Moderator
3d trek map? Sure im interested!
The problem is well over half the trek stars/planets don't reference real stars and it would be much harder to triangulate a rough position for them in 3d in 2d
You should also come here:
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/fanconsensusmap
This is a older one that myself and Dave started along the lines of 3d mapping and IFOS.
------------------
SIRSIG
AKA: SirPostalot
AKA: The MapMaker
AKA: The Trek Cartographer
AKA:...Well I could keep going forever
Registered User
I'd love to get a copy of those files. i also have IFOS. I think i have some 3d coordinate info on file
Karg
[This message has been edited by Karg (edited 06-28-2001).]
Registered User
Okay where do I begin, SirSig let me start with you. I checked out your latest map and again I have questions.
1. You moved the Breen this goes against set cannon. Please explain why ?
2. You down sized Cardassia, although I agree you had them way to big before, now they are to small. The Federation could have counquered them after Setlik III. Not to metion the Klingons in 2370's before the Dominion. Please explain the great down size ?
3. You seem to be resisting the 3d map idea, please enlighten us with why ?
Okay now for Morrigan, I agree with you in that a 3d map is the answer. But SirSig is right, tyring to find the location of half the Trek planets is too dificult. I propose a an idea, what if for starters you broke bown the z axis into three levels upper, middle and lower (to make it easy) Put what ever planets/systems that we know belong there in the upper or +Z and those that know belon in thhe lower in the -Z. All othe planets, ignore the z and put it in the middle until other wise known. THis allows for your borders and allows us to use SirSigs maps and research.
But hay what do I know I just ask questions? You guys are my heros for going this far already.
Registered User
I'm not Sir Sig, but I may be able to provide you with answers.<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Hirlindale:
...SirSig...I have questions. </font>
No clue. Sorry.<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
1. You moved the Breen this goes against set cannon. Please explain why ? </font>
I believe this map is intended to reflect the state after the end of the Dominion War, after the Cardassian Union had lost a lot of territory to the allies.<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
2. You down sized Cardassia, .... Please explain the great down size ?</font>
You answered this yourself below:<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
3. You seem to be resisting the 3d map idea, please enlighten us with why ?
</font>
------------------<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
SirSig is right, tyring to find the location of half the Trek planets is too dificult. </font>
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.
Moderator
Im not SpyOne but I might be able to help
Morrigan/Scott/Corax: Nice stuff with the IFOS maps. But what canon basis do you have to place these trek stars in this 3d format?
Hirlindale:
1) Breen: Set canon doesn't say they share a border with anyone. Just that they are warlord/pirates and near Cardassian/Romulan/Federation and even Klingon space.
This is quite a stretch even for a 3d map. Unless using a Earth analogy; that the Breen are Antartica, and have polar acess to everyone. I personally feel the individual 'bandit kingdoms' works better.
2) Cardassia: What can I say? Next time they'll be 'just right'!
Plus the Federation wouldn't have invaded as such during the early Cardassian War. It was a border skirmish; more or less.
3) Resisting a 3d map? No fear, just been there tried that and no effect.
I've been trying to get a mapping group going for a while now. So perhaps with all this mapping interest we can actually make a good 3d map.
We could draw apon the ST Mpas 3d cordinates. But they are TOS, in Parsecs, and in Celestial cordinates, shunted by the CNB.
If you cut all the gag planets out of this, then perhaps we can make a strong starting point.
Go here and check the files for some of the ST MAPS I scanned:
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/fanconsensusmap
If you can't get in for some reason I'll make you a member on the spot if you email me. (I'm a co moderator with Dave)
SpyOne: Perhaps not after the war. But you are close.
------------------
SIRSIG
AKA: SirPostalot
AKA: The MapMaker
AKA: The Trek Cartographer
AKA:...Well I could keep going forever
Moderator
Another thing with my 'new cardassia'. Its roughly on the scale of whats seen in the DS9 DW maps.
So with canon respect it can't be to much bigger.
But again this is late season 7 and just after the Breen have entered the war. So what SpyOne said might work to.
------------------
SIRSIG
AKA: SirPostalot
AKA: The MapMaker
AKA: The Trek Cartographer
AKA:...Well I could keep going forever
Registered User
Ok, first off my 3D map is still a work in progress. Here is my methodology:
I started with the Sol system as basically ground zero.
Then I placed a few real stars for points of reference. This info came primarily from the Internet Stellar Database site. The only real star that causes problems is Rigel because it doesn't sit where it should to jive with canon. to help solve the Deneb problem I used the real star Denebola and shortened the name to Deneb.
