As I stated in my thread about the Brattain, I'm writing up some starship-related essays, one of which concerns the conjectural Starfleet ship classes. In order to pin down attributes for each class, I needed to find out in what time-frame they were hypothetically built, by using the registry numbers of the known ships of each class, along with the numbers of some other official contemporaneous classes. So by using such research materials as the Chronology, Bernd's timeline from Ex-Astris-Scientia, the TNG Tech Manual, statements made about the ships in dialogue, and other factors, I made a hypothetical timeline of ship production. Not only did it help me out, it also showed some interesting information, such as that production of new ship classes happened in roughly ten-year increments between the 2290's and 2360's, the timespan of the timeline.
As always, please understand that these are my own unofficial opinions based on my data, and that there has never been official proof that registries are chronological (and even in some cases, my timeline has no good explanation for some classes of ships, i.e. the Oberth production). But I've tried to do my best with the information I had. Please bring to my attention any mistakes or omissions, as I want this to be as complete and accurate as possible. In a few cases, my findings will also be in dispute with some of the ASDB stuff. It's not my intention to disregard the work that the ASDB did, but hopefully they'll see my work as a supplement to theirs.
Since I don't have a website, I'm just going to cut & paste the OpenOffice document I used to write the timeline into the next post. The original document had black font for canon statements and blue font for conjectural statements, so I'll have to differentiate the two some other way. Asterisks are the quickest thing that comes to mind...
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
OR, you could save it as an HTML document & Flareupload it.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Thanks for the idea, Shik. That makes more sense, although there's a few formatting differences. But you'll all get the picture.
Not bad...a little different that what I worked out (especially for the 2290s & 2300s), but it works.
How did you choose your specific data points?
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
I don't have any trouble with your list, in fact haven't gone through the whole thing yet.
But some thoughts in general.
A "major" class showing up every ten years is probably pretty reasonable, and might even be a goal. The major cost (in time and resources if not cash) is in making the first unit of something and getting it to work right. Even for Star Fleet this is going to be true. After that it gets easier and easier as your construction team gets more efficient at their job.
So it might actually make sense to stick with a hull form for a long time, especially if it was initially designed to have a great deal of growth potential, as described in the tech manual. Of course post-TNG sort of messes this up with new classes popping up right and left but we can probably "fix" most of those.
Galaxy as a Ambassador replacement and the Sov's as Excellsior replacements or something like that.
That said I'm not sure I'd count Jenolan as a "major" ship type though.
Aside-- really does make you wonder what happened to 1701-B, doesn't it?
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
I ascribe those post-TNG ships spawning like rabbits to Dominion War fleet escalation.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
I don't know if it will help you at all, but I did a chart/timeline based on when the ships were first & last seen on-screen. It hasn't been updated since late 2006 (& I really need to finish off those ENT entries!), but here it is, for what it's worth: http://flareupload.pleh.net/uploads/858/ships.html Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Not bad...a little different that what I worked out (especially for the 2290s & 2300s), but it works.
How did you choose your specific data points?
Basically I started with all the known instances of ships in operation before the start of TNG. For example, I knew that the Apollo class Ajax was at least in service in 2327, the year in which the past sequences of "Tapestry" take place. So obviously the Apollo class had to have been commissioned at least before that date.
Then after that, I extrapolated some logical shipbuilding times around those points, based on the registries. I'm of the opinion that Okuda didn't just pull registry numbers out of his ass, and that they do have some semblance of chronological sense. It's usually the registry numbers he wasn't involved in creating that cause problems (i.e. the First Contact ships, or Greg Jein's extrapolation of Commodore Stone's wall chart).
The TNG Tech Manual's timeline of Galaxy class design & production also helped considerably, as did the date of the replacement of duotronics with isolinear chip technology, which affected my timeline in a major way.
Besides the FC ships, the only problem registry-wise was, of course, the Oberth class. However, although I still find it preposterous that the Oberth class was still in production right up to the start of TNG, I've come to the conclusion that its registry scheme is different than other ships, starting right when we saw the ship for the first time as the Grissom NCC-638 (the reason for that, however, is unknown, and I couldn't even hazard a guess). There's no way that ship was commissioned even before the TOS Connies were, as the registry seems to indicate. But the TNG Oberth registries are internally chronological to other Oberths, but not to other starships.
BTW, I wouldn't mind seeing your interpretation for the 2290's-2300's, although any differences between yours and mine still wouldn't affect my speculation about the conjectural classes, as the earliest known class (Deneva) wouldn't be in production until after the 2300's.
quote:I ascribe those post-TNG ships spawning like rabbits to Dominion War fleet escalation.
That, and the Borg threat, too.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Ok, here's quick listing of canonical & Okudaic conjectural classes for 2290 to 2315. Please keep in mid that things are still being fiddled with lightly, especially at the turn-of-the-century end:
Deneva, 2293
Ambassador, 2301
Apollo, 2302
Hokule'a, 2308
Wambundu, 2309
Niagara, 2315
It looks really bare, but there are other non-canon classes filling gaps a lot.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
I have a forty-year window between major classes in my timeline, with varying numbers of supplementary classes in between. Not counting development time, we have the Constitution class becoming viable circa 2245, the Excelsior class becoming viable circa 2285, and the Galaxy class becoming viable pretty close to 2365. So slotting the Ambassador in at 2325 made good sense to me. And it also means the next major class would be coming along around 2405.
The Sovereign class, to me, is a bad choice for an Enterprise. It's a placeholder, a new Heavy Cruiser that Picard takes out to explore because tht's who he is. The class only came along five years or so after the Galaxy class entered service, and -- I feel -- was a rush job to complete in order to have it available to fight the Borg.
In between those forty-year cycles, I have new batches of the current/previous major class at the twenty-year marks, depending on viability. So a round of refits and newbuilds for the Constitution class in 2265, some Enterprise class (yep, I still say that) newbuilds circa 2285, and maybe again around 2305 (the one that was at Wolf 359...? ).
