother returning to the Federation anyway?
You're going to join the Marquis and you don't think you'll ever need to return to Federation space? Ever? You're going to cut off connection to one third of the alpha quadrant because you want to spend like 20 years stealing a starship?
>I'd much rather hang out with the Klingons
Do you really expect Klingon's to want to hang out with you? You'd be getting a broken face every day and Klingon doctors aren't renown for their skill.
>or Ferengi
They'd scam you out of life. I like the Ferengi but they'd be horrible to have to deal with on any regular basis.
>or independent human colonies
Now this at least makes sense.
>As far as pursuit goes, they'd only know the direction you travelled in when going to warp, not how far you went.
I don't think you understand the strength of a Starbases sensors, Anon. They're insanely good. Also if you think starfleet isn't going to place tracking bugs on their ship you'd be mistaken.
>In case you've forgotten, space is VERY big.
Voyager could scanners could detect something 10 lightyears away. Starbases provide oversight for whole sectors.
>If they ever caught up to us, we'd have the whole ship completely overhauled
Starfleet puts identifying information onto the molecules of its uniforms. They'd do the same to every part of their ship. You'd have to replace the entire ship, every molecule, to get rid of every, single trace.
>Or we could have even scrapped and sold it for parts and switched to an entirely different ship at that point.
A smaller Federation vessel wouldn't be a rare thing. You're suggesting like 20 years to learn how to crew a ship and get someone to captain so they can authorize the transfers to allow people to steal a small, common Federation ship so it could be sold off for what little the scrap would fetch and none involved would ever be able to go anywhere without the Federation demanding they be extradited, which any nation would do because none of the people involved would be worth the hassle of keeping. And for what? Hanging out with a Ferengi who kill you and steal everything you had or pretending that a Klingon girl would let you talk to her let alone sleep with her?
Sorry, but stealing a Federation ship would be a horrible idea. In that time you could just get some masks, some phasers, and just murder the dozen odd crew people of a cargoship a hundred times over.
>there's a small federation ship that would be perfect to start with
The USS Raven is an Aerie-class which is available to civilians to purchase. Stealing one from the Federation with all that complicated doings that involves would be stupid compared to simply being able just get some phasers and steal a civilian one the moment it leaves Federation space.
Also most people would probably accuse you of using it to spy, given its fantastic sensors.
2eee8f No.5570
>>5565
>The USS Raven is an Aerie-class which is available to civilians to purchase.
They probably wouldn't want it, considering the state the Hansens left it in.
fb6c29 No.5582
>>5570
Don't be cheeky, you little plump dumpling.
6d86c4 No.5588
>>5565
>The USS Raven is an Aerie-class which is available to civilians to purchase.
How does one purchase something in a moneyless economy?
fb6c29 No.5591
>>5588
The Federation isn't a moneyless economy. They have the standard Federation Credit, which is mentioned in TOS and TNG. The reason people think the Federation doesn't have a currency is because of lines where they say Earth doesn't use currency. Most Federation citizens don't use currency either, due to replicators, but the currency still exists and is accepted by non-Federation aliens. Also, with things like copyrights (and moral rights probably) and brands (or products with a PDO) still existing you likely can't legally replicate all things, so you'd still have a need to order some of the stuff you want.
You'd likely encounter it more the further from Federation core space you went. For example DS9 Starfleet employees use Gold-Pressed Latinum, Starfleet probably issues Federation credits and then they're likely exchanged at a money exchange (for a modest fee from our fantastic money-lending Ferengi friends [if Starfleet didn't exchange the credit for latinum beforehand and just pay DS9 crew members in latinum straight up]).
6d86c4 No.5593
>>5591
>Federation Credit
Rothschild backed cryptocurrency, the more things change the more they stay the same.
85945b No.5599
>steal a transport ship to steal a science ship to steal a frigate to steal a destroyer to light cruiser to steal a heavy cruiser to steal a battleship
We Khan now
855a2f No.5614
why not simply build the ship ourselfs? we could replicate most components, parts that cant be replicated we can buy or manage without them. Also we could steal blueprints for something small comfy and commercially avaiable
fb6c29 No.5643
>>5614
Learning how to design our own ship would take decades to learn how to do.
