Why are all Federation starships similar in design?
All Federation starships I have seen have a very similar configuration. Is there any in-universe explanation for this?
I know this configuration comes from human ships like the NX-01, but why was it kept for the federation after it was formed? why not follow a Vulcan or Andorian design instead? Is there any inherent benefit of having a big round section and external engines?
I remember from an Enterprise episode that they emit some radiation that is dangerous, but there should be a way to shield it to allow a less fragile design.
star-trek spaceship federation
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
add a comment |
All Federation starships I have seen have a very similar configuration. Is there any in-universe explanation for this?
I know this configuration comes from human ships like the NX-01, but why was it kept for the federation after it was formed? why not follow a Vulcan or Andorian design instead? Is there any inherent benefit of having a big round section and external engines?
I remember from an Enterprise episode that they emit some radiation that is dangerous, but there should be a way to shield it to allow a less fragile design.
star-trek spaceship federation
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
13
Out of universe explination would be that it helps the audience recognise who is who. And the way it looks was just an asthetic the prop designers chose during creation.
– OghmaOsiris
Jun 28 '11 at 13:39
8
Suggested speculative in-universe explanation: “We spent 18 years designing and building one starship this way, and it worked. We’d rather not spend 18 years designing and building a starship in a different way only to find out it doesn’t work.”
– Paul D. Waite
Jun 29 '11 at 16:16
2
Also, if each ship is a unique, custom-designed ship, it makes training crews and replacing crew members an impossible task. Standardization saves work both in building and in operating.
– PoloHoleSet
Sep 8 '16 at 15:15
@PaulD.Waite: But that's just the point of the question, isn't it? "We", the Vulcans/Andorians, spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked. Be aware that, once the Federation has been founded, "we" refers (at least) to humans, Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites, not just humans any more.
– O. R. Mapper
Oct 29 '16 at 12:37
@O.R.Mapper: “the Vulcans/Andorians... spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked” — sure, but maybe not as well as the Earth-designed ships for the kinds of missions that the Federation and Starfleet wanted to conduct. (I haven’t seen Enterprise, so I’m not clear on the different races’ ships and their capabilities at the time.)
– Paul D. Waite
Oct 29 '16 at 13:35
add a comment |
All Federation starships I have seen have a very similar configuration. Is there any in-universe explanation for this?
I know this configuration comes from human ships like the NX-01, but why was it kept for the federation after it was formed? why not follow a Vulcan or Andorian design instead? Is there any inherent benefit of having a big round section and external engines?
I remember from an Enterprise episode that they emit some radiation that is dangerous, but there should be a way to shield it to allow a less fragile design.
star-trek spaceship federation
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
All Federation starships I have seen have a very similar configuration. Is there any in-universe explanation for this?
I know this configuration comes from human ships like the NX-01, but why was it kept for the federation after it was formed? why not follow a Vulcan or Andorian design instead? Is there any inherent benefit of having a big round section and external engines?
I remember from an Enterprise episode that they emit some radiation that is dangerous, but there should be a way to shield it to allow a less fragile design.
star-trek spaceship federation
star-trek spaceship federation
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
edited Jun 28 '11 at 15:10
neilfein
6,09423452
6,09423452
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
asked Jun 28 '11 at 13:31
santiagozkysantiagozky
1,4741425
1,4741425
13
Out of universe explination would be that it helps the audience recognise who is who. And the way it looks was just an asthetic the prop designers chose during creation.
– OghmaOsiris
Jun 28 '11 at 13:39
8
Suggested speculative in-universe explanation: “We spent 18 years designing and building one starship this way, and it worked. We’d rather not spend 18 years designing and building a starship in a different way only to find out it doesn’t work.”
– Paul D. Waite
Jun 29 '11 at 16:16
2
Also, if each ship is a unique, custom-designed ship, it makes training crews and replacing crew members an impossible task. Standardization saves work both in building and in operating.
– PoloHoleSet
Sep 8 '16 at 15:15
@PaulD.Waite: But that's just the point of the question, isn't it? "We", the Vulcans/Andorians, spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked. Be aware that, once the Federation has been founded, "we" refers (at least) to humans, Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites, not just humans any more.
