Hi all, long time no see. Real life keeps getting in the way of things, but a couple of months ago a guy took a shine to the old Bradbury model I made (designed by Lance at the ASDB) and asked if he could use the model. The model sucks, it was made years ago when I was just learning Lightwave, so I did a makeover of the ship to a slightly higher standard than before. Anyway, here is the makeover, albeit still with some texturing and detailing yet to do.
Still needs work, but a better quality model than the old one, that's for sure. Someone from ABC Australia saw one of the pics on Flickr and requested a hi-res pic for use on the New Inventors show on national Aussie TV. Just as a backdrop to a set during a show on future transport, but still its telly debut.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
The artwork is great, but I have an ish with the design, namely, the bussard collectors. There appear to be crew quarters behind the collectors all the way along the saucer back to the nacelles. How does the collected hydrogen get back to the nacelles? I suppose hydrogen molecules don't need huge conduits... you'd just think the transfer would be more efficient with the collectors on the nacelles.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
*drools*
any chance a updated SFC3 mesh could be made from this? (Not that anyone plays SFC series anymore)
Nice! Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Oh bloody hell, not him again! Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: The artwork is great, but I have an ish with the design, namely, the bussard collectors. There appear to be crew quarters behind the collectors all the way along the saucer back to the nacelles. How does the collected hydrogen get back to the nacelles? I suppose hydrogen molecules don't need huge conduits... you'd just think the transfer would be more efficient with the collectors on the nacelles.
The hydrogen needs to go to the deuterium tank anyway, not the nacelles. In any event, although it's lovely work I can't stand this design. Gives me colon pain.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
I have to admit to not being a fan of it myself, but it originally caught my eye as a potential project beacuse it was so different from the norm. I remember the same criticism about the bussard placement from the first time I made the model. Frankly I think that there are plenty of designs out there where you could make that argument that their bussard placement is dangerous, assuming the bussard is a huge EM radiator for gathering hydrogen. The ones on the Brad have a clearer frontal view than some I've seen out there. I like to do something out of the ordinary, rather than the standard stuff everyone else does.
Anyway, here's a couple of quick test videos done before the textures and decals were in place, just to give me an idea of how the thing looked when moving. Poor quality, but what do you expect for free?
Oh, and here's another couple of quick pics the guy requested, in a drydock this time. This really shows up the fact that it wasn't textured at the time. I need to do some better pics now it's actually 98% textured...
He's alive! Nice, but it doesn't seem like much of an improvement over what I remember. It could definitely use some better detailing.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
That design is SO annoying that I just want to slap it!
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Axeman 3D: I have to admit to not being a fan of it myself, but it originally caught my eye as a potential project beacuse it was so different from the norm. I remember the same criticism about the bussard placement from the first time I made the model. Frankly I think that there are plenty of designs out there where you could make that argument that their bussard placement is dangerous, assuming the bussard is a huge EM radiator for gathering hydrogen. The ones on the Brad have a clearer frontal view than some I've seen out there. I like to do something out of the ordinary, rather than the standard stuff everyone else does.
Anyway, here's a couple of quick test videos done before the textures and decals were in place, just to give me an idea of how the thing looked when moving. Poor quality, but what do you expect for free?
Oh, and here's another couple of quick pics the guy requested, in a drydock this time. This really shows up the fact that it wasn't textured at the time. I need to do some better pics now it's actually 98% textured...
Ain't it just ironic that out of the three of us that worked on this thing, Lance was the only one who actually liked it.
Personally I always thought it'd be greatly improved by just lopping off those two not-at-all Excelsior like hulls and just leave it with a mostly flat underside.
That said there's a definite improvement and I much perfer the new impulse engines.
Oh and I think this seams appropriate for the occasion.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
I am of the same opinion, in fact I might lop them off myself and do a quick redo to see how it would look.
You're quite right B.J. in that it needs more detailing, but at least this model will take the detailing whereas the old model was so low-res it couldn't take it. I doubt I'll do a lot more to it though, since as Rev has pointed out above neither of us were particularly thrilled by it. It has very few good sides, although from above and behind it's fairly passable.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I can just imagine some drunk engineer, after partying it up in the lounge, trying without success to open the door to his quarters, and then in his drunken haze realizing that his quarters are actually on the other, identical engineering section, which he now has to navigate to without throwing up before he can get there. He yells out in a maddening, drunken rage, "Why the hell does this ship have two identical hulls? I mean, what's the bloody purpose other than to get my drunk ass all confused?!"
