At least partly inspired by Captain Boh, I decided to mock up a late-TOS, pre-TMP "Miranda/Avenger". A friend and I had been discussing what we would do to Trek, given half the chance, and this would be our hero vessel. But before I got in too deep with detailing, I thought I'd see what people think.
As you can probably tell, I've pushed the nacelles way back, and I've spread them out quite a bit. I'm still not sure what I'm doing with the deflector pod thing. I'm mostly concerned with aesthetic feedback, though canon arguments frequently amuse me. So do your worst.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
I think I've been out done Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
It appears to be defecating.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
TEH SHITTLEPOO NUMBER TOO!!!
quote:Originally posted by Captain Boh: I think I've been out done
This was not my intent. And it's different. I'm trying to bridge TOS into movie era. Yours is straight TOS. Fewer goo-gahs to fidget with.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Still, you clearly know a lot more about what you're doing than I am.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Windows. There are windows on the leading/front edge of the 'square hull at the back of the saucer under the dish region'. I don't think Captain Boh (any relation to the Face of Boh?) had any there. Yes, yes you haven't added much detail yet - but I just wanted to get in quick!
Oh should you lessen the grid lines on the saucer? Although you are trying for a pre TMP feel to the ship like you said.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Maybe the impulse deck is a bit large, and the impulse deflection crystal is mounted too far forward?
I know the roll bar is from Reliant, but I've always thought that separate vertical supports for the torpedo pod and phaser cannons would be a lot simpler.
Captain Boh: Put a nice fat outline around your schematic as BX does here. It helps tie the drawing together.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
I think the sensor pod and side cannons should be raised to provide better arcs of fire and so that whatever rays are emitted from the sensor dish will not cause irreparable harm to the bridge crews....um... "libido"
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
quote:Originally posted by Masao: Maybe the impulse deck is a bit large, and the impulse deflection crystal is mounted too far forward?
Oh, impulse delfection crystal. Right. I totally knew what that was. And also totally realized why it was where it was positioned before. Totally.
Thanks all for feedback.
Andrew: I hereby appoint you window nazi for all proto-Mirandas. Rest assured that windows will go there. I just won't put them there until I'm solid on the shape of that portion of the ship. It takes a while bending all those rectangles to conform to new shapes. Good call on the deflector spacing. I was using a movie era template and it wasn't jibing. This feels much more TOS.
Masao: I worried about that being too big. I wanted to make sure the face series would have enough space to still make a fun show and you lose a lot of volume with that secondary hull. This is smaller, but retains some of that original shape. I hope we're talking about the same "impulse deck." No way I'm losing the roll bar. That's half the fun!
WizArtist: Yeah I had similar concerns for their fertility. Rather than raising the rollbar any higher, I've lowered the Bridge module somewhat. The TOS module stands up so proud, and I felt like this kept the lines of the ship. Do people feel like the deflector needs to entirely clear the bridge? I suppose the next step would be making the dish smaller.
Also, Masao, careful about giving away all our tricks. Next thing you know we'll have to become good illustrators!
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
Did you intentionally mke the pylons holding up the roll bar at a different angle (from the front/back) than those holding the nacelles? On the Reliant those are part of the same structure, and I'd have assumed they'd be here too (espcially because they line up in the side view).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I liked the bridge module better before. The saucer looks too flat this way. Was there a particular reason you didn't want to raise the rollbar a bit? Also, I know you mentioned doing this deliberately, but I think those nacelles stick out too far to the sides. In general, make it a little taller and a little less wide. (Not too much, of course.)
There also definitely needs to be some more detail on the rear deck structure.
-MMoM Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
[Insert many "wider is better" comments from GM's marketing campaign way back when]
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Mr. Neutron: That was an intentional departure. I wanted to imply that the rollbar and nacelle strut were the same structure, but I didn't feel TOS era ship design allowed for the trek boomerang shape that so beautifully connects the nacelle, main hull and phaser on the movie era Miranda. I suppose this is my way of uglying it up a bit so the movie era is a marked improvement.
MMoM: The main reason I'm reluctant to raise the bar is to retain the sleek(ish) lines. I want it to look fast. That being said, I can't make up my mind about the original proud bridge vs. my 'adjustment'. Not surprisingly, the original implies TOS more than the changed one (at the cost of the bridge jutting up into the path of the deflector.) Rear detail (and windows) will come later, promise. I want to establish that shape before doing too much detail work.
