I've watch the teaser today and i saw a new shuttlecraft it looks like an APC.Its called "APCO"(i think so). I made an schematic of the ship(based on the pics of the teaser). With closed wings EDIT: I heard from a friend thats not "APCO" is, but its ARGO. oops:D Lobo
[ June 27, 2002, 07:15: Message edited by: Lobo ]
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
That's a beaut of a design, Lobo!
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
Its not my design.
Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
Well, yeah, Lobo, I know. Sorry, nice "realization" of the design. Better?
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
Ah its ok sorry Snay:D
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Assuming that's the E-E it is leaving - has that shuttlebay always been there?
And what's the knobby-round-airlock thing next to the conference room(?) windows behind the bridge? Looks like a shuttle docking port a-la TMP.
Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
quote:Originally posted by Toadkiller: Assuming that's the E-E it is leaving - has that shuttlebay always been there?
And what's the knobby-round-airlock thing next to the conference room(?) windows behind the bridge? Looks like a shuttle docking port a-la TMP.
Yeah, I think that's the only shuttle bay Ent-E has ever used onscreen.
[ June 27, 2002, 07:53: Message edited by: TheF0rce ]
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I quick check of my E-E cutaway poster shows that it is labeled as "Aft Airlock". However, the same poster also shows it connected directly to a standard corridor with no actual airlock system or any kind of vestibule at all... It basically shows it as a round door for use in blowing all the personnel on the deck out into space.
But I still think it's an airlock or travel pod dock.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
IIRC the conference room seen in FC is on Deck 1. This dockin port is at Deck 3.
Wasn't there another row of windows on the left side of the docking port, too?
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
That's good work, Lobo, as always.
It's interesting to see this type of setup where the shuttle carries a all-terrain vehicle. It kinda gives some reinforcement to all the shuttle designs The Animated Series used (like the shuttle boat).
Posted by Captain Cabac (Member # 354) on :
The right Name ist "ARGO" a new version of the standard shuttlecraft that is able to carry land-based vehicles.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
And has already been mentioned earlier in the thread before you replied.
[ June 27, 2002, 10:10: Message edited by: Dat ]
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Those top winglets need to be folded down as well when you close the bottom wings.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Never thought I'd have to post this on a Trek forum but here goes; what do you guys think of the jeep? It's about three quarters of the way down this page. Looks like a Humvee with a smooth downed back to me.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:; what do you guys think of the jeep?
The same what I think of the Insurrection-joystick. And this James Bond-jump doesn't make it any better.
[ June 27, 2002, 12:18: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Capped In Mic (Member # 709) on :
Argo.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I think I should do a schematic of the Jeep for you. Wow, first time ever I concider doing a wheeled vehicle schematic for Star Trek
If you want more Jeep-pictures, here are my references: Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Hey maybe the Delta Flier's design principals paid off back home! Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
That thing looks like it drove straight out of Mad Max's arena.
Posted by The Real Folk Blues (Member # 510) on :
it looks rather like the "combat dune buggy" that the US Navy SEALS use.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
quote:Wasn't there another row of windows on the left side of the docking port, too?
Yes, and it's still there. It's just that the brightness of the reflection just barely outshines the light from the windows so the windows are almost invisible. Look closely and you'll see the windows.
Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
And here a first view of the "remulan" shuttle: I know its not so accurate.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Still bloody nice though.
Wahey! A new weapon. Barrel looks suspiciously reminiscent of the Worfzooka, the Isomagnetic Disintegrator, from Insurrection. . .
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Don't like the wheels, but then again I have never tried wheels. :rolleyey:
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Maybe I know where Eaves or whoever designed it got the inspiration for the jeep. Three screens from Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within...
So? Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
A Closer pic from Insurrection of the Main? Shuttle Bay of the E-E. (Can anyone make out what is in through those windows?)
The only thing we really know abou that control room is that it's double-sided, such that controllers can look on the inside, then turn around and watch ships depart.
Mark
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Well, now I've seen better (well, clearer) pics of that jeep I like it even less. It just looks silly. Not to mention the fact that they have anti-grav for God's sake!! They don't need a jeep. Nice schematics, everyone who's done 'em.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
You know what's wierd about that shuttle bay picture? It looks like the bay ends about one shuttle length from the door. There doesn't appear to be any interior space at all. I suppose that wall could be movable... but where would it go? Down?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
They had a similar structured bay in Away Team (aboard the USS Leyte Gulf, Akira class). Basically, you have a front part where you place one shuttle, and an aft part which is the storage space. There's that large wall that seperates the two areas, but the wall is as wide as the bay doors. You can pass the wall on either side of it. Don't know where's the sense behind it, but I didn't design it. On the other hand, it looks as if there are two elevator platforms. And what is left and right of the bay door? another two doors? For what purpose?
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
I like the jeep. One can't always flit about in antigrav hoppers, after all. Besides, why waste the power/fuel to fly around when driving works? It's like saying "Well, the US Army has helicopters, so why do we use jeeps?"
[ June 28, 2002, 12:38: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Well why go to all the trouble of carting the jeep down from orbit when you can just use a shuttle?
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
Stupid writing, of course.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:Well why go to all the trouble of carting the jeep down from orbit when you can just use a shuttle?
Or a transporter, for that matter.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Ryan sadly does not post here often enough for me to separate sincerity from sneaky cleverness in that comment.
