The 18650/21700 debate. Well its not really up for debate, theres a very specific reason why @Jon Nellis uses 18650s and it has everything to do with his UN38.3 certification.
FAA Allows passengers to carry up to TWO batteries <160Wh -- and as many as you can carry <100Wh, the slices Jon uses hold 8 18650 cells netting 98Wh (hence warp core design follows the rules)
The closest one could get with 21700s would be 5 cells and only 90Wh but theres something very important with having 8 cells over 5. Its divisible by 2.
The Genesis 3.1 uses 9 battery plates with a 2s4p config to make a total 18s4p
The Genesis 3.2 uses 18 battery plates in a 1s8p config to make a total of 18s8p
They are the same plates just configured slightly differently.
Oh and a UN38.3 cert costs like $10-15k so why fix something thats not broken.
Most of the power tool companies moved to 21700 (except makita....) simply because its a cheaper $/Wh as 21700 and 18650 cells cost almost the same but have a much higher discharge rate and about 45% more capacity...
Fair enough.
But, what if each layer was made with a removeable jumper separating the two sides, so you still had 8 cells (but they were 21700s)? Each layer would be 2 individual "batteries" at 74 W-Hr.
21700s are a little heavier than 18650s, so maybe only do 8 layers, instead of 9? Space them a little further apart to accommodate the slightly thicker cells and allow better cooling. Still have over 1150 W-Hr in something that could potentially carry even more payload than the G3.1 (i.e. more positively buoyant before weighting).
And possibly also allow a higher current drain, so the motor could be tuned up for even more thrust? (Samsung 50S cells, 5000 mAh and rated for 25 amps?)
More range AND more thrust AND lighter weight than a Seacraft Future 1000. Do a long-tube version at 2300 W-Hr and outrun the Seacraft Ghost 2000.
Warp Core 2.0? Can be installed in an existing Genesis tube as an upgrade?