I played around with some different configurations taking your comments into consideration. The first silhouette is the the 3rd iteration of the design posted above. The second is what I would consider a pretty straight emulation of the Miranda shape using TOS parts and includes a much higher bar to accomodate the big deflector and tall bridge. The third is an attempt to bridge those two and is the incarnation towards which I'm currently leaning. The size of the deflector has been reduced, and the roll-bar raised somewhat. The nacelles have also been brought in a bit (that front view was putting me off my original "wider-is-better" arrangement.)
Everyone's comments (well, save Tim's) have been very useful so far and I'd certainly appreciate more.
Posted by Irishman (Member # 1188) on :
I actually prefer the original version you made. The wider nacelle-base (pardon the automobile pun) makes it seem less boxy to me.
Also, about your deflector dish. I came up with a neat way and logical way to determine how round or oval a deflector dish should be. Take your front view of the ship and - using your circle tool - draw an oval over it, letting the ship's outermost extremities define the shape of the dish. That seems logical to me, as the job of the deflector dish is to provide coverage (via deflector beams and particle emitters) for the whole ship. It seems that having a dish constructed that way would be the most efficient way to go about it.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
The original is very good yet I would change the deflector dish to a shape similar to the NX-01 albeit not as narrow. I hope you get what I mean.
Anyways I always wondered what a TOS Excelsior would look like. Even though I know the Excelsior was developed in the TMP Era it would be interesting to see it TOS-erized
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I'd say that given the complexities of the transwarp drive and the Excelsior's number, she was probably started in the 2260s instead.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Yeah she may have been started in 2260 but it would be nice to see something of a "rough draft" showing her as a TOS style ship.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Fuuuuuck that notion. That would imply that either the Excelsior took forever (unlikley considering the Federation's supposed rescources and all it's member world's briliant scientists' expertise to draw upon) to build or that the general design style of the Excelsior is really old but did not influence starship construction at all (and makimg those Excelsior class ships still in service by DS9's era that much less likley).
Silly either way.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Re: the roll bar. If you don't want to raise bar itself, you could either make the pod smaller or change its attachment to the deflector pod (not have it going right through its middle, sort of like the attachment of Oberth's "sensor pod" or whatever it is). A more radical idea is to move the bridge forward and lower, from the center of the saucer to the forward slope of the hill.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I might lose the deflector crystal and insert the weird TOS raised strip thingie above the impulse engines.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
quote:Originally posted by Masao: Captain Boh: Put a nice fat outline around your schematic as BX does here. It helps tie the drawing together.
I don't suppose there's a quick and easy way to do that... is there?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Sharpie marker- just draw it on the screen...
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Damn it! I can't seem to find one.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Alternately, you could turn off your monitorand paint the ship on with White Out.
Whatever works for you, of course. Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Damn plastic modelers!!! Always sniffing that demon glue!!
The easiest way to have a thick outline is to place a copy of the ship on a lower layer and increase the line thickness. You can remove any unseen interior lines if you'd like.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
I can't belive I didn't think of that. Thanks.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Thanks a lot Masao! I was sooo close with that gag too....
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irishman: I actually prefer the original version you made. The wider nacelle-base (pardon the automobile pun) makes it seem less boxy to me.
Irishman: Yeah for me too. That was the problem I was having with a lot of the fan proto-Mirandas I was seeing. Spreading the nacelles lends a sense of stability. A matter of personal preference I expect. I've decided to embrace my original impulse (warp?) and bear the inevitable "Wide-Load" jokes. Incidentally, that's a great trick with the deflector. I tried it out and... yeah I didn't like the oval deflector. It looked too, I dunno. It didn't fit. I've opted for shrinking it and raising the rollbar slightly.
Mars needs Women: As I mention, I did try the oval deflector, but I just couldn't get a shape I liked. Something about the three circles of the nacelles and the deflector seems..right. I am a hippie. I started thinking about your proto-Excelsior, but then my brain blew up trying to imagine where those shapes would come from in TOS. I guess I've never been an Excelsior fan. I would be curious to see someone try...
Masao: I nudged it up a bit. It does give a better weapons arc for those phasers. But I've opted for a tiny deflector in the full-size pod. It's an interesting idea, but I fear moving the bridge foreward betrays the TOS aesthetic I was going for. I'm curious to learn more of this Oberth "sensor pod". If memory serves, the Oberth was pretty symmetric. I do like me some asymmetry...