– O. R. Mapper
Oct 29 '16 at 12:37
@O.R.Mapper: “the Vulcans/Andorians... spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked” — sure, but maybe not as well as the Earth-designed ships for the kinds of missions that the Federation and Starfleet wanted to conduct. (I haven’t seen Enterprise, so I’m not clear on the different races’ ships and their capabilities at the time.)
– Paul D. Waite
Oct 29 '16 at 13:35
add a comment |
13
Out of universe explination would be that it helps the audience recognise who is who. And the way it looks was just an asthetic the prop designers chose during creation.
– OghmaOsiris
Jun 28 '11 at 13:39
8
Suggested speculative in-universe explanation: “We spent 18 years designing and building one starship this way, and it worked. We’d rather not spend 18 years designing and building a starship in a different way only to find out it doesn’t work.”
– Paul D. Waite
Jun 29 '11 at 16:16
2
Also, if each ship is a unique, custom-designed ship, it makes training crews and replacing crew members an impossible task. Standardization saves work both in building and in operating.
– PoloHoleSet
Sep 8 '16 at 15:15
@PaulD.Waite: But that's just the point of the question, isn't it? "We", the Vulcans/Andorians, spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked. Be aware that, once the Federation has been founded, "we" refers (at least) to humans, Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites, not just humans any more.
– O. R. Mapper
Oct 29 '16 at 12:37
@O.R.Mapper: “the Vulcans/Andorians... spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked” — sure, but maybe not as well as the Earth-designed ships for the kinds of missions that the Federation and Starfleet wanted to conduct. (I haven’t seen Enterprise, so I’m not clear on the different races’ ships and their capabilities at the time.)
– Paul D. Waite
Oct 29 '16 at 13:35
13
13
Out of universe explination would be that it helps the audience recognise who is who. And the way it looks was just an asthetic the prop designers chose during creation.
– OghmaOsiris
Jun 28 '11 at 13:39
Out of universe explination would be that it helps the audience recognise who is who. And the way it looks was just an asthetic the prop designers chose during creation.
– OghmaOsiris
Jun 28 '11 at 13:39
8
8
Suggested speculative in-universe explanation: “We spent 18 years designing and building one starship this way, and it worked. We’d rather not spend 18 years designing and building a starship in a different way only to find out it doesn’t work.”
– Paul D. Waite
Jun 29 '11 at 16:16
Suggested speculative in-universe explanation: “We spent 18 years designing and building one starship this way, and it worked. We’d rather not spend 18 years designing and building a starship in a different way only to find out it doesn’t work.”
– Paul D. Waite
Jun 29 '11 at 16:16
2
2
Also, if each ship is a unique, custom-designed ship, it makes training crews and replacing crew members an impossible task. Standardization saves work both in building and in operating.
– PoloHoleSet
Sep 8 '16 at 15:15
Also, if each ship is a unique, custom-designed ship, it makes training crews and replacing crew members an impossible task. Standardization saves work both in building and in operating.
– PoloHoleSet
Sep 8 '16 at 15:15
@PaulD.Waite: But that's just the point of the question, isn't it? "We", the Vulcans/Andorians, spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked. Be aware that, once the Federation has been founded, "we" refers (at least) to humans, Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites, not just humans any more.
– O. R. Mapper
Oct 29 '16 at 12:37
@PaulD.Waite: But that's just the point of the question, isn't it? "We", the Vulcans/Andorians, spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked. Be aware that, once the Federation has been founded, "we" refers (at least) to humans, Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites, not just humans any more.
– O. R. Mapper
Oct 29 '16 at 12:37
@O.R.Mapper: “the Vulcans/Andorians... spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked” — sure, but maybe not as well as the Earth-designed ships for the kinds of missions that the Federation and Starfleet wanted to conduct. (I haven’t seen Enterprise, so I’m not clear on the different races’ ships and their capabilities at the time.)
– Paul D. Waite
Oct 29 '16 at 13:35
@O.R.Mapper: “the Vulcans/Andorians... spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked” — sure, but maybe not as well as the Earth-designed ships for the kinds of missions that the Federation and Starfleet wanted to conduct. (I haven’t seen Enterprise, so I’m not clear on the different races’ ships and their capabilities at the time.)