Seriously, this was actually one of the ASDB's designs I liked the most, if only because it was so radically different than the usual ship designs. But I also think it would be nice if all the ASDB designs were given a new looking-over.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
I remember Lance's motivation for the dual engineering hulls was replication of the M/ARA power systems, giving this ship a healthy surplus of power and safety redundancy. There might also have been a backstory of using the ship as an engineering testbed, much like fitting current multi-engine aircraft today with one experimental unit so they can see how it runs without risking falling out the sky. You have to admit it would give you plenty of staterooms, and no end of juice for weapons or engines.
As for me, I preferred the ASDB designs like the Istanbul and the Wambundu, which to my eyes look much more like something the human race would build as a spaceship. They're bulkier, more compact and make better use of space, although if you like having exterior windows in your stateroom you're better sticking with thin, multi-segement traditional Star Fleet designs.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Really? I prefer the Antares, Deneva and Korolev because they're...well, mine! Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
This is one cool looking ship. I like it!
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
The Antares and Korolev are more tweaks on the same theme, whereas the Deneva is a bit more like it, but also a bit too busy for my tastes. If I were to sit down and design an interstaller tramp steamer and orbital transport it would be somewhat different. It's tempting though, but... I dont know.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
If sucking were an olympic sport, and all the countries in the world sent their top hookers to some sort of sucking competition, it still would not suck half as much as this design sucks.
It's awful-worse than the worst kitbash.
That being said, you did a fine job putting lipstick on this pig. Your talents are better employed on better designs, young padawan.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Axeman 3D: The Antares and Korolev are more tweaks on the same theme, whereas the Deneva is a bit more like it, but also a bit too busy for my tastes. If I were to sit down and design an interstaller tramp steamer and orbital transport it would be somewhat different. It's tempting though, but... I dont know.
Well I was being ever-so-slightly facetious, but ok. Yeah, to be honest the Deneva needs a little streamlining, that lower level side bay for example has to go and I wonder if the modules shouldn't be made to be more in-line with the hull.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
Well, I like the current version, Axe. *Goes to pee on all the haters of Flare*
Weeeeeeeee! Star Trek Water Sports! Weeeeeee! (that's something you should never experiance at... [Wait for it]...
Oh wait, isn't ST: The Experiance closed?
oh well. Guess i better drink some more water...
seriously though, i really do like the Braddy because of it's flying against conventions line of thought. *looks at the ASDB entry on EAS* No back story, YET? you need to dry hump Brend for updates, dude (He's tuff, he can handle it!)
i hope.... Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Been using the big colouring markers again have we?
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
And to pile on, I think the saucer section is a little on the thin side which makes the two giant Twinkies on the back seem more unnecessary as I wouldn't think such a small, flat ship would need all that power and two deflectors.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Been using the big colouring markers again have we?
He's inhaling the Fumes of Creativity.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
I agree, saucers a bit thin and the hulls a little bulky. However, if I thicken the saucer a bit and thin out the hulls a bit, we're steering dangerously close to making a saucer with tube nacelles again. I wonder if it might be possible to put more than just a coat of lipstick on this "pig" of a design. I might play around with the elements tomorrow and see what ideas I can ome up with. I dont want to make the same old nacelle+saucer+bit in between=Star Trek formulaic stuff.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Been using the big colouring markers again have we?
He's inhaling the Fumes of Creativity.
*smirk*
horrible day, yesterday. i spent like a month building the uber Conjuror for yesterday's gaming session... only to die painfully to stupidity. fuking waste. next time i'm justing playing another WF tank who follows the cleric and kills who ever needs killing otherwise, don't bother me DM until i gotta roll intiative...
*sigh* seriously, all that effort for a really good PC (Wizard/Master Specialist: Conjuration and 3 lvls of Paragon. dead to demons with ready action bows of fort save or die...)
still like the braddy as is *steals Jason's markers*
*looks at the 1st pic again, then EAS*
maybe the bussard collectors could be placed a hint forward of (actually the caps of the nacelles to be specific) the top nacelles. not to completely explise the forward sweep of the nacelles to the primary hull but close to it so from the forward view, the collector looks like a thin strip no higher than the top of the lettering of the ship's name, no lower than the NCC 's.
either that or take away some of the room windows closest to the currently placed collectors since the placement in reference to livng spaces is what i think turning everyone else off...
either that, or they been all stealling Jason's markers for 'advanced anal play'
*howls in giggles*
Posted by Mikey T (Member # 144) on :
I like the renderings... though I am not a fan of the dual secondary hull design.
Either way at least it isn't a horrible kitbash...