Similarly the Excelsior class in 2305 and 2325, with a big building surge around 2345 for the increasing state of turmoil locally.
We really weren't due for anything until 2385, but the Borg, the Dominion, the Cardassians... That forced things a little. Early completion of Flight-I Galaxy spaceframes, early introduction of the Sovereign class (and making the new Enterprise one of those, to boot), rapid refit program for some post-Ambassador, pre-Galaxy classes*...
--Jonah
[*Yes, I still stubbornly cling to the belief that the Akira, Saber, StReamrunner, and Norway classes are recent but old enough to be cheaply made/refit -- more cheaply than another New Orleans or Springfield, say. And not to the same standard as the newer Intrepid or Prometheus classes (why they all have the same "unfinished" look as the Sovereign).]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:And it also means the next major class would be coming along around 2405.
The Enterprise-F...?
quote:The Sovereign class, to me, is a bad choice for an Enterprise. It's a placeholder, a new Heavy Cruiser that Picard takes out to explore because tht's who he is. The class only came along five years or so after the Galaxy class entered service, and -- I feel -- was a rush job to complete in order to have it available to fight the Borg.
I think it was bad, too, but that's just because I don't like anything that John Eaves designed. As for your hypothesis about the Borg...
quote:Yes, I still stubbornly cling to the belief that the Akira, Saber, StReamrunner, and Norway classes are recent but old enough to be cheaply made/refit -- more cheaply than another New Orleans or Springfield, say. And not to the same standard as the newer Intrepid or Prometheus classes (why they all have the same "unfinished" look as the Sovereign).
Yes, but would you feel the same way if those FC ships had registries of 77XXX or 8XXXX? Probably not. They all had the same design attributes that the Enterprise-D, the Enterprise-E, and the Defiant had, which in my mind makes them newbuilds.
Although I agree with you that the Sovereign class probably came about so soon because of Wolf 359, I think the other FC ships did as well, regardless of what their registries are. I certainly don't think they're refits of older designs. If that was the case, then why didn't Starfleet refit all the Excelsiors, Mirandas and Oberths to look more modern? (and I don't consider making the warp grilles on the Miranda's engines glow blue to be a refit.)
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
quote:Originally posted by Daniel Butler: I ascribe those post-TNG ships spawning like rabbits to Dominion War fleet escalation.
But if we put in the context of previous (apparent) shipbuilding time scales than there isn't time for them to done more than *start* to respond to the Borg by the time that the Dominion show up. Let alone enough time between when it is shown that diplomacy isn't going to work (and the wormhole can't be held) and the war starts.
I'm firmly in the Star Fleet had to fight the Dominion war with the "fleet they had" and not the "fleet they might have wanted".
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
No, I agree. What I meant was that after the Dominion and Borg, Starfleet escalated it's activities because (I think, anyway) they were shown they were too complacent, trusting, and didn't have enough true warships to fight a war - which, they were shown very strongly, could happen to them easily no matter how diplomatic and peace-loving they were. Kind of like the Hobbits where their "keep yer nose outta trubble and no trubble'll come ter you" attitude.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
My personal view on the Oberth-Class is that it is exactly as old as the Grissom's reg makes it look and the reason why it looks so radically different from most other Starfleet ships of the time is because it was mostly designed and built by Vulcans. Just as it seams logical that the very first Federation Starfleet ships would have been made up of already serving vessels from Earth, Vulcan, Andoria et al. It stands to reason that the second generation would be a mix of hybrid designs as each world would still be making ship's semi-independently but with more and more influence from other worlds. So the Oberth is a Vulcan design that has been heavily influenced by Earth tech, but still retains it's cultural aesthetic.
...But that's just me.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
...I may end up using that one day, Rev.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Actually, now that you mention it, the Oberth DOES look somewhat vulcan. The secondary hull looks kind of like a ??Sulaya Class??, and the way the pylons form with the hulls harks back to the "ring" warp drive the Vulcans used.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
There's another thing that bothers me. That annular warp drive of theirs. If I understand the way warp supposedly works and how the field is supposedly generated, how the hell do you do it with a ring like that?
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Perhaps the ring defines the outer boundary of the warp field and it is projected fore and aft to encompass the ship?
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Well in canon we don't really know much about the field, but in the TNG tech manual I remember reading that the field is actually a nested system of fields that push off of each other rapidly, formed by the veeeerterium or whatever unobtanium the warp coils are made out of, when plasma hits them. So in order to do it in a ring...what, shoot plasma around in a circle and collect it at one end and vent it out the back? Isn't that a bit convoluted?
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Besides, the way you understand warp supposedly works would only apply to paired nacelles. The annular ring just does it differently. There's plenty of other non-nacelled starship designs out there as well.
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
If a set of rectangles can create a bubble why wouldn't a ring be able too? Just adjust the tuning of the coils.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:My personal view on the Oberth-Class is that it is exactly as old as the Grissom's reg makes it look and the reason why it looks so radically different from most other Starfleet ships of the time is because it was mostly designed and built by Vulcans.
But that still doesn't explain why they were still in production in the 2360's (actually, your speculation makes it worse, because now the class is contemporary to Captain Ramart's Antares, which adds a few more decades to its lifespan), and why the Tsiolkovsky, commissioned in 2363, would have a 5XXXX registry instead of 7XXXX.
I was always under the impression (and remain so) that the Grissom and other ships of her class were brand-new as of ST:III, regardless of her registry number. I believe that whatever production VFX person was in charge of modelmaking at the time, simply used a three digit number for the Grissom because she was a small ship, whereas the brand-new kick-ass gigantic Excelsior got a kick-ass "NCC-2000" registry for exactly the opposite reason (never mind that FJ's manual already had ships with registries even higher, but I doubt the VFX people knew that, or cared).
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Man, I really wish they'd made Excelsior NX-5000. Would've been so much easier to work with. Ah, well.
