I was digging through the old post archives a month or so ago and came across a few threads pertaining to this odd and contraversial design. Lots of people hate it, so you just know I had to build my own version.
My version is kinda refit on the Curry (as it uses refit parts): USS Helios Side view
Flyby Front I took some needed design liberties here- chiefly was modding the oversized nacelles a bit. The nacelles are not as disproportionate as the studio model's are and I've tweaked the bussard collector to be a bit more "TNG" looking. TO give the saucer a bit more clearance, I used two "necks" stacked on each other. I also moved the forward hangar opening even farther forward to give the secondary hull a "Goblin Shark" look that I find appealing, and replaced the standard two aft torpedo tubes with three of my own design (it lacked coverage back there, IMHO).
So, is it a carrier of shuttles? Fighters? A class all it's own or a part of a group of Excelsior variants?
Anyway, I like the idea that the secondary hull detaches as a sort of mobile orbital command center.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I think that "Shely" is he unofficial class name. USS Curry was the actual name on the studio model.
The detaching secondary hull might indeed work as a mobile command center. Possibly also as an orbital defense thing, with fighters/shuttles useing it as a base of operations while maintaining patrol.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Shelley-class was a name someone (Here?) came up with, to describe this class, because of it's freaky Frankensteinish construction. Years later someone (Sternbach or Ukda, that kind of someone) revealed that the name on the model was USS Curry, named for one of their FX people.
Damn, talk about stating the obvious. I think I'm turning into Colin in my old age.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The Shelley name was me. My only lasting contribution to unofficial fandom, dammit, and I'm keeping it!
Mark
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I concur. All I have, claim-to-fame-wise, is being the first one "here" (we're talking roughly 1998 here, when this was just the Behaviour Group webboard) to suggest using $ to denote spoilers - something that's become so universal, I can't believe I was the first ever to think of it. And I was the first one to identify a ship-registry in "TotP" as that of the USS Galaxy (but I told Adam via ICQ, and he immediately went public saying "Guess what I just found!").
So, really, I'm relying on the Iceland-class for posterity! 8)
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
What about the USS Pamela Anderson? Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I wouldn't call that "fame," more "notoriety" or "pariahdom."
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I really like the Shelley Class. I remember seeing it on screen when the show aired and being all excited about seeig a new ship class. I was taping all the episodes, so I, of course, rewound the tape after the show and studied the fly-by frame by frame.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Okay, but what do you guys think of my version? It's a bit diffrent, ya know.
Leave it to fellow Flarites to stray so far afield immeadeately
What's the practical uses for this ship? Sol's idea was pretty good....
Really, this all stems from a challenge by fellow modelers to make the "Lost Era" ships that must have been developed in the span between STVI and TNG. Anyone got any other "Lost Era" designs I can see? It's odd that so few seem to exist...
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I dont mind the saucer impulse engines from the Ent. B saucer, but I don't like the use of the Ent B secondary hull in this design. Just doesn't work for me.
Posted by Shakaar (Member # 1782) on :
I like the Helios the most- I'm astounded by your modeling know-how, the photos are kinda blurry though, It's difficult to see how the saucer and secondary hull are connected.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Yes indeedy. Looks good, but a macro lens would really, really help.
Mark
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Lee invented $ = spoiler. Good heavens I had no idea we were in the presence of such greatness!
You really should have put a spoiler warning on that post though.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Aploogies for the super-crappy photos, guys. My best friend (and professiomal photographer) moved last year and all I have is the freebie digital camera that work gave everybody.
Hmmm....once I get my new Razor phone, things should improve.
The saucer and secondary hull are connected via two Excelsior "neck" pieces stacked one on the other (for twice the height). The connection is made just fore of the aft shuttlebay's cowling (that crescent-shaped part).
Really, the Helios is very nicely done (one of my best builds to date at least) and once I can, I'll snap more pics.
BTW, both ships are in 1:2500th scale (as are all my models) so the Helios is only 4.75" long. The challenge is in the details. Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
If the camera in a Razr will be an improvement over what you have now, than you must have a really crappy camera.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
My wife has a RAZR, it's pink.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Topher: If the camera in a Razr will be an improvement over what you have now, than you must have a really crappy camera.
