Where is the Shuttle hangar of the ship? And what are(/is in) these "containers" above and below of the ship?
Lobo
[ September 12, 2002, 23:16: Message edited by: Lobo ]
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
id say Deck 2 and 3 all the way to turbo shaft and i would put eng on deck 8 and 9
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
No one knows, and no one knows. The ship may not even have a shuttlebay, though some of us think it might be located in the extreme aft, conveniently blown away on the model. The pods could be anything, but some of us think they may contain weapons. But then, they are probably modular containers which could have just about anything inside. Heck, they could be the shuttlebays.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
Could they be Escape pods maybe? Maybe thats what there were refering to in the companion and TNG Tech. Manual
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Uh, in theory, sure, though that seems more than a little unlikely.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
They're either AGT-Enterprise phaser cannons (the F4NB0Y theory, I think) or some kind of sensor/generic hi-tech stuff.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Obviously no one can be certain what is in those pods. I'd like to think that they're torpedo launchers, given that the NO is a frigate-type ship. Given the scale, the usual neck-mounted launcher isn't feasible, so they'd have to go somewhere else.
As for the shuttlebay, if you take a close look at the mangled aft hull, you can still see the point where the curves meet, proving that there's no bay there. (Besides, the ship was made with Galaxy-class parts, so there'd be nothing there.) However, the shuttlebay on the saucer would still be big enough to hold the appropriate complement for a smaller starship.
Posted by Capped In Mic (Member # 709) on :
one thing i would recommend to aspiring starship designers is to study real naval ships.. see how, in our seagoing vessels, certain features always land in the same place, if there are extreme differences in design (one detail on a frigate that varies vastly from a cruiser, for example), then try to understand what causes it. reverse engineer the ship and then engineer it back up and it will reveal why things are there.
our study of the damaged N.O. model has revealed that the shuttlebay must be either in the missing aft section, or in the damaged back of the saucer. we can extrapolate this because we know many ships before it had bays in the aft 2ndary hull and many ships after it have bays on the rear upper saucer.
i doubt the frigate mission profile would require three skinny shuttlebays, so i eliminate this as a possibility, even though its as good a theory as any.
To iterate: a frigate is a vessel which is smaller than a cruiser and larger than a patrol/escort vessel. a frigate may not be faster than a cruiser, but is faster (add: more maneuverable) than other ships of its size, and, while not as well armed as a cruiser, still heavily armed compared to other ships of its size. in space, i can imagine these frigates using their greater speed to be fleet escorts within friendly territory and policing outer territories. a trade off for the increased speed and weapons would be mission duration, basically these ships dont stray far from home bases as federation cruisers and explorers.
So, with this said, i could theorize the extensions as torpedo bays, or even swapped out modules that could be launchers, or if the vessel were specialized, made into tractor beams (for coast guard duties); sensor platforms/communications arrays (for listening/patrol duties); or possibly some combinatin of the possibilities, frigates are often required to be versatile, moreso than other specialized ships like escorts, corvettes or scouts. basically take all of a cruisers capabilities (speed, arms, scouting) and pack them, tightly wound, into a ship that is smaller, easier to outfit, but lacks the range and duration but gains versatility.
i think the N.O. extensions are along the lines of the Miranda rollbar or the swappable Nebula platforms: mission versatility. and probably easily swapped out.
[upon this edit, i can see that Minutiae Man and Harry beat me to this post due to my own longwindedness]
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
I can't recall how many NO's we've seen - is it only the one?
Maybe they aren't even a standard part of the ship?
Posted by Capped In Mic (Member # 709) on :
i'd like to think they are, just to make the vessel have a little more character against the Galaxy and other Galaxy-like ships
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I'd settle for them being semi-permanent, like the Miranda rollbar. There may be situations when the ship sails without them, but those situations are rare. There may also be missions where a different type of module is called for, but these missions are unlikely to be seen as long as the camera rides along a vessel with the mission profile of a typical Enterprise (Insert your own rationale here).
The blackened center of the forward face in these modules does suggest a "launcher" mission. The muzzles are a bit large in comparison with TOS era ones, but not too big IMHO. After all, some here are willing to believe that the Centaur was more than 300 meters long, and had even bigger launchers...
As for the definition of "frigate", perhaps the 23rd/24th century one goes "a ship that is about cruiser-sized, and pretends to be a cruiser by wearing modules, but is much less capable than a cruiser when naked". That would satisfy the fan idea that the Mirandas/Avengers are frigates, too! It would also make Springfield a frigate.
The Nebula would be excempted from the humiliating nomer because it doesn't pretend to be a cruiser by wearing modules - it pretends to be an explorer! We could invent a whole new designation for ships of Nebula type...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
There could be two side-by-side circular torp tubes in each pod, if the opening is too large as is.