The thing is, Oberth isn't a front-line ship; she's a logistical support design. It's not built for speed or combat, doesn't need to be capable of extended-range voyages, so it's not really necessary to update the design. It's obviously very modular, & well-designed & well-suited for its tasks, & the modularity probably led to later internal variants. We know it's so well respected that civilian agencies use them.
I see no problem with it lasting as long as it has because there was no reason to update it or pull it from service It did its job, & it did it very well. We've already seen how..."economical" (Frugal? Lazy?) Starfleet is with ship designs; as long as they work well enough, they keep making them & keep them in service. I'm sure it's only with the greatest reluctance & sadness that they ended Oberth production & designed the Nova class.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Daniel Butler: There's another thing that bothers me. That annular warp drive of theirs. If I understand the way warp supposedly works and how the field is supposedly generated, how the hell do you do it with a ring like that?
I imagine it'd work something like this.
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat:
quote:My personal view on the Oberth-Class is that it is exactly as old as the Grissom's reg makes it look and the reason why it looks so radically different from most other Starfleet ships of the time is because it was mostly designed and built by Vulcans.
But that still doesn't explain why they were still in production in the 2360's (actually, your speculation makes it worse, because now the class is contemporary to Captain Ramart's Antares, which adds a few more decades to its lifespan), and why the Tsiolkovsky, commissioned in 2363, would have a 5XXXX registry instead of 7XXXX.
I was always under the impression (and remain so) that the Grissom and other ships of her class were brand-new as of ST:III, regardless of her registry number. I believe that whatever production VFX person was in charge of modelmaking at the time, simply used a three digit number for the Grissom because she was a small ship, whereas the brand-new kick-ass gigantic Excelsior got a kick-ass "NCC-2000" registry for exactly the opposite reason (never mind that FJ's manual already had ships with registries even higher, but I doubt the VFX people knew that, or cared).
I'm sure that your real world explanation is correct, the reg is just a product of the thinking at the time.
However, to me the "Vulcan explanation" works best in a retro active way. Sometimes you simply have to ignore the original intentions of the VFX people. As Shik pointed out, this isn't a front line cruiser, it's a scout, a surveyor, a science vessel, probably mass produced for Starfleet and civilians agencies alike. It's the sort of design that WORKS, does the job and is easy to build, maintain, even swap out and upgrade internal components, so it could easily have a life well into the 24th Century. Put it another way, this thing is a tool, a flying tricorder if you will. Once you have one that works and can be kept up with the latest advances WITHOUT ripping the hull apart every few decades then why would you want to change it? If the look of the thing bothers you, just have a look at some of the Vulcan ships from ENT and you can see that even in the 22nd century, they are structurally much more streamlined an elegant than the boxes, tubes and sticks approach Earth was using a full century later. I'd also put it to you that it would stand to reason, given how advanced Vulcan technology was compared to Earth tech it's logical that they'd be the one's churning out the Science vessels. I'm not saying it's a pure bred Vulcan ship as it clearly uses dual a nacelle drive and the colour isn't the usual red/pink/brown hue, but the influence is clear. Or if it makes it easier... Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
And it's not like there were 200 year old Oberths flying around. They did build multiple batches every so often, so ad long as the design works...
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Hey Rev, that's a pretty cool illustration! (Although I still hate the design... )
The truth is, what you're all saying makes sense. I'm probably just spiteful about the Oberth because it was used in TNG simply because of the laziness and budget-consciousness of the producers' unwillingness to build new models that would be more contemporary to the Enterprise-D, unless the script specifically called for it.
BTW, although my lousy cut & paste art skills pales in comparison to yours, Rev, for fun I made an illustration of a ship that could have replaced the Oberth, based on the Executive Shuttle from ST:VI. There were at least two of these models built, one that was turned into the Jenolan, and one that was used in ST: Generations. Since the models had what looked to be GCS nacelle caps in the rear, I turned it the second one into a verifiable larger starship a la the Jenolan, only more contemporary. It's flipped upside down and backward, so the Bussard collectors are in front, and the bridge is in the rear. Do you think maybe you could refine it for me? *NOTE* I got the bridge and the lights from the Pasteur illustration from the Fact Files, which was where I got the pic of the Exec shuttle too.
That's one weird lookin' flying brick.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ritten: If a set of rectangles can create a bubble why wouldn't a ring be able too? Just adjust the tuning of the coils.
What rectangles? Warp coils are semi-toroidal.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
*grumbles at people still calling the Grissom design "Oberth"...*
--Jonah
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
A hundred years ago, you'd still be bitching about the War of Northern Aggression, too.
You lost. Get used to it, move on.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Where did the name "Oberth" get applied to the ship?
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
In the first edition of the Encyclopedia, I think. When all the ships that were supposed to be Oberths and ended up reusing the Grissom miniature found their way intot the entries and ship list.
--Jonah
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Hey Rev, that's a pretty cool illustration! (Although I still hate the design... )
The truth is, what you're all saying makes sense. I'm probably just spiteful about the Oberth because it was used in TNG simply because of the laziness and budget-consciousness of the producers' unwillingness to build new models that would be more contemporary to the Enterprise-D, unless the script specifically called for it.
BTW, although my lousy cut & paste art skills pales in comparison to yours, Rev, for fun I made an illustration of a ship that could have replaced the Oberth, based on the Executive Shuttle from ST:VI. There were at least two of these models built, one that was turned into the Jenolan, and one that was used in ST: Generations. Since the models had what looked to be GCS nacelle caps in the rear, I turned it the second one into a verifiable larger starship a la the Jenolan, only more contemporary. It's flipped upside down and backward, so the Bussard collectors are in front, and the bridge is in the rear. Do you think maybe you could refine it for me? *NOTE* I got the bridge and the lights from the Pasteur illustration from the Fact Files, which was where I got the pic of the Exec shuttle too.
I have to say I'm not a huge fan of the whole cut'n'paste school of thought to designing new ships. Even so, that thing just doesn't say "science Vessel" to me. It looks more like a transport and that would effectively make it a backward Sydney and since we already have an upside-down Sydney, that's be pushing things a little. Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
It kind of looks like a killer whale. Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote: I have to say I'm not a huge fan of the whole cut'n'paste school of thought to designing new ships. Even so, that thing just doesn't say "science Vessel" to me. It looks more like a transport and that would effectively make it a backward Sydney and since we already have an upside-down Sydney, that's be pushing things a little.
Oh, believe me, I'm not either...I was just kinda extrapolating what someone like Greg Jein might have done with an older model to make it into a newer model. But that's beside the point. Honestly, I always envisioned the "Oberth" class as more of a miniaturized Galaxy class, since both the Tsiolkovsky and the Enterprise-D were commissioned the same year. You know, kinda like a smaller version of the Enterprise, but having larger windows or escape pod hatches, or a larger bridge, to represent a smaller ship.
Oh, wait a minute. That's already been done... Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: In the first edition of the Encyclopedia, I think. When all the ships that were supposed to be Oberths and ended up reusing the Grissom miniature found their way intot the entries and ship list.
--Jonah
Well, the plaque on the Tsiolkovsky in "The Naked Now" (TNG) said Oberth on it...
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat:
quote: I have to say I'm not a huge fan of the whole cut'n'paste school of thought to designing new ships. Even so, that thing just doesn't say "science Vessel" to me. It looks more like a transport and that would effectively make it a backward Sydney and since we already have an upside-down Sydney, that's be pushing things a little.
Oh, believe me, I'm not either...I was just kinda extrapolating what someone like Greg Jein might have done with an older model to make it into a newer model. But that's beside the point. Honestly, I always envisioned the "Oberth" class as more of a miniaturized Galaxy class, since both the Tsiolkovsky and the Enterprise-D were commissioned the same year. You know, kinda like a smaller version of the Enterprise, but having larger windows or escape pod hatches, or a larger bridge, to represent a smaller ship.
Oh, wait a minute. That's already been done...
Sounds like you're describing the New Orleans to me. Whatever the reasons though, the Grissom was an Oberth and that's that, we're stuck with it. Sure it would have been nice if they spent money on something new, but the budget is the budget and money spent there means taking it from somewhere else. To be fair though, we did eventually get the Nebula and of course the Constellation, which is way more than we got in TOS! Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Hmm, TOS, what'd we get earth ship/Federation wise...
I can think of the DY-100, and that blob of light that is the J-class. That's about it.
We're getting more in TOS-R though, so we should be somewhat happy.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Yeah, I was really annoyed when I saw the other ships used in the wargames with the Ent-nil. Only "twelve like her in the fleet" and apparently they could afford to stick 1/3 of that force in one spot for a wargame!
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
You know, a thought just occured to me. WE know that the E-nil went through a refit between the 2250's and the 2260's. ( depending on how the new movie version looks, there might be ANOTHER refit in there somewhere) What if Kirk's line of " only 12 like her in the fleet" referred to post (first)refit Connies. Not all of the Connies need be refitted at the time of that line, so that would allow for more than just 12 Constitution class ships in Kirk's era. Starfleet must have built more than 12 of it's most powerfull ships between 224_, and 2266 ( that is when TOS takes place right?), so maybe the older run of Connies were refitted, and the newer ones left as is and waiting for the TMP refit.
I'm probably wrong though.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Well we can retcon that line all we like, I think. At the time Star Trek was a far different beast than what it is today.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Well, the plaque on the Tsiolkovsky in "The Naked Now" (TNG) said Oberth on it...
Well, yes. That was created by Mike when they thought Rick's design was going to be the ship in jeopardy. The Grissom got stuck in at the last minute. I mean, the VFX people didn't even change the labelling on the miniature.
In this medium, we're not "stuck with" anything. As George Lucas is so fond of saying, "movies aren't finished -- they're abandoned". Same applies here. Especially with the time and budget crunches endemic to American episodic television. There is nothing but will and money preventing Paramount from dusting off the original materials and tweaking things as they did for TOS, TMP, TWOK... The only thing is knowing what to do and where to stop.
--Jonah
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
You're seriously suggesting that if and when they remaster TNG, DS9 and First Contact they will replace ALL appearances of the Grissom/Oberth? No. We are stuck with it, it's not a big deal, get over it.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Actually with today's home computers a fan could do it if they had the skills and the time.
I probably missed it - but is their a picture of the suggested design for TNG?
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: You're seriously suggesting that if and when they remaster TNG, DS9 and First Contact they will replace ALL appearances of the Grissom/Oberth? No. We are stuck with it, it's not a big deal, get over it.
Demanding it, actually. Star Wars Remastered back in the 90's proved people will bitch while they wait in line at Best-Buy....
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
quote:Originally posted by Toadkiller: Actually with today's home computers a fan could do it if they had the skills and the time.
I probably missed it - but is their a picture of the suggested design for TNG?
I think Dukhat asked Sternbach about this on Trek BBS a while back. As I recall the answer was a resounding "don't have a clue". Really, what dose it matter? Now admittedly the Pegasus was a missed opportunity and in that case I might support "replacing" it. However, as I understand it was meant to be a prototype so from an economical point of view it'd be a miniature they couldn't use ever again (being a one of a kind), which for a Starfleet ship makes it a bit of a waste of money. So deciding NOT to spend money on it is understandable.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
If you're reffering to the "official replacement", I think it was an Ambassador-esque design.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sean: You know, a thought just occured to me. WE know that the E-nil went through a refit between the 2250's and the 2260's. ( depending on how the new movie version looks, there might be ANOTHER refit in there somewhere) What if Kirk's line of " only 12 like her in the fleet" referred to post (first)refit Connies. Not all of the Connies need be refitted at the time of that line, so that would allow for more than just 12 Constitution class ships in Kirk's era. Starfleet must have built more than 12 of it's most powerfull ships between 224_, and 2266 ( that is when TOS takes place right?), so maybe the older run of Connies were refitted, and the newer ones left as is and waiting for the TMP refit.
