Printable View
It's a shame that budgetary requirements meant that there weren't more ships in the TNG era, other than 'alien of the week' (several of which were re-used for aliens on oposite sides of the Galaxy :D). Yes there are notably designs which are real kitbashes in BoBW - but people who sit with a video recorder on freze frame trying to capure them need to get a life :D They are just some wreks :D How do we know the Borg didn't rearange all of the pieces, for fun? :D
You'll run out of smilies if you use them too fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobian
The late TNG era has plenty of designs; off the top of my head you have the Galaxy, Ambassador, Nebula, Intrepid, Akira, Steamrunner, Saber, Norway, Defiant, Nova... and that's just the 'modern' ones.
The thing with the TOS era is there's simply a dearth of designs to compare things too. We have the Connie an' that's it, so weird things like the Franz Joseph designs and the later FASA ships show up. The first batch of FASA ships (Loknar, Larson, Derf, etc) were, single nacelles aside, great. But those are the odd ones out, and stuff like the Decateur and Bonaventure just goes to show the lack of direction.
Later FASA I can agree with you, but the FJ designs as 'weird'? I can't see that. FJ went on the assumption (as told to him by Roddenberry himself) that Federation ships primarily use the same components across the board. So, assuming the Enterprise as a 'heavy cruiser', the other ships fell in line.Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Huth
When we DO see other Federation designs from that era (TAS), they keep the same basic idea of main components. This mindset lasts through TWOK, honestly.
Early FASA (Loknar, Larson, Derf, Nelson) is a bit unfair to credit, though... since they TRACED the FJ designs to make their own. A point of contention to this day , I'm sure. :)
Decatur was never official, and Bonaventure was on TAS ..
Yeah, at the time, it may have seemed alright, but in relation to later (on-screen) ships they don't really mesh, especially the single-nacelle part (and the big ship is just... you know).Quote:
Originally Posted by TFVanguard
The only TAS designs i recall were the freighters, some proto-runabouts, and the Bonaventure... The freighters and the small ones were ok, but the Bonaventure is an obvious trace-job.Quote:
When we DO see other Federation designs from that era (TAS), they keep the same basic idea of main components. This mindset lasts through TWOK, honestly.
Really? The loknar, larson and derf look distinctive enough, and retain it when put next to later designs. Again, the single-nacelle thing seems weird to me, but that's one of those issues...Quote:
Early FASA (Loknar, Larson, Derf, Nelson) is a bit unfair to credit, though... since they TRACED the FJ designs to make their own. A point of contention to this day , I'm sure. :)
Returning from Holidays!
USS Northampton Class Cruiser
Another fASA design with issues. Not a terrible concept, really, but the three views, of COURSE, do not remotely match up. Hell, the top view was so badly done that it wasn't even symmetrical... oy... Anyway, this interpretation TRIES to get the three views to agree. Again, minis and 3D models of the ship (fan interpretations) were used as a more solid guideline.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...ampton_165.gif
Oh, the Northampton is the pretty!!
USS Kiev Class Frigate
A quickie! The Kiev class frigate. I see this as cheap 'border defense', probably designed as a 'cheap' Miranda, or an intended-but-not-accepted upgrade of the Larson.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/files/fed_kiev_171.gif
I never was big on the Northhampton. There are any number of Starfleet ships that put their nacelles out on long, spindly pylons, but these wings just scream "shoot my really long PTCs!" (Besides, it looks like a frog in the dorsal view.)
The Kiev, now, that seems a little more practical. A lower-cost hull, maybe, but a far more pragmatic design.
SS Liberty Frieghter
...um.. yeah. I'm redoing this ship tommorow. Again, the lines FASA gave her were just impossible (the side view cannot match up with the others, due to the 'cowling'... and this is the result of trying to make them mesh). This is one I'm going to apply some cold hard reworking to... I thought you might want to see /why/.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...iberty_193.gif
I reworked the Kiev's pylons too... this time it was pretty easy just to tuck them back like that. They WERE at a sharper angle and much thinner. The modification wasn't drastic to the lines, but made a HUGE difference in how it looked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Filean
I like the pylon changes to the Kiev, brings it more in line with the Knox/Daran family.
