posted
Increased storage volume means increased range and mission duration. Some of the cargo and engineering spaces in the saucer could be converted to other uses (extra quarters, labs, expanded sickbay etc.) and I'm sure the new deflector and new nacelles have some increased functionality to the warp drive and sensors. I'd say it significantly increases the useful life of what must have been an increasingly limited design.
posted
Agreed. I always got the impression that the NX class was built with an eye on lifespan upgrades to begin with, and surely they ratcheted up ideas for compatibilty for new technology one Enterprise and her sisters got out there and found much cooler tech to copy or reverse engineer (or whenever the Vulcans got de-analized about their own stuff with humanity).
I see no problem with a warp 7 engine requiring a whole new space that the old Engineering hull simply could not accomodate, so they slapped one on using the exisitng infrastructure above the shuttle bay (where the grappler arms needed a solid frame anchor on the ship, etc.) to hold onto. Needing new power transfer conduits from said engine resulted in the new pylons, running through the exisitng catamaran to get to the nacelles. There's a small shuttlebay (or something) in the aft section of the secondary hull, which should concievably hold a shuttlepod and arguably be better to accomodate visitnig shuttles than the smaller footprint pod bay they originally had.
IF the original warp 5 engine was still there as a backup, it may have been an intended redundancy for the new engine if it failed on an extended mission and Entrprise needed to limp home. Voyager had one 200 years later (which they never used), so why not this?
As it stood, you could argue that a ship the size of this was way too huge for its original crew of 87, where the Constitution primary saucer was not that much larger for its initial crew of 202, which doubled. No reason why that can't happen here...
posted
I always found crew size estimates based on ship size to be a little silly since it really depends on how you arrange things.
As I understand it, in the real world navies (on subs especially) the crew are practically living on top of each other and even sharing bunks between two or more people on a shift rotation. We see in ST:VI that the Ent-A had this arrangement, so I really don't see a problem with small ships having several hundred people on board. I think it's fair to say that it wasn't until the earth 24th century that automation got the the point where they could afford to have smaller crews on bigger ships with enormous quarters, almost deserted corridors, vast cargo bays made up of mostly empty volume and two deck tall holodecks that don't even appear to ever have a queue.
posted
True but consider that exploration is still a big unknown quantity at this point- nice accomidations would make up for a lack of shore leave and would be an incentive for such a risky mission.
Also, larger quarters allows for easier potential doublingup during evac/rescue missions- it's possible that the bulkheads even slide back to provide larger rooms -or the occasional emergency hospital space, sports or onboard training.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Aesthetically, this is a very good transition to the 1701.
But from a technological sense, I can't go with it as a refit. Two separate deflectors, two separate warp cores? Just build a new ship!
It seems to me that this would be a revision to the NX class for newer builds, rather than something they'd bother to refit. I'm thinking of an example like, say, the Challenger's keel is laid but before they go too far they upgrade it to this "NY" class.
Because otherwise, all that tech and space taken up by it in the saucer that's dedicated to engineering still goes to waste, and now becomes dead weight being hauled by this extra warp core and secondary hull. Think of the warp supercharger things just sitting there doing nothing.
And to put another deflector on the front? Not very original. I can see a widened deflector, one which might even look a little silly poking above and below the hull rim. Might look a little ungainly, but it would be functional, and would make a good transition. The main complaint against the NX (and Enterprise itself) for years was that they basically got everything 'right' on the first try. This would be a case where they didn't. The front of the new hull could be the new landing bay or something else or a shape like the later Daedalus, and it wouldn't be until the next class starship that they moved everything to the "right" place.
Nah, in my personal little book this would be the design for something like NX-06 or so. Stick the reactor in the secondary hull, lose some of the extra catamaran hump space, complete the saucer on the back, and expand the deflector dish.
Then you have a situation were the Constitution (or some other next class starship) can do away with the impulse catamaran altogether by sticking the impulse engines on the saucer, putting the deflector dish on the nose of the secondary hull and moving the shuttlebay to the secondary hull rear. Nice and easy.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: True but consider that exploration is still a big unknown quantity at this point- nice accomidations would make up for a lack of shore leave and would be an incentive for such a risky mission.
Also, larger quarters allows for easier potential doublingup during evac/rescue missions- it's possible that the bulkheads even slide back to provide larger rooms -or the occasional emergency hospital space, sports or onboard training.
Judging by what we've seen of Starfleet's entrance exams and psych evaluations I don't think Starfleet has much of a recruitment problem, so "incentive" really isn't an issue. People WANT to be on those ships, it's a privilege.
With the early ships especially, space should be at a premium and every kilo of mass and cubic meter of volume should count. One of the things they did actually get right with Ent was the set design. You really got the feeling that everything had a function and there weren't just miles and miles of deserted corridors, serving no day-to-day purpose.
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: Aesthetically, this is a very good transition to the 1701.
But from a technological sense, I can't go with it as a refit. Two separate deflectors, two separate warp cores? Just build a new ship!
It seems to me that this would be a revision to the NX class for newer builds, rather than something they'd bother to refit. I'm thinking of an example like, say, the Challenger's keel is laid but before they go too far they upgrade it to this "NY" class.
Because otherwise, all that tech and space taken up by it in the saucer that's dedicated to engineering still goes to waste, and now becomes dead weight being hauled by this extra warp core and secondary hull. Think of the warp supercharger things just sitting there doing nothing.
And to put another deflector on the front? Not very original. I can see a widened deflector, one which might even look a little silly poking above and below the hull rim. Might look a little ungainly, but it would be functional, and would make a good transition. The main complaint against the NX (and Enterprise itself) for years was that they basically got everything 'right' on the first try. This would be a case where they didn't. The front of the new hull could be the new landing bay or something else or a shape like the later Daedalus, and it wouldn't be until the next class starship that they moved everything to the "right" place.
Nah, in my personal little book this would be the design for something like NX-06 or so. Stick the reactor in the secondary hull, lose some of the extra catamaran hump space, complete the saucer on the back, and expand the deflector dish.
Then you have a situation were the Constitution (or some other next class starship) can do away with the impulse catamaran altogether by sticking the impulse engines on the saucer, putting the deflector dish on the nose of the secondary hull and moving the shuttlebay to the secondary hull rear. Nice and easy.
As refits go, I'd say this is much less extensive than the Connie refit. That practically WAS a totally new ship! This is more like building an extension on your house.
posted
Besides, they would not simply scap the NX-01- Starfleet's first true "Hero Ship".
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I like it... I'm just not crazy about how the saucer AND the engineering hull both connect to the pylons. It's a logical step towards the Connie for sure... And maybe future scratchbuilt NX class ships would eliminate the double connection.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well it certainly looks more structurally solid than the connie. I suppose it stands to reason SIFs were less able to carry a ship's structural load so combined with a lack of shields, a compact and re-enforced design make sense.
posted
It would be cool to see the Intrepid design get this treatment....the underslung secondary hull would be waaay back or forward in a nebula sorta configuration.
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I think the added structural strength the multiple connections provide is a nice touch, it rather harks back towards the Intrepid-type, and also anticipates the dersigns of the other ships seen in the new film.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