Jason: Are you talking about the shoehorn-looking thing on the aft saucer of the Constitution? I don't think it adds nearly as much visual interest (the real reason). And maybe because it's bridging up into the movies it's justified (the excuse). I promise not to light it with blue. (Unless lighting it with blue makes it look incredibly cool, in which case all bets are off.)
Captain Boh: I actually don't do the black outline in the in-progress vector version (shapes moving and changing too often and I get confused easily). I use the magic wand in Photoshop as I am putting the jpg together and just stroke the selection with 2 or 3 pixels of black.
So, er, wider IS better:
Please to be making the comments...
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Fuuuuuck that notion. That would imply that either the Excelsior took forever (unlikley considering the Federation's supposed rescources and all it's member world's briliant scientists' expertise to draw upon) to build or that the general design style of the Excelsior is really old but did not influence starship construction at all (and makimg those Excelsior class ships still in service by DS9's era that much less likley).
Silly either way.
I was not trying to say that the Excelsior was developed in the 2260's, I was just saying what if it was made in a more TOS-style. Don't have a heartattack over this.
Anyways thanks Balaam Xumucane for listening to my request and your Miranda is coming out really nice. Have ever thought about putting the deflector dish as an extension that is connected to the sensor doom a la Surya-class?
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
funny how this thread keeps going....
actually when i read it, it helps greatly with my imagination. The last book i read, ST: Vanguard, had a TOS era Miranda stationed at Vanguard. it makes me wonder what the author's mind's eye is of the USS Bombay (no registry, surprisingly)...
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
I want that ship in .lwo format right now.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane: Jason: Are you talking about the shoehorn-looking thing on the aft saucer of the Constitution? I don't think it adds nearly as much visual interest (the real reason). And maybe because it's bridging up into the movies it's justified (the excuse). I promise not to light it with blue. (Unless lighting it with blue makes it look incredibly cool, in which case all bets are off.)
I am talking about the black shoehorn thingie (I dont know if I've ever seen a description of that part). Hmmm....I do think the crystal looks cool (and in blue), but mabye you could have a small deflector crystal at the terminator of the "shoehorn strip".... Kinda a blending of the two designs. Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane: Mr. Neutron: That was an intentional departure. I wanted to imply that the rollbar and nacelle strut were the same structure, but I didn't feel TOS era ship design allowed for the trek boomerang shape that so beautifully connects the nacelle, main hull and phaser on the movie era Miranda. I suppose this is my way of uglying it up a bit so the movie era is a marked improvement.
I'm not referring to the shape...I'm referring this...
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Mars needs Women: I hadn't really considered it. But I've never seen an execution of the sensor doom (dome+boom, right?) that didn't look too 'fragile'.
Pensive's Wetness: Glad to be of service.
Cartman: But Lightwave is hard... I will likely try to mock this up in Strata as that will take, say, hours as opposed to the days that LW would take me. It's a great program, but I'm still learning.
Jason: I've never really understood/liked the shoehorn. I've got a ridge in there now. Maybe that's enough. Anyone happen to know if the Miranda's warp core is at an angle? The doodad on the bottom looks like it ought to correspond to the impulse deflection crystal thingy.
MrNeutron: Yes? I think? Yes, the angle of the rollbar riser and the nacelle strut are intended to be different in this design. It makes like an arc out of the whole shape. Basically if it looks cool, then I totally did it on purpose and if it looks dumb, then it was totally a mistake.
Speaking of looking dumb, here's the part where everyone yells at me and tells me I'm an idiot.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
Nice but... it's too detailed now. basically i mean the sections of gagets above the landing bays and the, *ahem* Gundum Wing attena aft the bridge. a simple depression for the landing bays and a bare center spine would be better (no impulse crystal as that's really a TMP component)
but it looks nice as a intermediate version, RIGHT BEFORE full TMP production occurs across the entire fleet...
wait.... Sir? when you mean Pre-TMP... i miss understood this to mean TOS Miranda... am i mistaken and you really mean, 'Just a year or two before TMP?'
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Pensive: Indeed, this would be a late, late TOS version. Actually it would probably be finished towards the end or after the events of what we saw the series. Certainly towards the end of the original 5-year mission. I'm imagining 3-5 years before TMP.
And before everyone really puts their backs into telling me I am an idiot: A) I know, and B) this ship is a stellar survey ship. I imagine those strips above the shuttlebays to be recesed alcoves where interchangeable mission-specific pallets could be loaded. The hedgehog thingy is a probe-launcher as part of a cartographic pallet. I dunno about the limo antennae anymore. I liked it from the front. It's just I can't see putting on one of those GIANT Nebula backpacks.