Exceptionally crappy. Just slightly better than the disposable cameras toursits use. If I use the "zoom" feature all the black background I put in the photo breaks up into semi-pixilated blue and black mismash. Hence, no macro closeups yet.
My Razr phone will be unfinished metal, not pink. C'mon W2 form! Be in the mail today! Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
My brother has a black Razr. It has a decent camera, but definately not as good as a full-on digicam.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
It's funny, my second reaction to seeing Jason's pics was, "somebody needs a macro setting." Alas, my first was, "That Mirandasior has a dong." No, but I don't know that I'll ever like this design. Jason's take on it is a decided improvement. The batwing para-Constellation looks to be a great model. I'm not too sold on the design.
ps-Pink RAZR is the shiznit. Your wife set us all up the bomb, Lee.
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
We have the black Razor in the lab... I hate it... no phone should restart while you are in the middle of a phone call.
I kinda prefer the Samsung A900 more but the battery sucks on it... less than an hour using the Sprint Power Vision for data and about an hour for talk time.
Posted by tricky (Member # 1402) on :
I've got a new SLVR L7, no problems so far (except for no notes function), and you barely notice it in your pocket.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
My neighbor has a Razr- he de-installed all the pre-loaded crap in there, added memory and now has like 50 megs of memory to use for pics and songs and other genberally non-phone related worthless shit.
Hmmm....reaction to the Stachran design has been lukewarm at best. Odd, as most people really dig the Larson (which is what it's an update on) but I generally don't. I'm mostly keen on itt's Excelsior impulse engines on a modified Connie Refit saucer.
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
The biggest beef I have with this design is the fact that normal convention has the engineering section in the secondary hull. If the ship does not have a secondary hull then the warp core would most likely be in the saucer section. Much like your other design. But here, as the nacelles are located in the saucer section that would most likely imply that the M/A reactor assembly would be there as well. To have the M/A reactor assembly in the secondary hull would mean that the warp conduits would run all the way through the ship and in the saucer section.... does not seem quite effective for me.
I've always had the impression that the Shelley class is more like an oversized Oberth. That design would also allow for the nacelles to be connected directly to the secondary hull, but at the same time, how do the people get from the saucer to engineering anyway?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
People get from one section to the other via the Excelsior "neck" -which is still present, just moved back towards the aft of the ship.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Good news! My photographer friend was in town yesrerday and snapped these pics:
Soo much of an improvment- that whole "focus" thing really pays off, I guess. Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Well, she's still ugly from the side, but yours looks much better than the ones we saw on screen. (Although I may still be dissapointed from expecting new ships, or even Norway's or Ambassadors instead of ugly kitbashes like 3D photoshop monsters. Bitch over, go about your bussiness people.)
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Funny, I've decided to get the SLVR L7 as well. Black or silver, tricks?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Thought I'd muck around with one of the pics...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Cool....but "Van Helsing" might be considered a human rescourses snafu to all the vampire-looking races of the Federation.
Mabye they solely fight Remans?
Gimmie some LCARS! I defy anyone to come up with an MSD for this class (gotta have the whole "through deck carrier" feature though.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What programme to people use to do MSDs?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
No idea- Illustrator, I'd think, or Corel Draw.
Corel is probably easier....
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
I'll do it!
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
basic outline done, but without the naclles or the new torpedo launchers.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
"Neck" looks too 'thin' - it's an Excelsior neck.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Good start though: my ship's neck is hat tall though- two standard Excelsior necks stacked on each other for that level of clearance from the secondary hull.
Also (only if you're making my particular ship) I've tweaked out the aft torpedo bay a bit.
Either way, this is gonna be sooo cool!
