Anton-class A recent WIP. I'm currently (slowly) redoing all my fandom schematics, using my all new Casimir-derived Constitution schematics. I tried my hand at the Anton, concentrating on making it slightly less ugly. It's still pretty weird though. That's why I'd like it to be a one-off frigate prototype.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Bueatiful Anton rendering: I always prefered the TMP era version though....with Phase II nacelles though.
Me have Illustrator CS to install today. Soon me am good drawer like you. Mabye I make a Chandley...
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Ye Gods, the Chandley is an abomination...
(...and so is the Anton.)
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Hey the new banners and markings on the Connie class make this design more 'accessible' to me - sorta brings it closer in-line with all the other ship's we've known - without having to add more hull detail or panelling etc etc.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Harry, "Tiberian" should probably be "Tiburonian" or something. Dr. Sevrin was from Tiburon. Tiberia is where bats come from.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Ye Gods, the Chandley is an abomination...
(...and so is the Anton.)
BLASPHEMER! I love the frog....er....Chandley! Those "shoulderpads" are barracks for starfleet marines. The ship knocks down an enemy's shields, mass transports 50-100 marines over and takes their ship by force. Good for all sorts of fun, really. Something Starfleet would have re-commisioned during Cardassian and Dominion wars.
My statement stands.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Far better than the FJ or SFB designs to be certain.
Posted by Phoenix Merrick (Member # 1142) on :
Jason, I'm not sure if you noticed but your Chandley Frigate looks more like a Strike Carrier. Which still fits with the FASA concept.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yeah...the Chandley is really a bruiser for a supposed "frigate". It's stats far outshine a Connie Refit in later models.
I like the "strike carrier" concept for that era though.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
"Better than the FJ designs"? Surely you jest, Sir. The FJ designs are great. They showed that Starfleet would build ships efficiently, using a set of modular components rather than outlandish new hull configurations that were wildly different across classes.
FASA's general design ethic seems to have been to take a bizzare, unfamiliar shape and slap a saucer on the front of it and somehow attach some nacelles. No sense there, at all. Hate them. All of them. Will kill them. Bloodily.
And yes, SFB ships were terrible. But what can you expect from the 13-year-olds desigining the game in their garages and living rooms? The historically-popular fandom stuff is all crap.
Posted by Kobi (Member # 1360) on :
Those images look really good. A bit more creative licence to the Aurora would not harm I think Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
My pet theory concerning the Aurora is that it is a Tholian hull. The Tholians sold a number of their hulls to intermediary X (Orions, Nyberrite, whatever) and Tiburon bought a number of these (empty) hulls and transformed them into corvettes.
The rather 'Earthly' name of Aurora is due to the pilot being a space hippy. And space hippies are like, one step below evil alien nazis.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: "Better than the FJ designs"? Surely you jest, Sir. The FJ designs are great. They showed that Starfleet would build ships efficiently, using a set of modular components rather than outlandish new hull configurations that were wildly different across classes.
FASA's general design ethic seems to have been to take a bizzare, unfamiliar shape and slap a saucer on the front of it and somehow attach some nacelles. No sense there, at all. Hate them. All of them. Will kill them. Bloodily.
And yes, SFB ships were terrible. But what can you expect from the 13-year-olds desigining the game in their garages and living rooms? The historically-popular fandom stuff is all crap.
THe FJ designs lack all common sense: on the Saladin, there'd be no room for engineering and crew: so much for "modular efficentcy! They look exactly like what they are: cheap cut and paste rearrangments of the AMT model that kids could build at home from parts and scraps: it made them instantly popular but not very practical. It's silly to think that dozens of races would consent to use five or modular six ship designs when they probably had fleets of their own prior to joining the Federation. The FASA stiff makes sense because the times changed (to the TMP era) and the Fed designs should have changed accordingly as new member races were brought into the fold. Nothing is lamer than the constant re-use of the TOS and FJ designs in into the DS9 era: it's not as though the humans of Starfleet ship design could/would shut out all other cultural influences. Some of FASA's designs are Andoriuan in origin and that explains the more radical concepts (like the Thurfir and Andor classes).
The SFB stuff is indeed terrible and it's all (highly) derivitive of the FJ stuff. TOS ships just dont lend themselves to diversity when they all use the exact same parts.
rearrangments
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Hey. This is the DAC forum. And it's my thread. So no FJ-bashing in here!
There's no rule that says starships should look pretty. Take the Baton Rouge, Anton and Chandley for example. They look horrible, but they have a special place in the Trek legacy.
The most ridiculous designs ever IMHO are the TNG Officer's Manual things created by FASA. Only God knows what the hell was going on there.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: The rather 'Earthly' name of Aurora is due to the pilot being a space hippy.
I think Aurora or it's equivalent is present in the lexicons of every space-faring race. For the sake of Americans, who refuse to speak anything but English, even in the 23rd century, the alien "aurora" has kindly been translated.
quote:Originally posted by Harry: And space hippies are like, one step below evil alien nazis.
I think space pirates (as in that TNG episode) and space con-men are even worse!
I must admit, I've always hated FASA's Chandley.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Masao:
quote:Originally posted by Harry: And space hippies are like, one step below evil alien nazis.
I think space pirates (as in that TNG episode) and space con-men are even worse!
I must admit, I've always hated FASA's Chandley.
No....space hippies are DEFINITELY worse than space con-men or even the hackened "space pirates" but I'd be happy to never see an episode with any of them again: even in reruns!
...and the Chandley is a work of art: even if it's too wide to fit through Spacedock's doors. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: The most ridiculous designs ever IMHO are the TNG Officer's Manual things created by FASA. Only God knows what the hell was going on there.
I totally agree about those baaad designs: by then, Paramount was not giving FASA anything to work with (thus the silly Starfleet/ Klingon hybrid ship) and Gene was not happy with how militaristiclly Starfleet was portrayed in the movies....the liscence was not going to be renewed and FASA knew it.....
A cluster fuck all around.
TNG did mange to establish a few FASA ships as canon via Conspiracy though, so it's not a total loss. Posted by Sarvek (Member # 910) on :
Great job on the Starship Design Issue 16, the Potemkin movie era markings, and the Anton class. I have always liked the Aurora and found it to be a facinating design. I also am a big fan of FJ and his work, my favorite is the Federation class dreadnought. Keep up the great work and are you going to elaborate more on the Starship Design issue??
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I totally agree about those baaad designs: by then, Paramount was not giving FASA anything to work with (thus the silly Starfleet/ Klingon hybrid ship) and Gene was not happy with how militaristiclly Starfleet was portrayed in the movies....the liscence was not going to be renewed and FASA knew it.....
You mean Gene was not happy with how realistically Starfleet was portrayed in the movies.
What surprised me with the TNG FASA stuff is why they never bothered to do the Ambassador concept, it did exist as a painting and also as a gold blob on the ready room wall even in the first season so everyone knew of it. The Klingon dreadnought with Excelsior nacelles - itself a bad kitbash of an existing FASA TMP ship which was not quite as ugly - was an absolute abomination.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Gene was not happy that his "advanced humanity" of TOS had/was slipping into the bigoted crew of STVI.
The STII and VI resemble a Tom Clancy movie than Gene's TOS Trek. (oddly, STV has the closest emotional feel to TOS).
As to the Ambassador painting: who knows? FASA had very little contact or input from Paramount/Trek by that point: note the lack of Ferengi or other threat vehicles in the book as well. They got shut out.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
Unfortunately I must agree that STV was the closest film to TOS, since viewing some TOS eps again I realised just how dreadful most of it was, there's a couple of gems like the doomsday machine, balance of terror, that one with the Klingons on the Enterprise and that 'malevolent energy being of the week' that fed on their anger. There's more but I can't be arsed to remember them. The rest just haven't stood the test of time.
STVI may have portrayed humans as bigoted - which we are, and always will be - but what I thought more important was that it showed them overcoming their prejudice (or at least Kirk overcame his 'you've restored my son's faith' or whatever the line was).
P.S. speaking of FASA's ineptitude - Romulans with photon torpedoes and totally gimpified ships; what were they playing at? Oh and the Klingon 'Dangerous Fat Man' battleship.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Kirk and crew were not bigoted just one movie prior so why the collosal chip on their shoulders in STVI? The whole prenise of Trek is that humans have already overcome our (current) petty natures and strive for something better and unselfish. Which the movies competely overlook.
Romulans do indeed use torpedos (at least by TNG anyway) so who's to say when they started using them instead of the Plasma Weapon? FASA even went so far as to explain why they switched and the resistance they had to using "alien" weaponry instead of the Plasma Weapon (with it's very limited range).
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
I don't recall any specific mention of photons being used by the Romulans in TNG, we just assume those little balls they fire are torps, they may be an advanced form of the plasma torpedo without the range limitation - technology advances in Trek, photons have developed a lot since Kirk's time so why not the plasma torp?
Edit: I prefer humans be portrayed in a realistic light - we may eventually abandon civil war, flawed economics, even money, and all the other evil-bad-nasty-stuff that those damn commies who go to university tell us are bad. But we'll always posses our deep rooted base drives, i.e. to kill, to procreate and to accumulate worthless stuff. Greed will follow us to the stars wether we want it to or not. GR had some very unrealistic expectations of humanity, about the only thing I'll admit he got right was that we'll one day abandon God. Ironically the thing everyone else thinks is his major failing.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Well, back in "Contagion" we specifically hear the Romulans do use photon torpedoes.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I'm not sure I agree that ST 6 showed the crew as super-bigoted. They had a predjudice agianst the Klingons, sure. But remember, there had been decades of unremitting hostility. Why wouldn't they be a little edgy around them? I agree it doesn't quite fit with inviting the crew of a bird of prey over for drink from the last movie, but they were only dealing with one ship, not the prospect and tensions of forming an alliance between governments.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
It's just that they (morally) slipped a LOT from the TOS characters to their movie-era versions.