68217c No.5690
>>1130
Yeah i fucking love the Miranda class. It just feels right. If the Defiant class wasnt a thing i would pick that.
f73d0f No.5692
>>5690
Defiant Class always felt like a prototype that would never achieve full production. Pretty sure even in production it was said that they only managed a limited batch and instead developed easier to produce and cost effective ships like the Saber instead.
c52906 No.5695
Why do people like the defiant? The design is terrible.
f36443 No.5696
b1865f No.5697
>>5696
The Defiant is a 12 year old?
ade461 No.5734
>>5695
There's a lot that I like about the defiant, but it's got problems. In particular, I've always hated the "starfighter cockpit" deflector module on the front. I think if you yanked that module out and put a more conventional deflector in the recess, it would look fine. In addition, the back end of the ship always struck me as just kind of lazy and generic. It doesn't feel anywhere near as tightly refined as any other "hero" ship in ST. I've also never liked the bussard scoops, as they look distinctly like a car's tail lights.
I like the Defiant's basic shape and the concept behind it (a Borg-killer which is "over-gunned and over-powered for a ship its size"), but the visuals just never did it justice as far as I'm concerned.
17e19b No.5739
>>5697
>loli starships
I think something both dreadful and wonderful is about to be unleashed.
b1865f No.5742
>>5739
>loli starships
Howdy, we're the Police Of Shooting You In The Dick, for your crimes please prepare to get shot in the dick.
7fa797 No.5744
>>5742
Since when is it a crime to appreciate cute little ships?
9f802b No.5747
ebad69 No.5803
>>5744
When there aren't cute anime girls crewing the cute ships.
bd285f No.6242
Don't know how Fed ships are comfy, they always have something going dangerously wrong with them.
17e19b No.6340
I know that most non-canon ships from Star Trek are frankly beyond trash but found myself developing a fondness for the Insurrection Class Destroyer from Klingon Academy/Starfleet Command. It actually looks what you'd expect a heavier Bird of Prey would look like and always in my headcanon what a K'vort should really have looked like instead of being an oversized B'rel
Wish also fags would stop focusing on Fed ships all the time, would love to see an expanded Cardassian, Romulan, Dominion, Klingon, hell even Ferengi shipline.
d3a73c No.6439
no love for excelsior class?
apparently these bad boys are the multi role work horse, probably a pretty safe bet
give me a choice of ships and it would probably have to be galaxy class tho
surprised noone has said galaxy yet? too mainstream?
369acc No.6440
>>6439
>surprised noone has said galaxy yet? too mainstream?
Just fucking ugly.
17e19b No.6441
>>6439
>Galaxy
Too big. Just be bored shitless to serve aboard.
369acc No.6442
>>6441
>Implying you could be bored fucking your waifu and battling Worf's weird Skeletor orc in the holodeck
17e19b No.6449
>>6442
>implying you would get time in the luxury cruise liner
ab6710 No.6453
>>6439
Too big. It's a flagship too which means admirals and diplomats will be showing up regularly and the ship will never have a relaxed atmosphere. Sure, it has all the creature comforts you could want, but it NEEDS them, lest the stress of the job eat you alive. Intrepid class has all the same comforts at a much smaller scale and if you were on any of them but Voyager you'd probably have a good time.
2eee8f No.6458
>>5582
>Don't be cheeky, you little plump dumpling.
WHO TOLD YOU?!
38a7a4 No.6464
>>6439
>~750/>1000 crew
>ugly saucer, which is only good as a giant escape pod well… I'll admit, Excelsior doesn't look too bad, but Galaxy class is pretty ugly
>only warp 9.6
vs
>~150 crew, not too big, but big enough to ward off random pirates and similar scum
>nice, sensible, one-piece design
>fast
>much smaller but still plenty comfortable.
Yeah, I'll take Intrepid class over those two any time. The only thing I'm not quite sure about are those nacelles, movable parts are always more tricky than solid parts.
