Well, two things from the past. First, me. Hi, I uh...got lost when I ventured out into the real world and never found my way back...
Or something.
Second, a large amount of old Star Trek drawings I recently found while clearing out my old school notebooks. I tend to keep all my notebooks, some of these dating back to high school nearly 7 years ago or so, so they're truly from way back when. I decided, among trying to figure out which notebooks to save, to scan in all the old pictures to share with you guys.
These designs were made throughout high school and early college, and were simply things done out of boredom while sitting in class. I used no tools other then a mechanical pencil and lined notebook paper, so all lines are eyeballed to make sure they are straight.
Some things on the designs may seem rather foolish, probably because they are and I only realized it after the drawing was started or done. Scales are almost definately going to be off on certain elements, possibly because I had one idea in mind but upon finishing realized it no longer fit that size. Shit happens.
As you can see, most are also unfinished. For every drawn here, there are probably 10 rough sketched ideas that never went anywhere and thus aren't scanned.
Anyway, my old school drawings...
Baltic Sea class
Basically a movie era tug, except unlike other tugs which simply had a neck connecting to the large cylindrical pods, this one has the pods connect into the large opening in the rear of the engineering hull and are supposed by the spine trailing off the rear, making for a better connection.
Bihlman class
Basically a TOS-era Miranda but on a smaller scale.
Bihlman class refit
A movie-era upgrade to the Bihlman. A further refit was sketched but never finished.
Bushido class
An attempt to take starship design to an extreme, similar to a Saber.
Coridan class
Class of small explorers. Two sub-classes were made, Altair featuring nacelles set at a wider stance and Betazed featuring two sensor pods set on their sides instead of the single one on the other two classes.
Cronos class
Also known as Arrow class, the Cronos was another rethinking of Starfleet design. Also an attempt to make a "movie-era Defiant class" with tightly packed design features.
Furious class
Nothing particular special, but I did like the immense amount of detail I put into what little actually was completed...
Hertz class
As part of my thinking that Starfleet would create ships to fill small niches instead of ships to fill multiple niches, I created a small sketch of the Hertz, a ship designed specifically for jamming of communications and sensors.
Continued...
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Part 2...
Illustrious class
A simple stablemate to the Sovereign, the Illustrious was meant to be a medium sized cruiser, likely a replacement for the Excelsiors. It featured no major engineering hull so would be rather flat on the bottom.
Independence class
A modern replacement for something like the Constellation, yet slightly more advanced then a Cheyenne. Also a rethink of the layout of my Mustang class.
Kepler class
Strictly science vessels, it featured an Erandi sub-class which had an extension off the back for equipment and science bays.
Luna class
Basically a supertanker of the stars, I interpreted the design of an ocean-going tanker into a starship, with a prow front end and all command structure way in the very back of the vessel. Designed to carry cargo units in pairs sideways, leading to a capacity of 14 units, making this a very massive vessel.
Mustang class
My favorite design, it's been reshaped for over 10 years now (I originally drew the basic design in 8th grade). Basically something like the Defiant, but not dedicated solely to fighting. It's key point was playing deflector dishes and engineering hull on top instead of the bottom.
Odin class
A simple design seen many times, Constitution hull and neck with a single nacelle at the bottom.
Orwell class
An electronic warfare ship, similar to my idea with the Hertz. Would be used for various secretive purposes outside the use of conventional weapons.
Still more...
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Part 3...
Revolution class
Another major rethink of Federation design, attempting to compact things a bit better, as well as offer some slight protection for warp nacelles. Also the notion of "aerodynamics" in design, although things obviously don't work quite that way in subspace. Possible Galaxy replacement.
San Francisco class
Another Defiant-like vessel, meant strictly for offensive purposes, unlike the Defiant's defensive purpose.
Shiloh class
Group of TOS frigates. The basic class is the bottom drawing, obviously nowhere near complete, but was meant to be a saucer with two nacelles and no engineering hull. The Nelson sub-class was meant to add the engineering hull to the bottom of the sauber, as well as extend the rear shuttle bay. The Salvation sub-class was identical to the Nelson, but a hospital ship. The final (and complete) variant was the Oracle subclass, which featured the gigantic "sail" on top, meant to be a large group of deep-space sensors.
Shooting Star class
A tiny courier, meant to be very basic and very fast in its ability to delivery small but necessary items.
Shrike class
Small Akira-like ship loaded with 3 torpedo pods, predecessor to the San Francisco design which came later.
St. Lawrence class
Small scoutships, again with a subclass variant, Yellowstone, which added the sensor pod.
Mustang class shuttlebays
A look at other work I've done besides exterior design, this was basically blueprints for the main shuttle bay and cargo bay on the Mustang class seen above. Other drawings included sickbays, the bridges, officer's lounges, transporter rooms, and engineering for the Mustang as well as other classes as well.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Part 4...
Superior class
A basic destroyer design similar to the Odin, but more refined I think. Basically, the Superior = Odin. This is the design in the TOS era.
Superior class refit
The movie-era version of the Superior, which included refits of existing Superiors and construction of new vessels, known as Everest sub-class.
Superior class refit II
New builds of starships named Huron II sub-class, all named after original Superiors which had been lost at the time. Upgrades over the other refit is the fact that it features 2 nacelles instead of one, and also has the ability to seperate the saucer from the rest of the neck.
Titan class
Termed a heavy super scout, she was meant to be similar to an explorer, but more capable of defending itself, making it ideal not only for exploration but also border patrol duty with a vast sensor suite.