Posted by Pwesty (Member # 1035) on :
I think that you have done a outstanding job sir. I think it looks just right(love the detail) now if somebody saw this idea and made a model out of it. Keep it up!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I love everything except the boomerang antenna. That looks like it should be on Shaft's Lincon.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
U.S.S. Jive-Turkey? No, but the antenna is gone and no one will miss it. I hope.
Only placeholder textures, and very little detail so far. I just wanted to get a feel for how it would work in 3D. Lemme know what you think...
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Shiny. What are you using to model it?
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
If I may offer my 6 grosze (that's 0.02$ ) so late in the develompent cycle...
This ship truly looks great. Indeed, this is the best interpretation of TOS Miranda looks I've seen. What huge difference rotating nacelle pylons did
However, I'm with Pensive's Wetness on this one - those probe launchers look too detailed, not to mention they look too much like smokescreen grenade launchers on modern tanks. Basically, to me, this doesn't look like 23th century equivalent of rapid-deployment equipment, but 20th century equipment slapped on the hull.
Do you actually need so many launchers? I don't think that stellar cartography requires steady rain of probes launched at unsuspecting stellar objects Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Hah! I caught you, centuries-long stellar-evolution process!
Topher: This is the new Strata Studio Pro. Probably the cheapest half-decent/full-featured 3D App. I mean if you're not going blender (and I'm not). I don't recommend Strata for modelling, but the new version can use light-dome HDRI rendering now which just makes all the difference.
Kazeite: Thanks. As for the probe/drone-launchers, I knew people wouldn't like them. Each tube would launch 3-5 little sensor drones to more easily chart an entire system at a time. These drones are self-propelled and semi-autonomous and the main reason my they're not launched out the torp-tubes is they are re-usable. They return when the charting is done and the ship moves on to another system. Even so, I realize they aren't REALLY justified. I just like 'em.
More justification/rationalization/explanation: So one of the implications of interchangeable mission modules is that these could ostensibly be developed and constructed in much less time than, say, an entire starship (and wouldn't necessarily be manufactured by Starfleet even.) So I figured that those would likely be the most advanced parts on the ship, closest to movie-era tech and provided a small (in area) departure from Starfleet aesthetics. But, really, more than anything I just think they're neato.
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
I've been half-following the developement.. but something just kinda-jumped out at me. The boxy structure on the tail of the hull is the right size for the movie-era impulse engines, but the smaller TOS era impulse engines look a little odd on that big square box.
Might I suggest a bevel below the impulse engine.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What about shuttle bays?
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Oooh, good idea, Woozle. And yes, Andrew, there will be shuttle bays.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Nice work but I would love to see some grid lines on that ship.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Trying out a new paint/lighting scheme. Any comments?
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Not everyone at once, please. Ahem... Is this thing on?
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
1337.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Humor. It is a difficult concept. It is not logical. I =/= l33t. Sadface. If anyone has any ideas about registry, I'm kind of at a loss when it comes to that sort of thing.... Even just an acceptable range would be helpful.
[ September 09, 2005, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: Balaam Xumucane ]
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Looking great!
One thing though- youneed to make the red Bussard Colletors opaque- they have a goldfish bowl look as they are.
I'd like to see the impulse crystal lit in purdy blue.....and some subtle paneling on the long flat plane between the aft bridge and the impulse crystal- that's a tad blank.
Posted by Vanguard (Member # 1780) on :
You know, the Reliant (according to the novel) is listed as an old ship - why not just do the NCC-1864 for her and have done with it?
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
The only thing that looks off to me is the cylinder at the upper dome. Seems too "chamfered" if you will.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Actually, a registry of 1337 wouldn't be too far of a stretch for a Coventry-type ship... Too low for a Surya, though.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Very purdy - agree though about the Bussard collectors....
I wouldn't want the Reliant to be a refit of this class but this would be a lovely step in the design lineage. Maybe a smidge smaller than the Miranda?
Posted by Home Decor and Gardening (Member # 239) on :
CAPTAIN JEFFK HEAR TOO TELL YUOS WEAR YUO CAN STUFF IT KLINGANS!!!1
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Weird.
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Wha-huh, hey? Someone on the internet mentioned that he might be interested in making a kit-bash physical model of this thing, and so maybe I could send him some high-rez orthos of the ship. Which at the time of that writing didn't exist.
