posted
I was thinking about this while looking over my cutaway for my Titan class, and thinking of where a weekspot for the ship would be. This would be along the lines of "Why is the bridge on top for all to see?"
Well, obviously an extremly weak point on almost every ship is the belly. Look at what all is down there. Deflector dishes, antimatter pods, the very bottom of the warp core, heck, even some torpedo launchers (which means that the torpedo storage bay ain't too far away either).
So, my question is, why would you want to put highly explosive stuff, especially antimatter pods, on the very bottom of the ship where only the exterior hull is what stands between you and an oncoming torpedo or phaser blast? Why aren't the antimatter pods put somewhere in the middle of the ship, and then have the antimatter piped elsewhere to the antimatter injector.
Of course, why have your antimatter injector so close to the belly of the ship as well? Really, the only answer for that is, so the core can be dumped. Now, if you wanted to forget dumping, having a horizontal core to me would be more practical, since it'd be deeply imbedded in the ship.
Also something else to tack onto this - why are the warp cores so tall? I mean, if the Defiant can have a core that's only 3 decks tall, why does a Galaxy need one that's about 12 decks tall? Both of them have reaction chambers that are nearly the same size, so I don't see how the height of the core could affect power output.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"So, my question is, why would you want to put highly explosive stuff, especially antimatter pods, on the very bottom of the ship where only the exterior hull is what stands between you and an oncoming torpedo or phaser blast? Why aren't the antimatter pods put somewhere in the middle of the ship, and then have the antimatter piped elsewhere to the antimatter injector. "
You're saying "let's get rid of the "belly" or "engineering" hull of most Starfleet ships. The most known ship so far with your "ideal" layout is the Defiant-Class, where all the engineering equipment is effectively in the "middle" of the ship thus giving these parts extra protection. Can you think of any other starship layout to meet your requirements?
posted
That is totally NOT what I was saying. What I WAS saying was to reposition the warp core and all it's componants on the interior of the ship, not change the exterior. Where you remove the antimatter pods, replace them with sensors or quarters. The shape will remain pretty much of the same shape, it's just the interior is jumbled.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
The official answer to most of your questions is: with the hugely powerful weapons used in Trek, it wouldn't really matter where you placed the bridge module/antimatter storage pods/other vitally important stuff. Once the shields are down, no amount of armor, no internal layout would prevent catastrophic damage.
Unofficially, we've seen this doesn't hold ground (for example, the many battles of DS9 where combat took place between unshielded ships). Obviously, the Defiant's design is a testiment to a more militaristic design philosophy - ablative armor, warpcore and bridge tucked away safely, etc. So, why is the bridge located on top then? Because it represents the most dominant position, the 'highest' point on a vessel, from which everything is controlled, watched, etc. It's a psychological thing, not unlike the idea behind DS9's Operations layout - the Prefect's office is a a yard or so above 'ground level', so other officers have to look up to him.
Finally, why is the Defiant's core apparently just as powerful as that of a Galaxy, yet so much shorter? Because the very concept of the Defiant is flawed. It's very small, but still more than a match for most cruisers - however, smaller means less space! - when it comes to (star)ships, 'bigger is better' applies. You can't have a small destroyer with as much raw firepower as a dreadnought. Had I designed it, I would have made it roughly 400 meters in length, with the entire front section being essentially being one big gun (remember TNG's deflector weapon from TBOBW?), and perhaps two horizontal warp cores running along the entire length of the ship. To me, that seems like a much more credible warship - and it resolves the issue nicely
Sigh...let's read your post: "Well, obviously an extremly weak point on almost every ship is the belly. Look at what all is down there. Deflector dishes, antimatter pods, the very bottom of the warp core, heck, even some torpedo launchers (which means that the torpedo storage bay ain't too far away either)."
"Of course, why have your antimatter injector so close to the belly of the ship as well? Really, the only answer for that is, so the core can be dumped. Now, if you wanted to forget dumping, having a horizontal core to me would be more practical, since it'd be deeply imbedded in the ship."
If you keep the lower hull as you suggest, we'll all hear the OTHER arguments: 1. Why is the deflector dish so exposed on the lower hull if it can get hit like the Odyssey? 2. Why make the lower hull and neck so exposed if it will get hit like the Ent-A in ST II (especially if nothing important is down there...)? 3. Why not tuck everything into the middle of the ship (like the Defiant...)?
I'm beginning to sense a little hostility and that you will not even tolerate anything I say, so I shall drop out of this topic. Have a nice day!
posted
Ace, you're totally not talking what I am talking about, and you're obviously not reading everything clearly enough (especially my 3rd post).
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well...you want all the explosive stuff near the exterior of the hull so you can get rid of it quickly, like many have already said. Warp core and antimatter pods have to be readily ejectable.
Which brings up the thought, why would you NOT want to be able to dump the core?
"Oh no! We just lost magnetic containment!"
"Eject the core!"
"But we CAN'T!!"
"Damn."
BOOM
As for the deflector dish, well, where would YOU put it? It's kind of hard to bury something like that. It has to be visible from the front and have a rather large angle of effect or whatever. It NEEDS to be exposed to do it's work.
-------------------- "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."
But with the ejection of the core thing, it's sort of a trade off. Would you rather risk the core instantly being blown to bits by a torpedo hit just so there is the possibility of ejecting it, or would you rather have the core protected, but you can't eject it?
Either way, you could either save the ship or lose it.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
posted
I think the real question here is, How crap would engineering look with a horizontal warpcore? I mean, the reation chamber would have to be either imbedded in the floor or hanging from the celing, Because you can't have it going through the middle, it'd breach health & safety codes.
section 29, paragraph 8, line 62.
A 24 or above Cochrane warpcore may not be stored aboard a type 7 federation or starfleet vessel in a horizontal position due to the inceased risk of heads breaching the low hanging plasma coolant tanks or interns tripping over the dilithium chamber hatch while carrying self sealing stembolts.......
So there...
also it would be a real bitch to install an intergrated warpcore.....
posted
That's true, as well. If it's ejectable, it's modular, and can be replaced or upgraded.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Gammera
Ex-Member
posted
As for the core on the defiant being shorter then the other ships and being just as powerfull, well it just doesn't matter how many constrictor segments you have, they just help bridge space. On the Ent D it is six decks from the PDT to the M/ARC and five decks up from the anti-matter to the M/ARC. Other then the trnspher role from very distant sorces the only other thing the constrictor segments do is make sure the streams are lined up, I agree this could probably be done with one or two of them.
IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
