ajohnson
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by ajohnson on Dec 4, 2006 16:21:16 GMT
This part of the project is currently scheduled to run until Sunday 17th December 2006.
This is where we decide what type of propulsion the ship will have. Now, this is fairly straightforward, we just have to answer a few questions.
1) What is the ship's maximum warp speed?
2) What is the ship's maximum sustainable warp speed?
3) If the ship has seperation capability, will both modules have warp capability?
4) Will the ship have Quantum Slipstream Drive?
5) If so, what are it's QSD capabilities.
We will take for given that the ship will have warp and impulse capability and that if the ship is seperable, both modules will have impulse capability.
I expect this topic to maily revolve around the Quantum Slipstream Drive, however if you have any other ideas, any points you feel I have not raise, please do not hesitate to add them.
Discuss.
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 4, 2006 18:09:34 GMT
If you want to install a QSD, you're gonna need me to get clearance from Starfleet Operations. Currently the BT is only ship authorised to use the drive and it's highly classified, but we're working on equiping the rest of the fleet. This new ship would be the perfect extension to the project, and would allow us to tailor the ship to the drive this time ;D
My crew's experience and expertise are at your disposal (I myself have a PhD in subspace mechanics and helped develop the mathematical coding that allows you to map the slipstream phase variance imbalances )
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 4, 2006 18:20:16 GMT
Just to help encourage you, I've decided to share some of the specs from the BT's homepage Originally discovered by the U.S.S. Voyager, NCC-74656, during her passage through the Delta Quadrant, this new form of faster-than-warp propulsion was trialled by Voyager first in 2375 and then again in 2377. Each time the crew was able to successfully travel at phenomenal velocities but were unable to sustain their journey because of the incredible stresses it placed on the ship. Upon Voyager's eventual return to the Alpha Quadrant in 2378, Starfleet were eager to analyse the data from these trials with the ultimate goal of solving the problems Voyager had encountered and allowing slipstream-capable vessels to be added to Starfleet. It quickly became clear that research into this field would have to be broken up into two separate problems, namely the excessive structural stresses placed on the hull and the phase variance imbalances that caused the slipstream to destabilise. Both these issues were studied in detail by a series of dedicated research groups, most of who were allowed to concentrate only on a particular aspect of the project and were therefore unaware of what it was they were really contributing towards. In this way, significant progress was made over the next ten years in one of Starfleet's most top secret areas of scientific research. In early 2388, the first preliminary test of QSD on a Starfleet vessel was conducted. Because of the amount of power required it was decided that only the Sovereign class would be able to support the drive, and so the U.S.S. Black Tulip, under the command of Captain Elron, was chosen as the first test-bed for the system. Before being assigned to the Black Tulip, Elron had played a significant role in developing the mathematics that would eventually solve the phase variance imbalances encountered by Voyager. The ship underwent a period of refitting in preparation for the trial, though the drive had been designed to work on a standard Starfleet ship with a minimum of modification. Shortly after engaging slipstream, however, the drive began to destabilise and the ship was thrown from slipstream space, leaving it adrift and severely damaged. Disappointed and disheartened, Starfleet never the less continued its research and after several years of redesign and improvement a second test of QSD was again conducted on the U.S.S. Black Tulip in 2391. The entire ship's hull was reinforced with specially designed structural plating developed through advances in quantum epitaxy engineering. This plating was integrated with the existing ablative armour and designed to work in tandem with a specialised quantum integrity field. The standard Sovereign warp core was again modified to incorporate a Quantum Reactor to fuel the drive and the existing sensor package was expanded to include immensely sophisticated sensors, developed specifically to map the quantum field phase variances quickly enough for the emitter to keep the slipstream stable. The Black Tulip re-launched on May 4th and, despite some unrelated setbacks encountered on her shakedown cruise, the Quantum Slipstream Drive proved itself reliable and passed intensive testing. Minor modifications were necessarily made on site by the test supervisors