Third, I started placing key systems (Vulcan, Bajor, Cardassia, Ferenginar, Qo'NoS, etc.) based on canon travel times, etc. For this I have been using the Okuda warp charts which obviously contradicts the Picard "8000 ly" quote.
As to who got placed zenith or nadir, etc... that was purely creative license. I have been trying to use LUG sources to get rough ideas of where to place systems in relation to each other.
Now as to 3D being harder to map than 2D... yes it is. But in my opinion it is really the only way to do it right. I just cannot get a 2D spacial map through my head.
As to it being harder to place Trek systems in 3 coordinates I don't find it any harder than deciding where they should be in 2D. It is a little more confusing but by rottating the field in IFOS it makes it easier to visualize routes between systems, etc. A little trial and error and then it works out.
I encourage people to really give IFOS a try and see what they think. I have been in contact with it's designer who has told me that any upgrades to the progam will be quite awhile coming so the only thing really missing for the time being is the ability to map nebula, etc.
On a side note... Sig could you add me as a member to that other group. It gives me an access denied message.
I have done a fair amount of work in the past day by adding in LUG info on the Vulcan and Andorian systems and will upload the latest IFOS map to the Yahoo site at the end of the day today. (I'm on the atlantic coast of North America)
Comments and criticisms are most welcome.
Cheers,
Scott Agnew
AKA Morrigan
AKA Corax101
Registered User
Yea sig, could you add me too, i get the access denied message also
Thanks
Karg
Moderator
Consider it done Gentlemen.
Come on down and see the wares we have.
------------------
SIRSIG
AKA: SirPostalot
AKA: The MapMaker
AKA: The Trek Cartographer
AKA:...Well I could keep going forever
Registered User
Sir Sig, I'd like to join (and apparently need to).
If I am a member, I have forgotten my ID and stuff.
I feel I should mention that the last time I joined a Yahoo! Club, it increased the amount of spam I got dramatically. I even got spam from/about the club.
That was a club where I just wanted in to see the pictures. This club I would not mind getting a newsletter from.
As for the 3d maps, folks....
I, too, felt this was the only way to go. Right up until I realized that if the Federation is a sphere 1000ly in diameter, it would reach both the top and bottom of the alactic Disk. (Apparently I just lost one of my keys. Time for a new keyboard.) I tend to make the Federation about 3000ly in diameter on my maps, so it can't even be a sphere, but rather a disk of some sort. Since there is absolutely no room for anyone important above or below the Federation, Romulans, Klingons, and probably Cardassians, (And the alactic Barrier probably forms a tangable obstacle at the top and bottom) I feel 2d works just fine, and is far easier to draw and understand.
But that rather assumes you like my sizes.
------------------
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.
Moderator
Done SpyOne.
As to spam? I'm a Yahoo member across 20 odd groups. Now if you condsider spam a daily digest once a day from all those sites the sure
Seriously I dont generally get any from Yahoo. Also another reason why I made my Fedsize group open to the 'public' to view pics.
As to 3D? Well perhaps we plug in all real stars associated with Trekdom and see what that leaves us. Thats a 30 odd stars so we could get a very rough picture of where the powers lie.
Why do you say (or did) fed is a sphere 1000 ly in diametre?
Perhaps when we get everyone together we can do a quick sensus on where evryone thinks everything lies. Both 2/3D!
------------------
SIRSIG
AKA: SirPostalot
AKA: The MapMaker
AKA: The Trek Cartographer
AKA:...Well I could keep going forever
Registered User
I have few good reasons. Or maybe many, but they're only good to me.<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by SIR SIG:
Why do you say (or did) fed is a sphere 1000 ly in diametre?
</font>
I noodled this for a long time, I banged my head against the table, and I used tons of graph paper. I wanted the Federation to be BIG, so it would take a while to travel across it, but I wanted it to be a "realistic" and manageable size.
Another big consideration is that the size of the Federation influences the size of Starfleet.
The map I liked most out of my crude attempts had a Federation that could be patrolled by 14,000 ships with an consistant response time of 22 days or less at Warp 9.
The RNZ is about 141ly from Earth at it's closest, and Romulan Space extends 200ly into the Alpha Quadrant. The Klingon/Romulan border is about 360ly from Earth, with the RNZ running a nearly 45 degree angle from that point to the point where it turns coreward in the Alpha Quadrant.
The Federation/Tholian border is 1000ly rimward of Earth, and Klingon space encircles Tholian space. (not happy with that. Klingon space is too big.)
The Federation reaches almost to Deneb, and coreward 1000ly from the mid-point of a line from Earth to Deneb.