17e19b No.6473
>>6464
The Excelisor class must have caused some autistic debates in Starfleet
>Hey that's a nice ship you've made, we should get it into mass production right away!
<No we must use it for the great experiment! It needs to be faster!
>Okay well why not use one as a prototype and build several with conventional drives, mean it's a great design and can be upgraded later right?
<NO! IT MUST HAVE TRANSWARP CAPABILITY BEFORE IT CAN BE PRODUCED!
>But it's a great ship we need, it fills a badly needed niche in our fleets and it is an ideal replacement for our aging Heavy Cruisers!
<NO THIS IS MY MACHINE! IT MUST BE USED FOR GREAT EXPERIMENT FIRST! REEEEEEEEEEEE!
7c6a9d No.6477
>>6439
Galaxy is easily the comfiest. It's like a cruise ship.
3b75d0 No.6478
always kinda liked the nebula class. modern, heavy, sleek, but without all the added weight of the galaxy class.
but I would probably prefer a birb of prey, without any other crew. just me and my set of invisible fuckoff disruptor cannons.
7fa797 No.6484
I've always had a soft spot for the Akira.
Its smaller than a galaxy class, with a 3rd of the crew and is supposedly the most heavily armed design in starfleet.
Its like a bigger meaner defiant, while still having room for things like bar's and holodecks, and since its not one of the big flagships, its captain won't have to put up with diplomats using it as a cruise liner or being used for PR stunts for the fleet constantly.
And unlike Excelsiors, its warpdrive actually works.
17e19b No.6488
>>6484
Excelisor class doesn't use warp drive though :^)
b1865f No.6504
>>6484
>>6488
Transwarp was a prototype and Excelsior was chosen as a testbed for it. The USS Excelsior had a normal warpdrive during Undiscovered Country when Sulu piloted it after transwarp was abandoned, and all Excelsior Class ships received regular warpdrives from the get-go of their construction.
d64337 No.6595
>>6504
You missed the joke. Are you a Vulcan?
b1865f No.6607
>>6595
No, I'm a Star Trek fan.
b1865f No.6608
File: 4b0d5ca36ec2f72⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 78.9 KB, 760x490, 76:49, Holographic_CaptainProtonR….jpg)
File: 3e040a79463434d⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 36.37 KB, 760x430, 76:43, Holographic_CaptainProtonR….jpg)
>>4977
How could I forget about best ship ever?
c07345 No.6610
>>6608
Terran Empire Proton when?
ade461 No.6658
>>6340
>would love to see an expanded Cardassian, Romulan, Dominion, Klingon, hell even Ferengi shipline.
I can definitely see that working for the Romulans, Ferengi, and Klingons, as all of their ships have very clearly defined aesthetics and detail styles. It would be harder for the Cardies, though, because while their ships have a distinctive thing going on with their overall shape, the fine-level details are just "lots of little boxes and panels" generic sci-fi trash.
b1865f No.6661
>>6610
>Kapitän Proton
>Heroic Explorer and Champion of Earth!
>Join our dashing aryan do-well as he faces his most treacherous foes to date in…
>…Kapitän Proton And The Democracies Of Mars!
2eee8f No.6665
6ebfa5 No.6990
>>1130
Miranda is a good looking compact ship.
Too bad you probably get cancer from the warp nacelles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCpYqWAIwFA
6ebfa5 No.6991
>>6478
The Nebula always struck me as underpowered. The Miranda class looks sleek and fast, the Nebula looks like a budget Galaxy with every system downrated except the crew saucer.
It is like the gaming laptop of starships, too much cramed in not enough space, too many corners cut and insufficent cooling so the hardware can't even be run to its full potential.
6ebfa5 No.6992
>>6442
They only had like 12 holodecks for a thousand people. You'll get like an hour once a month at best. More likely a staff officer reserves the whole thing for a day or more.
6ebfa5 No.6993
>>3356
space fighters/bombers only work if you have small scale weapons that can reliably penetrate starship shields. It also means that shield integretiy numbers drain alarmingly fast in capital ship engagements.