Cmdr Doug Branson and Admiral Elron, but the drive was officially commissioned for permanent use on the U.S.S. Black Tulip. While Starfleet works on ways of installing the drive on other Starfleet vessels, the Black Tulip's slipstream capability remains highly classified. Quantum energies from a reactor in Engineering are funnelled to the main deflector array, which then opens up a "quantum slipstream" in a dimension below subspace. The quantum slipstream is actually a narrowly focused, directed warp field that is initiated by manipulating the fabric of the space-time continuum at the quantum level. It works by focusing a quantum field through a "quantum matrix" and a deflector dish that can generate massive changes in local space curvature; this creates something analogous to a subspace tunnel, which is projected in front of the vessel. In order to maintain the slipstream a ship has to constantly modify the quantum field with its deflector dish; however, the calculations involved are extremely complicated and required a new branch of mathematics to be developed. A quantum energy field similar to a warp bubble is projected ahead of the craft and into slipstream space. This field is continuously generated by the craft to maintain the quantum slipstream, which then pulls the craft along the path. Unlike the warp bubble, which can be likened to a zero-dimensional subspace manifestation (when seen from subspace, say), the slipstream field is a one-dimensional (linear) manifestation of subspace. Stresses build up because of the fluctuating nature of quantum-level energy, or "quantum cavitation". Slipstream space is not free and open in the same way as subspace or true-space, but must be traversed in the form of grooves or pre-laid paths. To change destination mid-journey one must alter the slipstream. The slipstream has only one speed setting which cannot be increased or decreased at will with this version of the technology. Local stars and gravity wells pose no risk to a vessel in slipstream since their effects do not extend into slipstream space, unlike subspace. The ship moves by manipulating the quantum energy field and using its impulse engines. In order to initiate a controlled shutdown of a quantum drive, the field strength has to be reduced to 50 percent. This can be done by reversing the drive's polarity. Type: Dauntless-class Mark II Quantum Slipstream Drive, developed by the Brunel Institute of Propulsion Technologies. Information on this drive is classified by Starfleet Operations and restricted to authorised personnel only. Output: The slipstream produced by this drive can propel a ship at an estimated speed of around 512,000 times the speed of light, which is approximately 65 times faster than the next fastest ship in the fleet. At this speed, one can cross the span of Federation space in a little over a week.
|
|
ajohnson
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by ajohnson on Dec 4, 2006 18:37:49 GMT
Thanks E. I was going to contact you about participating in this stage since you have the experience. I'm glad to see that you're so keen, I didn't even have to contact you. Thanks for the info, your continued assistance would be very welcome.
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 4, 2006 18:44:52 GMT
Are you kidding? This is what I spend all my time doing when I'm not trying to run a fleet and a section. In between the odd death-defying leap, the mountains of paperwork and serving as a breakdown service for the USS Vesuvius, I sit in my office and develop faster-than-warp propulsion technologies! It's not so much a hobby as a passion
|
|
Deleted
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2006 19:05:46 GMT
Are you kidding? This is what I spend all my time doing when I'm not trying to run a fleet and a section. In between the odd death-defying leap, the mountains of paperwork and serving as a breakdown service for the USS Vesuvius, I sit in my office and develop faster-than-warp propulsion technologies! It's not so much a hobby as a passion Hey! I could've had the Klingons take us all the way though I doubt Admiral Clark would've loved us for doing that. I could also have contacted the nearest prowler or something....instead I ask the fleet flagship commander to do us a favour....
|
|
Deleted
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2006 20:40:34 GMT
Are you kidding? This is what I spend all my time doing when I'm not trying to run a fleet and a section. In between the odd death-defying leap, the mountains of paperwork and serving as a breakdown service for the USS Vesuvius, I sit in my office and develop faster-than-warp propulsion technologies! It's not so much a hobby as a passion Physics nerds....*shakes head*
|
|
Jamey Gaz
Commander 1C
Species: Joined Trill
Registered: Feb 17, 2005 8:15:35 GMT
Posts: 598
|
Post by Jamey Gaz on Dec 4, 2006 22:06:00 GMT
1) What is the ship's maximum warp speed?