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Axeman 3D: I agree, saucers a bit thin and the hulls a little bulky. However, if I thicken the saucer a bit and thin out the hulls a bit, we're steering dangerously close to making a saucer with tube nacelles again. I wonder if it might be possible to put more than just a coat of lipstick on this "pig" of a design. I might play around with the elements tomorrow and see what ideas I can ome up with. I dont want to make the same old nacelle+saucer+bit in between=Star Trek formulaic stuff.
Well my first instinct is to simply mirror the hull along the horizontal plane, like so. For the deflector, you can either go the conventional route and put it in a ventral cut-in or if you want to retain the dual dish look of the design, you can sink them into the ventral cutouts where the bussards would have been. It might also be worth adding an extra cowling too a pair of the nacelle radiators. Just to break up the symmetry a little.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
What about making the two hulls less symetrical - perhaps take a wedge out of the inside of the two hulls, and move to a sigle deflector, perhaps underslung, but definatly moved from the outriggers.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Actualy, after fiddling around (and then redrawing Reverends designs and altering them), I kinda like a more catamaran hull, but with the dual deflectors:
The one on top is the current design, and the one beneath has had the side profile of the secondary hull reduced and reshaped (badly I think, needs tweeking), with the front profile changed to a more wedge shape, with a less excelcior style deflector, raised to be opposite the bussards.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Hmm - I like it better, but still have difficulty imagining a technobabble reason for two deflector dishes. The ship isn't that wide, or anything. Maybe a saucer placed dish? Keep the catamaran hulls for separate warp cores?
Of course that changes the whole idea of the class quite a bit. Maybe not a bad thing though.
Or come up with a really good idea of why the deflectors are split.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Rev's new take looks like a smooshed down Zandura, Ginger's got some nice stuff goin....maybe if the two hulls connected at the aft somehow? Maybe a large hangarbay at the aft with specialty mission ships enbarking from one secondary hull or the other....could be a nice colony ship/transport/liner design that way. If so, I'd add tons of windows and luxury suites along those two secondary catamaran thingers.
I'd definitely move the bussard collectors to that hump at the front of the nacelle- that alone would greatly improve the function of the ship (lest the interior of the saucer be all kinds of crazy to walk around- dead ends, cul de sacs, etc.).
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I don't know. Move the bussards and it's not even remotely recognisable as the Bradbury.
I like the cut-in catamaran idea, though it terminates too far back on the saucer and those hulls were always too tall. As for the deflectors, while the cut-ins look of from the front, they make less sense from other angles so I wonder if they should be moved to those humps instead of the bussards. Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Oh, I like that Rev. I think the deflector should be in the more "traditional" place on lower hulls. For me, the aggressive styling on the enginering hull goes a bit too far forwards perhaps - but only a bit.
And Jason, if the hulls connected at the back, wouldn't it be a bit to NX class?
As for two deflectors? Redundancy, like on Voyager? Or perhaps with the flat design of the ship, rather than having a big "searchlight" deflector, two smaller lower powered units could be better directed.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
I dont have a problem with 2 deflectors, it's easily explainable, and I think I'm with Ginger on preferring the placement underneath rather than the rather Cylon looking slashes. If I get a chance over the next couple of days I'll mock up a quick version of this one and see how it looks at various angles. As we have learned to our cost, the 2D does not always translate easily or fully into 3D.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
Me likes.... but....
ok, round Excely dishs either on top the nacelles or on the bottom. keep the curves of the secondary hull and think about the lower 'bridge' under the primary hull and now inbetween the catamaran hulls. what else would you put there?
and the Braddy isn't supposed to be a front line combatant is it? think about it. what if you used as the 24th century version of a Ptemky (sp?) cargo tug? that underbirdge could be the connection to something else?
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
and another thing. if you ultimately do construct a version with all these ideas we've given you, could we still keep the original as BASE line from which varients of the class have been built?
ooooooooooohhhhhh, Ship Building! Someone tell me when we did that last? *giggles*
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I tend to think of the Bradbury as a one-off testbed ship for a bunch of different systems that ended up in later full production classes like the Sovereign, Intrepid & Defiant. Mostly boring stuff like the Bio-neural gel packs, regenerative shields, newer engine design, etc.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
A testbed is a nice idea for this- I can see a swappable pod (either rising above the bridge or dropping below the "waterline") like a Nebula- That way it would attach at the back (which this class desperately needs, IMHO) without being "like the NX-01".
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I really don't think an outboard pod would suit here. Besides, it doesn't make much sense to use an outboard pod to test an integrated system. Those things are more for mission specific functions, not equipment testing.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
Wasn't one of the canon designs supposed to have a plug-in bridge module anyway, so that they could upgrade quite quickly when in dry dock? I seem to remember reading that somewhere in the specs.
