The Mann's side elevation is more or less finished now. It's a bit of a strange ship, and definitely not one of the best from the Chronology. Apart from adding details like windows, I just have to physically attach those anti-matter pods (or whatever they are) to the nacelles.
Oh, and this is also the debute of my Connie schematic, which I used for making the STTM and other fandom kitbashes.
P.S. The NCC for the U.S.S. Mann is taken from Steve Pugh's site. But your guess is as good as mine (or his).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Wow, that looks pretty nice. I don't really care for ANY of the vessels depicted in the Chronology, but I suppose there not all that bad.
In fact, I'd be quite interested to see a rendition of the Horizon-class from that book.
-MMoM
Oh, and just to be playful jibing for a moment, I still do BTW maintain that the NCC-1700 looked just as it did in FJ's blueprints, despite what the NCC-1701 and later ships looked like. Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Pretty cool, Harry. Those Chronology ships look nice with updated color schematics.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Wow, Harry! It's amazing how many of those old, "horrible"-looking ships look a lot more presentable when rendered in crisp graphics and a better color palate.
Just to toss my opinion in, I think that the Mann looks more like a contemporary or close descendant of the Daedalus. Some kind of transport type, or maybe a bulky and ill-conceived attempt at an early long-range explorer. Which would put the NCC's somewhere around 500. (Ignoring FJ's indecipherable numbering system. )
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
I have to say I prefer my interpretation of the Mann class. I just wish I had pics of the model I made. I took two Oberth saucer tops and added about a 1" spacer to fill out the primary hull. I took the Oberth nacelle fairings, rotated them out 90 degrees, and faired them directly into the primary hull. The nacelles were lengthened, too, using a conversion kit made by Thomas Sasser. And I used plastic bits from some of my Warhammer 40,000 stuff (four power cells from Eldar fusion guns) to make the football-shaped pods on the nacelles' trailing ends.
The final (sort of) schematics.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
kewl.. beats my rendering. months back, i just took the Mann schematic and colored it..
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Man, is the Mann class an ugly design!
The top view isn't THAT bad though.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
It might be worth doing an aft view since there are no apparant impulse engines or a shuttle bay in the existing views. Perhaps they are both recessed into the back of the hull between the nacelles.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: It might be worth doing an aft view since there are no apparant impulse engines or a shuttle bay in the existing views. Perhaps they are both recessed into the back of the hull between the nacelles.
Well, they're not apparent in the aft view either...
Harry--- Two words: HORIZON CLASS!
-MMoM Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
And to correct the attribution, the design is by Rick Sternbach, as are all of the other illustrations... Goldstein only did the text.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
That's good, Harry. My only suggestion would be to lower and enlarge the name and registry. I would make the numbers a bit larger and center them in the top section (as delineated by the panel lines). The name seems to be hugging the top bridge mound too closely. Then on the front and side views the numbers should be following the hull curves, as indicated by the panel lines. I know that curving and slanting the letters is a pain in the ass, but doing so is preferrable to leaving them off the view or having them too straight.
Does this have a shuttle bay somewhere? (and impulse engines too.)
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
I might sneak in an impulse engine between the nacelles. Seeing as the artist who did the beauty shots hasn't got a clue of what a Starfleet ship looks like (I hope those weren't done by Sternbach..), it might be acceptable to add some required details.
I think I'll do an aft view showing the impulse engines and (possible) shuttlebay.
Good idea on the NCC. I might try and move it. And yes, it IS a pain to stretch and manipulate the text (without making them into curves).
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Yes, those drawings were done by Sternbach. But long before he worked on Trek, IIRC.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Sternbach worked on TMP, though, didn't he?
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Mm... I don't think so. Jeffries and Probert did the refit of the E-nil.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I believe Sternbach was brought on during the Phase II project, which soon after became the TMP project, to collaborate with Lee Cole on designing computer consoles for the Enterprise. (IIRC this was circa 1978.) But yes, as far as designing whole ships, Sternbach's first crack at that was in the Spaceflight Chronology.
