Federation Commander

[cnuzzi]

We recently had a discussion here re: the firing arcs of the primary hull side ph-1s on the Fed CA/GSC vs the CS/BC. A similar situation exists for the Fed DNs - the FJ DN and the DN+ have LF+L and RF+R arcs, while the DNG, DNF, DNL, and DNH all have LS/RS due to their "flat" nacelle arrangement.

Except...the Fed DNs with angled struts are different from the CA. The forward view in the FJ Tech Manual clearly shows that the nacelles - with angled struts - are below the level of the primary hull, due to the struts being shorter and mounted at a shallower angle. Given that the side phasers are on the top of the dish, shouldn't all the DNs have LS/RS arcs?

[Steve Cole]

The arcs are correct as printed. Seriously, those were published in 1979 and nobody has ever complained.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander

[cnuzzi]

Oh, I wasn't complaining, nor was I implying that they should be changed - they're tradition at this point. I was just wondering if there was some game-universe reason for them. Maybe the firing path of the beams is too close to the nacelles to satisfy safety regs.

[Steve Cole]

That was done 40 years ago and nobody remembers individual decisions. Your guess about being too close is as good as any.

And with all due respect, "Given that the side phasers are on the top of the dish, shouldn't all the DNs have LS/RS arcs?" is indeed complaining and implying it should be changed.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander

[Steve Cole]

To be sure, there is nothing particularly wrong, evil, rude, or fattening about asking for a change. Just understand that changes are very very unlikely to be done on anything that old.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander