STF

Specification Review: Independence-class Heavy Frigate (TOS), Draft 3 - Review CLOSED

Posted Oct. 28, 2020, 10:36 a.m. by Robert Archer

[snip]

The dawning of the 2240’s was a generally peaceful one for the Federation. Though there were random border raids near Klingon space, and the occasional issue with Orion pirates, Starfleet felt confident that the immediate future would be one of expansion and discovery.

There is no comma needed between the words “space” and “and”, as there are only two independent clauses here.

== Noted

They still had to remain vigilant for possible threats from old enemies and potential new adversaries. It was with this in mind that Starfleet put the call out for a multi-role rugged frigate, one which, though smaller than common cruiser designs, could perform just as well in a variety of situations.

It took the Starfleet design bureau almost five years of design and construction before the first five Independence class frigates came out of the assembly yards around Earth, with another three ready for commissioning should the need arise. The intent was to build a small, fast, maneuverable and relatively inexpensive ship that could be easily reconfigured for a variety of different roles should the need arise. This would range from system patrols, to scientific surveys, anti-pirate/raider actions, and service as a logistics transport.

That last sentence is clunky. I would suggest that you replace “range from” with “include”, say “scientific” instead of “to scientific”, and call it a day.

== Noted

[snip]

Survey, analysis and cataloging of anomalies and uncharted systems
Planetary and astrological event response
Discovery and survey of new life and civilizations
System and border patrols, anti-piracy/raider combat roles
Cargo supply and relief efforts in emergencies

The last term here is somewhat confusing. Does it mean that the Independence only performs cargo operations during emergency situations? Given that cargo supply and relief efforts are technically separate operations, perhaps you should separate that. I would suggest that you do the same with patrols and anti-piracy/raider combat.

== Noted

The Independence Class Frigate was designed from the ground up to be rugged, dependable, and functional for its missions. The rearward sections of the ship are shaped as a rectangular structure which then connect seamlessly as one unit into a half dome shaped saucer. Projecting upwards at the rear of the ship, on a pair of short V shaped pylons, are the ship’s two warp nacelles.

This is still a little confusing. Are there two rectangular structures at the aft (not rearward) of the ship, or one? I’m guessing that lower outer hull of the aft section is level with the lower forward hull, but I’m not entirely clear on that here. As for the pylons, I’m envisioning a V-shape that is fore-to aft with the pylon being directly parallel to the z-axis of the ship. If that isn’t your intent, you may want to adjust your wording.

== Its one structure, I cleaned up the description a little for the next draft

[snip]

The core is positioned vertically on decks 11 and 12 with support systems on deck 12 with the matter/antimatter pods. Emergency ejection systems propel the core and pods out the bottom of the ship.

I know this has already come up in discussion, as Discovery has mentioned core ejection, thereby making it a possible feature. Looking at the Enterprise Owner’s Manual, it isn’t a capability that featured in the Constitution, partly due to the fact that the warp plasma conduits were a grouped series instead of a pair of lines running to the individual nacelles. You may want to specify the dual conduit setup instead of the multi-conduit setup just so that this is clearer.

== Noted

IMPULSE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

The Independence Class Frigate has one quad-injector impulse engine positioned at the rear of deck 1. The engine has a maximum output of .23c and can accelerate or decelerate the ship, coupled with the RCS thruster system, in 35 seconds.

Okay, this makes the ship design even more confusing. Does that mean that Deck 1 runs from the fore to aft in a continuous shape?

== As noted in the deck layout it is with fusion reactors and deuterium supplies etc

[snip]

The Independence Class Frigate is equipped with the Type-5 phaser bank system. The system has a maximum energy output of 0.3 MW out to a range of 18,750km. The ship has two, twin emitter banks to port and starboard along the forward lines of the ship positioned dorsal and ventral. With an additional pair of twin emitters to port and starboard, dorsal and ventral along the aft end of the ship next to the ship’s nacelle pylons.

There are both grammar and technical issues there. There shouldn’t be a comma in the third sentence, so it should read “two twin”. The last sentence is a sentence fragment, and should say “additional pairs” since you described four phaser banks. Finally, you don’t say how many emitters each bank has.

== Noted

Forward phaser fire can angle 90 degrees to port and starboard respectively providing a full 180 degree length of coverage along the forward dorsal and ventral beam of the ship. The aft phasers cover an additional 180 degrees of the aft quarter except for a narrow line between the ship’s nacelles and pylons.

The phrase is “firing arc”, not “length of coverage”. That also only treats the X and Y axes, not the Z-axis. I’m guessing that you meant that they can adjust their aim by 90 degrees in all directions. Technically, that leaves a space directly forward of the vessel where the phasers are incapable of firing; you may want to adjust the horizontal firing arcs to have some overlap.

== Noted

[snip]

The scientific, medical and engineering labs of the Independence class span the central areas of decks 9 through 12. Each grouping of labs for both the science and engineering departments, contain 10 dedicated duotronic computer cells for lab processing and faster archival storage to the main computer system. The labs also contain basic 3-D holographic projection systems for object analysis and study.

There doesn’t need to be a comma after “departments”.

== Noted

[snip]

On Deck 9 is the general biology lab. The Chief Science Officer’s office is also located here.
On Deck 10 is the general planetary science lab.
On Deck 11 are the general astrological science, and stellar cartography labs. The last of which extends down to the port side of deck 12.

There does not need to be a comma after “science”. It’s “latter” instead of last, since you only have two labs listed. This needs to be a single sentence with a comma instead of a period after “labs”.

== Noted

[snip]

There are 2 tractor beam emitters located dorsal and ventral on the aft ends of decks 2 and 12.

I get what you’re saying, but this is awkwardly phrased. It seems like you’re saying that, somehow, the emitters are both at the very aft of the vessel, but also on top and bottom of the vessel. Honestly, you need to say “aft dorsal” and “aft ventral” and then the decks. Also, given how you’ve described the ship structure to this point, it seems somewhat difficult to have the dorsal side of Deck 2 be exposed enough for a tractor beam. Does the aft section of the vessel somehow cut Deck 1 short?

== Hmm you’re right I dug into my notes and see this was meant to be deck one not two I’ll fix that for the next draft!

[snip]

The Independence’s shuttle bay is located along the underside of the ship’s forward midsection on deck 12. It is divided by a series of double doors that allow half of the bay to remain pressurized while the other half is launching or recovering spacecraft. Due to the interlocking doors, only one spacecraft can be launched or recovered at a time.

This has a very Pre-Federation feel to it. Most other TOS-era vessels launch their shuttles from the aft of the ship. Why the difference?

== Just to be different I guess? Just because on screen ships had this didn’t mean others couldn’t i guess? Was trying to avoid a cookie cutter ship

[snip]

8x Type-5 dual-emitter banks

Okay, so you clarify here that each bank has two emitters. You need to clarify it in the main body of the spec.

== Noted

[snip]

USS Independence - NCC 1600
USS Hudson - NCC 1601
USS New York - NCC 1602
USS Delaware - NCC 1603
USS Baltimore - NCC 1604
USS Chesapeake - NCC 1605
USS Savannah - NCC 1606
USS Portsmouth - NCC 1607
USS Potomac - NCC 1608
USS Philadelphia - NCC 1609
USS Rhode Island - NCC 1610
USS Raleigh - NCC 1611

I understand that it’s typical to name a minimum of 10 vessels in a spec, but you said in the design history that Starfleet assembled five and planned a further three. The list either needs to be pared, or you need to adjust your description above.

== I actually noticed this error after submitting the doc for this review, I’ve already fixed it in the history section!

[snip]

This is an improvement over the previous draft, but there are still a few hiccups here and there. A rework is definitely in order.

The review for the Independence-class is closed and the specification is returned to its designer for revision.

Nicholas Villarreal Engineering Director

== Thanks Nick! Next Draft incoming!

Robert Archer


Posts on Engineering Department

In topic

Posted since


© 1991-2024 STF. Terms of Service

Version 1.15.9