Really the secret to carriers is you have lots of patrols over a large area and fast responses in a way that works better than destroyer wolfpacks.
b1865f No.6994
>>6993
>only work if you have small scale weapons that can reliably penetrate starship shields
I was thinking the exact opposite. Mobile torpedo carriers the swoop in and hit ships when the shields have been knocked out by other ships. I mean if they have tech that can penetrate shields that are small enough to fit on fighters/bombers then they'd be standard on all ships and enlarged.
Given that they're usually one hit kill ships you'd want to keep them back and not in the first wave and ideally after the enemy ships have suffered damage that might impair their tactical capability, hit them from the now blind spots caused by their damaged/offline weapons arrays. Late-mid to late battle duty and clean up would be how I see them being deployed.
6ebfa5 No.7001
>>6994
but now you're holding the fighters in reserve when you could have had more destroyers and ships of the line to participate in the actual combat. You're justifying a cavalry that can only be used after the battle is already mostly won.
You're talking about some kind of deployable gundrones or MIRV that can only be used when enemy point defense is overwhelmed.
Hard to theorycraft in ST when the power levels are wonky and you have the potential for FTL Picard maneuvers in every battle.
17e19b No.7002
>>6994
I found it funny they used Maquis Raiders as their "Fighters"
Federation weren't even pretending anymore at that stage, their "civilian" ships were suddenly ships of war? wew
6ebfa5 No.7003
how come there weren't many refinements of the Defiant hullforms? Was the lack of naucelles that inefficent?
The Bird of Prey had no naucelles, most cardassian ships lacked naucelles. Plenty of bulk transports had no naucelles. I get it is fiction and distinctive styles is important for normies to tell goodguy/badguy, but still.
07fbe1 No.7004
>>6661
I'd not only watch it I'd pay for it.
17e19b No.7008
>>7003
I honestly couldn't tell you. It's an autistic debate for another time. All I can figure out is space. Having them outside allows for more space inside. Cardassian ships have them intergrated to the wings so only really the center of the ship is used. Bulk transports I am not sure, there's quite a few I've seen with nacelles so need an example there.
ade461 No.7009
>>6994
It seems like fighters would be great for overwhelming enemy ships with numbers. After all, most of the big capital ships seen throughout ST seem only able to fire one or two beams at a time. If you've got two dozen fighters bearing down on you then you're only going to be able to destroy two, maybe three, before you get fucked by twenty photon torpedoes from twenty different directions.
855a2f No.7011
>>6994
think about it, there is no known ship with dedicated fighter fighting capabilities. Literally nothing can hit them unless they are targeted by ships cannons, and when they are trying to hit fighters, they are not hitting your capital ships
2eee8f No.7023
I've noticed something. It's a guess, and the BO might be able to confirm it, but I'm pretty sure this is one of the first threads the new crew members gravitate to when they arrive. I'm pretty sure it was MY first thread, as well. Everyone's got an interesting opinion and some of the choices are surprising but reasonable. This really is one of our comfiest threads.
b1865f No.7036
>>7001
>You're justifying a cavalry that can only be used after the battle is already mostly won.
That's how cavalry was actually used for most of history. They didn't charge in until the enemy had broken for the most part.
But again, they get destroyed in one hit by any weapon whenever they're deployed. How are you going to justify sending them into battle? That's like sending medics without phasers into a horde of nausicaans.
>You're talking about some kind of deployable gundrones or MIRV that can only be used when enemy point defense is overwhelmed.
That would be much better. Use them to end the battle now instead of 30 minutes later. When those big starships have a crew of hundreds maybe it's better to leave the frantic last moments to small ships that exploit weaknesses.
>>7002
Well it's possible it was a courier ship first, that the Marquis fitted for hit and run tactics, and then the Federation made their own version.
>>7009
>It seems like fighters would be great for overwhelming enemy ships with numbers.
I could understand that but given that they die really easy I don't see the federation justifying what is basically suicide runs.
>After all, most of the big capital ships seen throughout ST seem only able to fire one or two beams at a time.
That's how it use to be. In DS9 they seemed to be able to tank hits better, and were a shit load faster. Maybe if it was TNG-era ships that would make sense, but nowadays I doubt it. I don't recall the fighters ever destroying anything that wasn't crippled already, they usually just cause minor damage.
>>7011
>Literally nothing can hit them unless they are targeted by ships cannons, and when they are trying to hit fighters, they are not hitting your capital ships
For that to be the case then you've got to have the Federation tell pilots that they're basically suicide running to by a few more seconds for another ship. Doesn't fit with their morality.
7fa797 No.7064
>>7003
BoP's do have nacelles, its just that they are in the middle of the hull, protected from incoming fire instead of on a strut. We see this with the Galor's nacelle's in its wings and the Defiant having its nacelles under its armor at the edges of its hull as well.
Its likely a trade off between protecting the nacelle from being shot vs its working efficiency for generating warp power or somesuch. Could also be a cooling thing.
Could also be a size thing, since larger klingon cruisers all have them external on their wingtips.
Could also be that keeping the nacelle internal is cheaper/easier to construct.
>>7009
ST isn't Star Wars. Like IRL, the point of a carrier is that it can project force without having to be present, allowing it to engage the enemy with its fighters while the enemy can't shoot back at the carrier. This is only useful in large engagements where the carrier can rely on a screening force of other vessels to keep the enemy from attacking it directly. Thus, logically the carriers role is to operate as part of a larger group, not engaging enemy ships 1 on 1. Hence, the ability of a large ship to only engage 1 or 2 fighters at a time is irrelevant since other nearby ships can engage said fighters to screen the bigger vessels. Thus, trying to overwhelm enemy fleets with hordes of fighters, would just mean the enemy deploys destroyers in their wet navy role, to screen the big ships against smaller threats. Thus, the fighters would get shot by small cheap ships designed to kill lots of fighters, while the big ships are free to focus on killing the carriers screen. Its the classic WWII ballance, except, unlike WWII or Star Wars, ships in trek have no trouble hitting the fighters or other small manoeuvrable ships, so the attrition rate among those fighters would be extremely high. Since each fighter has to carry a lot of expensive equipment, guns, military grade ECM/ECCM suites, warpdrives, military grade shield systems and so on, such attrition would not only be high on highly trained pilots who need years of training, but also in expensive material that needs to be produced in large numbers.
At that point, you'd probably be better off taking the pilot out and making it a drone, less lifesupport, controls and pilot mass to haul around. And since the guns on a fighter are so small that they might as well not bother shooting anyway, you can take them out as well and replace them with one big warhead that CAN hurt a big ship, drop some of the expensive equipment it won't need since its now a missile instead of a fighter, and the whole thing not only gets cheaper but a lot more dangerous to the enemy ships. Its also no longer a fighter.
Truth is, unless you have some kind of gun that can fit on a fighter and still hurt big vessels, fighters don't make sense. You would at most have some kind of forward AWACS style ship for directing missile salvos launched from outside effective sensor range by a ships little more advanced than a bulk freighter full of long range missiles. The Honorverse approach to capital ship combat, if you will.
As far as theorycrafting goes, it seems pretty clear that fighters don't work in ST because ship offensive and defensive abilities rely largely on the ships own power supply, and since larger vessels can carry bigger more efficient generators, and more of them too most likely, mass combat favours the side with the bigger ships. This would certainly explain why the borg cubes are so effective. This would also mean that fighters, wouldn't be able to carry enough firepower to threaten larger vessels, and that this fact is so universally accepted noone ever gives any priority to anti fighter defences any more. While you guys seem to take the lack of antifighter defences as a reason why fighters work, I would like to point out, that the main reason noone bothers with fighters, is that they simply are such a small threat to the larger vessels that no such fighter defences are deemed necessary.
855a2f No.7075
>>7064
then what about using fighters as "nodes" that send information about enemy capital ships to carrier so it can send missiles there. You could design fighters and missiles to use same infrastructure. Fighters would only need comms, power, life support and maybe shields/stealth.