Posted by iam2xtreme (Member # 836) on :
the observation bay of the shuttlebay image is minature photo's of sets imposed on the cgi model. dont ask me how they do it but it was in the uk star trek magazine once about when it first happened on voyager. unfortunately that shot seems to show the warp core(!).
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Ryan sadly does not post here often enough for me to separate sincerity from sneaky cleverness in that comment.
That one was mostly sincere, unless the Nemesis script has been amended with some other rationale. Posted by Lobo (Member # 669) on :
I know a little bit late, but here is the front view of the ARGO shuttle craft: I hope its accurate enough.
Lobo
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I wonder how the crew is supposed to get in. This is another of those poorly thought out Eaves designs - the only door out seems to be the one that's blocked by the jeep most of the time.
The jeep itself is a study of wasted space. Let's assume that the engine really needs to be as massive as the lump between the front wheels is. That still is no excuse for having that much chassis in front of the front axle, or aft of the aft axle. Those parts of the vehicle serve no purpose, except consuming space aboard the shuttle.
The vehicle also offers only about half the cabin size it could, and gives minimal protection against elements or aggression. Why give it any walls at all when it lacks a windshield and a roof? And why the high thresholds on the doors when the structure as a whole obviously is not waterproof up to that height? They simply hinder access to the cabin. And the gun mount seems to prevent the loading of cargo to the aft section.
The Final Fantasy vehicle is a far better design for a barebones dune buggy. I'd think Starfleet would opt for a much more enclosed vehicle, however. And one with transformer-like fold-out features (done in CGI, after which a non-folding real vehicle would be substituted). That would not only have been more functional - most importantly, it would have looked better.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
Another oddity. The Argo has no registry of her own. This seems to be true, also, of the shuttle seen in "Insurrections". Why the change in tradition? Since the first series, the shuttles have had registries (ex. Galileo NCC-1701/07 ). In the last two, there has been no registries, aside from the mother's ship registry. Does this make sense?
Yet another oddity. Where does the Argo store her engineering components? If you take into consideration the space needed for a 20th century-type jeep and the cockpit, there would appear to be no room for the life support equipment and many of the engineering components needed to fly this ship. Is this an extreme example of making every component very small?
Timo,
I agree with your opinion on the design of the ship and the egress/regress hatches on this shuttle. I was thinking that they would place a hatch on the top; however, considering the nature of the shuttle, this would seem impossible. Why? The hull doesn't look climbable and there are no ladders leading to the top of the shuttle.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Well, I don't really see any critical organizational difference between having a shuttle with "Galileo USS Enterprise 1701/7" (TOS-style) on the side versus "Galileo USS Enterprise Shuttlecraft 7 1701" (TNG-style).
Argo's presumed filed as an auxilliary craft of 1701-E and probably has an internal Enterprise number, like, say, 15 or something. So they could paint NCC-1701-E/15 on the side if they wished to, only they haven't tended to do it that since TOS.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by newark: Where does the Argo store her engineering components? If you take into consideration the space needed for a 20th century-type jeep and the cockpit, there would appear to be no room for the life support equipment and many of the engineering components needed to fly this ship. Is this an extreme example of making every component very small?
This is actually old hat. The Type-6 shuttle is another example of a craft that's basically thin walls and lots of stretching room.
Though I might've preferred a bit more obvious tech-room, in a fashion akin to the back room of the 1701 Galileo, I'll always have a soft spot for the Starfleet-clean look in designs, like you'll find in Probert and Sternbach designs, and parrotted elsewhere.
Then there's Eaves. (shudders)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Actually, the Argo is a *gigantic* piece of sh^H^H equipment. Compare it to the size of a person in the promo shots of the jeep leaping into it. Lobo's front view shows that the cabin could be quite narrow, with all the required machinery flanking the forward part of the habitable volume.
The interior set for that shuttle (if any is seen) will probably not be much bigger than the cabin of a type 6 or a runabout. Unless they reuse the VOY type 12 shuttle, it'd have to be a scratchbuilt set, more or less, and they won't bother to build a big one. So plenty of space for equipment outside the cabin.
It's just that the said equipment prevents access to the cabin, except through the stern... Just like in the "Insurrection" shuttle.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Sarvek (Member # 910) on :
quote:Originally posted by Siegfried: That's good work, Lobo, as always.
It's interesting to see this type of setup where the shuttle carries a all-terrain vehicle. It kinda gives some reinforcement to all the shuttle designs The Animated Series used (like the shuttle boat).
In the Animated Series there was a shuttle called the aquashuttle used by the crew on worlds covered mostly in water or some liquid. Ironically, the name of the planet that they visited is called "Argo". They also used a Starfleet raft to explore the surface of the planet.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Now they'd just use data!
I think the effects people are just getting lazy - or the people who supervise them aren't doing their jobs.
Data's ship in INS didn't have a name. The Shuttle didn't have a name or registry. The Argo doesn't have a registry.
Does the dune-buggy have a registry?
And in reguard to the double doors on the Main Shuttlebay - who knows why - but I assume that the second doors open out into the main shuttle bay - it's not as if they need a pressure hatch with the forcefield technology. Who is DESIGNING/WORKING on these things. There is so much these people don't remember from the episodes.
They should just have some uber-geek who knows allt he episodes, continuity and tech to work as a consultant on the movies/Enterprise.
Posted by Sarvek (Member # 910) on :
John Eaves is the designer of the Argo and the dune buggy. If you check out the latest issue of the Star Trek: Communicator it has his latest versions of the vehicles. There is also a poster that you can purchase that has all the ships and vehicles from Nemesis.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