Starfleet really liked to try all possible weapon combinations on its frigates:
Daran - phasers
Knox - phasers + megaphasers
Kiev - phasers + photon torps
Avenger/Miranda - phasers + megaphasers + photon torps
Hmm, how about a frigate with megaphasers + photon torps but no phasers? That would be silly...
Well if were also counting SFB you forgot Drones and Plasma :D
I forgot SFB. Lucky me. ;-)
Do Fed ships ever use plasma in SFB? I know they use drones, just not very often.
Retouched, re-biasing the lines in favour of the port-side view. I think it came out much better. Still not a 'favorite' design by any standard, but a lot more workable.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...iberty_132.gif
My absolutely most favorite ship; the Northampton! Whenever I played Star Trek, I always wanted to be a captain of a Northampton. Great work on it, TFVanguard!
USS Thufir Class Destroyer
While this design is a little overly complex (can anyone explain the purpose of the winglets, honestly?), the actual basics of this ship are pretty good. It's refreshing not to have to change TOO much on a FASA design. Here, I added the torpedo launchers, corrected the saucer section, and added a 'real' impulse drive to the cowling.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...thufir_191.gif
Nice work as always. :)
The NOrthhampton (or USS Hulkamania) looks great!
As for the Liberty, I always added some flight decks to her "boobs" and made her a carrier :)
I always did like the Thufir and Andor classes with their protected nacelles. It's not a perfect piece of design (the nacelles are protected by the housing for their own PTCs, and I don't know how you'd jettison the nacelles without having them collide with the hull), but the idea is a good one.
One thing I never noticed in the FASA manual that I see now is that the connection between the Thufir's nacelle supports and the saucer is pretty slim--the cross-section fore to aft is smaller than the diameter of the bridge module! Would it be worth thickening that just a little so it doesn't look like the saucer is going to tilt forward and snap off in a gravity well like those on oh, so many Trek starship model kits?
Sorry, are we talking about the Enterprise-B now? ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by TFVanguard
Maybe that's why the Enterprise-B has those winglets. "We've had modest success improving subspace 'slippage' of the hull in an optimally configured warp field when superfluous winglets are incorporated into the design. Consider the attached trial performance data from the U.S.S. Placebo...."Quote:
Originally Posted by Identity Crisis
Guy's, don't think of them as winglets...think of then as extended crumple zones :D
Identity Crisis:
The Fed's had one of two plasma armed ship designs the one I have used was based on the Fed BCH, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a DD with plasma also.
TFVanguard:
Sorry to keep doing this to you...
Take a close look at the bottom of the saucer section on the Liberty side view. Then take the measurements from the top and fore views. There should be some of the |// action aft of the center saucer before leveling back out \\|//||
I hope the little dashes are understandable, they're supposed to represent the shield emitter lines under the saucer.
Yeah, Phoenix has a point with the saucer section. And while I was looking at that, I noticed another "oops".
On the top view, you see the saucer section meeting with the secondary hull (upper section). From there, the secondary hull angles back until it meets the side, then shoots back to the aft end of the ship.
Now on the side view, we see the saucer section meeting up with the secondary hull, and immediately shooting back to the aft end of the ship...indicating that there isn't an angled section leading to the side portion.
And... I hereby give up on the Liberty as is... Sorry, but the three-view pictures from FASA here were completely impossible, and I'm at a complete loss as to how to make them work. Plus, no matter how you shake it, the 'boobs' design is laughable at best... I'm going to do something more serious to it, I think... maybe using the Laweya and Overfield as a base.