I would suggest that 10 would be max for any warp system ... until some-type of transition into/across the slipstream had to be crossed.
2) What is the ship's maximum sustainable warp speed?
I would say for story/plot sake .. this time at maximum would be a lower number ... and a max sustainable speed of warp 9 point something
3) If the ship has separation capability, will both modules have warp capability?
I would say yes to separation ... and both sections would be easily warp capable due to Prometheus Class Technology
4) Will the ship have Quantum Slipstream Drive?
If the fleet will be equipped .. the I say yes ... but I don't see how if Sovereign class energy is needed ... some of the smaller energy producing ships may need a overhaul ... LOL
5) If so, what are it's QSD capabilities. I would say that if QSD was an emerging technology ... then say warp 12(slipstream warp? 3) would be normal and warp 15(slipstream warp? 6) would be maximum
|
|
jared
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by jared on Dec 4, 2006 22:41:14 GMT
1) What is the ship's maximum warp speed? How about a new warp classification for this ship? 9.999999 is silly when we could readjust it to slipstream factor 5 which =9.999999x/whatever it actually is (I'm not up on slipstream)
2) What is the ship's maximum sustainable warp speed? Depends on size; if double sized (which was a suggestion) then 1.5x what it would be.
3) If the ship has seperation capability, will both modules have warp capability? One would expect so, but at a much reduced velocity (realistically at least half if not a third of the combined speed)
4) Will the ship have Quantum Slipstream Drive? Why not only have it? It is poor practice to run three seperate systems (QSD, warp and impulse) when two could be used. This would mean that this ship is regularly moving at huge speeds, increasing possible use in s47 beyond the usual Federation area.
5) If so, what are it's QSD capabilities. See above. Probably at least twice what the BT can manage. The more power that can be pumped into the drive, the faster it would go. Assuming standard size then refinements from the BT design and more advanced systems than the sovereign would mean probably twice. If double sized ship then three times the BT's power (efficiency is lost on the larger vessel since it would need more power to sustain the field.
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 5, 2006 0:55:19 GMT
Bear in mind that, according to current warp theory, Warp factor 10 is equivalent to infinite velocity, and is therefore something that can only be approached asymptotically but never attained (at least with normal warp technology).If you're talking about measuring slipstream velocity then you'd almost certainly need another scale. Apart from the fact that an endless stream of nines sounds stupid, the two technologies work in entirely different ways and any conversion can only be approximate.Not sure I get this bit about 'double sized' (must have missed that topic), but I don't think warp speed should depend significantly on size. Having a bigger warp core and longer nacelles increases your speed, but we've seen that smaller ships can be faster than larger ones (eg Intrepid). It all depends on which design trade-offs you choose, and is mostly dependent on the mix of technologies you have, rather than size.That's something that's being worked on, but we can expect that the ship would indeed need to have an enormous energy generator to employ slipstream technology effectively. On the other hand, much of that energy is probably required by the structural integrity systems; if your ship is specially designed from scratch, it may not need as much energy...I agree that having Warp drive and QSD isn't feasible. Apart from being completely unnecessary, it's prohibitively expensive and a nightmare to design. Admittedly the nacelles don't seem to be used for much in QSD, though. Perhaps this would allow you more freedom in your design...?Although "All Good Things" suggested a recalibration of the warp scale (I believe warp 13 was mentioned), it's never been clear what this refers to. I don't think it can be seen as based on the current warp scale though, since there's nothing beyond infinite velocity (warp 10). If you're going to start introducing slipstream factors, you'll need to think about exactly how you change the speed of your slipstream... If there's one thing I've learnt from my energy systems course, it's that more power doesn't necessarily mean better performance (you have to think about exergy destruction, and yes the 'x' is deliberate there ). If pumping more power into the drive makes it go faster, we can expect the stresses placed on the ship to increase exponentially and hence so will the energy demand of the structural integrity systems. It's a sort of Catch 22 - putting more power in requires more power, lol.
