Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Centaur Schematics

my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

»	Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » Centaur Schematics (Page 1)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Author

Topic: Centaur Schematics

Akira
Member
Member # 850

posted

Here is the top and the bottom (w/ & w/o windows)
http://240sxs14.nissanpower.com/Centaur/CENTAUR%20w%20windows%20web.gif
http://240sxs14.nissanpower.com/Centaur/NCC-Schem.gif
http://240sxs14.nissanpower.com/Centaur/CENTAUR1.gif

Guys let me know what you think

--------------------
Christopher
[email protected]
SR20Egg

Registered: Jun 2002 | IP: Logged

Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742

posted

Cool. Are those "hand-drawn" (scratch-built) or did you create them by drawing another layer over the CGI-image?

--------------------
"This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."

Registered: Nov 2001 | IP: Logged

Akira
Member
Member # 850

posted

took the enterprise b Schematic and the Miranda schematic and combaned them and hand drew the rest on the cpu

--------------------
Christopher
[email protected]
SR20Egg

Registered: Jun 2002 | IP: Logged

Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742

posted

EDIT: It seems I made a common mistake; perpective. I compared the top view after posting, and it seems the nacelles only appear to be larger than they really are. This leads to another question: Should the drawing be "real" 2D, meaning if component A is 1/1000 of the original size, component B has to be as large, without any perspective, or should I include the perspective. To be honest, the smaller nacelles looked even uglier than the larger ones. And because my drawings are always much more of a "drawing" than a real "schematic", I guess I should leave it like this, despite the error.

How did we handle this usually? I tried to think of any other ship where prespective made such a difference, but I don't think there are many because I can't remember a single one. Any suggestions?

Original post:

[Where do the nacelles come from? I'm talking about the model kit here. I thought they used the Reliant and Excelsior AMT-kits for the model. But it seems the nacelles are larger than they should be. Since I'm absolutely sure there has been only one Excelsior kit (besides the E-B, which was the same scale), and I'm quite sure I made no mistakes (I tried Bernds officially corrected schematic and my version - which is based on the dimensions of the model itself.). The nacelles are definitely not based on two Excelsior-nacelle-bottom parts. Could they be parts of the Reliant-kit? I didn't try it yet, but I think the nacelles are actually parts of the Constitution-style Reliant engines.]

--------------------
"This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."

Registered: Nov 2001 | IP: Logged

Masao
doesn't like you either
Member # 232

posted

Schematics are, by convention, orthographic and without perspective. Once you try to add perspective to drawings, you open up a whole can of worms since we then have to assume that anything nearer the viewer appears larger. I guess they rendered the pictures to mimic photographs of a model (which usually show some perspective), but doing so makes them harder to use for the usual things orthographic schematics are used for.

--------------------
When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum

Registered: Oct 1999 | IP: Logged

Akira
Member
Member # 850

posted

ok im lost have i made a mistake? the nacells are to bowwom peices trust me look at the model i studdied it for ever. If i have made mistakes please let me know so i can correct them.

--------------------
Christopher
[email protected]
SR20Egg

Registered: Jun 2002 | IP: Logged

capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709

posted

you've made several mistakes, they all stem from your spelling.

Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

Dax
Paradox
Member # 191

posted

I like your Centaur schematics, Akira. For the most part they are really good. One nitpick I have is that, going by the top view photo of the original kitbash, the Miranda rollbar should be further back.

I don't know what's going on with that new CG Centaur. The side view seems to show the correct proportions, but the top view shows a oversized saucer connected to shrunken nacelles -- shocking perspective on what's supposed to be schematics.

--------------------
"I exist here."
- Sisko in "Emissary"
Dax's Ships of Star Trek

Registered: Jul 1999 | IP: Logged

Akira
Member
Member # 850

posted

yes i must say i suck at spelling but i wont get into that again.

well i tried my best to make them as close as possable i might try to correct that. if anyone else has any other misstakes please let me know.

BTW: i really need a a good high res. side view of the torp bay so if anyone has one please send it my way and ill finnish the centaur side view (need the front and rear view also)

--------------------
Christopher
[email protected]
SR20Egg

Registered: Jun 2002 | IP: Logged

capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709

posted

here's a schematic i found.


                           ___.--.__________.--._ 
                           `\_  ____.------'-----`-----.____
                          ___[================================
                          `-/    /--' "  " `-----' " " " "
 __.------------------------------------. 
|___   (===========================)     )
    `-----------------------------------' 

                   _.---._      
      _______.----'-------`----._______
      =================================
         "  ____\_`--._.--'_/____  "
  ,--.-----'      `-------'      `-----.--.
  || |                                 | ||
  `--'                                 `--'

,---------------------------------------.
=========================================
`---------------------------------------'
                            |  \        _.--------._
                            |   \   _.-'            `-._    
                            |    \.'     __.----.__     `. 
                            |   .'    ,-'          `-.    `.
                           .---/_____/___________     \     \
                           |  | ___ \ |_|_|_|_| /`.    \     |
                           |__|  _ ` \\________`-.-`.   |    |
                           [__| (_)    ____(__)) |--|   |    |
                           |  | ___, //________.-'-,'   |    |
                           |  |_____/_|_|_|_|_|_\,'    /     |
                           `---\     \                /     /
                            |   `.    `-.__      __.-'    .'
                            |    /`._      `----'      _.'
                            |   /    `-._          _.-'
                            |  /         `--------'    
,---------------------------------------.
=========================================
`---------------------------------------'