I'm probably wrong though.
I don't think you're wrong. That's sort of what I've been maintaining, and occasionally getting shouted down for, for years. I go with an extrapolation of FJ's vessel type/hull design number-block notion, and by that they were well into the production run by the time of TOS, since the Defiant was NCC-1764, and probably wasn't the most recent one off the blocks.
Even if she were only twenty years old by the time Kirk got her, the Enterprise and the other survivors of such a surprisingly hostile galaxy (look at the attrition numbers for TOS alone, then estimate that backwards until you get to the ship's launch date) would have all achieved a sort of legendary status, the ones surviving longest being the most awe-inspiring.
And since I like the idea that the Enterprise entered service first, while the Constitution remained a testbed vessel for a while, that would make the big "E" the longest serving Connie by the time TOS took place. Wonderful mystique...
--Jonah
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
As for the Oberth kerfluffle...
I honestly don't know what to think of Rick's design vis a vis the ship from "The Naked Now" or "The Pegasus". TNG had some weird notions about ships' complements. The Tsiolkovsky had 87 people aboard, which seems light for an Ambassador-esque design. Similarly, I remember the Pegasus was a smallish ship with a smallish crew for testing the Federation's phasing cloak.
But then we also have the Lantree with its crew of 26 in a roughly Constitution-sized spaceframe, or the Arcos with its crew of 2.
...Contrasted against the Enterprise-D with over a thousand people aboard. Even stripping away families and rotating mission specialists... *shrug*
Nor do I think all instances of the Grissom miniture being reused should be replaced. The Vico, for instance, makes sense as a surplussed older Surveyor (contemporary Starfleet livery ignored). Maybe the Cochrane, too, as they're going to need Surveyors in the newly-opened Bajor Sector.
As for difficulty, or doing it right...? I think this is only a few tweaks away from being the Star Wars I've always wanted. The original was great, but as soon as George started messing with it again in the '90s, each of his "special editions" have diminished as much as they've added to it. This guy spent over two years working on this and, speaking as an aspiring filmmaker myself, this is almost what I think Star Wars should be once George opened the gates by modifying the original.
--Jonah
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Where is the evidence that there were any plans for a new ship design at the time of "The Naked Now"? IIRC, Sternbach didn't come up with a design until they were working on "The Pegasus".
George Lucas' tweaking of his films has left me with a very bad taste in my mouth, and I haven't been impressed with TOSR in the slightest. I prefer to come up with creative rationalizations for what we saw onscreen rather than to pretend it didn't happen that way or try to change it.
I personally see nothing wrong with the idea that SF would continue to use and build basic spaceframe designs for many decades, upgrading various internal systems and components along the way. It's just like the manufacture of cars and airplanes and ships today. Also, like evolution in regard to the body plans of animals. You can only re-engineer something so much before the design becomes more or less static. How much would the functions required of a starship really change between the 23rd and 24th centuries?
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
I was as disappointed when they'd show us an old ship class as the next fan, but I wouldn't support "official" remasterings either.
The money/effort is better spent on new content, trek or otherwise.
As for SF - we see very little technology change (other than FX) over the what, century or so TOS-post DS9. Clearly Scotty, while impressed, at least had a basic idea of what the parts were. Compared to actual navy tech from WW1 until today - a WW1 engineer wouldn't even know what a gas turbine was, let alone how to work on one. The basic motive force has changed dramatically. There's hardly any steam driven ships left anywhere, discounting nukes.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
It's all post-singularity anyway. In reality people in Star Trek would cease to lead lives that were recognizable to us pretty damn quickly.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I made several changes and updates to my timeline. If you have time, please read it and comment.
Clearer in many aspects.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Thanks, dude.
A couple of points:
1. First, I want to thank The Red Admiral (is he even here anymore?), for his article on Trekmania.net about the "Unified Starship Design Theory." It helped me organize the likely Ambassador-era designs of the Antares, Apollo, Hokule'a and Wambundu classes, which also helps explain why there are only one or two vessels of these classes around by TNG.
2. It's been assumed for years that the Ambassador Class was the "midpoint" between the Excelsior and Galaxy classes (it certainly was supposed to be that way when TNG first premiered and the only design for the Ent-C was Andrew Probert's), but judging by the registries, that's really not the case. Although design-wise it's sort of a midpoint, it seems the Ambassador class was phased out even before the huge surge in Excelsior class production started, and the only starship class that was wedged in between the mass production of Excelsiors and the start of the Galaxy class "family" was the Renaissance. So is the Renaissance class the "missing link?"
3. (Continuing from #2) The Raven. Although she is definitely a Federation ship, it's not definite that the Raven was a former Starfleet vessel. However, other Federation ships (i.e. the Lakul, the T'Pau), look nothing like Starfleet vessels, while the Raven has very Starfleet-like features (warp nacelles, runabout-ish design, Starfleet pennants and markings). I conjecture that she was a former Starfleet vessel that was decommissioned and given to the Hansens. Since her warp nacelles match no other known ship type, I'm speculating that she is similar in design to the Renaissance class; perhaps she is even a member of that class (I distinctly remember someone referring to the U.S.S. Aries as a "small scout ship" or something like that, in "The Icarus Factor," but none of the online scripts for that episode make that comment, and I don't have the DVD of the ep handy. Perhaps someone could take 48 minutes out of their time to watch the episode & tell me?
4. I was going to talk about the Oberth class here, but for Reverend's sake, I'll demur. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sean: If you're reffering to the "official replacement", I think it was an Ambassador-esque design.
Based on the MSD-ish sketch by Sternbach: Mr. Sternbach's a mmeber over at SSM and he said he really liked this model. My modeling hobby is eternally justified! Pardon the registry number and font- those have since been replaced on the model.
