posted
Design-wise, I favor the Steamrunner and Intrepid-classes.
As for why everyone likes the Prometheus so much, I have no clue. I'm not particually fond of the design myself.
------------------ Flare: Where sarcasm is just one more service we offer. Federation Starship Datalink: Brand new look, fresh minty scent, same great taste!
posted
Hey! What's wrong with the Oberth? I think that if it were streamlined just a bit, it would be a real beauty. By the way, considering the amount of potential deck space in the underslung pod, I think there has to be access to it. And it doesn't have to be by turbolift.
Hasn't anyone ever thought of running something like a tram car in those pylons? Like a turbolift flipped on its side with seats installed. It would fit perfectly because it lacks the height that makes a normal turbo impractical. Something similar was illustrated in Todd Geunther's Ships of the Star Fleet Vol II in the Akyazi class starships.
Otherwise, the refit Constitution is my all-time favorite ship. She just has a wonderful feeling of elegant grace.
posted
Ace - 15 tubes? Someone had to do it eventually. If it were rationalized into proper treknology, most of those launchers would be rapid-fire micro-torpedo launchers, as described in the DS9 tech manual.. Or at least, mini-torpedoes (microtorps are 10 cm long - suuuure).
Hobbes - The Prommie is just do gadget-cool, it's tough NOT to like it. Doesn't everyone remember those 1970s robot shows with the three jets (or whatever) that combine into one giant robot? I loved those, and I love the Prometheus. Go figger. Just wished it had a better bridge...
Daniel - People here have run calculations: yes, there's ample space in those pylons for a turbolift car to move between the hulls, without having to tilt over or anything. The only question remains is *why* the were designed like that.
Mark
------------------ "Why build one, when you can have two at twice the price?"
posted
I would imagine it would be to be able to swap out different sensor pods.
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted) *** "Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" -Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001 **** "The candidate who slimed John McCain in the primaries and smeared Al Gore in the general election is now the president who pledges to elevate the nation's tone and bring civility to our discorse. Kind of like Michael Corleone brought peace to the mob by killing the heads of the other four families." --Paul Begala, Is Our Children Learning?
posted
And *I* like the Nebula class. Short, fat, ugly. That's the idea, and I like it for that.
On the practical side, I'd surmised that the Nebula was the most adaptable of all the current-era designs. The module, if swappable, would be able to mount anything really necessary, and give the ship a per-mission flexibility beyond that of most ships. That is, load 'er up with a bunch of sensors, and a Nebbie could outdo the standard pallet of Galaxy-class equivalents. Weapons, ditto. Extra warp engines, why not?
Plus, the lack of windows in the earlier-seen model of the Nebula only reinforced that - instead of standard rooms under there, you can have lots of mission cargo bays and transporter-swappable modules (as described in the TNG manual) capable of customizing to anything you really need.
Overall, the Nebula may not match up to the GCS in every department - but give it a layover at a starbase, and it can kick a Galaxy's butt in one or more of the same.
As for aesthetics, it's up to the individual. I think it's cool in its non-gracefulness, and even cooler in its practicality. S'me.
Mark
------------------ "Why build one, when you can have two at twice the price?"
posted
I think that the Nebula class is good looking ship (probably because it has the Galaxy class parts) The ship was probably designed to be a cheaper alternative to the Galaxy class and multi-roled ship too. Similar to the Galaxy class but smaller and more adaptive.
Why does the turbolift have to be inside the pylon of the Oberth? Why can't there be tracks or something on the inner side the pylons where a smaller turbolift runs along into and out of the secondary hull.
------------------ Predict the unpredictable, but how do you unpredict the unpredictable?
I guess the main reason I like the Nebula is it's utilitarian design. The ship makes sense. Perhaps that's why it appears as the workhorse of the 24th century Starfleet.
As far as if she's ugly...well, I like the look of it. Especially when they did the beauty pass of the Farragut in ST: Generations. It was just so...majestic.
As far as the 15 torps...the problem is the torp. launchers are on the CGI model and worse, they're full size. Granted, we've never seen an Akira fire her full load, but thanks to the Akira, we've got fanboys going "15 torps is greater than 3 torps...Akira is DA BOMB! Galaxy sux!!" and so on...
(Sigh) I don't know. I think the guy who designed her didn't understand that a single launcher has rapid fire capability already. Just what is the tactical value of having 15 tubes in such a small space? When she's armed, all an enemy would have to do is target the little "launcher warehouse" and she'll go boom.
posted
The Oberth isn't that shabby, either. My thinking is Starfleet felt that as years go by, the extensive sensor/science equipment could be replaced easily with swap outs. How the Nova-class fits into this...I have no clue.
Something to note on the Nebula. Up until it was turned into CGI, it actually differed from the Galaxy model design with a different saucer, main deflector/secondary hull, and other minor details such as the Starfleet pennant on the shuttlebay. Then, the CGI folks probably didn't bother to incorporate any of these features. Our current Nebula has been "Galaxy-ized". Even odder, this CGI model has various ship names and registries all over it...
Example of Differences: USS Sutherland (1st Generation) vs. USS Honshu (2nd Generation)
Solution: It recieved a design refit, further proof Starfleet finds it a valuable class.
------------------ Ace
"Objects in mirror are closer than they appear."
[This message has been edited by Ace (edited March 05, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Ace (edited March 05, 2001).]
posted
With all due respect to Andy Probert, I never really liked the E-D. Too squat, wide and with way too many curves just for the sake of curves. But the Nebby as a truncated variant is even uglier. They haven't made the perfect starship for me yet, but the closest to my ideal are the classics, E-nil and E-A, and the new classic, E-E. I'm not a big fan of the Prometheus. It's not bad, just not great. Basically on a scale from 1-10:
posted
OMG! I LOVE the Nebula... it was a great ship in "The Wounded" just hanging in space there with the Enterprise and her both at warp. Its the Enterprise's kin... its beautiful. The most brilliant appearance of the Nebula class was in Generations, when we FINALLY get to see just HOW BIG these Galaxy-generation ships are... it was VERY impressive.
The Oberth I like too. Its a different design, but it IS starfleet... It IS the federation...
I feel that I like the ships that are Star Trek ships - by that I mean look at the Enterprise and the Oberth they are original and unique ships... they are ships that didn't or don't have equivalent looking things in any other sci-fi universe. they LOOK like they are built to be in Space... something that would not be practical to be landed on planets. Another thing is that Star Trek ships are supposed to be big, graceful yet lumbering through space... they are all gigantic cities... I'm actually getting tired of seeing Star Trek ships portrayed as these little sports cars or aeroplanes that can zip and bob between every asteroid from here to Jupiter... they are supposed to move grandly through space. The way they moved the Enterprise-E in Insurrection, really was abhorred. Look at that cutaway of the Sovereign class, and SEE what is in it, and what this ship does. Its a giant "captial" ship... its not meant to go dodging and weaving through space debris and then skirting along ships like something out of Top gun.
The best appearance of ships have been the TOS movies and Generations... and TNG. And Early DS9... look at "The Jem'Hadar" now THAT is how you show space battles on Star Trek.
posted
To be fair, Galaxy-class ships have never been shown as particularly zippy. Look at Sacrifice of Angels. They move very slowly and quite gracefully. They certainly don't pull any fast turns, unlike the Miranda's, which dart about all over the place.
Generations too, the Enterprise was hardly super-manouverable.
------------------ "And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!" -Bubbles
posted
oopse sorry i posted that when it was said the norway was an ugly ship but it took so long to register that the thread moved on LOL
Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
Just wished it had a better bridge...
Printer-friendly view of this topic
