Rhode Island Deck Plans

[Publius]

I'll post my Spacedock Nova/Rhode Island stats in the next few days, but the Nova itself is listed in Spacedock 2 as I recall. I might have a slightly different take on it than Steve Long did, but I'm certain they'll come out similar. I liked IceGiants CODA version of the Nova refit as a Light Cruiser (which I still think matches the ship much better dude), but he modified that post so I don't think the stats are still there, I can post that too however if IceGiant doesn't mind.

[IceGiant]

Go for it. I have them still as well if anyone wants.

Which system do you use btw Publius, CODA or ICON?

[krijger]

Publius,

I am planning of using your Nova Deckplans for my campaign (maybe later upgrading to the Rhode Island version), so I am really curious what kinds of stats you think it should have, no matter the difference with the Spacedock version.

Thijs

[Publius]

IceGiant: I am using the Spacedock rules if combat occurs in my new PBeM, but if I were tabletop, I'd probably use the CODA system. It is unfortunately not the most detailed space combat rules, but it does capture the cinematic feel of the setting overall. The old LUG/ICON system wasn't especially bad capturing that feel either btw, I just would like to remain current if I can and the targets etc. in CODA ship combat are integrated into the other aspects of the system (skill rolls, professional abilities etc.). The Spacedock rules are much more detailed, and given the time that is available in a PBeM to calculate numbers, look up information, determine the effects of damage etc. I think that it's primary problems (mostly complexity) will not inhibit its playability. The only problem is that as the Narrator, I'll have to do some modifications to the system as we play, but that shouldn't be too much trouble.

Below are the Stats that IceGiant developed for the Nova refit as a light cruiser. I think that this best reflects the ship for the CODA system stats. I'll post a PDF of my Spacedock Stats on the Spacedock section of the website.

Nova Upgrade
PRODUCTION DATA

Origin: UFP
Class and Type: Nova-Class Light Cruiser (Refit)
Year Commissioned: 2373 (in my capaign, I have bumped this up to 2379 to reflect the integration of new highly efficient replicator technology gleaned by the USS Voyager from its experiences in the Delat Quad.)

HULL DATA

Structure: 30
Size/Decks: 5/8
Length/Height/Beam: 165/34/62
Complement: 80

OPERATIONAL DATA

Atmosphere Capable: Yes
Cargo Units: 50
Life Support: Class 2 (C)
Operations Systems: Class 3 (D)
Sensor Systems: Class 4 (+4/E)
Separation System: None
Shuttlebay: 1 stardrive aft
Shuttlecraft: 5 Size worth
Tractor Beams: 1 fv, 1 av
Transporters: 2 standard, 2 cargo, 2 emergency

PROPULSION DATA

Impulse System: FIE-2 (.85) (E)
Warp System: LF-35 (6/9.2/9.8) (D)

TACTICAL DATA

Phasers: Type X (x3/C)
Penetration: 5/5/4/0/0
Torpedo Launchers: Mk 95 DF (B)
Photon Penetration: 4/4/4/4/4
Deflector Shield: FSQ (D)
Protection/Threshold: 17/3

MISCELLANEOUS DATA

Manuever Modifiers: +1C, +2H, +1T
Traits: None

[IceGiant]

Yeah, I know you like the Light Cruiser version. In the end I am using this slightly modified version:

Nova Class Refit

Origin: UFP
Class and Type: Nova-Class Deep Space Surveyor (Refit)
Year Commissioned: 2375

HULL DATA

Structure: 30
Size/Decks: 5/8
Length/Height/Beam: 165/34/62
Complement: 80

OPERATIONAL DATA

Atmosphere Capable: Yes
Cargo Units: 50
Life Support: Class 4 (E)
Operations Systems: Class 4 (E)
Sensor Systems: Class 5 (+5/F)
Seperation System: None
Shuttlebay: 1 stardrive aft
Shuttlecraft: 5 Size worth
Tractor Beams: 1 fv, 1 av
Transporters: 2 standard, 2 cargo, 2 emergency

PROPULSION DATA

Impulse System: FIE-2 (.85) (E)
Warp System: LF-35 (6/9.2/9.8) (D)

TACTICAL DATA

Phasers: Type X (x3/C)
Penetration: 5/5/4/0/0
Torpedo Launchers: Mk 95 DF (C)
Photon Penetration: 4/4/4/4/4
Deflector Shield: FSQ (D)
Protection/Threshold: 17/3

MISCELLANEOUS DATA

Manuever Modifiers: +0C, +2H, +0T
Traits: Prototype (Beam –1/x3)

[ComaBoy]

These plans utterly rock. It's that simple.

I've loved the Rhode Island ever since I first saw it on screen and I use it as the basis for my slightly larger, Spacedock based Harrier-class cruiser.

Excuse me while I go back to drooling. . .

[Lancer]

I know I am late to the party, but for what it's worth I'd like to offer a few comments on your Rhode Island-class deckplans:

1. These plans rock!! Great stuff!
I have tried to come up with my own deckplans for the Nova-class, but yours are better by several magnitudes.

2. What's with the room on deck 1, opposite the Observation Lounge? What is that supposed to be? (If I overlooked the answer in this thread, please excuse me).

3. As much as I look I can't find a dedicated airlock. What if the crew needs to make some repairs to the outer hull of the ship? Do the engineers just don spacesuits and walk out the ramp on deck 8? If the ship docks at a space sation, where does a docking pylon connect to the ship? Personaly I'd turn one of the "expeditionary gear" storerooms on deck 8 into an airlock, but that's just me.

4. Is there no way on Deck 3 to just walk from the cargo bay to the planetology labs and the other forward sections? Looks to me like the only connection between the aft and forward sections of this deck is by turbolift, with somehow doesn't feel right to me. Personaly I would run the turbolift straight forward from the vertical shaft to the computer core and then split it off to port and starboard, leaving the aft half of the turbolift network as corridors, but again, that could just be me.

5. A similar situation exists on Deck 5, with the Deflector Control and Operations Rooms (P/S) being only reacheable by turbolift or Jeffries tube as I see it. Not the most desireable layout in my book. As I said that may just be me, but personaly I feel that every part of a starship should be reacheable on foot without going up or down a deck through the Jeffries tubes, if possible at all. (Which it should be, if you establish a connection between life support monitoring and auxiliary deflector control and have the turbolifts end at the vertical shafts.)

[Publius]

First, thanks for the kind words, most appreciated.

Originally posted by Lancer
2. What's with the room on deck 1, opposite the Observation Lounge? What is that supposed to be? (If I overlooked the answer in this thread, please excuse me).

I don't recall where I discussed it, but it was somewhere on the boards. I I have no real plans for that room myself, and I had asked for some opinions from others. Later I finally decided to just leave the room blank so that individual ships can do whatever they like with it (Trophy room, extra lounge, whatever; I drew one set with an airlock, see below however).

Originally posted by Lancer
3. As much as I look I can't find a dedicated airlock. What if the crew needs to make some repairs to the outer hull of the ship? Do the engineers just don spacesuits and walk out the ramp on deck 8? If the ship docks at a space sation, where does a docking pylon connect to the ship? Personaly I'd turn one of the "expeditionary gear" storerooms on deck 8 into an airlock, but that's just me. [/B]

If you can find an airlock on the exterior of the thing you are a better Trekkie than I am. I have looked and looked and looked and cannot find a single one. I happen to agree with you wholeheartedly about why one should be there, but in this I am limited by the exterior image. This is one of those times I can say "talk to Paramount" BTW, I have not found any airlocks on the Sabre and some other vehicles designed after Voyager either.

Originally posted by Lancer
4. Is there no way on Deck 3 to just walk from the cargo bay to the planetology labs and the other forward sections? Looks to me like the only connection between the aft and forward sections of this deck is by turbolift, with somehow doesn't feel right to me. Personaly I would run the turbolift straight forward from the vertical shaft to the computer core and then split it off to port and starboard, leaving the aft half of the turbolift network as corridors, but again, that could just be me.[/B]

I have some ideas about that I'm going to work on whenever I get some free time (just got back from Vegas). However, it can be accessed by Turbolift and I can put a ladder option in the deck 4 shuttlebay (I had also originally planned to put a large elevator in the back of Cargo Bay 2 and 3).

Originally posted by Lancer
5. A similar situation exists on Deck 5, with the Deflector Control and Operations Rooms (P/S) being only reacheable by turbolift or Jeffries tube as I see it. Not the most desireable layout in my book. As I said that may just be me, but personaly I feel that every part of a starship should be reacheable on foot without going up or down a deck through the Jeffries tubes, if possible at all. (Which it should be, if you establish a connection between life support monitoring and auxiliary deflector control and have the turbolifts end at the vertical shafts.) [/B]

Wasn't Deflector control accessed via Jefferies Tubes by Capt. Kirk in Generations? That was what I was thinking when I dropped it in there. Alternatively, I could strike the word "Auxiliary" from the Defector Control room on Deck 3 and make the small chamber on Deck 5 a relay of some sort.