Of course, this big cow of a design would not easily work in the context of the story as compared to a small ship, but it makes a hell of a lot more sense that the Galaxy systems would be tested on something large....and that such a valuable experiment would be on a tougher ship than an Oberth!
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
I like it.
The saucer and secondary hull kind of have to switch roles though, huh? Warp core in the saucer? Or just run the conduits longer?
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
That's exactly what I had in mind. Actually, from the top view, it kind of looks like an Oberth...
This design would also look good with the nacells in their normal place on the secondary hull me thinks.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
quote:Originally posted by Sean: If you're reffering to the "official replacement", I think it was an Ambassador-esque design.
Based on the MSD-ish sketch by Sternbach: Mr. Sternbach's a mmeber over at SSM and he said he really liked this model. My modeling hobby is eternally justified! Pardon the registry number and font- those have since been replaced on the model.
Of course, this big cow of a design would not easily work in the context of the story as compared to a small ship, but it makes a hell of a lot more sense that the Galaxy systems would be tested on something large....and that such a valuable experiment would be on a tougher ship than an Oberth!
Nothing against the model itself, I just never liked that configuration. Which is why when I did (read started) the Apollo for ASDB I used an arrangement that was more Nebula inspired than this Miranda-with-secondary-hull take on it.
quote: 4. I was going to talk about the Oberth class here, but for Reverend's sake, I'll demur. [Razz]
You know I'm RIGHT! [/Sybok]
As far as the Renaissance goes, I always had that one pencilled in for a re-visit as I was never happy with the version the ASDB originally put out. I saw it as being stylistically similar to Probert's original Ambassador painting. I think I did some thumbnail sketches that had it an a catamaran type configuration...but then Enterprise came out.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Well, I think I've finally finished updating my timeline, if anyone's interested:
Now, the whole point of making this timeline was so that I could figure out the design attributes for the conjectural Starfleet classes, based on their time of commissioning, for an essay I'm writing in my spare time. Now that I have some ideas, I was wondering if I could get some help from any graphic artists around here.
I'd like to have small side-view illustrations of each class design idea I came up with to go along with the text. But I'm incredibly graphically-challenged, as can be seen from my hideous cut-and-paste job for my first ship on the list, the Antares class:
I would love the overall look of the ships to look much more like the Apollo class design Reverend came up with (and which I'd like to use in my essay, with his permission...)
Thanks in advance for any help you can give me. The descriptions of the designs can be found in the addendums to the construction dates in the timeline, or if you just don't feel like reading my timeline, I could describe them for you :-)
*Disclaimer* My essay is going to pretty much repudiate what the guys at the ASDB have done (with the exception of the Apollo class), but that doesn't mean that I don't admire the work they did. Believe me, I certainly like Rev's design for the Antares class much better than mine, but I'm going with my timeline for this essay.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I shall take solace from the fact the Korolev fits in that timeline reasonably well and shall forgive your slighting of the Antares.
As for the Apollo...I may have something for you soon-ish.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Thanks! And you're right about the Korolev. I was planning on using this design from Shipschematics (SciFi Meshes has a more accurate depiction, but I couldn't find it)...
...but I like yours better. It's not cut-and-pasty like this is, and it fits better as a sister ship to the Olympic class, which is also a contemporary.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
That was the general notion. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Just having a browse through the article and I note the Hokule’a is roughly consistent with our design...though it was never finalised and needs plenty of work. In a nutshell it was meant to be a post Excelsior, pre-Ambassador frigate IIRC. Oh and the Deneva is about right too.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Am I looking at the right Hokule'a? The one at the ASDB appears to have design elements mostly from the Excelsior, with downswept nacelle pylons instead of upswept, and no neck. I rather envisioned it as an Ambassador version of the Stargazer, with four nacelles.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Yeah that's the one and those images are ancient. I wasn't happy with the way it was shaping up so I re-jigged it to look more like Probert's Ambassador, but with the same basic configuration. I perfer not to just copy and extrapolate quite so literally as to make an Ambassador or Excelsior version of the Constellation or the Cheyenne. For one thing it gets a little boring and to be frank the logic behind that type of thinking is scratchy at best.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:2358: Oberth class U.S.S. Pegasus, NCC-53847, commissioned.
“The Pegasus” (TNG). Geordi states that the ship is twelve years old in 2370. Registry numbers do not apply in this case. Apparently the Oberth class has a separate registry scheme than other starships
I cant fathom that Starfleet was so enamoured of the tiny, underpowered, lightly armed science vessel that they'd still be cranking them out into the TNG era... I've often considered the possibility that the Pegasus was a "one off" prototype that was made to externally resemble an Oberth to avoid unwanted attention while testing advanced technology.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
The only problem with that theory is that both the Oberth class U.S.S. Cochrane and the U.S.S. Tsiolkovsky have even higher registries than the Pegasus, meaning that they were even newer, and there was nothing prototypical about them.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Maybe their resgistries reflect a re-deployment with upgrades....possibly a shortage of science vessels required the refit and return to service of several retired ships.
Such a shortage could have resulted from the expansion of expplored space during the generally peaceful span between the Tomed Incident and TNG (with the Cardassian War a brief, geographiacly isolated event).
It could also help explain the shortage of available combat ships in TNG- a lot of the fleet might have been science and service vessels (with popular sentiment in the UFP leaning toward diplomaccy as the main resolution to conflict.
A particular NCC number sequence might indicate a science-only or refit designation...or ships re-purposed for service only withn the relative safety of the UFP (due to advanced age and defensive weakness).
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: I shall take solace from the fact the Korolev fits in that timeline reasonably well and shall forgive your slighting of the Antares.
As for the Apollo...I may have something for you soon-ish.
Did you know someone kitted that design? Nice job of it too.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: I shall take solace from the fact the Korolev fits in that timeline reasonably well and shall forgive your slighting of the Antares.
As for the Apollo...I may have something for you soon-ish.
Did you know someone kitted that design? Nice job of it too.