I'm with Rev on this one, they would make a testbed ship, not a subsystem strapped on to a standard ship, otherwise it's no fair test of the new systems. I suspect that like most navies they'd make a smaller one-off ship to test the concept, before building the ideas into a larger, fully functional ship.
Actually, on the web RPG game site that the new model was made for, the guy has come up with the premise that it's a testbed ship that has been loaned to an Ambassador for a special mission, rather than tying up a front line vessel.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Supposedly they all had plug-in bridges. Though I think Voyager's was the only one with it's own cargo bay & escape pods.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
It could also be an "NX" concept that, while servicable, was not deemed suitable for mass production.
I like to think there are a gaggle of such "one off" ships in service- most as escorts, transports or diplomatic duty.
I really cant see this thing fighting anyone. Thus my idea for making it a transport/liner.
We should design a large colony ship- we've never seen anything like that in Trek, yet even small colonies would need a lot of initial equipment and hundreds of colonists. Terraforming (even slightly) would require even more....the ship would have to be large.
I sorta like the notion of the ship itself becoming the colony- most of it landing to be disassembled into various buildings and shelters with the remainder staying orbital as assorted orbital sats for weather, communications and defense.
Back to the Bradbury, I still want to see a version with the bussards on the "bumps"... Also cool would be to lose the dual deflectors and install a Sovvie deflector hanging down from where the torpedo launcher is on the sovvie.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
They've mentioned colony ships a few times on the show, it wouldn't do any harm to have a bash at making one. As you say it would probably seperate into a lander section and a space section, with the lander section carrying equipment, life support, power and so forth. The space section would act as a basic space station, comms array and escape route should it all go wrong. Hmmmm...
Anyway, the Liner idea is ok, but I dont think it would suit the Brad design. It really does look more like an experiment with engineering hulls and nacelles, rather than something built for transporting people in luxury with lots to do.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I've occasionally toyed with designing a colony ships. I thought it'd be an interesting twist on the original idea for the Enterprise, where the saucer is the part that lands and the rest of the ship stays in orbit.
As for the Brad, I don't see any reason why it has to be a failed class that got converted into a transport. A ship purposefully designed to be a test-bed platform seams perfectly reasonable to me. There may well have been others built, say two or three more, but not a full production run. Sort of like the Bell X-1 series, just not quite so revolutionary.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Well, in an emergency, the Brad can make a water landing. Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
OK, I tried some of the suggestions with the Brad, and I have to say it looked crap. The layout is kind of limited when you try to play around with it a bit, I think it's too special to be toyed with. I think maybe we'd be best to move on from this thing and maybe go design a colony ship or something.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
As for the whole ship becoming the colony thing - I really like the idea. Seems that the warp drive section should either turn into a sort of system defense ship/coast guard type deal or return to the federation to pick up another landing module.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Oh well, guess you really can't polish a turn after all.
Moving on, here's a very quick sketch of the colony ship concept. Obviously it's very crude and the proportions aren't what they should be, but I think you can get a sense of the concept. I designed the saucer to split into 5 pieces and reconnect on the ground to form a central complex. Also because it's meant to land, the sensor array is on the top instead of the usual place on the bottom. As for the stardrive, I would think it'd stay in orbit so they can use the main sensors and long range comms via uplink.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Maybe the bridge and sensor array could stay with the stardrive and the saucer and perhaps the 'red pods' could be moved to the surface?
I suppose another route is to drop the saucer in orbit and leave. Let it serve as a space station, albeit a small one. it might be better for your base of operations to stay in orbit where it is safe from whatever odd climate, fauna or other environmental issues that the planet may have hidden from the survey teams.
If the saucer has its own power, shuttle bay, impulse engines and transporters - even an industrial replicator - it could sit in orbit and provide for the growth of the ground-based colony.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Ages ago I had a sort of idea about taking an old ship, like something Masao designed, heavily modifiying it and converting that into a base, planet side.
I think for my own ammusement I might still toy with the Bradbury, just for fun.
Posted by Axeman 3D (Member # 1050) on :
You're on your own Ginger, we've given up on the Brad as an engineering experiment and that's as far as it goes. It certainly doesn't look modular in any way.
As for the colony ship idea, I'm all over it. We should maybe start a new thread with ideas first though, just so we know what we're creating first off, rather than kitbashing starships without know what's going to be required.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
A nice as the initial sketch is for that ship, Rev, is that anything related to the Braddy?
*whips Rev for better looking sketch* Improve it! (cause that does look interesting, oddly enough)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
