And this next one, which I see more as a 1701 contemporary. Again, everything is a placeholder. I just think I had an epiphany regarding through-deck carriers in Trek. There's really no way to put that type functionality in a traditional 1701 style configuration. So, This leans more to a totally different planform.
See if you can see the TOS influences besides the nacelles here.
Looking good, but the central support in the first one looks too teeny-weeny to support the nacelles and that secondary hull. Maybe beef that up a bit? It looks as though it'd snap if you looked at it sideways...
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Topher, I thought the same thing. But when you look at the good ole e-nil, doesn't she looks a bit wirey too?
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Here's the Jefferies design file I got them both from:
Further, the landing bays are in the forward hull. The hangars for the embarked craft are in the engineering hull.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Great renderings of baaad designs.
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Thanks.
The latest is this. Here is a cutaway of the carrier, showing a rough view of how I envision the arrangement here. The red arrows indicate direction of work flow of the ships as they land, are dropped below for repair, refueling and retasking, then are shunted up above the landing bay to be lowered back down by tractor beam for launch.
I kept clicking on the sliders trying to scroll to the rest of the drawing...
It's Monday. I'm hungry.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Could work nicely -if they keep the gravity in there low. The way TOS Enterprise rocked back and forth under combat conditions, it would be suicidal to keep a full G in there.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Irishman, I really love that carrier design, but I think that the secondary hull is too bulky and simplistic for the 2240's era. Maybe you could have a sort of teardrop-shaped lower end of the saucer-turned-engineering-hull to make it more visually interesting?
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I love the carrier concept. But I agree with Minutiaeman that you might add something to the bottom of the engineering hull, plus maybe a protruding or a recessed rim.
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Yeah, I agree something has to be done with that engineering hull. You know, I got it from the shuttlebay section of the K-7 station.
You should have seen the bulkiness of the first version. A huge rectangular block with rounded corners.
Teardrop, huh? Hmmm. I am trying to stay away from anything that screams "Enterprise 1701". Maybe something else. What about a taller version of a Grissom saucer with maybe a smaller inverted saucer stuck on the underside?
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
No offence to your work, they're very well done. But damn! I'd put a phaser to my head before travelling around in something like that. or the Deadaulus for that matter.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Daedalus = cool.
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
I like my spelling. What was that other ship that had the sphere bridge? That other hideosly ugly thing. I swear the only race to ever get sphere shaped spacecraft right was the Empire.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
The Pasteur. Also cool.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Good heavens man - what version of iTunes are you using! Purple icon?
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I like the first one , although the shuttle deck must just be like a helipad as its so small. Where's the bridge?
The second one is a good idea, but, yeah, the secondary hull is a bit blocky. Way back in the dim and distant past I tried to do something with the design (must have been a few years back). I found it on an old floppy disk a while ago...
Edit: Oh, is the thing on top of the ball (on the first ship) meant to be the bridge, or am I being thick? On second thoughts, I probably shouldn't ask leading questions...
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
TGB,
Inspiring as a carrier isn't it? Even though that's not how Jefferies intended.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I think it works better than almost any other design as a carrier (especialy the one that consists of an oberth saucher pasted on to two excelcior secondary hulls). Kudos to you.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I reckon that design that you've made a carrier looks like it could have been fiddled with to be made an old-style Klingon Vessel. Remember in ??The Chronology?? they had those pics of "old style" Romulan ships... looked like long tubes with nacelles. Could be something in a similar vein.
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Andrew,
I'm surprised noone else has yet mentioned the visual similarity between this carrier design and Klingon ship morphology. It was on my mind as I developed it. I tried not to be led down that path, letting the ship retain UFP sensibilities. Time will tell how well I've succeeded.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Neato. Older ship designs. Hooray for lineage.
The purple iTunes isn't iTunes at all, but (I suspect) kTunes. Also if you don't want us snooping at your dock, if you press Shift+Command+4, you will get a cross hair you can click and drag a marquee to snap just a portion of the screen.
Posted by Jim NCC1701A (Member # 1021) on :
quote:Originally posted by Toadkiller: Good heavens man - what version of iTunes are you using! Purple icon?
Judging by the smaller size of the spinning beachball I'd say he's using OSX 10.1(.5?), so probably iTunes 2...
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Actually, Jim, you're right. It is OS X 10.1.5, and iTunes 2!
Posted by Jim NCC1701A (Member # 1021) on :
Opps, just outed myself as a Mac-addict. And proud of it Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Actually, I am so much of a Mac addict that I installed 10.1.5 on an ancient unsupported Mac - an 8600/250!
Anyone feels sorry for me yet is asked to leave donations for an iMac Core Duo at the door. Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
I like these designs, something that people around here seem to have a hard time remembering is that these are complex engineering machines, and form would absolutely follow function. And like that one caption to Jeffries' concept said, a sphere is the best shape for the pressure involved, not to mention you get the most volumetric bang for your buck.
Is that a K7 pod hanging between the nacelles there?
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
OnToMars,
Yes, it is indeed a K7 pod! Good eye.
I think I'm going to reshape it into something more like a Grissom saucer.
Posted by Jim NCC1701A (Member # 1021) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irishman: Actually, I am so much of a Mac addict that I installed 10.1.5 on an ancient unsupported Mac - an 8600/250!
Anyone feels sorry for me yet is asked to leave donations for an iMac Core Duo at the door.
How well does it run on the 8600? I've got one sitting in the corner doing not much... Presume you used XPostFacto? iMac Core Duo would be nice, can't wait to see the PowerMac replacement. Might finally retire my B&W...
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Okay, here's the latest on my carrier idea, the U.S.S. Monticello. Tell me what you think. Be as critical as you feel the need for. I want to get her right in the spirit of the slightly-after-Pike-pre-TOS feel.