Probably not that helpful, but what the heck... here's a Liberty of a different color:
3-D model attempt
USS Wilkerson Class Destroyer
Decided to add some detail to this one, just adding a new engineering section and some much-needed lines to the warp pylons. Adds a lot of character to one of the laziest of FASA's designs. :)
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...kerson_920.gif
I'll retackle the Liberty sometime this week.. right now, it just bugs the hell out of me. :)
USS Remora Class Heavy Escort
What IS it with FASA and impossible angles, anyway? Same old story about the views not matching up..so I biased the top and side, tweaking the front to fit as I went along.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...remora_968.gif
re: the Remora
Now that's pretty! I'll be using that one.
Nice designs there! I like the side view of the Remora.
Glad to see some new stuff. I found I was starting to go into withdrawals after 5 whole days of not getting anything new! :eek:
Thanks for giving me my fix. ;)
Very nice, very nice!
I guess they put the nacelle under the pylon rather than above for protection.Quote:
Originally Posted by TFVanguard
I'd have figured it would have gone the other way (like the nelson). It would be ... lazier, I guess. :p :D
Looks pretty neat anyways.
Alex
Nice job pulling that together. I'm not personally that fond of it (and the other FASA, "Hey let's add yet more stuff hanging off the engineering hull" style). This design looks almost sleek, rather than tarted up.Quote:
Originally Posted by TFVanguard
Alex
Very nice Remora. I always kinda liked that ship, but now I kinda like it quite a bit better.
I dunno... considering that the majority of the defensive measures that they use are in force-fields or energy-based, i doubt many of these decisions lie in the realm of mere protection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Blake
Perhaps, but sometimes shields fail, or get dropped. And having a spindly warp engine stuck out at the top and the bottom of the ship says to me "blow the crap out of this". At least in this case, it's attached pretty well, at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Huth
It probably doesn't matter much, you're right on that.
But the other option for the change is that it somehow stabilizes the warp bubble, and I would think that obscuring that much of the side wouldn't help much.
Perhaps it's closer in, so the shield bubble is smaller, and hence more resilient.
Or, maybe it doesn't matter and the designer prefered it that way. Alas, we don't know as much about warp dynamics and subspace superstructure as I'd like.
Alex
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v8...ara-battle.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Captain Blake
USS Kitty-Hawk Class Cruiser
This is one of those 'controversial' ships from SFB, the original F-CA. Basically, this is the Constitution class, tucked in a little, and given the 'smaller' primary hull. Why do this? Because this more accurate models the USS Constellation (NCC-1017) shown in the original series - or, more correctly, the old AMT model.
There's more debates about this ship, but I decided to go ahead and make it (it was quick), dub her a regular cruiser, and put her back as a limited-build run for the NCC-1015 to 1019 range... making the Constellation a member of /this/ class (and making THAT issue go away at the same time).
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...y-hawk_149.gif
USS Archer Class Cruiser
This is a fan-ship from sub-odeon's board. Basically did this to clear it out of my 'request' bin, and help clean up my multitude of files. I listed the ship as a 'cruiser', being largely made of (obviously) Connie parts, rearranged, but with the smaller primary hull.
No story on this one. I imagine that, if she really were built, it would be in a very limited number, since there's no real advantage to her over other ships.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...archer_211.gif
USS Makin Island Assault Carrier
While not perfect, this is one of the better FASA designs. The only major change I made was the size of the warp engines, putting back the 'full scale' ones instead of the 3/4 size ones that were used originally. Also, the proper ship name is 'Makin Island', and not just 'Makin'. :)
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...island_652.gif
Nice one that and another great candidate for a through-deck carrier :)
USS Sussex Class Carrier
One of SFB's three 'big ships' for the Federation. This is the slightly more reasonable one. I did tweak a little to get some standard components on, such as the shuttlebays and the primary hull, but I think it came out all right. At least, this version I can actually see the Feddies making in Kirk's time.
http://www.pixelsagas.com/forum/file...sussex_139.gif