7fa797 No.7076
>>7075
Name a single advantage to using a pilot over a drone controlled by an AI or remotely via FTL com.
Hell, having missiles with EW suites be part of the missiles network would make sense regardless of what controller you use. It lets your controller hang back out of the enemys effective range while giving the enemy's defences multiple sources of ECM to overcome to effectively defend against the missile swarm.
WWII style single seat fighters don't make much sense in a hard sci fi setting.
But other than that, yes, this would be one role a small craft, manned of not, could be useful. It does mean you don't really need carriers though. Anything that can carry and launch a ton of missiles will work as launch platform, so you don't need armor, fancy shields, much in the way of guns and all those other high tech toys battleships like to use, to be effective. The launcher can really just be a bulk freighter that just dumps its cargo to launch the missiles.
Of course, the problem with this system is that those missiles are going to need a lot of expensive things, like warp drives and fancy sensors, and you are going to need A LOT of them.
Now that I think about it, this could make for a secondary role for armed shuttles or fighters. Mobile AA guns to screen large vessels. Even the weak weapons of these things can take out missiles and you need as many guns hitting that swarm of missiles if you want to survive.
855a2f No.7077
>>7076
>Name a single advantage to using a pilot over a drone controlled by an AI or remotely via FTL com.
*
>harder to hack
>doesnt suffer from slowed down controlls thanks to having actual pilot and no need of control signal being transmited
>bigger awareness
17e19b No.7078
>>7076
EW
Not even shitting this is actually part of the canon why they rarely use drone warships. Apparently it's ridiculously easy for control signals to be disrupted. Hell even in a Fleet Battle with ships nobody was actually able to communicate with other ships due to interference.
7fa797 No.7079
>>7078
Fair enough, though this rarely seems to happen in the show.
17e19b No.7080
>>7079
Like most things in the show, conviently forgotten when the plot demands it. Like after rewatching TOS and one episode they forget they actually have shuttles
036e33 No.7088
404e93 No.7089
>>7088
It happens a few times in the first Season when the transporter malfunctions.
e7ba0b No.7115
>>3371
the lack of arm rests would get really fucking annoying during a long shift but as a guitarist, i'd love to have them in my home studio
>>5506
>>5690
>>5734
>Defiant
I fucking despise that design. It's a giant sub-light shuttle that the producers just decided could be a "starship". It has integrated warp nacelles. They are totally fucking with the established design language for no goddamn reason. It looks generic, like it could be from any sci-fi series. Star Trek established a distinctive look. I wish they wouldnt fuck with it.
Starfleet vessels do not have integrated nacelles.. REEEEEEEEE
855a2f No.7132
>>7115
>Starfleet vessels do not have integrated nacelles.. REEEEEEEEE
HU-MAN vessels dont have itegrated nacelles. maybe it was stolen design wise from ships of another species (which is probable when you find yourself sudenly in a danger of total anihilation), or maybe to be easier for allied shipyards to construct.
Please also note that its role as an ""escort"" (aka. undergunned destroyer), isnt very well researched by federation forces (since they are cucked and dont understand that live is hard), but is used on large scale by other species, like birds of prey, which have proven to be sturdy usefull design so they probably just badly copied what worked for others.
7fa797 No.7134
>>7132
I suspect that this is the main reason its nacelles are internal.
The feddies ship designers where faced with a task that was for them, unprecedented, making a dedicated warship except it wasn't, the Akira was also designed as a dedicated warship and work on that began after the cardassian war
It stands to reason that the ship would be based on ship building experience of those federation members and allies who had more experience making warships than the humans who normally dominate federation proceedings. Hence, internal warnacelles, a feature on ships like the BoP and andorian ships for example, is unsurprising in the result of such a project.
17e19b No.7139
>>7134
>Akira
>Designed after the Cardassian War
>Was present in large numbers before the war
What?
Unless you are referring to the TLE Cardassian War then well what?
7fa797 No.7148
>>7139
The first war, not the dominion war.
17e19b No.7149
>>7148
Fair enough, although a bit of a mute point?