– Paul D. Waite
Oct 29 '16 at 13:35
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
In-Universe, the Federation has a standard design for their warp engines, and they use a technology for power and warp travel which is somewhat different than other species use. The necessities of their design compel them to build their ships along a standard model (saucer + nacelles).
Form follows function, in this case.
There is also a unification aspect: the Federation is composed of many species, some of which are radically different, physically and physiologically. Their ship design is part of the Federation shared culture, and serves to give all the races a cultural touchpoint. The origins of this go back all the way to the NX-01 and its sister ships.
Other races seem to use different technology (or at least a different method of nacelle design) for their propulsion. Romulans, for instance, somehow harness energy from micro black holes. Thus, other species designs follow their own culture, limited by their engineering constraints.
Edit:
Here's a page which includes some Star Trek starship design guidelines, including nacelle pairing (they MUST be in pairs), placement (must be visible from the front), and size. They are included in a site devoted to people designing new types (for fanfic, fan images, etc) but are purportedly from Gene himself.
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
2
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
4
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
2
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
2
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
4
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
|
show 10 more comments
The Not-In-Universe is the trope of "Shape identifies fleet." This trope is VERY common in Sci-Fi, being obvious in Battlestar Galactica (Old and New), Buck Rogers, Star Trek, Star Wars, the whole Mecha Anime subgenre, and more.
Gene Roddenberry, according to multiple sources, said the ships must have two nacelles, with nothing between them, and a saucer; they may have a secondary hull. All of the filmed TOS ships match this except for the Tholian and First Federation ships.
In universe, it's reuse of known strategies of ship design.
This can be seen in how the last several US carrier designs are pretty much externally identical, in ways that go beyond mere practical considerations. Elevator locations, cat and arrest gear locations, and defense systems are practical; tower shape is far less a practical matter. Much of what's in the tower could be relocated, making for a smaller, less imperiled tower.
The Saucer design provides a low frontal cross section, and high deck surface. (Ignoring the illogic of having thrust run along the decks, of course.) A tubular secondary hull is similarly efficient, but puts more vertical space together than horizontal space. All federation designs seen save 3 mix these elements; the other three are special cases (the Multi-Vector Attack ship, the Warp Shuttle in TMP, and the freighter in TAS).
Further, the use of similar pattern nacelles means crew familiarity with them... likely, they also carry the same drive systems in them.
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
4
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
1
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
|
show 2 more comments
I recall a visual reference book that "Saucer separation" was an emergency procedure which could be performed by some types of Federation starships, and involves the complete disconnection of the primary and secondary hulls.
the system was designed to allow civilians and non-combatants to remain aboard the saucer section, while the main crew took the secondary hull with the main armaments to meet any threat that a starship could face.
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
add a comment |
All because there are ships that work "as is" from one species, doesn't mean that every single species in the Federation should be using the same ship design.
That is like saying we all should just drive Ford trucks since they work just fine and forget about all other car designs. For that matter, shouldn't everyone be living in the same house types? How about restaurants and....and....and....
All because a species is part of the Federation doesn't mean they all share their technologies etc. It only means they help each other out. Just like our United Nations. They "can" share tech, but they don't HAVE to.
Just like all planets and species, the Federation is still responsible to have it's own structure and policies and whatever type of "money" to build things. Being part of the Federation doesn't mean everyone and every planet should be using the exact same tech.
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "186"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f4362%2fwhy-are-all-federation-starships-similar-in-design%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In-Universe, the Federation has a standard design for their warp engines, and they use a technology for power and warp travel which is somewhat different than other species use. The necessities of their design compel them to build their ships along a standard model (saucer + nacelles).
Form follows function, in this case.
There is also a unification aspect: the Federation is composed of many species, some of which are radically different, physically and physiologically. Their ship design is part of the Federation shared culture, and serves to give all the races a cultural touchpoint. The origins of this go back all the way to the NX-01 and its sister ships.
Other races seem to use different technology (or at least a different method of nacelle design) for their propulsion. Romulans, for instance, somehow harness energy from micro black holes. Thus, other species designs follow their own culture, limited by their engineering constraints.
Edit:
Here's a page which includes some Star Trek starship design guidelines, including nacelle pairing (they MUST be in pairs), placement (must be visible from the front), and size. They are included in a site devoted to people designing new types (for fanfic, fan images, etc) but are purportedly from Gene himself.
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
2
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
4
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
2
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
2
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
4
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
|
show 10 more comments
In-Universe, the Federation has a standard design for their warp engines, and they use a technology for power and warp travel which is somewhat different than other species use. The necessities of their design compel them to build their ships along a standard model (saucer + nacelles).
Form follows function, in this case.
There is also a unification aspect: the Federation is composed of many species, some of which are radically different, physically and physiologically. Their ship design is part of the Federation shared culture, and serves to give all the races a cultural touchpoint. The origins of this go back all the way to the NX-01 and its sister ships.
Other races seem to use different technology (or at least a different method of nacelle design) for their propulsion. Romulans, for instance, somehow harness energy from micro black holes. Thus, other species designs follow their own culture, limited by their engineering constraints.
Edit:
Here's a page which includes some Star Trek starship design guidelines, including nacelle pairing (they MUST be in pairs), placement (must be visible from the front), and size. They are included in a site devoted to people designing new types (for fanfic, fan images, etc) but are purportedly from Gene himself.
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
2
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
4
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
2
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
2
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
4
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
|
show 10 more comments
In-Universe, the Federation has a standard design for their warp engines, and they use a technology for power and warp travel which is somewhat different than other species use. The necessities of their design compel them to build their ships along a standard model (saucer + nacelles).
Form follows function, in this case.
There is also a unification aspect: the Federation is composed of many species, some of which are radically different, physically and physiologically. Their ship design is part of the Federation shared culture, and serves to give all the races a cultural touchpoint. The origins of this go back all the way to the NX-01 and its sister ships.
Other races seem to use different technology (or at least a different method of nacelle design) for their propulsion. Romulans, for instance, somehow harness energy from micro black holes. Thus, other species designs follow their own culture, limited by their engineering constraints.
Edit:
Here's a page which includes some Star Trek starship design guidelines, including nacelle pairing (they MUST be in pairs), placement (must be visible from the front), and size. They are included in a site devoted to people designing new types (for fanfic, fan images, etc) but are purportedly from Gene himself.
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
In-Universe, the Federation has a standard design for their warp engines, and they use a technology for power and warp travel which is somewhat different than other species use. The necessities of their design compel them to build their ships along a standard model (saucer + nacelles).
Form follows function, in this case.
There is also a unification aspect: the Federation is composed of many species, some of which are radically different, physically and physiologically. Their ship design is part of the Federation shared culture, and serves to give all the races a cultural touchpoint. The origins of this go back all the way to the NX-01 and its sister ships.
Other races seem to use different technology (or at least a different method of nacelle design) for their propulsion. Romulans, for instance, somehow harness energy from micro black holes. Thus, other species designs follow their own culture, limited by their engineering constraints.
Edit:
Here's a page which includes some Star Trek starship design guidelines, including nacelle pairing (they MUST be in pairs), placement (must be visible from the front), and size. They are included in a site devoted to people designing new types (for fanfic, fan images, etc) but are purportedly from Gene himself.
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
edited Jun 28 '11 at 20:49
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
answered Jun 28 '11 at 14:22
JeffJeff
93.6k27311390
93.6k27311390
2
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
4
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
2
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
2
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
4
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
|
show 10 more comments
2
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
4
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
2
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
2
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
4
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
2
2
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
but is there any explanation of why the human design prevailed? Vulcan spacefleet was probably a lot larger and with more experienced people.
– santiagozky
Jun 28 '11 at 20:15
4
4
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
@santiagozky: None is explicitly given, though Enterprise shows that the NX-01 was CRUICIAL to the formation of the Federation, and of the 3 main races (Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians) the humans were most neutral. Vulcan and Andoria had been at war as bitter enemies for a long time, either would have been hesitant to adopt the other's ship designs.
– Jeff
Jun 28 '11 at 20:19
2
2
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
Doesn't the Defiant break those rules?