[Lancer]

[QUOTEIf you can find an airlock on the exterior of the thing you are a better Trekkie than I am. I have looked and looked and looked and cannot find a single one. I happen to agree with you wholeheartedly about why one should be there, but in this I am limited by the exterior image. This is one of those times I can say "talk to Paramount" BTW, I have not found any airlocks on the Sabre and some other vehicles designed after Voyager either.[/QUOTE]
All the schematics I have seen for the Nova-class were AFAIR drawn only showing the starboard side of the ship. Maybe the airlock just isn't visible on the sources you use.

Wasn't Deflector control accessed via Jefferies Tubes by Capt. Kirk in Generations? That was what I was thinking when I dropped it in there. Alternatively, I could strike the word "Auxiliary" from the Defector Control room on Deck 3 and make the small chamber on Deck 5 a relay of some sort. [/B]

Well, the Nova isn't the E-B, but OTOH that may be just a matter of personal preferences. I just don't like rooms that can only be accessed through Jeffries tubes and not by way of a regular corridor, but that may be just me.

[Publius]

Originally posted by Lancer
[B][All the schematics I have seen for the Nova-class were AFAIR drawn only showing the starboard side of the ship. Maybe the airlock just isn't visible on the sources you use.

I include the schematics on that page here, while the Port side isn't shown there, it is shown on the attached photo (touched up from a pic I got off of Gilso's Page, made lighter to see details) and I cannot find any airlock indications.

The only real prospect that I have is a circular hatch of some sort over the Cargo area, but it doesn't look like the same style as used on the Intrepid class (and shows up a lot better on the digital model pics than it does on the drawings I use, see this page on Gilso's site for some of the best of these pics). Even then, it really wouldn't show up well on the plans (Airlock in the middle of the Cargo Bay).

[Lancer]

Publius, I wasn't very serious about the ship only being shown from the starboard side, but thanks for the link to the Gilso schematics, I hadn't seen them before. Most impressive images.

Now to offer some more stats for the Rhode Island version of the Nova-class, here is my take:

modified Nova-class Heavy Scout; Commissioned: 2368

HULL DATA
Structure: 25
Size/Decks: 5/8

OPERATIONAL DATA
Atmosphere Capable: Yes
Cargo Units: 50
Life Support: Class 3 (D)
Operations System: Class 3 (D)
Sensor System: Class 5 (+5/F)
Separation System: No
Shuttlebay: 1a
Shuttlecraft: 5 Size worth
Tractor Beams: 1av, 1fd
Transporters: 3 standard, 3 emergency

PROPULSION DATA
Impulse System: FIG-2 (.9c) (D)
Warp System: LF-35 (6/9.2/9.8) (D)

TACTICAL DATA
Phasers: Type X (x3) (D)
Penetration: 5/5/4/0/0
Torpedo Launchers: Mk 80 DF (x2) (D)
Photon Penetration: 5/5/5/5/5
Deflector Shield: FSQ (D)
Protection/Threshold: 17/3

MISCELLANEOUS DATA
Maneuver Modifiers: C+0, H+2, T+0
Traits: Design Defect (Warp), early availability (Sensor System)


Here is some of my reasoning behind the different choices:

Mk 80 torpedo launchers - as the Rhode Island version should be more combat capable then a standard Nova I thought giving it smaller (i.e. using less space) torpedo launchers would allow the ship to carry more torpedoes for each individual launcher and therefor give it the capacity for larger spreads than the standard Nova can fire.

Design Defect (Warp) - Standard Nova-class ships are built for top speeds of warp 8, so it seemed logical to me that at much higher speeds the nacelle pylons would suffer considerable stress that would limit the maximum speed achievable by the Rhode Island version. (Besides, I needed some flaw to pay for all the other systems. )

3 transporters of each type - this just seemed right to me, even if another space to use on a class 4 operations system would have been nice. As I said, that's just me.

[FN|Scooter]

Publius, I must commend you on your excellent work. I browsed your web site and thoroughly enjoyed your deck plans. I would very much be interested in seeing more deck plans drawn up.

[Dan Stack]

Publius -did your site go bye-bye?

[Capt Daniel Hunter]

Was wondering that myself.

[Publius]

My website host (Stargate) has been having problems for at least a week. I have been fielding frantic emails from students looking for the website handouts I use for my classes on the "other side" of the website since at least then. I have no idea when it will be fixed because Stargate has posted a "No ETA possible" message on their website, although the lovely little darlings have changed the date of the "service Interruption notification": up until yesterday, they said that it was down from Oct 8th, now they claim that the service was down from Oct 14th. Frankly, I think that they changed the date so that they could claim that they weren't down for over a week. Since Dan posted his comment on the 5th, I'm wondering if they haven't been playing this shell-game with changing the dates for even longer than the 8th. I have made phone calls to the service and they seem to have little clue when they might get things back up and running.

The upshot is that the site will be back up (eventually) as soon as the #@!#$%$ webhost gets their act together.