Page 33 of 44

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Sat May 08, 2010 8:48 pm
by Mark
I'm going with all three. Remember gentlemen, we are designing the puppy with a minimum of two warp cores (I think Deep suggested four). We've seen ONE warp core power a regular Starship in extended combat before, so I don't think that power is going to be a problem. However, I WOULD set up a safety system with backups to allow for a rapid transfer of power. Our tac systems can only hold so much power before the rest becomes surplus, but we may need some of it back if relays or EPS lines or transfer stations take damage.

I definitely think the pro's outweigh the cons here. After all, this is a matter of survivability.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Sat May 08, 2010 9:15 pm
by Deepcrush
I recommend eight primary cores.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Sat May 08, 2010 9:21 pm
by DarkMoineau
With 8 warp core, we can use what we want ^^

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 8:31 pm
by Mark
A dual core per nacelle? Or spread throughout the ship?

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 8:38 pm
by DarkMoineau
Well, i am not sure this will be a good idea to put them in the same room.
For me, it's 1 core per nacelle, 2 core for shield and 2 core for weapons in battle, and the possibility to fly at higher cruising speed because we can use the 4 others core when the first 4 have reached their 12/36 hours limit.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 8:51 pm
by Captain Seafort
That assumes that the limit is imposed by the cores. If think it's more likely that it's due to the nacelles, in which case the only way to do what you're suggesting would be to only use two nacelles while resting the other two, then swap. This in turn assumes that two nacelles can carry the ship fast enough for long enough, and can be back to maximum effectiveness quickly enough to take over again, that it wouldn't simply be more efficient to use all four and accept a lower warp factor.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:00 pm
by DarkMoineau
Well, in my idea, the problem isn't the warp factor but the time that we can travel at high warp factor.

But you are probably right.

The answer isn't in "Best of Both World" when Enterprise travel at Warp 9,6 and try to intercept the Cube Borg?

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:07 pm
by Captain Seafort
DarkMoineau wrote:The answer isn't in "Best of Both World" when Enterprise travel at Warp 9,6 and try to intercept the Cube Borg?
They simply say they can only travel at maximum warp for a limited time - they never said why.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:09 pm
by Sonic Glitch
Captain Seafort wrote:
DarkMoineau wrote:The answer isn't in "Best of Both World" when Enterprise travel at Warp 9,6 and try to intercept the Cube Borg?
They simply say they can only travel at maximum warp for a limited time - they never said why.
I always suspected the problem was in the nacelles myself. Perhaps warp coil burn-out or something?

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:14 pm
by Mark
I figured it was akin to running a car at high RPMs for an extended period.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:16 pm
by Captain Seafort
Sonic Glitch wrote:I always suspected the problem was in the nacelles myself. Perhaps warp coil burn-out or something?
Possibly. We know from "The Chase" that sustained high-warp travel can damage them. Another possibility is that they simply get clogged, given that the E-D needed a more intensive baryon ( :x ) sweep due to being much more active than a typical starship.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:16 pm
by DarkMoineau
They didn't said if it's the nacelle of the core?

Okay.

Why do you speek about baryon?

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:25 pm
by Mark
DarkMoineau wrote:They didn't said if it's the nacelle of the core?

Okay.

Why do you speek about baryon?

That was another entire episode with the baryon sweep.

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:30 pm
by DarkMoineau
With terrorist no?

I habve totally forgotten the technobabble ^^

Re: Federation Battlestar

Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 10:05 pm
by Mark
That's the one :wink: