>One thing to keep in mind when weighing these up is that
>Surprise is rather smaller than Challenger (which is on
>the humongous side as this style of starship goes); her construction
>isn't simply a Sovereign dish and warp engines with the
>secondary hull omitted, the external arrangement is also scaled down
>by about 30 percent. (I say "external arrangement" because, well,
>obviously inside the ceilings aren't all 30 percent lower, etc. :)
>It's pretty much impossible to see without a scale reference, so for
>purposes of actually making the artwork it doesn't matter, but it
>should be borne in mind when looking at them.
>
>--G.
>-><-
>Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Admin
>Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/
>Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

30% scaled down? Is that by mass or by length? I do not want to think about all the problems that caused for the designer of the thing, given what I know about warship design. Probably involved a divorce, the loss of a good two inches of hairline and the gain of about 10-15 kilos if it was a male. Being put in charge of a major project is apparently a major source of stress, if my sources can be believed.

In all seriousness, even if the nacelles are shared the hull would have to be a totally new design. If the nacelles are proportionally scaled down, then you have to shell out more money for a new design and fabrication equipment to make the smaller design, and that doesn't save you any money because the hull still needs to be redesigned to fit the reactor and to resist different stresses than the full-sized design would experience. It might not be quite as big a job as the sister design, but it wouldn't be easy either.