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
^ But that would make at least six torpedo tubes, isn't that a few too many for a ship this size? Even if frigates are quite well armed.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Shuttlebay: there could be a dropbay behind the rear en of the lower "tube". Or a lift ("DS9-style") between the upper tubes.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
I will set the Shuttlehangar in the upper container and the lower container becomes a cargo container.
Lobo
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Excellent work! What program ar eyou using to create this?
I have a minor nit though: If they need to eject the warp core, they either have to jettison the lower thingamobob or the core would have to go through it.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: Excellent work! What program ar eyou using to create this?
I have a minor nit though: If they need to eject the warp core, they either have to jettison the lower thingamobob or the core would have to go through it.
Corel Draw 10
Yes you have right! It was an big problem with this Warpcore! I will place a "pipe" in the center of the lower container, so the core can "flush" through the "pipe" into space.
Lobo
[ September 13, 2002, 11:14: Message edited by: Lobo ]
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Phlox: ^ But that would make at least six torpedo tubes, isn't that a few too many for a ship this size? Even if frigates are quite well armed.
Fully armed yes, but since these pods are probably inter-changeable it's reasonable to assume that under normal circumstances a New Orleans-Class ship will only carry one or two torpedo pods, while the other one or two pods contain sensors, cargo and the like. The Kyushu could be an exception, in that the usual sensor/cargo pods were removed in favour of an all torpedo complement, in anticipation of the engagement with the Borg. Other such improvisations could have been made on several of the other 39 ships at W359, indeed the Saratoga seams to have been outfitted with an unusually large set of weapons.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
That would assume however that said pods could be swapped out really quickly, and a supply was available... In practice, the only place they really could have gone for such an outfitting would probably be Utopia Planitia. I guess it's possible, but I'm of the opinion that all ships went as is. Pods can look the same on the outside, no?
UF link - one of the pics Mojo was working on included UP emptying out of anything that could fly... Including the half-built replacement for the USS Yamato.
Mark
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I don't mind the idea that the NO is overloaded w/ torpedo launchers, actually. After all, it's called a "frigate", and we know how Starfleet hates to refer to their ships as warships. So, if they gave the NO a designation which immediately implies that it's a warship, I think it's safe to say the ship is very well-armed.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:I will place a "pipe" in the center of the lower container, so the core can "flush" through the "pipe" into space.
Or you place the jettison hatch on the upperside and the deuterium storage beneath the core.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Or you could just have it so that the lower pod can be dumped to free up the warpcore ejection hatch.
quote: UF link - one of the pics Mojo was working on included UP emptying out of anything that could fly... Including the half-built replacement for the USS Yamato.
Some ship's names have all the bad luck. I do remember Mojo mentioning that he wanted a Galaxy at Wolf 359, I'm glad that he chose to use a half built one instead of one of the original six.
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
I'd think the 'switchable pod' system would neatly answer the question of "where is the hangar?"
It is actually a quite elegant system - sub-designing each ship per mission. Place thrusters in the pods, and swapping them becomes no more difficult a task than redocking the Ent-D Saucer.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Regarding Wolf 359 -- if the Kyushu and Saratoga were unusual in that they carried extra weapons pods... then why didn't they offload civilians, like Jennifer and Jake Sisko?
Guess that nixes that... Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Rev: yup, that's the one. We were trying to work out why there'd be an incomplete GCS at Wolf 359 without screwing up any NCC numbers we had or were going to run into from the first six. We rationalized that if a GCS were under construction at UP, it would be of the first batch - but we'd accounted for all of them (more or less) in the show, and fandom had more or less accepted that Starfleet wouldn't have let out contracts to build any more until after the battle of Wolf 359. So why would there be one under construction? We figured that if there were to be one, it would be one of the six replacements whose superstructures were broken up and hidden. And what better reason to build another one but to replace a lost ship - the Yamato - in much the same way as the space shuttle Endeavour was built to replace Challenger.
So whatever the GCS was in the planned pic, it may not have been the next USS Yamato; rather, it was an (as yet) unnamed ship under construction to replace her.
Mark
[ September 13, 2002, 16:51: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, for the Saratoga, anyway, but its attachments never looked much like weapons to me.
"The Best of Both Worlds" (part 1) stretched from stardate 43989.1 (Enterprise picks up Shelby and heads for the New Providence colony) to 43998.5, which we might say counts for three and a half days or so, which seems like plenty of time to swap out science/cargo/etc. components and put in weaponry, assuming that the Kyushu (and any other New Orleans at the battle) were in the same system as an appropriately outfitted dock facility at the time. Of course, there is less time between Admiral Hanson announcing the formation of a fleet at Wolf 359 and the battle itself. So, you know. I don't know what I'm saying.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Watch the nacelle struts and the lower pod on the new photos (of the already famous series of caps by Starship Millennium). I just incorporated that into my own schematics (although I admit they are quite coarse and could need more details).