Harry: I always kind of wondered whether the pods at the end of each nacelle weren't the impulse engines. As you suggested, they might be matter/antimatter fuel cells, but they do look quite similar to the fusion reactors we see in so many MSDs and blueprints of modern ships such as the Ent-D. (I think I'll ask Sternbach if he meant them specifically to be one or the other, but if it's indeterminate, I'd suggest making the pods the impulse system in order to avoid changing the structure of the ship to add one.) And as to a shuttlebay, I personally am unsure about whether one is really necessary for this ship, and would be hesitant to just arbitrarily throw one in.
-MMoM Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
In regards to the name and registry; I'd be inclined to put them on the forward edge of the hull, like on the Daedalus or the Pasteur. It would be easier to curve the text down there for both views and it would be consistent with the only two Federation ships we've seen with spheroid hulls.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Those pods remind me of the pods you see at the back of those DY class ships.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Ah, but it's clearly established what those pods really are. Read the relevant passages of John M. Ford's "The Final Reflection". When "the heat sinks of the Manns glowed dull red" as the ships struggled to go to high warp, nothing was left unclear about which part of the ships Ford was referring to!
Apparently this was Rick's intent, too, since those pods are right where the "intercooler" tubes on the Constitution nacelles go.
The impulse engines I'd just hide somewhere in the dark shadows of the upper aft primary hull. And the ship need not have much of a shuttlebay. Either she makes do with docking ports, or then a bay could be at the bow, right next to the nav deflector dish and the torpedo tubes.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
quote:right next to the nav deflector dish and the torpedo tubes
And where might these be?
I'm thinking of making a small impulse installation between the nacelles.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I'm probably in the minority here, but I'd say leave the ship's structure as seen in the book and either just "pretend" there's "invisible" impulse engines somewhere, or leave it at calling it a design oversight, as has been seen with plenty of other ships.
Again, though I'm probably an oddball, I'm not a big fan of "correcting" or redesigning other people's ships.
-MMoM Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Call me crazy, but the lack of any sublight engines is a little more serious than a mere design oversight.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Call me crazy, but the lack of any sublight engines is a little more serious than a mere design oversight.
Of course! But I'm merely saying that while the ship must have impulse engines somewhere (indeed, they're noted in the specifications section in the book) they're just not visible to us. They're either "hidden" somewhere behing hull plates or there's some other undefined reason as to why we can't see them. I'd be against just saying: "Ah, this looks like a good place for impulse drives, I'll just stick them right here..."
-MMoM Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
These are probably the final schematics for this ship, and it comes in two versions. One is as close to Sternbach's sketches as I like to be, the other has some necessary upgrades in the form of an impulse engine and a modest shuttle bay.
And because I had some time left (well.. it actually took a bit longer than I anticipated), an MSD of the Mann class. I'm not touching the inner workings of pre-TOS nacelles...
I'm sorry but that Mann class is one hideous ship!! LOL! I like the Raging Queen/Shelly/Curry better than that! Or EVEN the Medusa.
LOL @ the 'Plot Devices'.
And something I never got with MSD's - what is with the rectangle above the shuttles in the shuttle bay - I'm gathering it's an obs deck - but why is it along the side/at an angle?
Oh nice work BTW!
I reckon you could tackle the nacelle.
I remember seeing one of those large cut-away posters of the E-nil. It had the inner-workings of the nacelles. Not that they are 'canon' or anything - Psi Pub Tech posters weren't they?
The Mann class would pose a different task - as it doesn't connect in the 'traditional' way. The closest way would be the Steamrunner.
Re those Psipubtech posters - are there any online scans of them? How would you scan something so big? piece by piece?
I remember there was the well known E-D, then I saw the E-nil, and BRIEFLY at a convention saw an E-refit/E-A. Then in a magazine I saw a picture for a DS9 - but that looked UBER-dodgey. It's scale - even from what I could make out from the magazine - was ALL skew-iff. Then I remember after FC - there was the Phoenix and the E-E. How they would know what to put in the E-E is beyond me. I'm wondering if they'll end up doing a pre-E.
Also - maybe in that MSD above - you could have a warp (it's not the core in Enterprise they show is it?) core? like in Enterprise?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Love those "plot devices"!
IMHO, we could capitalize on the total lack of forward and ventral views of the ship. A shuttlebay could be at the lower bow easily enough, without disrupting the known views. So could a deflector dish or two.