Mabye they just got old and republican.... Comes with their Starfleet AARP cards.
Besides, it's not just the TOS cast depicted as prejeduced: it's ALL of starfleet: the whole "only the top of the line models can even talk" line is cringeworthy: right out of a KKK rally!
I dont think it's just the Klingons they'd have had issue with: the same would have happened with Gorn or any non-human looking species becoming allies. Trek went from being better than us to far far worse....in ONE movie!
I dont see that as "realistic", just pathetic.
Only Spock remained true to character. Go Spock-O! Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
Well, erm, I wouldn't say they became worse than us - certainly your KKK mention is an exageration. Besides which they are friends with the Gorn, further there're many races within the Federation that are even more outlandish than the 'foreheads' as the Cardassians call them. What about the Andorians? The Tellarites? Hell, what about those ones that can't breathe in M-class atmospheres - the other-other blue guys. Also it's well known that Klingons aren't the brightest matches in the box - that's probably where the line came from.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
When did they become paals with the Gorn? I dont think te Gorn were ever mentioned again (aside from Sisko's reference in Tirals nad Tribulations).
As to the other races: where are they in the movies? The Federation President is about as "non human" as shown and that a slim distinction at best. Anyone watching the movies and unfamillair with Trek would think Starfleet was a humans-only organization (with the occasional token web-footed alien thrown in to make Chekov seem even more dumb than usual). that might have served the obvious cold-war theme of STVI, but it's certainly not what Gene intended for Trek to be (thus his annoyance at the militaristic aspects nad parralells to modern US military structure instead of exploration).
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"When did they become paals with the Gorn? "I dont think te Gorn were ever mentioned again (aside from Sisko's reference in Tirals nad Tribulations)."
The Gorn weren't, but Cestus III was. The fact that it had human inhabitants in the 24th century has led people to believe that the Federation must have made up with the Gorn.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I think top-of-the-line models was referring to cleaning apparatus that can get rid of the Klingon smell.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"When did they become paals with the Gorn? "I dont think te Gorn were ever mentioned again (aside from Sisko's reference in Tirals nad Tribulations)."
The Gorn weren't, but Cestus III was. The fact that it had human inhabitants in the 24th century has led people to believe that the Federation must have made up with the Gorn.
Or the Gorn were all killed by an asteroid hitting their homeworldand the Federation just moved in later. Or they just could not grow any good weed on the planet and gave it away. Or anything. Even the Tholians and Romulans had ambassdors at the conference the Dominion bombed on Earth but not the Gorn. Mabye they were protesting the SFB guys stupidly naming all Gorn ships after Earth dinosaours. Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
"I think top-of-the-line models was referring to cleaning apparatus that can get rid of the Klingon smell."
OK, I can't tell anymore; this is intended as a joke, right?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I sure hope so...or Andrew has very odd notions about...well everything. Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Marauth: But we'll always posses our deep rooted base drives, i.e. to kill, to procreate and to accumulate worthless stuff. Greed will follow us to the stars wether we want it to or not.
Are you sure you're in the right place? This is Star Trek; the dystopian-punk scifi forum is three nodes over.
Agree with you about the religion part, though.
Marian
This random sig quote is brought to you by Hildy Johnson: "When I'm feeling festive I might put on a colorful skirt, more of a sarong, really, and never fret about the hemline. But most of what I wear wouldn't have raised eyebrows if I had gone back in time and walked the streets in the years before sex changing." --John Varley, Steel Beach Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
The point I was making is that ST shows a completely unrealistic view of the future of humanity - we will never be as altruistic as the Federation, it goes against human nature which is something that no amount of paradise can overcome.
And god do I hate punk-sci-fi.
