So: does it evolve into the prototype for the Constitution-class and get rechristened after yet another refit a hundred years later? Just another crazy dead end? What say you, fellow geeks?
quote:So: does it evolve into the prototype for the Constitution-class and get rechristened after yet another refit a hundred years later?
I'm not sure what you mean by that statement, but basically Drexler took a design that I absolutely hate and made it better. QED.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I'd like to see the front of the ship. I want to know if the new "pod" has a deflector, and if they removed the one at the front of the ship.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Since Doug was talking about redundancy on his blog, the saucer's deflector would probably still be there along with a new one on the secondary hull.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm intrested in all the re-arranging needed to move the hangar to this new secondary hull- talk about a major refit!
Hmmm...I bet this configuration has a much greater ranger/mission duration capacity- what with foodstuffs, antimatter and duterium storage and whatnot.
Or maybe the entire secondary hull is devoted to Orion lave girls and hot Vulcans in Pon farr.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't think "moving" the hanger would be that difficult, since you're not moving it, you're installing one in the new hull and decommissioning the old one. It'd just be a matter of stripping out all the heavy equipment (grapple, fuel tanks, etc.) and just convert what is essentially open space into a cargo bay...or something else.
posted
He's not said that the old launch bay would ve removed, but the new neck does seem to go where the hanger bay was before.
BTW the cargo bay doors port and starboard on the saucer - I suppose they could be used as launch bays. We did see them with the occasional pod or whatever in them, so I guess its doable.
Also, Drexler actually says the deflector will "co-exist" with the new one on the secondary hull. The ship is warp capable with the secondary hull damaged or absent, due to the old enginering also being retained.
Nice idea for redundancy but it does seem a bit odd that you'd bolt on a new engine and leave the old one in place (unless you expected the new one to break?).
-------------------- I have plenty of experience in biology. I bought a Tamagotchi in 1998... And... it's still alive.
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
With the frequency of major damage, computer viruses, alien saboteurs, weirdo space 'weather', and random-ass malfunctions, I think Starfleet would be pretty stupid to *not* expect it to break.
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
^ What? And remove their greatest plot device?
-------------------- I have plenty of experience in biology. I bought a Tamagotchi in 1998... And... it's still alive.
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
Well, the families of the dead might appreciate it.
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
That's my problem, this new secondary hull doesn't replace anything. I see it as the starship equivalent of an external harddrive. I would have thought it freed up some space in the saucer, but it really doesn't.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
