Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Timo's Hitchhiker's Guide to the UFP Starfleet
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Timo: [QB] For the interested, the text is at http://lobotomy.pleh.net/~flareupload/uploads/245/shiptext.zip - a couple of Word files. I did some of those entries way back, when I yet couldn't do English perfect grammar. And I've forgotten more about what I've written than you could believe. But let's try answer a few of the readers' questions: Mark: I usually open up an article with Starfleet needing a ship class, and until paragraph three I must withhold the class name since Starfleet hasn't decided on it yet. When I do get down to the name, it gets so personal that I go name-happy and avoid the "the class" and "the design" and "the proposed frigate" things of the early paragraphs at any cost. It does get ugly at times, now that you point it out. Revanche: I generally agonize between volumetrics, canon mentions and noncanon source data, but basically I try to think of the nacelles as superheavy (to justify something like 780,000 tons instead of 180,000 for the Connie), and then derive the unknown masses from that. A PB-31 must mass something like 250,000 tons apiece to be a plausible source of the ship mass... There's a lot of work there, especially if I add mass to the stats of all ships. Most of the SFC and FASA stuff will have to be re-massed anyway - I haven't been as systematic with them as I should have. And most of the pics don't exist. I just dreamed up a few catchy captions, things that would be different from yer standard Trek encyclopedia but not out of place in a Bill Gunston style reference work. Thus, a few (2D or holo) photos of varying qualities, "official" and "unofficial", some schematics - one painting, even... The work has a few "alt-timeline" things built in. Like the lack of a Four-Year War. Basically I still try to aim at what is "real" from the POV of a 2376-77 publication date. And some things I deliberately do with a "24th century bias". A praised battle from the 23rd century may be referred to as shameful slaughter - a pacifist wimp might be a visionary, a powerful warship a poorly thought out waste of resources. Some Kirk adventures are treated as "mythical" or "not made public" or even "remembered differently from how they happened". And I want to insert even more such mischief when I have the time. Please help. :) Timo Saloniemi [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3