Anyway it got me off my ass on this one and I sort of picked a name. U.S.S. Spinoza? NCC-1837? That OK?
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
I like. Especially the bottom one where they are flying through the static nebula.
Seriously - very nice.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Yeah this really good bx, its so excellent its yummy.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
This is easily my favourite take on the old "TOS era Miranda" idea. Although I think the deflector would look better if it was a wide distorted rectangular shape, with the sides straight and upper and lower edges bulging out. The pod it attaches too would also benefit from a little beefing out.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Pretty.
"Anyway it got me off my ass on this one and I sort of picked a name. U.S.S. Spinoza? NCC-1837? That OK?"
Yeah...I mean Lantree
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Actually I sort of liked it being named Preliant, but Spinoza alright too I guess.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Who says it has to become a standard Miranda? Er...I refer to the one on the right. It's a Miranda hull with a sensor/deflector pod much like your deflector design and a pair of "saddlebag" sensor pods on the sides.
I have an extra Coventry hull (somewhere) and would love to build this design... Not too keen on the name though. Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Thanks for the compliments. I should probably try to finish this one. Or maybe learn Lightwave. (Grrr, stupid old-brain) I've another view:
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I don't think there should be a blue deflector crystal dome thingy - or what ever that is... that was introduced with the Refit Enterprise and it's era of ships - have something more TOS-y there. An Ion pod perhaps? Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Well this one is supposed to be bridging between TOS and the movie era ships. A few pages back there was some discussion of the shoehorn thing from the back of a Constitution's saucer, but the heart of the matter is that I've never trusted shoehorns. I've never been able to forgive them for the death of my boy.
[ May 22, 2006, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: bX ]
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What do you think the shoe-horn was for - a similar thing - deflector?
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Shin Meat?
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Meat off of a shin?
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Who has meaty shins?
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Jason mentioned that he wan't fond of the name and since he revealed to us the awful nature of what ails him. I thought maybe it would cheer him up or something.
Also I've heard the shoe-horn referred to as the "linear accelerator", as to what function that would serve on a starship, your guess is as good as mine.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Why, it accelerates the linears, of course! Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
quote:Originally posted by bX: Jason mentioned that he wan't fond of the name and since he revealed to us the awful nature of what ails him. I thought maybe it would cheer him up or something.
Also I've heard the shoe-horn referred to as the "linear accelerator", as to what function that would serve on a starship, your guess is as good as mine.
You know I really shouldn't have read Jason's post about his disease after dinner, and maybe it also wasn't a good idea to look at some pictures of it on Google.
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Yeah, it's uh, pretty awful maybe I should have said.
For those who might care:
Note: no gundam antennae.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mars Needs Women:
quote:Originally posted by bX: Jason mentioned that he wan't fond of the name and since he revealed to us the awful nature of what ails him. I thought maybe it would cheer him up or something.
Also I've heard the shoe-horn referred to as the "linear accelerator", as to what function that would serve on a starship, your guess is as good as mine.
You know I really shouldn't have read Jason's post about his disease after dinner, and maybe it also wasn't a good idea to look at some pictures of it on Google.
Never a good idea, no.
I was wondering if "Shin Meat" was a gag. Pretty funny actually....I can say "so that's where it went!
Mabye it'll get refit and still be in service during the Dominion War- then it'll be Dead Meat (like the poor Majestic).
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
That Copernicus ship has no shuttlebays....hmm.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Uh, yes it does. A TOS-style shuttlebay at the end of the upper pod. Of course, now you have the whole "how do they get from the shuttlebay to the main hull without going through those flimsy pylons" issue that the Oberth has. (Although the pylons look significantly thicker on the Copernicus; I'm guessing they have room for escalators)
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Mine's cooler. (Really nice renders though.)
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The bridge is at the TOP of the ship, dammit!
Otherwise cool, though.
Mark
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Well, what I meant was it doesn't have the same shuttlebays as the Reliant...
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by bX: Mine's cooler. (Really nice renders though.)
was it your mesh i've seen here, the color one with a funny USS name on the hull? i just cant remember where i seen it here...
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
If you mean the USS Shin Meat, than yes. Indeed, bx's ship is far superior.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Maybe the Oberth uses transporter pads, or those mucous-like jelly pods from Galaxy Quest.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Why not leave the shuttle bay where it was in the normal Miranda Class?
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