And as for the impulse engines, the ones you installed seem to fire periliously close to the red Easter egg things... To solve two problems at once, what about using the two oval things of the top view (just behind the bridge - you omit them from your rear view for some reason)? That area doesn't show in Rick's painting, and engines placed there won't fire at any part of the nacelles.
Sure, they are off-axis. But so are most impulse engines anyway. Screw Newton, like Starfleet apaprently does.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
If you're reading Timo - I just added more to my above post.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Screw Newton, like Starfleet apaprently does.
And Data - according to the unseen alternate opening to "Descent"!
Do the impulse engines have to be VISIBLE though - they weren't THAT visible on the E-nil.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
They weren't glowing on the E-nil. But then again, nothing was glowing on the E-nil. I remember reading somewhere that the inside of the nacelles (those grilles) were even supposed to glow in a familiar blue fashion. Yuk!
Andrew: - The observation deck runs around all three sides. It's not at an angle.
- The cutaways of the 1701 are a bit iffy. For one, almost the entire engineering section is filled with tubes and nameless things, and the nacelles are no better.
- That sphere in main engineering IS the reaction core. The ENT reactor looks a bit underpowered for this ship, IMHO.
Timo
- Those ovals are VERY off-axis. It just doesn't look right from behind. I'll move the impulse engines above the eggs, but the ovals are going to have to be something else.
I think you've made the deflector dish too small -- considering that the original verson of the NCC-1701 from "The Cage" had a larger dish, I think that older ships would need decent-sized deflectors, rather than mini-dishes. Or you could just drop the deflector altogether and say that it's integrated in some other system (like the Miranda and Constellation).
And I still believe that the registry number needs to be a bit lower (in number, not in placement on the hull). Of course, I'm a fan of Masao's line of ships and so am thinking of it from that perspective, but the Mann looks too bulbous to be a recent predecessor of the Constitution-class. Even though there are a few ships that can be described as "bulky" (like the Olympic), the Mann just lacks that "sleekness" that TOS-era ships and beyond have, and so I'd place it closer to the Daedalus era. A number around NCC-500 would work better, IMO.
And I also like that little "plot devices" joke! Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: considering that the original verson of the NCC-1701 from "The Cage" had a larger dish, I think that older ships would need decent-sized deflectors, rather than mini-dishes.
There're some kids working for Paramount who would disagree with you on THAT!
BTW include phase lasers and particle artillery.. i know you want to!
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: There're some kids working for Paramount who would disagree with you on THAT!
Well, yes... but they're morons. No matter what equivocations they use, no matter what behind-the-scenes realities existed, the NX-01 is still a shitty design for its time period. No question. (That doesn't say I don't respect Doug Drexler's work at all, or anything like that -- I'm just talking about that damned ship's incongruity.)
Besides, didn't you read further about my comments on Masao's line of ships?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Keep that thing out of my thread, will you? We're trying to have a serious conversation here.
The deflector dish has to be small enough not to show up in the side view. Besides, there are enough designs with no dish, so a small dish wouldn't be much more of a problem.
The NCC is not entirely made up. Since I'm making these schematics for someone's chronology (a very open-minded one as far as canon is concerned), it has to fit with the numerous Fandom registries. Given a 2206 launch date for this class (the Spaceflight Chronology date corrected by adding 52), the closest unused registries are in the 1200 range. So, in the grand F**A scheme of things, this seems to be the best option.
But I agree that, with regards to Masao's ships, it would be better to make the Mann class a contemporary of the Daedalus and/or Wasp classes.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
according to "The Final Reflection" these ships were active in the 2210s-2230s, right? (excepting the old chronology, i believe the later portions of the book took place when Spock was 7 years old, circa 2237 and several parts of the book were years before that)
BTW if i credit and add a link, can i use this on my site too in the galactopedia? (i usually take the sideview and shrink it and transparency the background)
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
2210-2230 is possible. It's certainly within the 2206 - 2244 range.
Sure you can use my schematic with proper credits.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Excellent work! The impulse engines are fine as they are, although you might want to square off the bottom of the structure a little bit where it meets the hull.