Nope...which one? Still waiting for someone to do the v'teridix though. Must have had half a dozen permission requests on that one but never saw anything come from it.
As for the Oberth, while doing this I came to the firm belief that the Oberth is extremely modular in nature. Not in a swap out the saucer or hull kind of way but in a open up the hull and remove 80% of the internal volume kind of way. So it would make and IDEAL platform for prototype work since you just plug in your new engineering system, sensor platform or whatever and away you go. No need to design a new space-frame around it just to see if the thing with twitch on and function properly. I'm sure over the years/decades/centuries the Oberth has become a favourite with ship designers for precisely this purpose. The fact that I like to believe it was designed by Vulcans only re-enforces the justification to it's longevity. After all, why design something that won't even last your own lifetime?
Oh and as for that trident/medusa thing, I did actually come up with a vaguely credible idea that it's actually a container tug...now only if I can find the diagram I made...
And while I was at it I found another old concept sketch for the Chimera that I don't think I ever showed Bernd.
Edit: Wide image is wiiiiiiiide
[ October 05, 2008, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: Fabrux ]
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Huh, how big is it? Feels like a Connie sized Ambassador.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Roughly New Orleans-Class I think, maybe a little smaller. It never got any farther than what you see here and honestly I forget what the design brief for the Chimera was, but a vaguely recall it was supposed to be on the dinky side.
And apologies Fabrux, I sometimes forget most of you lot don't have a big widescreen LCD running at 1680x1050. Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Yes, some of us are still in the dark ages of square displays running 1280x1024. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend:
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: I shall take solace from the fact the Korolev fits in that timeline reasonably well and shall forgive your slighting of the Antares.
As for the Apollo...I may have something for you soon-ish.
Did you know someone kitted that design? Nice job of it too.
Nope...which one? Still waiting for someone to do the v'teridix though. Must have had half a dozen permission requests on that one but never saw anything come from it.
The Apollo that's sorta a Nebbie-ish Ambassador hybrid. I'll see if I can dig you up some links.
I just finished painting up two Lakat class cruisers -Cardie designs by Bernd himself, I believe. Dont know if (but hope) permission was obtained before it was kitted....the design is pretty..er...plain, but lends to a lot of creative expression on all those undetailed surfaces,and I went to town. I'll post pics of that later this week. I dont have the Apollo model- not a fan of that design (though you rendered it nicely).
There's a better version of that Anteres class that's now a kit- it's got an extended nacelle and some saucer-embedded deflector. Dont own that one either.
I dig that Medusa-as-a-tug concept: having built one a fewyears back, I can vouch for some unidentifiable greebles behind the saucer that cold easily be docking hardpoints for containers. http://pic90.picturetrail.com/VOL2210/657989/1301771/22724972.jpg It's be a nicely armed cargo transport too- if the ship can detach from the containers to engage an enemy, it'd be very formidable (lots of engine power, phaser mounts and low overall mass). Add a seperate ashield generator for the containers (possibly contained in the docking connection) and the cargo would be safe while the ship defendes it. Just an idea. Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:I prefer not to just copy and extrapolate quite so literally as to make an Ambassador or Excelsior version of the Constellation or the Cheyenne. For one thing it gets a little boring and to be frank the logic behind that type of thinking is scratchy at best.
But, in all fairness, that's kinda what you did for the Apollo; you made an Ambassador version of the Miranda and Nebula, and that design turned out to be great!
The reason I asked for people with graphic art know-how to design the ships for my timeline was because if I did it, they would be exactly as boring and cut-and-pasty as you describe. I guess the general idea I had was to have different variants of the Ambassador class, but still have design elements that would make them unique, and not just the crap that I came up with for the Antares class, for example. But if that's not your thing, I'm cool with that. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
No, that's exactly what I did with the Apollo and it's the one and only exception I'll make. The thing is, if you start applying that brand of reasoning to every starship design then you get a ludicrous amount of totally superfluous ships. It's boring and frankly lacks any imagination. Although I wasn't with the ASDB from the get go, i gather the whole point was to avoid just making kit-bashes that are some random re-configuration of the "flagship" class of the respective era.
The design process was to boil the known facts about each class (which was often next to nothing) and come up with a logical design that fits the brief.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
I think one of the problem with that concept, Reverend, is that 'rearrangements of components' is EXACTLY how we've seen 'canon' Trek handle starships since TWOK came out, and how 'official' Trek has handled it since TM.
Now, with FJ, there was nothing before it, and making the destroyer a one-engine ship made sense and all. But, since then, we've seen TONS of 'here's my new cruiser, it's got the secondary hull ON TOP!' designs, and much of that has shown up on screen (DS9, I'm looking at you!)
In that sense, the 'ASDB' approach, while laudable, isn't actually what Trek itself has done.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Well I see no reason to compound the error. Besides, we're hardly constrained by budgets or schedules, so there's even less excuse.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
It's a little tricky. Personally I look to the cold-war era US Navy to see about how many variants (and why they're variants) of different ship classes there are. So, it's reasonable that there would be a lot of destroyers out there, even if they're functionally nearly identical.
Now, this changes dramatically as you go higher and higher up in ship types. By the time you get to cruisers (and up), you're looking at technical innovations being the primary reason for new classes.. and even then, the ships are likely to be more variant builds than an outright new class.
So... shorting up this steam train of thought...
I've got little problem with a lot of destroyers, scouts, and frigates. Different shipyards will put out different designs (even if it's just an arrangement difference, in some cases). But as you get bigger, there's going to be fewer and fewer of them. It's easy to justify, say, a 'different ship similar to a Miranda in function' than it is a 'different ship similar to a Constitution class in function'. To say nothing of all the 'dreadnoughts' out there.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Which is why most ASDB ships tend to be on the small side or failing that they're from classes that had limited production runs. Actually very few are even 'front line' ships, most being transports, surveyors and other utilitarian designs.