A larger vessel might need more power to open a larger slipstream, but it should also have more power at its disposal (and the difference should be minimal anyway). Improved systems in the new ship should mean better efficiencies (therefore less power required), but this doesn't necessarily mean more speed. Please remember that the whole nature of Quantum Slipstream - as the name suggests - is that the slipstream itself generates a forward suction or thrust which propels the ship, the ship isn't pushing itself forward in the conventional 'impulse' sense. The only way to increase speed is to somehow make the slipstream pull you in faster...
Just some food for thought ;D
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 5, 2006 0:56:13 GMT
If you'll excuse me now, I'm going to go see if I can find my life...
|
|
Jamey Gaz
Commander 1C
Species: Joined Trill
Registered: Feb 17, 2005 8:15:35 GMT
Posts: 598
|
Post by Jamey Gaz on Dec 5, 2006 1:47:16 GMT
Bear in mind that, according to current warp theory, Warp factor 10 is equivalent to infinite velocity, and is therefore something that can only be approached asymptotically but never attained (at least with normal warp technology). [/size] [/quote] That was what I meant ;D ... that fact that the warp scale no longer "worked" ... In the show Andromeda, the slipstream already exists as "cords ... and a spaceship that enters the slipstream can harness the energy of these cords and ride them from one star system to another. Also, about a slipstream sucking the ship into the stream ... then I would ask how do you keep from debris surrounding a craft being pulled along with it? I would think that slipstream would be better scaled in time ... yes/no/maybe ... and what about alternate time-lines? ... I must have missed how things were worked out between VOY using this until S47 ... However, both Andromeda and the game Halo say that time-lines have nothing to do seeing that the "cords" of slipstreams already exist in parallel. hummmmm ...
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 5, 2006 13:44:20 GMT
Lol, sorry. I thought you meant Warp 10 was an attainable max. I just misunderstood you
I'm not necessarily saying that the slipstream sucks in objects from real space (since I think you have to use thrusters to enter the slipstream), but once you're in there, the slipstream does most of the work for you (you just have to keep from being destroyed!).
Scaling slipstream in time... it's a novel idea. Maybe when you're in slipstream space, it's not very meaningful to talk about velocities in the traditional sense. I'm not sure how you'd represent your equivalent 'speed' in units of time (unless it was the time taken to traverse some dimensional unit within the slipstream), but it sounds like something worth debating anyway. I can tell that the speed scale is going to be a hot topic for discussion, lol. ;D
Not sure I understand your question about timelines. Are you asking what the effects would be of leaving the normal space-time continuum? I don't know much about Andromeda's slipstream tech, but I think we have to try to base our tech as much as possible on Trek canon. Obviously there's gonna have to be a lot of creative thinking to fill in the blanks though, so we could use Andromeda as inspiration there. Any chance you could reword what you said? How do the timelines "have nothing to do"?
|
|
ajohnson
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by ajohnson on Dec 5, 2006 16:23:33 GMT
I don't like the idea of only having QSD.
This takes us further away from Star Trek canon than I'd like to be. Remember that people who sign up to S47 are looking to sim something close to what they've seen on TV, the further away we move from canon, the less attractive it will become to new members. It would also take us away from the classic nacelle design which is something that I personally think we should stick to.
Since QSD is a relatively new technology, I don't think it's something that needs to be used all the time, merely something that can be pulled out as a plot device when needed.
As for it not being efficient, I don't think we have to worry about that too much, let's not forget that this is a fictional ship and we are most concerned with building a sim environment here, not a working starship, although technical specs are of some importance.