BTW, I would expect the shuttlebay just where it is on the Galaxy, only half as tall. The engineering hull is just too much tapered that something could be in the blown away rear end. Shuttlebays in the pods may be an additional option, but I would expect one already in the basic configuration.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
So, you seem to have settled on using the pods as shuttlebays, or the top ones in any case. What are you nailing the ventral pod for?
And regarding the warp core - looks like it can be ejected upwards, thus removing the need to push if through the ventral hole. However, there is no ejection port to match it.
Mark
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I can't seem to view any of Lobo's pictures.
Just something about Bernd's schematics at his site... the bottom 'pod' that we see now is attached with a mini-pylon-thingy has a protruding round nodule on its anterior surface.
It would also be possible to use a much shorter warp core much farther aft. A four-deck core just aft of the aft end of the lower pod would be very nice: the plasma conduits would go straight up to the neck impulse engine and the pylon stems, and the core could eject down through a standard ejection hatch (which would have been obliterated by the Borg on USS Kyushu, as seen in the ventral photo).
Alternately, the core could be horizontal and eject aft through a hatch that also lies in a Borg-demolished spot.
Incidentally, the ventral photo seems to show another belly phaser further aft, roughly where the aft end of the lower pod is. Like the forward belly phaser, it would suffer some firing arc limitations due to the pod...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, everyone else seems to have the technical aspects covered, so I'll just ask this: What does the smiley face in that room in the forward dorsal part of the saucer do? :-)
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: Well, everyone else seems to have the technical aspects covered, so I'll just ask this: What does the smiley face in that room in the forward dorsal part of the saucer do? :-)
Arrg he has discoverd the face!
Yes its an in-joke like the Duck,Plane and the Porsche 911er on the E-D's MSD. Lobo
Posted by The Vorlon (Member # 52) on :
That is VERY impressive. =]
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote: It would also be possible to use a much shorter warp core much farther aft. A four-deck core just aft of the aft end of the lower pod would be very nice: the plasma conduits would go straight up to the neck impulse engine and the pylon stems, and the core could eject down through a standard ejection hatch (which would have been obliterated by the Borg on USS Kyushu, as seen in the ventral photo).
Agreed, that would be a tidier solution.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Or, you could have a horizontal core. Not exactly standard, but not impossible.
Mark
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Well, this gets into theoretical warp core engineering, but a shorter warp core could be considered as a sort of predecessor to the Defiant's ultra-powerful reactor. Some people have suggesed that the height of a warp core translates into efficiency, as it makes the aiming of the fuel injection more accurate.
I also finally went and picked out the image of the damage to the Kyushu's rear section: IMAGE If you look closely, you can see that the SIDES of the aft section have been chewed away, but the "point" of the hull still remains. That means that there's no shuttlebay on the New Orleans in that location.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I still don't get why someone felt the need to suggest there could be a shuttlebay there, especially when the existing one on top of the saucer is sufficient.
In regards to the warp core; Indeed a horizontal core is certainly possible, however a four deck, vertical core is a much simpler and conventional solution.
You could say that the damage to the underside of the secondary hull is evidence of the borg targeting the antimatter injectors, or - even more interesting - extracting the whole core with that cutting tractor beam.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: the bottom 'pod' that we see now is attached with a mini-pylon-thingy has a protruding round nodule on its anterior surface.
I know, it makes me sad. The New Orleans is my favorite, but that extra funk-pylon is a severe buzz-kill. But for that detail, it is one of the rare profoundly-good kitbashes.
I'm too picky, and use hyphens too often.
At any rate, it's easy to tell why they like to have damaged bridges for kitbashes. In this case, it would have had to have been scratch-built.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: If you look closely, you can see that the SIDES of the aft section have been chewed away, but the "point" of the hull still remains. That means that there's no shuttlebay on the New Orleans in that location.
Wow . . . and that area is hanging by a thread, too. Tough little ship.
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Sorry to bring this up but why would a ship like the New Orleans Class need more than one shuttlebay? The Intrepid and Prometheus Class starships only had one, which was quite enough.
Nice work on the MSD though, but I'd reconsider using the upper pods as shuttlebays. The color on the front of the pods are black instead of something that looks like a shuttlebay door.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Still can't see Lobo's images... Lobo can you "Flare Upload" them and then repost the link(s)!?!
Thanks
Andrew
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Lobo's not a senior member yet, so he's got no access to Flare upload yet.
Posted by Silent-Bob (Member # 861) on :
I just want you to know that your MSD is WAYYYY cool. Is this the only one that you've made, if not could you post a link to the others. I hope to see more of them !! Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I think we should collect them all at the Creative forum now, even if there's a lot of Tech content in this discussion. Moving the thread...
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)