– HorusKol
Jun 29 '11 at 0:11
2
2
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
The Defiant may be a different design. But the core concept remains the same. Like all Starfleet shişs she has twin nacelles. The only difference is they are placed in the body of a ship where other ship nacelles are far away from the body. IMHO this has two consequences; One is, Defiant is a more compact and this makes her a smaller target. Because unlike other Federation starships Defiant is a pure breed warship. The second consequence is because the nacelles are closer Defaint needs to be more compact cause the warp field will be smaller.
– Sinan
Jun 29 '11 at 12:30
4
4
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
The nacelles don't HAVE to be in pairs; the Enterprise-D from the future in "All Good THings..." was retrofitted with a third nacelle in the middle of the two original ones. Maybe it was double-wide and counts as two, I don't recall.
– KeithS
Sep 17 '11 at 1:29
|
show 10 more comments
The Not-In-Universe is the trope of "Shape identifies fleet." This trope is VERY common in Sci-Fi, being obvious in Battlestar Galactica (Old and New), Buck Rogers, Star Trek, Star Wars, the whole Mecha Anime subgenre, and more.
Gene Roddenberry, according to multiple sources, said the ships must have two nacelles, with nothing between them, and a saucer; they may have a secondary hull. All of the filmed TOS ships match this except for the Tholian and First Federation ships.
In universe, it's reuse of known strategies of ship design.
This can be seen in how the last several US carrier designs are pretty much externally identical, in ways that go beyond mere practical considerations. Elevator locations, cat and arrest gear locations, and defense systems are practical; tower shape is far less a practical matter. Much of what's in the tower could be relocated, making for a smaller, less imperiled tower.
The Saucer design provides a low frontal cross section, and high deck surface. (Ignoring the illogic of having thrust run along the decks, of course.) A tubular secondary hull is similarly efficient, but puts more vertical space together than horizontal space. All federation designs seen save 3 mix these elements; the other three are special cases (the Multi-Vector Attack ship, the Warp Shuttle in TMP, and the freighter in TAS).
Further, the use of similar pattern nacelles means crew familiarity with them... likely, they also carry the same drive systems in them.
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
4
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
1
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
|
show 2 more comments
The Not-In-Universe is the trope of "Shape identifies fleet." This trope is VERY common in Sci-Fi, being obvious in Battlestar Galactica (Old and New), Buck Rogers, Star Trek, Star Wars, the whole Mecha Anime subgenre, and more.
Gene Roddenberry, according to multiple sources, said the ships must have two nacelles, with nothing between them, and a saucer; they may have a secondary hull. All of the filmed TOS ships match this except for the Tholian and First Federation ships.
In universe, it's reuse of known strategies of ship design.
This can be seen in how the last several US carrier designs are pretty much externally identical, in ways that go beyond mere practical considerations. Elevator locations, cat and arrest gear locations, and defense systems are practical; tower shape is far less a practical matter. Much of what's in the tower could be relocated, making for a smaller, less imperiled tower.
The Saucer design provides a low frontal cross section, and high deck surface. (Ignoring the illogic of having thrust run along the decks, of course.) A tubular secondary hull is similarly efficient, but puts more vertical space together than horizontal space. All federation designs seen save 3 mix these elements; the other three are special cases (the Multi-Vector Attack ship, the Warp Shuttle in TMP, and the freighter in TAS).
Further, the use of similar pattern nacelles means crew familiarity with them... likely, they also carry the same drive systems in them.
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
4
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
1
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
|
show 2 more comments
The Not-In-Universe is the trope of "Shape identifies fleet." This trope is VERY common in Sci-Fi, being obvious in Battlestar Galactica (Old and New), Buck Rogers, Star Trek, Star Wars, the whole Mecha Anime subgenre, and more.
Gene Roddenberry, according to multiple sources, said the ships must have two nacelles, with nothing between them, and a saucer; they may have a secondary hull. All of the filmed TOS ships match this except for the Tholian and First Federation ships.
In universe, it's reuse of known strategies of ship design.
This can be seen in how the last several US carrier designs are pretty much externally identical, in ways that go beyond mere practical considerations. Elevator locations, cat and arrest gear locations, and defense systems are practical; tower shape is far less a practical matter. Much of what's in the tower could be relocated, making for a smaller, less imperiled tower.