BTW E, that was a really good writeup on QSD, you should write it up on Wiki47.
|
|
Jamey Gaz
Commander 1C
Species: Joined Trill
Registered: Feb 17, 2005 8:15:35 GMT
Posts: 598
|
Post by Jamey Gaz on Dec 5, 2006 18:48:48 GMT
Not sure I understand your question about time-lines. Are you asking what the effects would be of leaving the normal space-time continuum? I don't know much about Andromeda's slipstream tech, but I think we have to try to base our tech as much as possible on Trek canon. Obviously there's gonna have to be a lot of creative thinking to fill in the blanks though, so we could use Andromeda as inspiration there. Any chance you could reword what you said? How do the time-lines "have nothing to do"?I was just saying that canon (VOY) ... (this part copied) that the technology proved to be dangerously unstable, resulting in the loss of all hands of the Voyager in an alternate time-line. The shipboard computer unable to map the phase variance in the slipstream fast enough to calculate deflector corrections, Harry Kim offered to take the Delta Flyer ahead to map the slipstream and send the data in advance to Voyager. A miscalculation caused Voyager to fall violently out of slipstream to a planet. Harry Kim, surviving on board the Delta Flyer, sent calculations back in time to collapse the slipstream field before the accident occurred in the primary time-line. ... ... it seems that Trek Canon has this technology wrapped around time-lines and the possibility of alternate time-lines ... I, for one, think this is isn't the "way" to go ... thus the Andromeda method, simply as a suggestion, of the slipstream already existing in parallel to the current time-line makes more logical sense ... to my noodle anyway. Time travel and time-lines in Trek ... again, to me ... have seem to be a bit harmful to the canon of trek ...
|
|
jared
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by jared on Dec 5, 2006 19:28:45 GMT
Efficiency wise; the inherent oddities in efficiency is why I was using a rough 1.5 increase instead of a direct 2x one. Efficiency should be intentionally low to begin with to make the fictional ship as real as possible so that if it is simmed on then the CEO can play around making it better within the bounds of easy realism instead of having to know as much as Elron in order to be able to do it well. QSD only; of course, canonity is a problem, but since we're 13 years on from Voyager then we'd expect to be some way off canon anyway, otherwise we're just sitting in a frozen time. Since this ship is meant to be original, there's no point trying to make an entirely new ship and stay close to canon this far in the future. The trick would be to stay close to the spirit of the design lineage without sacrificing originality too far or else people won't think 'wow, I want to be on this ship', it'll just disappear into the reams of fan designs. I won't say any more on canon or original here because it'll take the topic away from opinions on the tech. If anyone wants to pick up on it then feel free to do so in the relaunch thread.
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 6, 2006 1:01:47 GMT
I think I'm getting too bogged down in 'realistic' technicalities, lol. I only popped in to offer some inspiration and instead I've ended up lecturing you all on the complexities of a fictional system! I'm afraid I can't help looking at this as a physicist/engineer rather than a simmer.
I definitely agree that QSD doesn't involve complicated timelines or anything. I'm not even sure that the Voyager epidose was trying to imply that. I think there have been several things in Voyager that in hindsight even the writers would like to remove though (such as that awful episode when Paris went at Warp 10, lol). Let's keep it to regular temporal mechanics.
When the BT first got her QSD, we played around with having warp and slipstream. In the end though, it just didn't make to sense to have both (if the slipstream works well, that is). Perhaps the best way to avoiding leaping too far from canon storylines is not to make the QSD ridiculously fast. When I decided on the BT's speed, I tried to choose something remarkable and impressive, and similar to the speed quoted in [VOY], but not so fast that we'd be completely changing the nature of our missions (eg intergalactic travel). It still takes a week to get across the span of Federation space, which I think is plenty fast. You could maybe make it around 50% faster, since that would allow you scope to improve the drive without it being implausible and inconveniently fast.
Just my two cents though...
|
|
Jamey Gaz
Commander 1C
Species: Joined Trill
Registered: Feb 17, 2005 8:15:35 GMT
Posts: 598
|
Post by Jamey Gaz on Dec 6, 2006 1:42:31 GMT
well ... I for one would rather the technicalities be as " realistic" as it could fictitiously be ... as far as QSD ... I wouldn't mind having a method of travel that could be faster ... and I agree that limits should be placed on "how fast" it could be ... But I do have one question ... Why would you not have warp and QSD? ... QSD would only be for the slipstream? right? ... and warp would be for normal / non-slipstream propulsion? forgive my lack of info on this subject ...