I'm hospital bound for a few days, I'll see what you've got on Friday or Saturday. (gonna demand that free adamantium skeleton upgrade they've been promising)
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I think the studio model actually used a Connie neck... or maybe one version of it did... can't remember. I believe it's too dark to really make out underneath the saucer onscreen though.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The Raging Queen (with the horizontally oriented nacelles) has an arrangement of two sloping pylons between the saucer and the secondary hull, apparently modified from Constitution engine pylons. These can be seen in the side image. There doesn't seem to be enough space for an Excelsior neck there, but some sort of a third pylon might still exist.
The Curry (with vertical nacelles, and seen close up on screen) has what looks like a single, thick, dark neck structure that no doubt is the original Excelsior component. The bow view shows this dark mass in silhouette. It is possible that the mass is just the result of shadows from some flimsier pylon structure, but fairly unlikely...
No hotlinking to Bernd's site and the article there, but I believe everybody here knows how to find the place...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: People get from one section to the other via the Excelsior "neck" -which is still present, just moved back towards the aft of the ship.
I believe I saw a version of the Shelley which had no "neck" connection, that is, the saucer was connected to the nacelles which in turn was connected to the secondary hull. That's what I meant by an oversized Oberth.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Is the engineer responsible for that sensor system placement still on Starfleet payroll?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
...what?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I mean, it must be reassuring to have sensor scans to verify that your secondary hull is still attached, but that's basically the only thing this "ventral sensor array" will be able to sense...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Who says it can only sense down? It's placed on the ventral side of the saucer, but it doesn't mean it can't sense forward or to the sides.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Or through the ship.
Are you going to make the neck - the excelsior neck?
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I always thought the rectanguloid extensions coming off of the dome were lateral sensors that could scan off in all directions.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Yeah, ditto. The dome itself need not be a dedicated, directional sensor - and if it were, how do all other starships sense stuff above them?
For what it's worth, I've always thought those darker panels on the secondary hull underside were some sort of sensor suite too, like the phased array panels on some USN warships.
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The geometry here is worse than it looks. The only scanning direction not obscured by the ship's structures would be directly forward; port and starboard are completely blocked by the pylons and the nacelles.
As for scanning above the saucer, that's what the dome atop the bridge is for!
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Hmmm...I'm sure that the secsor pallate can scan "through" the ship- just as it can through asteroids and anythng else without leaving a gaping blind spot in coverage.
The illustration where the Shlly has no connection comes from the DS9TM (and we've all been over the numerous errors in that rushed "starships" section).
The 'Raging Queen" arrangment of a bunch of nacelle pylons holding up the saucer is inexcusably lame- I'm not building one of those.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
There are acctually six boxes on the lower done of the Excelsior, rather than the four of the Constitution, so I think they may infact not be blocked by the pilons.
If the original Excelsior could saucer seperate, then the aft facing one would be clear as well.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Aren't they just floodlights for the saucer illumination?
ALSO - as I said before - there is nothing to stop scanning THROUGH or BEYOND the ship... just refocus the sesnsors to a point beyond. I'm sure what ever they use can penetrate the hull.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
While light does seem to come from the forward facing box, none of the others seem to shine any light on the ship, though they do glow.
And on the topic of sensors, is that what the grey boxes added to the Enterpise-B are supposed to be? They look like they could be a larger, earlier version of the Enterprise-D's upper and lower sensors.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I've always thought them to be sensor palettes of the swappable kind. If you compare that area to the original Excelsior model, it certainly looks replaceable to me - sorta like the lateral sensor array on Galaxies and Intrepids, which are also supposed to be modularized.
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
They could be escape pod hatches...or pinball flippers made to deflect torpedos away from the bridge.
Targeting sensors for the phaser array seems the most likely thing though.
Posted by tricky (Member # 1402) on :
I like the pinball flippers idea, great for swatting work bees when at starbase...
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Hmmm...I much prefer your large computer core over the nonexistant one on the "B" (mabye it was coming on tuesday?), particularly as this is a ship from the Dominion War and the Excelsior family of ships would have undergone many upgardes/refits over the decades.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
That MSD also makes the ship look much larger than I prefer.
I suppose I could be wrong about the neck, but the reference I was working from did have a slight taper in the neck, so when stacking two of them, I either have to make it look as though it tapers, then gets bigger than tapers again, or I have to double it. I choose to double it.