The Saucer design provides a low frontal cross section, and high deck surface. (Ignoring the illogic of having thrust run along the decks, of course.) A tubular secondary hull is similarly efficient, but puts more vertical space together than horizontal space. All federation designs seen save 3 mix these elements; the other three are special cases (the Multi-Vector Attack ship, the Warp Shuttle in TMP, and the freighter in TAS).
Further, the use of similar pattern nacelles means crew familiarity with them... likely, they also carry the same drive systems in them.
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
The Not-In-Universe is the trope of "Shape identifies fleet." This trope is VERY common in Sci-Fi, being obvious in Battlestar Galactica (Old and New), Buck Rogers, Star Trek, Star Wars, the whole Mecha Anime subgenre, and more.
Gene Roddenberry, according to multiple sources, said the ships must have two nacelles, with nothing between them, and a saucer; they may have a secondary hull. All of the filmed TOS ships match this except for the Tholian and First Federation ships.
In universe, it's reuse of known strategies of ship design.
This can be seen in how the last several US carrier designs are pretty much externally identical, in ways that go beyond mere practical considerations. Elevator locations, cat and arrest gear locations, and defense systems are practical; tower shape is far less a practical matter. Much of what's in the tower could be relocated, making for a smaller, less imperiled tower.
The Saucer design provides a low frontal cross section, and high deck surface. (Ignoring the illogic of having thrust run along the decks, of course.) A tubular secondary hull is similarly efficient, but puts more vertical space together than horizontal space. All federation designs seen save 3 mix these elements; the other three are special cases (the Multi-Vector Attack ship, the Warp Shuttle in TMP, and the freighter in TAS).
Further, the use of similar pattern nacelles means crew familiarity with them... likely, they also carry the same drive systems in them.
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
answered Jul 6 '11 at 20:29
aramisaramis
13.2k23772
13.2k23772
4
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
1
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
|
show 2 more comments
4
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
1
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
4
4
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
and don't forget spares commonality and construction cost. If you can have one facility build assemblies and parts for multiple classes of ships, the economy of scale kicks in to reduce cost and you also need less warehouse space for the gazillions of spare parts (and a ship in trouble can be more easily assisted by a ship of a different class of course).
– jwenting
Jul 7 '11 at 6:07
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
@jwenting: "spares commonality and construction cost" exists out of universe too. Lots of ship models in ST have been produced by modifying existing studio models or combining parts of CGI models, due to cost or time constraints.
– thkala
Jul 20 '11 at 20:57
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
of course. didn't mention it because the original answer was in universe
– jwenting
Jul 21 '11 at 13:37
1
1
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
@thkala Except that the scale varies widely for use of the same model part.
– aramis
May 27 '13 at 19:54
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
In this vein, it seems like color also identifies fleet. Federation blue, Klingon red, Romulan green, Ferengi orange, Cardassian yellow, Dominion purple, Borg white/gray, etc.
– user11521
Jun 13 '13 at 18:41
|
show 2 more comments
I recall a visual reference book that "Saucer separation" was an emergency procedure which could be performed by some types of Federation starships, and involves the complete disconnection of the primary and secondary hulls.
the system was designed to allow civilians and non-combatants to remain aboard the saucer section, while the main crew took the secondary hull with the main armaments to meet any threat that a starship could face.
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
add a comment |
I recall a visual reference book that "Saucer separation" was an emergency procedure which could be performed by some types of Federation starships, and involves the complete disconnection of the primary and secondary hulls.
the system was designed to allow civilians and non-combatants to remain aboard the saucer section, while the main crew took the secondary hull with the main armaments to meet any threat that a starship could face.
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
add a comment |
I recall a visual reference book that "Saucer separation" was an emergency procedure which could be performed by some types of Federation starships, and involves the complete disconnection of the primary and secondary hulls.
the system was designed to allow civilians and non-combatants to remain aboard the saucer section, while the main crew took the secondary hull with the main armaments to meet any threat that a starship could face.
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
I recall a visual reference book that "Saucer separation" was an emergency procedure which could be performed by some types of Federation starships, and involves the complete disconnection of the primary and secondary hulls.
the system was designed to allow civilians and non-combatants to remain aboard the saucer section, while the main crew took the secondary hull with the main armaments to meet any threat that a starship could face.