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 6, 2006 2:20:26 GMT
I'm sure when Voyager converted their ship to use QSD, they had to do heavy-duty maintenance on the warp core. Warp drive utilises a different kind of energy to QSD, and I wouldn't think it technically feasible for a single reactor to efficiently power both types of drive. The QSD requires use of a special reactor from which the quantum energies can be funnelled to the main deflector array, which generates the slipstream.
However, since we're creating a new ship rather than converting an existing one, perhaps you could have two seperate reactor cores; one for powering the warp drive and one for powering the slipstream drive. When you're travelling via one drive, you could always use the reactor from the other drive to power your structural integrity fields etc. This would be unbelievably expensive, but if the ship were a one-off rather than a generic class, maybe Starfleet's budget would stretch to it...
|
|
jared
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by jared on Dec 6, 2006 13:49:22 GMT
Although the engineering problems would cause a nightmare. You'd need twice the power systems crew so that you have specialists in both systems. Also, why would you want warp? That's like someone telling you that they could put an engine capable of reaching 500mph in your car and you saying that you want one which can go slower as well for twice the price and problems.
|
|
Jamey Gaz
Commander 1C
Species: Joined Trill
Registered: Feb 17, 2005 8:15:35 GMT
Posts: 598
|
Post by Jamey Gaz on Dec 6, 2006 15:17:49 GMT
Although the engineering problems would cause a nightmare. You'd need twice the power systems crew so that you have specialists in both systems. Also, why would you want warp? That's like someone telling you that they could put an engine capable of reaching 500mph in your car and you saying that you want one which can go slower as well for twice the price and problems. I understand now ... the QSD system would still power normal warp coils ... please forgive my misunderstanding ... I agree Reman ... twice the problems, crew, etc ...
|
|
ajohnson
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by ajohnson on Dec 7, 2006 0:19:37 GMT
Well, you have warp and impulse, so why not have warp, impulse and QSD. I don't really see any problems with having warp drive as well.
I think we're getting bogged down in real life here. I'll say once again, what we're most concerned with is building a sim environment.
The real question of this topic was whether or not we'll have QSD, which I can see, everyone is in favour of.
I think I'm gonna make an executive decision here and say that the warp drive stays. It gives more options in-sim and helps to keep the ship close to canon. The ship is new enough and advanced enough to be able to switch from Warp to QSD and vice versa.
With that matter settled, the only thing that remains is to specify the type of system that we are going to be installing here. I assume nobody has any objections to it being a "Dauntless-class Mark II Quantum Slipstream Drive"?
|
|
Jamey Gaz
Commander 1C
Species: Joined Trill
Registered: Feb 17, 2005 8:15:35 GMT
Posts: 598
|
Post by Jamey Gaz on Dec 7, 2006 0:33:27 GMT
I assume nobody has any objections to it being a "Dauntless-class Mark II Quantum Slipstream Drive"? no problem here ...
|
|
Elron
Fleet Admiral
[Retired]
?There are no facts, only interpretations? (Nietzsche)
Registered: May 31, 2003 12:23:57 GMT
Posts: 3,080
|
Post by Elron on Dec 7, 2006 1:58:29 GMT
Lol, I've been over-ruled
Can I suggest the Mark III or the Mark IIa? We've had the Mark II on the Tulip for a year and a half. If this ship is gonna be brand new and designed for slipstream (unlike the Tulip) then I reckon you can afford to have a few upgrades
|
|
jared
Guest
Registered: Apr 25, 2024 6:34:16 GMT
|
Post by jared on Dec 7, 2006 12:19:18 GMT
Omicron-class QSD? It's new! It's improved!! It goes ZHOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!
|
|