A few weeks ago I found myself incredibly bored, so, being the Star Trek fanboy that I am, I decided to naturally bug Mike Okuda about BoBW again. My email question had to do with this quote, from the interview he gave to Timo back in February 2000:
"Rick S. built the Mars perimeter ship from the same type of model kit. I think the body was made from a Typhoon-class Russian sub kit, although it was not specifically tied to the movie Red October. If I recall, he and I bought a whole bunch of kits, including the Russian subs, in hopes of doing some kitbash ships ourselves. I used a couple of other subs on the Buran."
My question was, did he or Rick build any other new ship kitbash designs from the extra parts, which didn't make it to the screen. He gave me an interesting answer.
He told me that there weren't any models finished but not used, but there was at least one design he had started but didn't finish. This particular ship was built from Ent-D parts, and the design was similar to the Chekov in that he wanted the secondary hull to be meshed to the back of the saucer in the same plane. However, the big difference was that he wanted the ship to be much, much smaller than the Miarecki bashes, so he had a 1/2 inch thick fiberglass "lollipop" shaped piece cut, to be placed between the entire ship's centerline (sort of like what Greg Jein did with the Connie saucer to make it into the Stargazer model). Supposedly, with this thickness, bigger windows could have been drawn on the hull to make the appearance of a smaller ship.
I suppose the closest description I can use for the ship would be a "Constellationized Galaxy."
Posted by Styrofoaman (Member # 706) on :
Pictures. Neeeeeeeeeed pictures.....
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
There are no pictures. Just the description. However, with all the graphic talent we have here, I'm sure someone could draw up a nice side-view diagram of the ship based on what I said...
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Ahh, the vaunted USS Lollipop! She's just been commissioned. She's a good ship.
Mark
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Oooh... this sounds like a very nice concept for a ship... One thing I'd like (if anyone drew it) was to have slightly different-style nacelles (like how the New Orleans nacelles were lengthened) to make it just a bit more unique -- especially if it's supposed to be a lot smaller than the other starships.
But of course, that's all up to us anyway since it never made it onto the screen? Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
[ December 31, 2002, 14:07: Message edited by: TSN ]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Nice ship, Lobo, but I think you're thinking of the Buran...it would look more like the Chekov. The nacelles are in the normal place, not up & down.
Plus, you need to put in a 1/2 inch thick space through the middle of the entire ship's centerline (think Constellation saucer).
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
But Lobo did! Look, it's a 1/2 inch insert in 1:1 scale! If you squint really hard, you can see it!
Anyway, in doing the insert, it has to be scaled appropriately. I'm guessing that the model would be built out of 1/2500 scale kits like the other "minor" ships; thus the 1/2 inch spacer would have to be scaled appropriately. One wonders how many decks this would correspond to...
Mark
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I guess it would depend on how large you make the windows. I would guess that the spacer should have no more than three decks, preferably two if you want the ship really small while still being realistic. And don't forget the bigger bridge module!
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
A cool ship, but still bigger than what Okuda intended, I think. This one is about the size of the Miarecki ones... Okuda would have wanted something the size of a Miranda or smaller.
However, if they were going to wedge .5" plexiglass between the saucer halves, I suspect the edge would be vertical, not sloped, otherwise the saucer bottom wouldn't fit without having its outer edge sanded down.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Well, these ARE professional modelmakers we're talking about.
Shuttlebay? Aft undercut?
Mark
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: Well, these ARE professional modelmakers we're talking about.
Shuttlebay? Aft undercut?
Mark
You can see the shuttlebay on the rear view.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
I had an idea... certainly this is nothing but speculation, but --
Perhaps this unseen/unmade design is what the USS Liberator (the ship that launched the shuttlecraft seen in "The Art of Star Trek") looked like? 'twould be interesting to find a place for such an interesting starship concept...
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Or we could assign this design to the Rigel class. Perhaps we could also have the Liberator be Rigel class as well?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
*smacks head*
How'd I forget the Rigel Class? Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Weeeell, the Liberator was 67016, and the Tolstoy was 62905... Not too big of a gap when compared to Mirandae and Excelsiors.
Posted by Micromaniac (Member # 546) on :
These wont open!
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Micromaniac: These wont open!
Thats Lycos Tripod sorry.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Would you mind E-Mailing me the pics directly? If it's cool, I'll build a 2500th model of it! I'm halfway through with my Excelsior study model...er...model!
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Would you mind E-Mailing me the pics directly? If it's cool, I'll build a 2500th model of it! I'm halfway through with my Excelsior study model...er...model!
No problem! I've mailed them to you.
Lobo
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
You sir, Rock.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I like it. I'll build it....mabye even this week if time allows. I'm glad it does'nt have those "marker nacelles". What is the length of this ship? Looks to be about 350-370 meters at first glance.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Lobo: Do you have an aft and ventral view?
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Lobo: Do you have an aft and ventral view?
I am working on them.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I notice the Torpedo launcher seems absent from the side view (assuming it's located at the saucer's ventral center)
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
The Liberator could be a Nebula Class for all we know. Anyway, I can't wait for the aft view.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
I think you misunderstood me when I said that the ship was like a Constellationized Galaxy. I was only referrring to the spacer between the saucer & secondary hull. I was not referring to the nacelles. Basically, the nacelles & pylons would be in the same place as on the Galaxy model. Sorry about the confusion. I hope no one has started making a model yet...
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
So basically, it's a Springfield with a thicker saucer and without the pod. And with the normal Galaxy-like nacelles.
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
what it sounds like to me
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I'm already building a Springfield, so I'll still go with lobo's version and call it the USS Rigel to confuse everybody.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
Hmm ok Design dropped.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
At 1:2500, wouldn't the saucer only be about an inch tall to begin with? A half-inch thick piece of fiberglass in there would make the saucer half again as tall as it is normally.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I'll have to scale down the "half inch" piece to match....mabye 1/16".
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Huh. Double post-o-ramma.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lobo: Hmm ok Design dropped.
Hehe. I already have your designs, so dropped or not, there will likely be a model soon. Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
way i look at it would be the bridge between the nebula galaxy and springfield
this order Galaxy Nebula Rigel? Springfield
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
It's a bit too big for my tastes. I prefer the saller ships in truth. That liiks to be a giant Springfield to me.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I'm a little confused at just how small this design was meant to be. If it was to be smaller even than the Miarecki bashes then the ship could be about four or five decks high, or am I misunderstanding the description?
(Airlock for scale)
[ January 07, 2003, 23:28: Message edited by: TSN ]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Good likeness, Reverend. I think that's how Okuda would have had it. Just some FYI:
He never told me that he wanted the ship to be smaller than the Miarecki bashes. I know I wrote that, but that was just supposition from his email. All he said was that he wanted a much smaller Galaxy-style ship than what was seen before, hence the 1/2 inch spacer which would probably have had only one or two decks, & the windows on the saucer would reflect that.
Which scale model did you use? I'm just asking because I fumbled around with my 1/2500 scale Ent-D kit in Okuda's configuration, & found that the nacelle pylons would be lower, which would make the tips of the Bussard collectors on the nacelles actually touch the ends of the saucer's impulse engines (unless I was doing something wrong).
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
I just relaized that that description could be either of these ships
btw what happened to the pic of the springfield with out the pod i have seen before or is there not one?
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I think you need to pay a little more attention. We've already established it to be Springfield-like. It just has no pod, a thicker saucer (though not really if it's supposed to be even smaller than a Springfield), and Galaxy-like nacelles. And it certainly is not Challenger-like in any way.
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
if you look at that pic i still think the challenger is two galaxy secondary hall tops together
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Additionally, let's not get outside of ourselves here and forget that this entire design is merely hypothetical. A model was never even BUILT, let alone shot for the episode... Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Oh great... a 24th Century NX Class. Thanks Reverend...
What was that second pic you posted Akira?
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
the first time i posted with two pics was the same pic but imagestation sucks so i just linked it hopeing it was bigger
next time was the challenger.
Ok this is what i fell it should have looked like but i forgot to do the conny type band around the top view. but if you guys want me to correct it i will
Ug. A 5 deck saucer would make it NX-01 sized (as already pointed out), wht would starfleet A) make a ship soooo small and underpowered in the 24 century? B) sens such a ship to it's certain doon at Wolf 359? ....I'm still going wit Lobo's effort: at least it looks plausable for the time period IMHO.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Ug. A 5 deck saucer would make it NX-01 sized (as already pointed out), wht would starfleet A) make a ship soooo small and underpowered in the 24 century? B) sens such a ship to it's certain doon at Wolf 359? ....I'm still going wit Lobo's effort: at least it looks plausable for the time period IMHO.
nobody said it was underpowered. the Deiant is tiny and packs a punch. The size of a ship design depends on the mission profile. And there are lots of small ships in Starfleet (and the Navy for that matter) out of necessity
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I always got the feeling that the Defiant was intentionally small and heavily armed/powered and was a radical concept because of it.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
I always thought the uniquness of the defiant class was more due to it's armament and relative lack of scientific facilities compared to other ships, rather than it's high power. Although I think it was mentioned a few times it was more highly powered?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Sisko said it was so overpowered that in initial trials it stalled and had to be oowed bac to starbase.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I always got the feeling that the Defiant was intentionally small and heavily armed/powered and was a radical concept because of it.
It's not like there were never small ships before it though.. the 11 deck Miranda is present in large numbers, the Oberth is tiny, as was the later Nova. Why do you assume that a small starship is such a hindrance?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The Miranda and Oberth were not small at the time of their conception and entry into srvice. Starfleet ships had become progressively larger into the 24th century and the Defiant seems to break the mold....leading to the "First Contact" family of ships that are departures in design and function like the Sabre and Steamrunner. Building a smaller 5 deck ship for the DS9 era makes sense (and if you give it Nova nacelles it looks correct), but BOBW is waaay too soon for that kind of switch in thinking about starship design.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
i gotta say, thats based on a helluva lotta assumption on your part. its not like small starships would be a new post-W359 idea. (of course, 359 obviously influenced their thinking).
no matter what Mirandae and Oberths were concieved as, the fact stands that small vessels DID IN FACT perform workhorse roles in the pre-BOBW 24th century Starfleet.. and if you add to that the assumption that some of the FC classes actually predate W359 (i'm looking at the NCC-5xxxx Steamrunner, here) you have a rather complete theory.
And the Defiant's 'new thinking' was the fact that it was a dedicated combatant, a warship, which was a no no up to that point. No one specifically said its size was a dynamic new idea.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
The United States Navy has been building battleships and aircraft carriers for a hundred years now. That doesn't mean they've stopped building frigates, destroyers, and Coast Guard cutters...
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Actually, the USN stopped building battleships a half-century ago, and has been building dedicated aircraft carriers only since the late 1920s (the first carrier, CV1 Langley, was converted from the old transport USS Jupiter in 1922).
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Good poinds on both counts, particularly about the registry numbers on the Steamrunner, but we've never seen or really heard of ships as small as 200 (ish)meters that did not have their origins in he TMP movie era prior to the Defiant project. Even the New Orleans dwarfs a Miranda and has twice the interior volume of an Excelsior class (the real workhorse of the fleet). It's entirely possible that the big lul in major conflict that seems to predate TNG's first season and the longivity of the starships themselves led to starship production grinding to a crawl. It would explain why much of the fleet is still Miranda, Oberth and Excelsior class starships.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
weare full of good poinds!
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)