Also included is a front/back view.
unnamed runabout class
I never got around to naming this (or I simply couldn't find the name now). Meant to be a slightly better runabout. One of the key features is the nacelles and impulse engines are attached directly to the body, which in turn makes for a slightly more stable landing "footprint".
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Part 5...
Alien ships from two species I created, as well as one we already know.
Ferengi Golnar class
Meant as a more militaristic Ferengi vessel, it is designed as a blockade runner, because the Ferengi was willing to go to any means necessary to get what they want...
Ski'a'na cruiser
Meant to be similar in design to Son'a vesels, with bow-like shape but more compact.
Synia dreadnaught
Radical design departure, meant to seem as extreme as possible.
Synia battleship, attack cruiser, cruiser, and scout
More Synia designs. These actually came first, with the Battleship being drawn first, then the rest done in order of size on down.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Matthew! Where have you been? Was she hot?
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
I grew distance of Star Trek after the end of Voyager, moved onto various car and video game forums, and have been doing the car dork thing for a while.
And she was decent. The next one was even better.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well, it's good to see you anyway. We've had to put up with some real riff-raff in recent years.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Like Lee... oh sorry.
Hey your Kepler class looks like a movie-era NX-class! Nice.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Weird how much your Titan-class looks like the Luna-class Titan...
Are the nacelles on the Bushido supposed to swing out? It looks like a ball hinge.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
The weird thing is.. I still have a few of these on my hard disk from when you posted them a few years (!) ago.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
The Kepler should look different from an NX, considering the nacelles simply go straight up from the saucer (think upside down Miranda) instead out from booms extended backwards.
And no, the Bushido's nacelles don't move, the ball hinge look is merely the location of the bussards.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: The weird thing is.. I still have a few of these on my hard disk from when you posted them a few years (!) ago.
Some indeed were scanned before, but I lost those scans in a hard drive crash. I also lost all my work that I had done in MSPaint (!) on redoing some designs. You wouldn't happen to have the detailed cutaway of the Titan class done in MSPaint, would you?
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Nice artwork! I especially like the Titan class http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5688/titanclassoe2.jpg although the two "ribs" like on the Akira aren't exactly the most original idea.
Posted by Lurker Emeritus (Member # 1888) on :
Very nice drawings. I'm impressed by the level of detailing. I wish my hand was steady enough to achieve similar results.
About your thoughts that Starfleet would build numerous small classes to fill particular niches: the Royal Navy tried that in the post war years. This was the reason they developed the Type number system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system_of_the_Royal_Navy
The problem was, they very rapidly realised it was a bad way to go. You could never guarantee that you'd have the right ship in the right place at the right time. Several specialist ships were often "caught out" in situations they weren't designed for, or pressed into service in roles they couldn't fulfill. Others were rendered redundant very quickly by obvious developments, such as the aircraft direction frigates which were made obsolete by the simple addition of radars to aircraft carriers who could carry bigger masts that gave them greater radar horizons.
Just a thought.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
Falklands anyone? Trying to make the Harrier a CAP aircraft brought about the losses incurred. I believe the Limeys lost five ships due to the inability to keep enough of the jump-jets aloft at a sufficient range to protect the fleet.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I dig the Furious class- looks like a sister to the original Holoship sketch by Eaves.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote: Falklands anyone? Trying to make the Harrier a CAP aircraft brought about the losses incurred.
Actually, there's been a lot of debate about this issue, mostly focusing on the manner in which 800NAS was deployed off Hermes, rather than range difficulties. I know the then OC801NAS has written a book in which the use of 800NAS in a low CAP is criticised and which blames this on insufficient understanding of the Sea Harrier FRS.1's capabilities, particularly as regards the Blue Fox radar (one CAP flight was diverted to make a visual recce of a reported contact when the radar would have been sufficient). I believe Adm. Woodward has acknowleged the lack of understanding of the SHAR's capabilities among Hermes's staff officers. Also it should be noted that the SHAR was designed as a CAP aircraft from the beginning; it's not the same aircraft as the RAF's GR varients or the US AV-8 series.
In addition it should be remembered that the FAA had no AWACS at that time, further inhibiting the early detection of attack aircraft.
Posted by Lurker Emeritus (Member # 1888) on :
Pretty much all of the grievous shortcomings highlighted by the Falklands and itemized by the body bags that need not have been filled resulted from the Royal Navy's increasing focus on becoming an almost single role anti-submarine force. Less charitable observers of the time referred to the RN as the United States Navy North Atlantis ASW fleet. The adoption of this tunnel vision NATO doctrine of focusing norther Europes naval efforts on combating the Soviet sub threat was used as a handy excuse by the politicians to cut back on capabilities which did not directly serve this doctrine. Among the losses were the planned big deck carriers to replace Ark Royal 4 and Eagle, and which should have been in comission to this day. These ships would have been around 60,000 tonnes and would have provided serious CAP and CAS capability in the Falklands, in addition to the ever vital AWACS capability which only carriers of that size are able to properly deploy.
It puts things in perspective when you consider that the Invincible class carriers were designed only as helicopter cruisers whose function was to act as an ASW escort for the carrier or to form the centre of an ASW task force attacking Soviet subs in the North Atlantic. That the RN was forced to modify them into relatively effective fixed wing carriers (and could only do this thanks to the development of the Harrier) is a prime example of how bad an idea small, single role ships really are. Generally such ships are only built under two conditions: 1. War emergency ships, as in escort construction during WWII. Almost all such ships built for that purpose were useless in peace time and were disposed off. 2. Government budget cuts. The RN's Falklands fleet contained a fair number of such ships.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)