P.S. this ain't the ST forum, it's the DAC so dystopian future comments aren't outlawed Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Well, if I'm remembering correctly, Kirk & Co. seem to barely tolerate the Klingon presence in "Trouble W/ Tribbles." I think Gene was very wise in portraying the Federation as a bastion of social integration, and I don't think the movies were necessarily betraying this philosophy. Khan says it himself (dripping with irony) on approach "We are one big happy fleet," right before he exploits precisely that trust to cripple Enterprise, (killing a bunch of idealistic trainee redshirts in the process). In VI the xeno-intolerance is the real enemy the heroes are fighting against, both internally and externally. The movie was about changing our perceptions of what had until recently been our bitter foes. And Kirk is able to overcome his own prejudice (note: stirred up by the particularly cruel and intolerant Kruge in ST:III) to A) beam unarmed into the belly of the enemy's ship in an attempt to aid Gorkon and eventually B) thwart the assasination attempt which would have furthered the xeno-phobic agenda. So where the ugly, naked hate expressed by several of the admirals and Kirk himself early in VI may seem to contradict Gene's vision of Starfleet, by the end of the film that school of thought is shown to be inappropriate and ultimately hideously criminal. It may not be the shiny utopia we assumed it was in TOS, but I assume the message these movies is trying to communicate is that these problems will need constant vigilance and may even require us to alter what we had assumed to be altruistic and enlightened perceptions. Hell one could even say that this message is timely given current events.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
^^ That's too much text. Should I read all that?
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Nah.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Marauth: about the only thing I'll admit he got right was that we'll one day abandon God. Ironically the thing everyone else thinks is his major failing.
1/ They do?
and
2/ Thank God you're here to say what he got right and wrong about his predictions for humanity's future.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Definitely not.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: 1/ They do?
and
2/ Thank God you're here to say what he got right and wrong about his predictions for humanity's future.
One day it will happen, every generation becomes more and more apathetic towards religion, some convert to pathetic non-religions like wicca, others become budhist 'because it's cool' but a lot are moving towards atheism and about bloody time too. I've had a lot of people tell me how they think GR was wrong on religion and how great it is . Idiots.
Besides we certainly haven't achieved any of GR's other predictions for our future, we're just as intolerant and spiteful and greedy and backstabbing judases as ever, more so than ever before IMO.
Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Marauth: [SNIPPAGE] IMO.
That's the one thing missing from your previous posts that made them so annoying. You need to do more of this. A lot more. Stating an opinion as if it were an incontrovertable fact tends to annoy people who disagree--as you may have noticed. And personally, I think a polite difference of opinion is much more fun than a flame war.
Marian
Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam:
quote:Originally posted by Marauth: about the only thing I'll admit he got right was that we'll one day abandon God. Ironically the thing everyone else thinks is his major failing.
1/ They do?
and
2/ Thank God you're here to say what he got right and wrong about his predictions for humanity's future.
1) That certainly seemed like GR's intention, although he had to be subtle about it, especially in the 60s.
2) Hear hear
Marian
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Please please please don't go down this path here. Any discussions regarding religion or religious figures is limited to the Flameboard.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
quote:Originally posted by MarianLH:
quote:Originally posted by Marauth: [SNIPPAGE] IMO.
That's the one thing missing from your previous posts that made them so annoying. You need to do more of this. A lot more. Stating an opinion as if it were an incontrovertable fact tends to annoy people who disagree--as you may have noticed. And personally, I think a polite difference of opinion is much more fun than a flame war.
Marian
What if I just put that in my sig (that all posts are my opinion and no one elses)? I'm gonna do that anyway even though I consider it common sense when reading the posts of other not to assume they're speaking for everyone, I guess I'm just an over-opinionated arsehole. Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Topher: Please please please don't go down this path here. Any discussions regarding religion or religious figures is limited to the Flameboard.
Is that board policy? If so, I would object to it. Surely if the discussion is in relation to Star Trek then it would belong in whatever forum most closely relates to the area of Star trek being discussed. And if it were in relation to a story or piece of art someone created, then it would belong in DAC.
Now, clearly, this particular tangent is not specifically in relation to this topic, so it is true that it doesn't really belong here. But I am simply responding to your blanket statement. Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I shall specify, then:
Any religious discussion that devolves into incendiary levels is restricted to/shall be cast to the Flameboard.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Which this one hasn't, so...
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I just advised so that it wouldn't.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
No. But if old-skool Omega walked in and started to say that obviously humankind will embrace God fully and everyone will go to church on a daily basis in one hundred years time, things would get a bit out of hand.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
What, they won't?
*dumps stock and bonds in the Catholic Church*
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: What, they won't?
*dumps stock and bonds in the Catholic Church*
Good man, though I don't think they're worth much after all those kiddie-fidler priest allegations dumbarse papacy protecting their priesthood. Oh and the American bishops saying W. Bush is a good christian - that offends me and I haven't been catholic since I was 12, oh well such is the way of the world.
Has anyone else realised how off-topic this has become? I mean Constitution variants and space hippies people - come on! Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I wasn't aware any RC bishops were calling Bush a "good Christian". I've only heard that they say everyonw should vote for him for the sole reason that, politically, he adheres to the same stance as they do on abortion.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
I must get different news stories, I listen to a lot of radio 2 in the afternoons on the way back from uni.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
. Idiots.![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)