Looks Klingon.
Posted by Jim NCC1701A (Member # 1021) on :
I like it!
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Very nice.
The only things I can think of is that the dome on top of the saucer looks too low if it's the bridge (which it might not be, so I'll shut up), and the registry on the back looks wierd , as if it can't decide if its comming or going!
Other than that eet's good-a shit!
EDIT One other thing I've just thought of - did you try it with pre-TOS nacelles (like we saw in 'the cage', or the early TOS nacelles without the lightbulb at the back and the cocktail stick in the front)?
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I like the front, but I'm thinking I'd like it more if the nacelles stuck straight out rather than angling down. Either that, or straight out, but angled towards the aft. Or angled upwards... I don't know. I just don't care for them angled down.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
So, the home pregnantcy test at the frot holds the shuttles?
It's not a bad design, but I'd also like to see older style nacelles on it, and the registry facting forward- it looks odd with it on the aft surface.
What I'd love to see though is the cylinder part lower than it is now-extending downward from the "saucer" by a "neck" piece. Currently the only weak point in the design is where the cylinder and saucer join, and this would solve the issue and make for a less klingon-looking design.
Hmmm...mabye have clamshell door at the rear of the cylinder in the new configuration...
Am I making any sense to you here? Here: I made a horrible Photoshop version of what I mean:
[ February 10, 2006, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
That's a neat design, Irishman! I echo the opinions of those who say that the registry should face forward and the nacelles should be pilot-style, however. Also, I think Jason's suggested modifications do indeed improve the lines of the ship, but that's probably more modification than you're a-wanting to be a-doing...
-MMoM
[And yes...insert requisite dick joke here...]
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Sure, I may make a variant of the design taking into account your changes, Jason. Yet, the point of what I did here was to just take one of Jefferies' concepts and develop it as far as we've seen the Connie taken, visually.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yah, I know- but he made a sketch very close the configuration I laid out as well (I think), so any variant will still be in the theme. Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Besides, if I change it the way you suggested (great layout, it looks even cooler turned upside down!), then it wouldn't work very well as a carrier. The straight-line conveyor from landing bay/repair/refuel bay back along the neck to the main hangar is designed with utilitarianism in mind. Breaking up that straight line makes conveyance from front to back less efficient.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Upside-down it looks like a grinning, one-eyed duck.
Hmm....I was thinking of the whole forward pill-shaped part as the hangar/repair/refuel section and the rest of the ship holding ship's functions, crew quarters, engines, etc.
The lowest level would be the shuttle recieving bay (connected to the clamshell) with elevators rising up to a repair bay and then up one more deck into a launchbay (sliding hangar doors on either side of the "pill". More like the landing bays on the old Galactica than anything we've seen on Trek, but cool in a Romulan War sorta way. The very forward of the bay holds flight ops while the ship's bridge is at the rear circular part.
Mabye the "pill" is a swappable module for the starship? Kinda a a mix of the Nebula's mission specific pod and the Plotmey's pods of cargo.
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
Jason, cool idea, but have you worked out how many shuttles or fighters you could actually fit in the forward section? I did. That's why I was forced to put hangar space in the rear hull.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I think that the Monticello is a very cool design, Irishman. In general I agree that it should have the Pike-era nacelles. Concerning the feel of the ship, I think that it generally is actually a quite solid design � the forward hull is by necessity simple and blocky. I think the best change would be to the lower half of the engineering hull � something to make it a bit more complex and visually interesting. Maybe something similar to the aft cutaway on the Constitution?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irishman: Jason, cool idea, but have you worked out how many shuttles or fighters you could actually fit in the forward section? I did. That's why I was forced to put hangar space in the rear hull.
Hmmm...go with a bigger "pill" or smaller shuttles! The ol' "penguin" shuttle or even the NX's shuttlepods would fit quite a few in there (assuming they store up into hangars like on the NX-01). Probably 15-20 shuttlepod-sized vessells could be stored with room for maintence and launch/recovery ops.
Not a huge number, but it's not a huge ship, either.
Might also be neat to see a "boomer" version from the Romulan war, where the pill is just a biiig missile silo with launch-tubes honeycombing it. Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I remember seeing the configuration of the Monticello before. Was it one of your designs, Irishman, or am I experiencing a d�j�-vu?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
ST: The Magazine published many little doodlr sketches comsidered for the TOS Enterprise- this was one.
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Not the Jeffereries sketches at the start of this thread or Irishman's ortho renderings of same?
They do look cool, btw. I mean I don't like the design particularly (despite being a huge fan of modular mission components), but the execution is plainly beautiful. I'm a little unclear, is it a straight-through carrier-type deck side-to-side? Open the side doors and you see straight through? I'm guessing that would make landing while the ship was maneuvering kind of complicated.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I think the page scanned is only one of three from that issue with sketches on it.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Old thread fishing...
Any more on the Monticello Irishman? What about the other scout yoru had got preliminaries on?
(Hijacks post) I've just been at my parents house overnight, and I found an ancient CAD program (called 'Design and CAD' I think) that my old design & technology teacher leant to me in about November 1999. It's a little bit primitive. Anyhew, out of boredom I made this - it's a sort of just post ENT version of the second one down on the left , the one labled 'INDEPENDANCE' (wasn't that Roddenberys first name for the Enterprise?).
In leiu of any other ideas, I'm calling it SS Monty, after my dog. He's quite ugly, and has a big head too, so there's the thinking behind it.
Any ways, comments on the ship, how crap the program is, and what I should replace said program with (and prices if known I guess) to make more lovely starships would be greatly appreciated.
It's influenced by Kareem Nassars Daedalus reimagining (the enginering hull), and Irishmans first ship in this post (the mid line deflector), as well as Matt Jeffries ideas of course - credit where it's due.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)