Rob Bonchune has come through again, this time with orthos and new angles of the Aeroshuttle. I wish he would generate larger images, but there's probably a reason he can't. (Original post by Rob at HobbyTalk .)
I dare someone to do an interior schematic for this bad girl. I double dare!!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Intresting that he's got a slight upward curve to it's "wings" to match Voyager's hull.
Really, the whole idea of those eally thick wings bothers me greatly- what's their purpose? It's as areodynamic as a brick, and Runabouts (which this is larger than) dont require aeroform shapes to perform well in atmosphere....
Just another part of Voyager stuff being designed more for a "looks cool" and not a "makes sense" factor.
That being said, it's still far better than the Sovvie captain's yacht or the (terrible) Galaxy yacht, so I can see it as a slight imporvment in that role.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Ooh, awesome stuff. The idea, IIRC, was to base the internal spaces on the runabout so Voyager could use the DS9 sets. I'd assume that they would use the top entrance and a stairwell or batpole of some sort to get in...
As for its use, I'd say it could be reserved for planets of peculiar atmospheric conditions - high pressure, really stormy, even pelagic - which the gang simply never ran into over the course of seven years. Or, they just never had one in the first place, having docked a nonflight test article until it got there on Tuesday, and building the Delta Flyer when they realized they didnt' have something that could be useful.
Mark
[ February 09, 2006, 10:06 AM: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I always wanted to see a scene in the drop-ship bay that basically had the aeroshuttle's upper portion sticking out of the floor with part of the hull forming a gangway to a side hatch. You could have that cool yellow and black striping outlining the wings...
I need to go back and watch Insurrection again as I suspect Data's "Saddle up. Lock and load" scene takes place in the Yacht bay. I don't think Picard would want to lug crates through the ship.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Some more info from Rob. The additional info down there is certainly going to put a fire under some people....
quote:Well, if we had aired the ship, I was going to refine the wings to be a little less "blunt trauma" to the aerodynamics. But when we got nixed, we moved on.....so, it stands as is. I've thought about refining it for next years Calendar, but now I don't think I'll have the time...
The only other original design that was also chopped (that I remmber now)was the John Eaves Klingon D-6 or D-5 and I included it in my calendar image for 2006. It was done FOR FREE for ST:Enterprise, Koji stayed up 36 hours to do it for the show it looked great, but then the "producers" said, put more windows on it. We said no (You have to understand that we did so much extra, that at that point it was the straw that broke the camels back when they were being mindlessely trivial and unappreciative). So, in ther infinite wisdom, the choose to use a lo-rex K'Tinga model (from over a timeline 100 years later) we had lying around. Because that was much more logical than a ship with that needed 10 more windows that no one would EVER notice!!!! E boy...
B.J.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I hate all executives.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
While I was working on Unseen Frontier, I knew this one the month they did it, but wasn't supposed to tell anyone... I guess the term for that has expired.
Mark
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Any other tid-bits!?!
Did they do a proper Galaxy Class captain's yacht?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What was wrong with them leaving a side-door on it like the runabout. When it is docked I'm sure they could have easily boarded the ship from the side - and it would make more sense when they land on a planet.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, the exterior of a craft this big could not be faked with partial sets, like the runabout was done. So if the aeroshuttle was ever shown landed and with live action, there'd have to be CGI trickery and/or model work.
...Which would in turn allow the craft to have proper landing legs. A runabout is narrow enough that it could plausibly land on its belly. The aeroshuttle wouldn't be able to choose landing sites quite as freely, though, and logically should have legs for sufficient ground clearance. This in turn allows for a belly hatch plus ladder/ramp, which I guess would be the easiest way to combine live action and modeling/CGI - no need to do a partial interior, since the audience can't see in anyway.
(If done this way, the next step would be to install a ventral cargo elevator... In CGI, of course. I'd think those four hull-colored skid shapes were always intended to be landing legs, so the bifurcated darker area could be the elevator/ramp combo.)
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Of course, we never saw the Delta Flyer landed on a planetary surface either... Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
Sweetness!
I hate the plain black backgrounds though, like the Starship Spotter book.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Oh, my freakin' cup runneth over! This came out of the same thread at HobbyTalk.
quote:Here she is. Designed by John Eaves, details and build by Koji Kuramura. Koji put in the free time. Bless him for caring. Enjoy
B.J. (I need a "Happy Dance" smiley!)
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
Ya think? Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Very nice, but he really is sadistic, making the pics so small and so dark. Light grey, sky blue or white would be good background.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I think it's a good idea. All the ortho shots of CGI models I've ever seen against light backgrounds have looked wrong, somehow - as if being brightly illuminated in stead of against the darkness of space just highlights their flaws, their inherent fakeness, as it were.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
It would probably help if the ships just had more light on them.
And the Klingon ship should really be a D-6.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Any particular reason?
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Because it doesn't really look like the D5 would have come between it and the D7.
And with its use in a TOS era image, it would make more sense for it to be newer than the D5 rather than older.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
OTOH, just seven D-ships during the glorious history of the Empire? The numbers need not really be chronological.
The D4 is IMHO a bit too subtle. Perhaps with a little more changes in the bridge area, a little more adjusting of the angle of the nacelles... Somehow, the D7 vs D4 pairing reminds me of the Old Cylons vs New Cylons (the obviously mechanical models, that is). I guess it's because of all those red lights on the D4.
In any case, the artwork is a delight to see. Now if we could get the two missing Starfleet vessels ("Iceland" and Sarajevo), and perhaps the rest of the Klingon models...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: I think it's a good idea. All the ortho shots of CGI models I've ever seen against light backgrounds have looked wrong, somehow - as if being brightly illuminated in stead of against the darkness of space just highlights their flaws, their inherent fakeness, as it were.
This is all completely true. Which is why they ought to release two versions. So that the poor 3D nerd presently trying to figure out the borders and shapes doesn't wind up completely blind squinting at these low-rez, dark images.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Canned rant about "dramatic" lighting in these sorts of images making me unreasonably annoyed and hateful.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
I've got no problems with the images, that is once I've bumped up the gamma in an image editor.
B.J.
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
In the interests of eye health. PM me your email if you want a zipped Photoshop version where you can swap out the background color/image (3.5MB file).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
How come the dorsal/ventral and fore/aft views don't seem to be to the same scale?
Posted by Jim NCC1701A (Member # 1021) on :
quote:Originally posted by Captain Boh: Because it doesn't really look like the D5 would have come between it and the D7.
And with its use in a TOS era image, it would make more sense for it to be newer than the D5 rather than older.
I must've come in late - and, apart from Broken Bow I haven't seen a single ep of Enterprise - but what's a D5 look like?
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: How come the dorsal/ventral and fore/aft views don't seem to be to the same scale?
I didn't do any scaling to the images. My guess would be that whoever was rendering these started out using 720X405, but decided they wanted a slightly larger image for the 3/4 views, set it for 768X432 and didn't set it back. Alternately they just felt like being difficult.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
- but what's a D5 look like?