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
The variance in designs from the TOS movie-era, a lot of them being near-identical is one of the primary reasons why on my page I listed them as individual ships and not classes. May as well have a single class of vessel and just have variants in the class for specific roles.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
Well, the TOS era is somewhat hurt by that both FASA and TM made a lot of 'rearrange the parts' ship classes. While TM made sense, and the first few FASA ships (Loknar, Larson, Derf) did as well, a lot of what would come later from FASA clearly just... didn't.
That said, I think a lot of people don't think in terms of Star Fleet appropriation. If there is only 13 CAs of a certain type, and they're still 'top of the fleet' in 2265, then would there REALLY be 500 'almost' CAs all over? Would there be a ship in 2265 that is suddenly far far better than the Enterprise?
(In FJ's defense, the Federation class, for its part, was a NEW ship design for the TOS era, and was meant to be the battle-first heavy ship.)
In a sense, it's a bit like game balance. The Federation class may be 'up top' for the period, but it's expensive to operate, and isn't good for the exploration missions around. Etc.
Think of how Star Fleet appropriations would decide on ship construction, and you'll suddenly start making a lot of sense of things.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Well personally I like to pretend the Federation-Class really looked like this. clicky
As for that FASA designs, Fabrux's chart perfectly illustrates everything I dislike about kitbashing taken to it's logical extreme.
[ October 09, 2008, 04:19 PM: Message edited by: Fabrux ]
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
I just drew the ships that looked most interesting to me. So Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Oh come off it, that one didn't even touch the sides! Besides it's an ancient one that's been sitting in flare upload since '03 at least.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
That dreadnaught take is pretty intresting- looks like a refit of the original (what's with that that red stuff in the deflector area though- bleah!).
I figure the Federation class was a showboat- something like the HMS Hood- to demonstrate military prowess and "show the flag" at trouble spots. I figure it would have had a very limited production run with each ship being somewhat unique.
quote:Originally posted by Vanguard: Would there be a ship in 2265 that is suddenly far far better than the Enterprise?
Yes, quite possibly. All it takes is one new Federation member joining with their uique technology to give birth to a whole new breed of starship- and the Connie had been refit several times by that point, I'd imagine.
I can only imagine that newer classes are more modular or easier to outfit with new systems than the Connie- possibly explaining the long lifespan of the Miranda and Oberth classes.
These technology jumps might account for the radical design shifts between STVI and TNG- and the FC ships bearing little design lineage to older classes.
P.S.- dont bag on the FASA stuff- some of their designs are great- Chandley, Thurfir, Andor, etc. Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
I wasn't bagging on ALL of FASA's stuff, but for every Loknar there's five or six Ambassador Paine's out there. If I'm going to use more of FASA's work, it's going to be VERY selective.
As for a new ship in 2265 in the Federation far far superior.. no, there isn't. Why? Because we know that she's the 'best' ship (on average) than anything else in the Federation in 2266 (TOS), and then again in 2272 (TMP). In fact, she's not 'one-upped' really until the Excelsior in 2283 (TSFS), and only then once they got it working right (TUC).
I know a lot of fans like to make their own super-DNs and BBs and all, but there just isn't a lot of room for them in Trek. The Enterprise is ALREADY a CA, which means that there aren't a lot of ships bigger than that , SFB's fleets not withstanding.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote: That dreadnaught take is pretty intresting- looks like a refit of the original (what's with that that red stuff in the deflector area though- bleah!).
Ask me five years ago, I'll remember by then.
quote:I wasn't bagging on ALL of FASA's stuff...
I was!
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Oh come off it, that one didn't even touch the sides! Besides it's an ancient one that's been sitting in flare upload since '03 at least.
The image is 1279 pixels wide. Add in Flare's formatting and you end up with a super-wide page when running at 1280*1024.
Show of hands for folks that are running =< 1280*1024?
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Raises hand. I think. Back to the old laptop for the time being.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
1440x900 here... yes, I am using a HI DEF TV/monitor! Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
=< != >= Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
If it makes Fabrux feel any worse, my secondary desktop display is a 26" Sony Bravia running as 1280x768.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
Well, judging from the 'math' on Fabrux's post... I think he's trying to be all inclusive. Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
26" running ONLY 1280*768... wow, that's a really messed up ratio. I have a 19" conventional running 1280*1024... Although at this point I'm only limited by the monitor's physical limitations with my new machine. Waiting for the day when I can plonk down the dinero for a nice 22" display. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
If you want to bag on ship designs, go with Starfleet Battles. Holy crap, they're awful.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
Depends on which. I actually like the Kirov CB, but I'll easily agree that the huge swath of BBs and DNs are rediculous. The games are nothing BUT super-ships anymore.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Fasa...battles...fanboy rpgs. All tends to blur together for me.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
I don't think anyone here can get away with using the term 'Fanboy' derisively... Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Oh there's a distinction, believe me.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
Sure, but it's mostly in how fanboys act rather that being a product of the RPGs, etc, in and of themselves. There's plenty reasonable in both FASA and SFB... and there's plenty that is not. Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Not trying to let this thread get too far off topic, but again I will ask if there are any graphic artists here would would consider helping me design the conjectural classes from my timeline?
Rev: I'd like to use your Apollo once it's finalized, with your permission.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
Well, you're free to use my toolkits as you want. I'm a little swamped just cleaning out stuff for Jaynz (and all of THAT will need to be updated as I graduate my drawing skills another level...)
You probably just want to start with rough sketches anyway, so us more artsy types will have an idea of how to get started. (Or, you may find, you're not nearly bad at this at all, and can do it yourself.)
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Not trying to let this thread get too far off topic, but again I will ask if there are any graphic artists here would would consider helping me design the conjectural classes from my timeline?
Rev: I'd like to use your Apollo once it's finalized, with your permission.
Of course.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Thanks, Rev.
Vanguard: That's exactly what I had in mind. I'm very good at pencil drawing, so I was going to sketch out the ships on paper and hopefully someone can go from there. But I'll take a look at your toolkit and see what I can do too.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
).
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