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:25
VulpesVulpesVulpesVulpes
111
111
add a comment |
add a comment |
All because there are ships that work "as is" from one species, doesn't mean that every single species in the Federation should be using the same ship design.
That is like saying we all should just drive Ford trucks since they work just fine and forget about all other car designs. For that matter, shouldn't everyone be living in the same house types? How about restaurants and....and....and....
All because a species is part of the Federation doesn't mean they all share their technologies etc. It only means they help each other out. Just like our United Nations. They "can" share tech, but they don't HAVE to.
Just like all planets and species, the Federation is still responsible to have it's own structure and policies and whatever type of "money" to build things. Being part of the Federation doesn't mean everyone and every planet should be using the exact same tech.
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
All because there are ships that work "as is" from one species, doesn't mean that every single species in the Federation should be using the same ship design.
That is like saying we all should just drive Ford trucks since they work just fine and forget about all other car designs. For that matter, shouldn't everyone be living in the same house types? How about restaurants and....and....and....
All because a species is part of the Federation doesn't mean they all share their technologies etc. It only means they help each other out. Just like our United Nations. They "can" share tech, but they don't HAVE to.
Just like all planets and species, the Federation is still responsible to have it's own structure and policies and whatever type of "money" to build things. Being part of the Federation doesn't mean everyone and every planet should be using the exact same tech.
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
All because there are ships that work "as is" from one species, doesn't mean that every single species in the Federation should be using the same ship design.
That is like saying we all should just drive Ford trucks since they work just fine and forget about all other car designs. For that matter, shouldn't everyone be living in the same house types? How about restaurants and....and....and....
All because a species is part of the Federation doesn't mean they all share their technologies etc. It only means they help each other out. Just like our United Nations. They "can" share tech, but they don't HAVE to.
Just like all planets and species, the Federation is still responsible to have it's own structure and policies and whatever type of "money" to build things. Being part of the Federation doesn't mean everyone and every planet should be using the exact same tech.
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
All because there are ships that work "as is" from one species, doesn't mean that every single species in the Federation should be using the same ship design.
That is like saying we all should just drive Ford trucks since they work just fine and forget about all other car designs. For that matter, shouldn't everyone be living in the same house types? How about restaurants and....and....and....
All because a species is part of the Federation doesn't mean they all share their technologies etc. It only means they help each other out. Just like our United Nations. They "can" share tech, but they don't HAVE to.
Just like all planets and species, the Federation is still responsible to have it's own structure and policies and whatever type of "money" to build things. Being part of the Federation doesn't mean everyone and every planet should be using the exact same tech.
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
edited yesterday
TheLethalCarrot
44k15231286
44k15231286
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
answered yesterday
TOS original fanTOS original fan
1
1
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
TOS original fan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f4362%2fwhy-are-all-federation-starships-similar-in-design%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
13
Out of universe explination would be that it helps the audience recognise who is who. And the way it looks was just an asthetic the prop designers chose during creation.
– OghmaOsiris
Jun 28 '11 at 13:39
8
Suggested speculative in-universe explanation: “We spent 18 years designing and building one starship this way, and it worked. We’d rather not spend 18 years designing and building a starship in a different way only to find out it doesn’t work.”
– Paul D. Waite
Jun 29 '11 at 16:16
2
Also, if each ship is a unique, custom-designed ship, it makes training crews and replacing crew members an impossible task. Standardization saves work both in building and in operating.
– PoloHoleSet
Sep 8 '16 at 15:15
@PaulD.Waite: But that's just the point of the question, isn't it? "We", the Vulcans/Andorians, spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked. Be aware that, once the Federation has been founded, "we" refers (at least) to humans, Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites, not just humans any more.
– O. R. Mapper
Oct 29 '16 at 12:37
@O.R.Mapper: “the Vulcans/Andorians... spent many more than 18 years designing and building plenty of starships in their respective ways, and they worked” — sure, but maybe not as well as the Earth-designed ships for the kinds of missions that the Federation and Starfleet wanted to conduct. (I haven’t seen Enterprise, so I’m not clear on the different races’ ships and their capabilities at the time.)
– Paul D. Waite
Oct 29 '16 at 13:35