Also strange that member species don't build many ships, especially with how many wars the Federation has been in. Then again the Cardassian War the Constellation was more than a match for most of what the Cardassians could throw at it
9f802b No.7187
7ae7d9 No.7217
>>4823
That's pretty feckin cool
watch out, everybody, best ships coming through
7ae7d9 No.7220
>>5132
>>4823
Anon, if you're still here, I'd actually really like to do a 3D render of this ship. Do you think you could draw the view from the rear? I don't want to misplace anything.
8017ea No.7238
>>7187
Are you aVulcan?
>>7217
No no yes, no no no
ade461 No.7288
>>7220
Sure thing, anon. While I'm at it, I'll probably clean up the pencil sketches. If I can find the time, I'll also do some quick detail sketches of bits like the deflector, maneuvering thrusters, etc.
9b117c No.7289
>>7220
>>7288
>/strek/ Bureau of Ship Design
I look forward to what this produces.
7ae7d9 No.7315
>>7288
Wonderful! I can't wait to see them!
e7ba0b No.7452
>>7445
>no cheese
>weird french bread
>pickles on top
wtf kind of burger is hugo weeving losing his shit for?
9ec6bd No.7507
>>7452
Same, there is something seriously wrong with that burger.
0f555a No.7510
>>7452
>needing cheese
A good burger should not need cheese.
c3ef43 No.7513
>>7510
No but it definitely needs more than some dry bread and pickles.
9f802b No.7593
>>7452
Where do you put the pickles? Below the meat?
17e19b No.7600
>Thread devolves into heated debate about Burgers
We /k/ now
7fa797 No.7602
>>7593
Why would you use pickles at all you sick fuck? Thats as bad as pineapple or sardines on a pizza.
9f802b No.7608
>>7602
Ham and pineapple on a pizza is delicious.
a44ca5 No.7612
>>7608
Ham is already a sweet meat, you don't need more sugar.
633563 No.7613
>>7510
>A good burger should not need cheese.
a good burger? no. but that burger is atrocious. The hot patty will liquify whatever that sauce is (probably mayo) and you'll be left biting into a dry, crusty top "bun" and gross bottom.
I always put mayo on the bottom, but place a bed of finely-shredded iceberg or romaine lettuce over that for the patty to rest on. This creates a buffer between patty and the bread. Everything else goes on top of the patty.
9f802b No.7614
>>7612
Pizza's already bad for you, you don't need to worry about the particular ingredients.
a44ca5 No.7615
>>7614
I'm talking about flavor.
6d86c4 No.7625
>>7608
>Ham and pineapple on a pizza is delicious.
Don't forget the bacon!
>>7612
>Ham is already a sweet meat, you don't need more sugar.
Blasphemer!
7ae7d9 No.7628
>>7608
you are a liar and a fiend
>>7600
how did this happen?
17e19b No.7630
>>7628
Happy little accidents.
ade461 No.8300
>>7220
>>7288
Okay! I've got an orthographic sheet worked up. I didn't change the pencil sketches much, just altered a couple places where the side and top views didn't quite line up (as they were drawn several months apart). I still want to do those aforementioned detail sketches, but I'm not sure when I'll have the time for it.
7ae7d9 No.8339
>>8300
Sick, man. This is definitely better as a reference. Since I'm in university currently, it may take me a month or so to finish. If you happen to make the detail sketches you can just throw them up on here since details will come last anyway.
17e19b No.8668
Debating whether or not to make a new thread for this. Not sure what BO rules are on such things.
ade461 No.8673
>>8668
I think it's generally better to wait a bit on slow boards. Over on /co/ the Questionable Malcontent regulars ride their thread all the way to the bottom of the catalog before starting a new one. It helps to prevent the catalog getting cluttered up with abandoned threads. The biggest barrier to making it work is getting the knowledge out there that certain threads remain active after they stop bumping.
f36443 No.8844
>>8673
At such a rate it will be a while before a new thread is created.
76f1a4 No.9334
Anyone think the Defiant Class label of a Heavy Escort made it sound like an overweight prostitute?