I still think the name and registry could do with being moved down some more. If it were me I'd have the reg about 3/4 the size that you have it at and position it directly below the "equator" line with the name positioned directly above.
As for the deflector, perhaps you could try doubling it in width and postioning it on the equator, it shouldn't impact on the side or front view too much if you recess it deep enough into the hull. Failing that you could ommit it altogether and say it's hidden inside the sensor dome, after all the Daedalus didn't have a visible dish.
The MSD looks fine, you just need to tidy up those lables a little bit.
From the registery I take it that you intend this to be the class ship for the U.S.S. Valiant (NCC-1223) which would be consistant with the destruction date 2217.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Just thinking - maybe this ship has a lot of open internal volume?? Like large grassed areas/arboretums etc. There seems to be a lack of windows above and below the mid section.
Also - maybe you could - instead of increasing the size of the deflector - put in two - on mirroring it at the top?
ALSO - where are the Bussard collectors? Do they appear at the front like the Steamrunner - or could those red balls be them? Theoretically bussard collectors could be located anywhere on a ship couldn't they? Why do they get placed on the nacelles?
And the top view looks like its a Galaxy relative!
Another thing - where is the original picture? Is there any possibility that the nacelles are actually at the FRONT? Cause Rick had a lot of those shuttles in the TNG Tech Manual with the pointy front parts on their nacelles.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Hey, that last one is really interesting!
There's also a scout of some sort that is shown next to the Constitution, and it, too, could use some reversing... Not all designs on the "timeline" need to point to the right. (Some point up, after all.)
If we say the painting shows the bow of the vessel, we're still missing a navigational deflector and a registry. But Rick didn't do registries in those paintings. And the deflectors could be those oval things near the top of the ship, shaped and sized pretty much like the three things at the bow of a Constitution.
For extra artistic touch (and for cutting down on that huge internal volume), I'd add an undercut to the stern. One that doesn't show in the side view, that is. Similar to the cut in which the Excelsior deflector dish resides... Similar indentations could house impulse engines and other typical butt enhancements.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
I'm not reversing it! Even if it could be reversed, all sources have it this way around. And I still want to keep this ship as consistent as possible with fandom. Even if it is a weird ugly ship.
I've deliberately left off windows in the upper and lower decks. Because of the hull curvature, those windows would become really long curvy shapes. Seeing as no-one in TOS ever even had windows in their quarters, I don't think they'd really mind.
There seems to be a general idea that my deflector dish is too small. I'll see what I can do.
Now, what else was there... *reviews thread*...ah yes.. The 'Buzzards'. There are no ramscoops on this ship. That's okay though, since they aren't really necessary. IIRC, the TNGTM says they're only used for emergency deuterium collection. It's not a vital part of the engines, so I think the ship will do fine without a pair of 'scoops.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
The final final schematics. It's now time to work on the Marshall class. Expect a new thread sooner or later.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
To get that one started on the wrong foot...
...Have you considered interpreting the Marshall painting as showing the ship after saucer separation?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Hey that Marshall Class does look like it's missing it's saucer!! There's even a flat plained bit that could be part of the top of the 'neck'.
Also look at this class's nacelles - it TOO has the cones/points facing forwards - more creedance towards the Mann class actually having nacelles that face forward?
ALSO - what is the big red thing at the front of the Marshall class - the entrance to a shuttle bay... maybe this thing is a big fighter carrier?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It seems to me that Sternbach is not hostile to questions like "Say, Rick, in the Spaceflight Chronology, which way is ship X pointing?" I mean, if anyone should care to ask.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I e-mailed him a week ago about the Mann-class "pods," but I still haven't had a reply. Which is unusual for Sternbach, as he generally replies within a few hours or, at most, a day. Maybe he's on vacation or busy with something else.
-MMoM Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Regarding the direction of the nacelles: "Spaceflight Chronology" has a chart showing the plan (top) view of all major ships and their stats. All ships are pointing to the right. USS Mann is shown with the nacelles trailing, not in front.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
No matter what equivocations they use, no matter what behind-the-scenes realities existed, the NX-01 is still a shitty design for its time period. No question. (That doesn't say I don't respect Doug Drexler's work at all, or anything like that -- I'm just talking about that damned ship's incongruity.)