Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 61 to 74 of 74

Thread: Fun with Greyscale II

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by First of Two
    I might be aple to scan a pic and link to it later. It might even be a "prettier" Taurus alternative... depending on whether the saucer is supposed to blend into the secondary or not.
    I could definately use the scan, though the placement of the ship is going to be odd. (I know it's an NX to NCC-1701 mid-step, though... the registry would date it closer to the Baton Rouge than the mid-way point...) Please send it along.

    The Taurus, though, explicitly states seperate hulls with no connection pylon, which is why she looks kinda funky there. I would have merged the underside of the saucer to the secondary hull more , myself...

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by TFVanguard
    USS Taurus Class Cruiser

    This is the last of Steve Long's original TOS-era designs (not including the pre-TOS or 'alien' ship designs). I've redone this ship a bagillion times, and never found a version I was happy with that came close to his specs and description. I finally settled on this, which keeps the TOS look but... isn't pretty, I'll admit. Ah well, I'm finally letting this one go now.


    It looks like a lame kitbash. Maybe make engingeering hull more flush/conjoined with the saucer, and de-sweep the pylons (it's too TOS-y for those).
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Somewhere behind a sand dune
    Posts
    2,263
    perhaps...but I kinda like her. she's ugly but functional
    A brave little theory, and actually quite coherent for a system of five or seven dimensions -- if only we lived in one.

    Academician Prokhor Zakharov, "Now We Are Alone"

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Canonsburg, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by TFVanguard
    I could definately use the scan, though the placement of the ship is going to be odd. (I know it's an NX to NCC-1701 mid-step, though... the registry would date it closer to the Baton Rouge than the mid-way point...) Please send it along.

    The Taurus, though, explicitly states seperate hulls with no connection pylon, which is why she looks kinda funky there. I would have merged the underside of the saucer to the secondary hull more , myself...
    Okay, it's definitely NOT a Taurus-like ship - I finally realized that the primary and secondary hulls are one element.

    Anyway, here's a link to 2 HUGE uploaded pics - my apologies for the size and such. I'd have combined and shrunk them... except I don't know how.

    NCC-1000 at Starfleet Proving Grounds
    "It's hard being an evil genius when everybody else is so stupid" -- Quantum Crook

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by First of Two
    Anyway, here's a link to 2 HUGE uploaded pics - my apologies for the size and such. I'd have combined and shrunk them... except I don't know how.
    Here's a quick Cut, Paste, Shrink, and do the best I can to line the two parts back up.

    Neat ship by the way.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Phoenix...

    "I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity,
    but maybe we should just remove all the safety lables and let nature take it's course"

    "A Place For Everything & Nothing In It's Place"

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix
    *Picture of TOS ship*
    DUDE YES.
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    3,462
    That is a really cool looking ship.. where's it from?
    Ta Muchly

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by C. Huth
    DUDE YES.
    I'm going to be torn there. The registration and design puts it squarely in the Baton Rouge era of starship, and conflicts directly with the USS Ranger itself. Worse, I already have the PB-32 test-bed ship as the Bonaventure...

    On the other hand, I easily see people wanting this ship speced-out, and it's a fairly nice design. So.. what do I DO with it?

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Soviet Canuckistan
    Posts
    3,804
    Make it!

    It is frellin' sweet!

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Canonsburg, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Tobian
    That is a really cool looking ship.. where's it from?
    Star Trek "Ships of the Line" 2006 Calendar. April, I believe.

    Amazon.com listing

    The entirety of the 2006 Calendar is devoted to TOS-Era images, since 2006 is TOS's 40th anniversary, but that seems to be the only "new" ship design in the bunch.
    "It's hard being an evil genius when everybody else is so stupid" -- Quantum Crook

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Nashville, TN, USA
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by TFVanguard
    I'm going to be torn there. The registration and design puts it squarely in the Baton Rouge era of starship, and conflicts directly with the USS Ranger itself. Worse, I already have the PB-32 test-bed ship as the Bonaventure...

    On the other hand, I easily see people wanting this ship speced-out, and it's a fairly nice design. So.. what do I DO with it?
    I think more what he's aiming for is "where the heck do I stick this puppy in the timeline" and not so much "do I draw it or not"

    Ok, so I know that the USS Ranger is in the RPG game as a name stuck on the upside down proto-Enterprise model. Is that any more "Canon" than that? I guess where I'm going is that this might be the USS Ranger, rather than what we're using now.

    Alternately, and probably less sacriligiously, kill the Bonaventure class design and replace it with this. This is the PB-32 test bed ship. The TAS episode with the Bonaventure class just had the wrong image (kinda like having the Enterprise re-use stock footage that has Phasors coming out of the Photon Torpedo launchers)

    Alternately, it looks like you'd slot the basic design into the NX, Loknar, Akira type, so this ship is the Loknar analog to the Baton Rouge class and the numbering just needs to be fudged.

    I personally like choice B. But hey, that's just me.

    Alex

  12. #72
    The Ranger is, AFAIK, only from the TOS ICON book and repeated in the DecTrek SOM book, and neither times is the design particularly good-looking. This one, on the other hand, looks pretty sweet.


    Is there any chance i could get some higher-rez versions of the images on here? I want to do some designs of my own, and tracing the components is kinda hard at this size.
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by TFVanguard
    USS Soyuz Class Patrol Frigate

    You know, i just noticed this, but according to this pic of the soyuz, the size of the back module is a little exagerrated in the schematic.
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  14. #74
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canyon, TX, USA, Sol III
    Posts
    1,783
    Bumping this and hoping TFVanguard still populates these forums. All the images are broken here, TFV, and not all of the ships are in galleries on pixelsagas. I use these as part of my screensaver, and several are missing. Could I convince you, if you're still here, to fix the image links or put the missing ships up in a gallery somewhere so I could download them?

    This message repeats across all the threads of TFV's images; just trying really hard to get his attention.
    Patrick Goodman -- Tilting at Windmills

    "I dare you to do better." -- Captain Christopher Pike

    Beyond the Final Frontier: CODA Star Trek RPG Support

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •