Okay guys! I posted some new shots of he starships Gao Yao, Endeavor and Telar! The Gao Yao is my tanker/cargo ship/ antimatter carrier. The Telar is a science oriented variant on the Olympic class and has two extra shuttlebays and a large planetary sensor. And a better color scheme.
Nice tanker design. Doubt that'd be used to move antimatter though... safer to move it in small pods than make huge bulk-shipments.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
I like that tanker too. Having the cargo pods outboard is an interesting switch. Who or what is "Gao Yao"?
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Telar, eh? No doubt one of the zillions of Vulcans in a science field. ("Vulcans in science?? The DEUCE you say, sir!") Why did you mount the nacelles with a 90-degree rotation?
The Gao Yao looks pretty good; nice to see someone else other than me doing tankers. Those tanks are pretty big, though. Hmm. What did you use for them? Also, I would have (& have done!) put the nacelles much farther away from the tanks so that in case of an emergency, there's no problems with shooting off either nacelles or tanks. But that's me & my design ethos.
What you might want to do is look through the Wayback Machine at my old website (www.skynjun.org) & look through the ship models i had there. There's a couple tankers & transports, & the concepts on operation & design there may give you some ideas.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Masao: I like that tanker too. Having the cargo pods outboard is an interesting switch. Who or what is "Gao Yao"?
Gao Yao is an old Chinese god of justice and equality. I'm trying to keep my fleet from being all WWII names. I wanted the tanker's podson the outside so the ship could cut 'em loose at warp in case of emergency. Also, I like the FASA designs with the nacelles closer together and toward the ships center.
The Telar is named to contrast the more aggressive USS Andor that I built some months back. I needed more science ships too, so here we are. I did my best to address and correct some of the Olympic class' features that bug the hell out of me: the nacelles in particular on the "stock" version look silly and frail to me and the large flat disk at the shpere's ventral apex really needed something as well.
I'll have to get better shots of that open shuttlebay though: it turned out sweet, but alas, my photography skills are not up to par with mt modeling skills...yet.
BTW: the Gao Yao's cargo containers are super glue containers -that should give you some idea as to how small she is!
I'll check your site Shik: I can always use ideas and apreciate your designs. Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Wait, it's named after the planet? That's Tellar. The Vulcan name fits better.
Hmm. Now that I look at it, not so sure about the shuttlebays. It's weird-ish. I could have seen removing or filling in sdome of the lifeboat hatches on the secondary hull to form more sensor arrays; presumable the medical section stuff is/was in there & since there's no patients to evac...
And...are those yellow odts on the fwd dorsal sphere phaser bumps??
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The ship's named Telar because "porkchop" would be demeaning to the hogs...er...Telleraies.
I don't know exactly what those yellow dot things are...they're on the Olympic- I didint add them! I think the two smaller rings on the sphere are intended to be phasers on an Olympic anyway, so I'd guess the bumps are sensors or a secondary deflector.
Naming the ship "USS Vulcan" would become an ongoing joke: "Sir, the Vulcan is hailing us again." "Ignore that green-blooded-son-of-a-bitch!" Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
No, I meant "Vulcan name" as in, "Oh, it's named after Telar, the Vulcan who helped develop the isolinear circuitry matrix" or some such.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Ah...would'nt that be more like "T'lar"?
Nobody has commented on the Endeavor so I guess it's a case of "seen one Nebula, ya seen 'em all". Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
seeing as Navy ships are named after current states and land masses, Starfleet probably does the same for planets and systems (examples abound, Deneva, Rigel, Aries, etc)
in the case where confusion would exist, i theorize theyd use the overly formal version of the planets name, USS Terra rather than USS Earth, perhaps USS Vulcanis rather than USS Vulcan.. itd be a fun wayto use that obscure nomenclature
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
Lovely work on the Endeavour, looks very good given the size it appears to be. The most interesting design however is the fuel carrier, lookslike a very practical and balanced design. How large are these models physically, the carrier in particular looks to minute! I gave up on physical modelling when I discovered Lightwave 3D, my models always looked like they'd had the brushwork details applied by a blind man with Parkinsons disease. No such bother with CGI, but no model to play with either.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Nice work - but was turning the nacelles on the Olympic class on their sides done deliberately?
Andrew
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Heh heh heh... The Telar looks like its sporting a nipple... Posted by Makotokat (Member # 1041) on :
Love the Gao Yao! What an interesting design! I like the way the nacelles are protected, kind of a combat transport idea!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The gao yao is 4.5" long, the Telar is 5.75" and the Endeavor is 7.5" long.
All are 1:2500th scale.
Yes, the nacelles on the Telar are turned deliberately. They look much better that way.
The Gao Yao is indeed a military style tanker and even has aft phasers, although by no means is she a combat vessel. That's what escort ships are for. Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
I like the Gao Yao, especially the four shuttle bays and the centered warp nacelles... BUT... besides the above comment, I would bet that those big outboard tanks would play havoc with the warp field geometry. Why DOES it have 4 shuttle bays, anyway?
So... Skill: 10, originality: 9, design: 4
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Those are'nt shuttlebays: they're sensor pallates. The decals themselves for those parts are scaled down from the 1400th Intrepid decals. Although the Gao Yao is configured like the Miranda, she is not made from one and really shares no parts other than the bridge and lower sensor. THe extra sensors might be there to monitor whatever the ship is transporting and I have an idea for some smaller drone cargo containers that could follow behind at a distance via remote control. nOt attached directly at all but rather a kind od wagontrain of smaller containers that amplify the G.Y's warp field (lower warp as the number of containers increase) with mabye four container drones maximum. It could also account for the nacelle alignment too. I figure the Gao Yao has a small crew of about 35 (ten per shift)and has no use for shuttles as she would'nt be having direct planetary commerce that the transporters could'nt handle.
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
I thought Starfleet spelt it "Endeavour".
Posted by Darkwing (Member # 834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Okay guys! The Gao Yao is my tanker/cargo ship/ antimatter carrier.
I'm wondering why so many folks keep perpetuating the Ptolemy idea of a full-size starship for a transport. I prefer the Jackill's Fisher class for that job. It's the class II saucer (Grissom/Oberth style) with the integrated engines and the neck and connector plate. It hauls two containers, and uses a lot less resources to run cargo. Why use a class I saucer or extended hull that requires a large crew, has more parasitic mass and a full weapons loadout?
As far as I can tell, the only real reason to use a Ptolemy or other such design like that is troop transport or for transport through hostile sectors without available escort.
All that said, your model is well done and I like that you turned expectations on their head by putting the containers outboard of the engines, rather than the reverse used everywhere else. Without engines, that cargo goes nowhere and has no value. Whereas without cargo, that engine still gets the ship around. So for use in hostile areas, it makes more sense to use the cargo to shield the ship, rather than vice-versa. However, why does a cargo ship need four sensor pallets aft? And I think even a cargo ship (perhaps especially a cargo ship) needs at least one shuttle bay, if not two. After all, Miranda's have an internal cargo bay, so why would this ship not have one, despite having the external cargo pods? I'd have a small shuttle bay for crew use and a large one connecting to the internal cargo bay for use transferring freight. Transporters do break down or are inappropriate for some cargos.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Well, nearly forty years of the Star Trek franchise have demonstrated that ships with common saucer designs are the exception rather than the rule. The proliferation of 1-B designs from the movie era seems to stem from the fandom (of the time)'s inability to come up with original designs - kitbashing was the rule. Only when the franchise came up with distinctly different, but canon, saucer designs to play with, did the fandom start to branch out into more original designs.
That said, most people seem to believe that in the 23rd century saucers were mass produced as one design that was somehow ideal for the Fleet's needs. Among them, some conclude that the saucers HAD to be standardized, each coming with deck upon deck of the same crew quarters, science labs, and storage decks. There was even one fandom book which said that lots of the same-looking design prototypes were constructed by using mothballed Ptolemy class tugs, upgraded accordingly because they had basically not been used except as a transport.
However, there's no reason not to believe that the saucers couldn't be modified internally. We see in TNG that Miranda-class ships are subclassed for any number of missions, from science vessel to transport to general combatant; fandom generally accepts that these ships, with their varying quoted crew counts and missions, would be modified internally to suit that. Jason's tug design here could have been built, or modified, for a minimal crew but a maximum internal cargo space before counting the pods - think of it like those big moving trucks with the smaller container mounted on the rig.
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The Miranda (if used for freight) has been shown to have a crew of as little as 26 (as per TNG)and I wanted a ship thatwas not a miranda clone but still in the same general design ethic. I lookied at making the parts where the sensor pallates are but I discarded it because it would make the ship too miranda-ish and I wanted something more unique. The sensor pallates could double as tractor beam emmiters if you prefer- to haul cargo containers.
I think this class of ship could easily transport exotic starship components from place to place or mabye even pre-fabricated colony equipment (industrial replicators and the like).
A bit about the model: I started with a smooyth resin casting of a connie saucer and added the rear hull extentions (made from balsa)via CA glue and modeling putty. All the ship's deflectot details are drawn in with pencil and weathered with graphite dust. Decals are made via Adobe Illustrator onto matte decal film. The cargo containers are made from super glue tubes with plastic "bubble eyes" glued on their ends.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
My belief is that Mirandas in the TNG era would have a regular base crew of around 20, with the rest being taken care of via automation. The additional crew would be stuff like a half dozen cargo specialists (Lantree) or a dozen-plus scientists (Br!ttain).
The Saratoga would likely have 50-100 crew, including civvies, wildly judging by the escape pods. But I still think that the "combat" Mirandas of DS9 would have around 20-50 crew to be on par with the density shown by the similarly-sized Defiant.
Mark
[ June 24, 2003, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
If the Gao Yao has a crew of 35 that would allow a operating crew of 10 per shift with five on light or no duty. I can't imagine that a ship could get by with less and still maintain 3-5 people on the bridge at all times (command, conn, ops are a must IMHO) and minimal crew in the rest of the ship.
Miranda's used as destroyers could have crews of 50 (when sciences, security and possibly trainees are included)with 50 civillians.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
The ECS Fortunate had inward nacelles too, so there is a precedence. Still, according to all we know from the TNGTM it would obstruct the warp field.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:I can't imagine that a ship could get by with less and still maintain 3-5 people on the bridge at all times (command, conn, ops are a must IMHO)
Not to argue ...
... I can see on some assignments where the Duty Officer could double at a duty station. In fact, in "Disaster", wasn't the night-shift officer also standing a watch at Ops?
On a small ship, a medical staff wouldn't have to be on duty at all times - it would be easy enough for them to be "on call" for an emergency. Sure it's not the staffing you'd find on a Galaxy-Class, but on a ship with a crew of 30, I can't imagine you'd have more than a doctor and one or two nurses, and it would probably be close to impossible to have someone in sickbay at all times.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
...Which casues one to wonder why you'd even need sickbay manned at all times. Without touching on the the LMH thing, odds are you wouldn't. Heck, Voyager seemed to be assigned only one doctor and nurse even before "Caretaker" (not counting the occasional blueshirt technician), and that's for a crew of 140. Anyone know what the medical staff is on USN warships?
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I was'nt really counting medical staff: I agree there. I know it's plausable that small, non-combat oriented ships would double up duties but I'd put three on a bridge that large at all times: in a bridge like the connie refit taht would be required. As far as the nacelle thing- that's mostly a FASA design element that i just dig. I have built several ships this way and have to point out that the Constalation, Nebula and Defiant seem to violate the old "warp geometry" rule.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: ...Anyone know what the medical staff is on USN warships?
Mark
I've asked a similar med staffing question to a USN officer (and SF Museum visitor) aboard USS Bataan (an amphibious assault ship).
Q: Do all ships have medical doctors aboard? If not, how large does a crew have to be before it is assigned a doctor? On ships with large crews, what is the approximate ratio of crewmen to doctors?
A: Right now I have 2 doctors and a Dentist to treat a crew of 1100 or so. On a Cruiser, they have one doctor to about 400 crew members. The Docs, though, will have Hospital Corpsmen to assist them in screening and treating patients. On BATAAN, I have the fourth largest hospital in the state of Virginia as far as beds are concerned (600), but we do not receive any additional medical personnel until we deploy with a Fleet Surgical Team. The FST has additional surgeons, nurses, and corpsmen to handle any battle field casualties, like we did in Afganistan.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
So few actual doctors are needed but several people with hospital tech-level training are there to assist. On a small ship with a crew less than 50 it's likely that all crewmembers recieve advanced medical training (mabye to a paramedic level) so that everyone can cover in a crisis.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Jason,
More like one or two members of the crew are Medical Corpsmen, which is how I believe the USN staffs submarines. However, since we're talking Starfleet, it's a good bet they're willing to "spend" one doctor on a ship with a very small crew complement.
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phoenix: I thought Starfleet spelt it "Endeavour".
They do, as the TNG version (a Nebula class) was named after the Space Shuttle Endeavour, which was in turn named after Capt. Cook's ship of the late 1700's.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Possibly the closest example I can think of right now is the USS Valiant, where the sickbay was apparently staffed by Chief Collins. Given that "Captain" Watters was such a stickler for the Starfleet ideal (hell, he promoted his XO to the rare FULL commander rank), I think that he'd have staffed his sickbay with a regular doctor or team thereof if the Valiant would regularly have one. After all, Julian was more often found on the bridge than in sickbay...
Mark
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I would think that the doctor on a ship this size would multitask... Like, when not doing doctor duties they'd be the pilot or something.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I figure the Doc would fill the role of Doctor, Counselor and mabye be a cargo specialist or something.
I got my "Endeavor" ship's name and spelling from the decal sheet made by the long-gone SFSM. Sure wish they'd come back though....
Posted by Darkwing (Member # 834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: ...Which casues one to wonder why you'd even need sickbay manned at all times. Without touching on the the LMH thing, odds are you wouldn't. Heck, Voyager seemed to be assigned only one doctor and nurse even before "Caretaker" (not counting the occasional blueshirt technician), and that's for a crew of 140. Anyone know what the medical staff is on USN warships?
Mark
Depends on crew size and mission. An ammo ship with a crew of over 400 had a Physician's assistant, an E-6 corpsman, and several other corpsmen, from E-5 down to E-1. Total of 7. After the PA was court-martialed, he was replaced as division officer by a Boiler technician Chief for several months.... On an Arleigh Burke DDG, medical was a Chief corpsman (E-7) and an HM3 (E-4 corpsman).
On a MT. Whitney flagship, crew around 800, plus frequent detachments of up to 400, a medical officer (MD), up to two chiefs and about 7-8 corpsmen of various ranks.
On all of the, medical was supplemented by stretcher bearers, 1-4 people from each repair locker who received limited eMT training and assisted during GQ. They were also often used as warm bodies to help out during immunisations and safety standdown training.
Stretcher bearer is a collateral duty, and not intended to do more than carry wounded and perform triage and first aid. Injections and IVs are not permitted, although one corpsman, who'd been in Bosnia, trained her stretcher bearers to do both.
Posted by Darkwing (Member # 834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: Possibly the closest example I can think of right now is the USS Valiant, where the sickbay was apparently staffed by Chief Collins. Given that "Captain" Watters was such a stickler for the Starfleet ideal (hell, he promoted his XO to the rare FULL commander rank), I think that he'd have staffed his sickbay with a regular doctor or team thereof if the Valiant would regularly have one. After all, Julian was more often found on the bridge than in sickbay...
Mark
Don't get me started. "full" commander is simply commander, as opposed to lieutenant commander, frequently abbreviated to commander. But Valiant was a big mistake. Midshipmen are not in the military and have no commission to give them authority, and a captain has no legal authority to make them such. That's reserved for the federation council (or congress today). As an actually commissioned officer, Nog outranked any jumped-up cadet and was obligated to take command. Hell, as an E-5 in a deck rate, I would have had the authority and obligation to do so in that situation.
Had the writers decided to have Nog assert his authority and be rejected by the cadets out of a misguided sense of duty, or better yet, to accept the law, and then mutiny when he decided to take the valian home (as opposed to their desire to assault the Jemmie battleship), that would have made a stronger story.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
I did always wonder why Nog never did pull rank with the cadets... after all he is a commissioned officer with a rank of ensign. It would has saved most of Red Squad and keep together a Defiant Class for the battle backgrounds.
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
quote:Originally posted by Darkwing: Don't get me started. "full" commander is simply commander, as opposed to lieutenant commander, frequently abbreviated to commander. But Valiant was a big mistake. Midshipmen are not in the military and have no commission to give them authority, and a captain has no legal authority to make them such. That's reserved for the federation council (or congress today). As an actually commissioned officer, Nog outranked any jumped-up cadet and was obligated to take command. Hell, as an E-5 in a deck rate, I would have had the authority and obligation to do so in that situation.
Well, I'm not 100% sure about the US Navy, but the USAF still allows a commissioned officer to make an enlisted member an officer via the Battle Field Commission. There's also a Battlefield Promotion given to POW's, tho this is rarely done as a rule. I have no clue how this would relate to real-world cadets, tho, not being sure of the actual status of said cadets. I'll see if any of our Oh's in the squadron know how USAF Cadets are regarded in this fashion, especially when it comes to violations of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). If they are subject to the UCMJ, then they should technically be capable of being promoted to an officer under battlfield conditions as well.
quote: Had the writers decided to have Nog assert his authority and be rejected by the cadets out of a misguided sense of duty, or better yet, to accept the law, and then mutiny when he decided to take the valian home (as opposed to their desire to assault the Jemmie battleship), that would have made a stronger story.
No argument there. I think it would have been a much better story and actually made more fans like and respect the character Nog. I also think it would have shown a much better growth of the character...
Posted by Darkwing (Member # 834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffworks: Well, I'm not 100% sure about the US Navy, but the USAF still allows a commissioned officer to make an enlisted member an officer via the Battle Field Commission. There's also a Battlefield Promotion given to POW's, tho this is rarely done as a rule. I have no clue how this would relate to real-world cadets, tho, not being sure of the actual status of said cadets. I'll see if any of our Oh's in the squadron know how USAF Cadets are regarded in this fashion, especially when it comes to violations of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). If they are subject to the UCMJ, then they should technically be capable of being promoted to an officer under battlfield conditions as well.
Midshipmen are not subject to the UCMJ, because they are still civilians. I looked into it after a first-class standing OOD got into it with a middie upset over not being saluted.
quote: Had the writers decided to have Nog assert his authority and be rejected by the cadets out of a misguided sense of duty, or better yet, to accept the law, and then mutiny when he decided to take the valian home (as opposed to their desire to assault the Jemmie battleship), that would have made a stronger story.
No argument there. I think it would have been a much better story and actually made more fans like and respect the character Nog. I also think it would have shown a much better growth of the character... [/QUOTE] Agreed.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)