I could remove it though, if I was wrong about the taper being there.
As for the size of the core, I based that on the Enterprise-D's core size and made it a bit smaller. This is after all a smaller ship, but its also an older one and one would thing computers would get bigger as one goes backwards in time.
I could probably move it under the bridge, originally I had it a bit larger and I was having trouble fitting it and the turbolift under the bridge. After I made it a bit smaller, I forgot to see how it would look moved back.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
There should be no taper, and I do think the core looks best under the bridge- that way it links the ventral sensor pallate, computer and bridge directly, and places the core dead center of the saucer's defector grid..
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
quote:Originally posted by Captain Boh: I'm using Jason's two Excelsior necks stacked on top of each other.
Ahhhhh! I see now. It just looked like a connie neck. Yeah as mentioned - I think it's the taper.
Oh seen your update... Isn't the excelsior neck... wider (ignoring the fact there are two there). It looks smaller in relation to the saucer than the Excelsior.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Possibly, if what I was using was wrong about one part of the neck, more errors aren't too hard to imagine. For the moment I'm going to leave it, since I'm not working in the neck yet, but I'll take a look at the dimentions of it again.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Deflector and surrounding sensors, secondary computer core and battle/emergency bridge.
Full Size Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
INtresting, but I'd probably place those in the "neck"- the lower hangar bay is just aft of your secondary core's location. Ideally, that space would hold elevators and such to move incoming shuttles/fighters up to a huge through-deck hangar that runs the length of the secondary hull.
I'd probbaly just move that secondary core/battle bridge to directly over the nav deflector (this would locate the battle bridge directly between the two torpedo rooms in the secondary hull....and I think that's sorta cool.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
I was thinking of putting engineering in the neck, it would allow for the class to use more or less unmodified Excelsior saucers.
This would also allow me to place the anti-matter so that it would be close to both the torpedo launchers and the shuttles and the deuterium tank near the impulse engines, as well as allowing for easy ejection and let the core line up with the impulse engines like in the Constitution Refit.
I had been thinking that I'd devide incomeing and outgoing craft between the upper doors and using the lower ones for cargo facilities, but looking at it now the upper doors do look like they'd be somewhat difficult to use at high speeds.
I may have to rethink some things.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I'd place all of engineering in the lower aft saucer (possibly extending into the "neck" a bit if you like) so that it serves close to the nacelles and impulse engines.
Antimatter storage pods can serve the launchers.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
No changes yet, but here's what it looks like so far as a post ST4 style graphic.
Full Size Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Very cool.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Opened this up again. Haven't done anything since the last time I opened it, but I had made changes since my last post here.
I'm thinking the large block in the saucer was Deuterium tanks.
I moved the secondary computer core and bridge elsewhere in the secondary hull, but if thats still no good, off to the neck it goes I guess.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Looks good to me, though I think of engineering to be in that area, there's no conflict: the tanks can easily flank the department on both sides. On the Shelly (because of it's nacelle placment in part) the tanks are ideal there.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Warp nacelle and Warp core. The Nacelle is there so that there is no overlapping. When I do the final graphic, I'll probably put the nacelle in its own section with a Nacelle Status subheading or something.
The core is outside because I hadn't worked out where exactly to put it. The size of it isn't final, more sections can be added to make it taller.
Compared with the bridge - the shuttles seem just a TAD too big.
I'd say the core would be in the upper section where the nacelles originate. Try to keep it all in the saucer section (incase it can seperate) or even make it a horizontal version.
Or a repetedly folded version - which I assume is what the Defiant is like. Don't ask me how that would work.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
You're probably right about the shuttles, I couldn't remember the scale I did this at, so I just guessed.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Hmm...put in some Starfleet Fighters! I agree that the shuttles are too big- probably scale them down by 50% nad you'll be on the money (at a guess).
As to the warpcore, I'd place it in the upper "neck". That way, it can retract into the saucer for seperation or be ejected downward through the secondary hull in an emergency.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