It works for me. Kinda.
I'm all for helping with a canon map, if only so I can know what I'm rejecting.
In a related note, I've decided that I've been making Cardassia WAY too big, and here's why:
The DS9 Tech Manual says that the Cardassian Union consists of Cardassia Prime, 15 other worlds that contribute major scientific or manufacturing facilities, plus 153 orbital or deep space facilities.
The Federation has 150 members.
Simply, I think this suggests that the Cardassian Union is about 1/10 the size of the Federation.
See my next post to see why Cardassia can still be a threat despite being technologically behind and comparatively tiny.
------------------
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.
Registered User
Not real clear on how this works.<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by SIR SIG:
Done SpyOne.</font>
Since I need a Yahoo ID to get in, I went to get one. (I have no idea what mine was.)
Seems there are a LOT of Spyones out there (though curiously I was the only one at Earthlink), and even a fair number of Double_o_souls. (In a pinch, I could be any spy.
Sorry for making more work, SIG.
------------------
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.
Registered User
Why is Cardassia a threat at 1/10 the size of the Federation? Several reasons.
To use a quote from the West Wing, "To achieve the kind of Victory we want, the kind Americans have come to expect, we need to outnumber them 10 to 1. We didn't feel comfortable acting in the Gulf War until we had built up 10:1 forces."
Starfleet, too, is not fond of losses, and would want to vastly outnumber an enemy it engages. Cardassia is more likely, due to an agressive military posture, to regard the dead as "acceptable losses". The Dominion even more so, as the Jem'hadar are more manufactured than a part of society.
So, assuming Cardassia sent half it's fleet to engage the Federation, the Federation would want to send HALF of it's fleet to get the superior forces it wants. However, times of conflict are often viewed as opportunities by ones enemies, so Starfleet cannot cut back and in fact has to INCREASE the amount of forces being deployed to "hostile" borders (like the Romulan border before they joined) to prevent an opportunistic incursion.
The Dominion War Sourcebook says that Starfleet has about 8800 ships. I estimate about twice that number. owever, due to the need to maintain service and patrols elsewhere, I would guess that Starfleet could deploy only about 20% of its ships to the War at any given time. That gives Starfleet about 3000 ships in the War zone, and that requires spreading their forces rather thin. Cardassia, however, has (let's say) 1/10 the ships Starfleet does, or under 2000.
Starfleet doesn't want to fight at those odds.
The Dominion War forced the Federation to fight, and since the Romulans and Klingons sent 13,500 ships together (according to the DWS), and the Dominion sent 15,000 (DWS again), the Federation had to deploy a huge percentage of their ships just to maintain 1:1 odds. (assume 1500 Cardassian ships and 3000 Federation ships bring the forces equal.)
The conflict with Cardassia in the past is entirely plausable with Cardassia 1/10 the size of the Federation because the Federation would not want to devote the number of ships needed for an agressive and conclusive victory. Cardassia also needs to have a small fleet in order to be threatened (and in fact, mainly defeated) by an assault force of a few thousand Klingon ships. (even 6500 Klingon ships could not get that kind of definite edge over more than 5000 Cardassian ships, IMO).
Whew. I'll shut up for a while.
------------------
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.
Moderator
Always figured you were a Large Federation man SpyOne
I to favor a large federation with regards to the number of distant stellar locations that have turned up in Trek.
But in recent times and some more decent data I've been favouring a smaller one to explain warp speeds etc.
It all comes down to how canon the warp chart is doesn't it?
Some episodes they're by the book while others are 10's even 100's of times faster then what the ships should be going.
"I noodled this for a long time, I banged my head against the table, and I used tons of graph paper."
Me to
In regards to fed ships, I always pegged them around the 5-10000 mark 'ships of the line'. The DWS just confirmed that (well Steve Long's view anyway).
If we go a large fed, then there's:
Antares app. 600 ly coreward (was around 300 odd before Hipparchus)
Deneb app. 1600 ly spinward (3200 ly using Hipparchus, but the 1600 would have been what they used at the time)
Rigel app. 700 ly rimward/trailing
So yes there's data to support a large federation. Plus we'll have to choose a stellar catalogue and stick with, so as not to get these conflicting distances.
Well you've seen my maps, so you know roughly how far away everything is SpyOne.
As to the DS9 TM, I take those 15 other planets/systems to be their coreworlds. So they could have upwards of 5 times that many actual planets/systems.
------------------
SIRSIG
AKA: SirPostalot
AKA: The MapMaker
AKA: The Trek Cartographer
AKA:...Well I could keep going forever
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
