posted
This is a three-view drawing of the S.S. Bonaventure from "The Time Trap" (TAS) that Masao did for me. Do you guys still think it's so ugly now, or what?
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
posted
Actually, these added views just reinforce my opinion of the Bonaventure. I still think that she looks like a pregnant bug of some sort. Add to the presence of many bulges that do not seem to provide any contributions to the ship where they are placed. In fact, only the top view looks palatable to my eyes.
The side view of the saucer section looks off. That upper expanse of the saucer has too abrupt an ending where the front part meets the forward part of the saucer. It's too contrasting with the gentle slope of the back of that same expanse meeting the aft part of the saucer.
The widening on the aft section of the nacelles is annoying as well. They seem to serve no real purpose, and it just adds to the unsightly bulkiness of the design. From the front, the diameter of the nacelle is almost equal to the diameter of the secondary hull (if you exclude the ventral protusion). The width of the nacelles and the height at which they tower over the saucer adds more unsightliness.
However, the most bothersome aspect of the design has got to be that secondary hull. It is horrible how there's a hull extension sticking out the front. With the dish there as well, it reaches the midpoint of the saucer section. That bulge on the top of the shuttle deck area reminds my of the same bulge that is present on the Excelsior between the nacelle support pylons. Here, though, it just an undetailed wart. That bulge on the underside of the hull, though, is especially bad for the same reasons. It gives the front view this stretched and flattened appearance.
Masao, you did an excellent job constructing the front and top views of the ship based off of the side picture we had. No problems there. The bothersome part is just that it's not a very appealing design, in my opinion.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
posted
Umm, the registry is evident of the system that was adopted for The Animated Series. I'm not quite sure what the letters meant, but I remember seeing an F, a G, and this S. The Enterprise didn't have a letter, so I think the system only called for support crafts to have letters identifying their function. But I don't think that covers why the Bonaventure has the S. But I do remember a freighter with the registry NCC-Fxxxx.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
After staring at screen caps of this damn ship, I'm kind of sick of it, but I don't think it's all bad. I think the design would look a lot better if that ventral beer gut were reduced or removed and the nacelles were lowered so that the bussards were just above the disc. That latter change can actually be a rationale for the fat end of the nacelle: the nacelle needs space for some techy mechanical stuff, but including it throughout the length of the nacelles would make them too fat and have them sit too far above the disc (as they are now). If all that stuff is put nearer the back of the nacelle, the front of the nacelle with the bussard can be set right above the disc and the fat end part doesn't hit the disc.
Actually, I like think the nacelles would look better back to front, which is how I used them for one of my own ships.
posted
I think in the front view the nacelles are drawn wrong. The nacelle pylon should be connecting to the thinner section of the nacelle, not the thick part. The nacelleshould go and meet at the small ring around the Bussard in the front view
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You know, I think it only appropriate that a ship hailed as "the first to have warp drive installed" would look ugly and have lots of extensions and add-ons. If it's a warp testbed of some sort, then the warp engines ought to have the highest number of add-on pieces and possible testing hardware, explaining the expanded aft ends.
I guess the S-registry could reflect the testing status of the ship, much like NX does - but where NX-nil is a prototype for an operational ship, NCC-S is an operational ship dedicated to testing.
One wonders if S registries have anything to do with "class S" ships and shuttles - one could well imagine Tom Paris flying a test shuttle back in his Academy days. "Class J" ships and "class F" shuttles might also be related to this registry scheme...
Okay, so Bonadventure is butt-ugly. I like her that way! And I absolutely love the SS Huron freighter design - uglier still, but very businesslike, very believable. If I could just figure out where her cargo holds are supposed to be.
posted
I actually like this shippy! Yes, she's ugly as Heck, but it does seem functional. She's packed full of sensor-bulges and techy extensions to the nacelles.
I just had a thought. What if Scotty's line about this being the first ship "to have warp drive installed" referred to the same mysterious technological breakthrough as that landing part member from "The Cage"? You know, the line about "we've crossed the time-barrier". This would place the birth of 'Bonnie' around 2250 or the late 40s. Now we only have to figure out what that breakthough was.
But what is up with that rego!? First, it's the *S.S.* Bonaventure, so she doesn't necessarily have to be a Starfleet ship. Yet, she did have SF markings, and the rego also begins with NCC. The 'S' could stand for Science, or something. Is there any hope that the rego wasn't mentioned or seen clearly?
posted
And the identity of the ship as "SS" Bonadventure is a bit questionable, too. The name of the ship is nowhere to be seen, and Scotty simply calls her "the" Bonadventure, no SS or NCC or USS or UESPA added before the name.
So if "Enterprise" introduces a definite designation scheme for early Starfleet ships (Earth Starfleet or UFP Starfleet), we can claim that the Bonadventure abides to this scheme - she can be SS or USS or EAS or HMS as needed, and still exist as a predecessor to NX-01 and all other warp-driven Earth vessels. If the "Enterprise" scheme is violently at odds with what we've seen of the Bonadventure (say, if NCC registries are proven to have come to use in 2158 only, or something else as definite and devastating), then we might try to fit the ship to a later point in the timeline - she would then only be a predecessor to a certain variety of warp-driven ships, just like suggested in many posts above.
posted
I'd prefer to pretend that Scotty was referring to a nondescript speck-like ship in the far background (that we may or may not have been able to actually see) when he referred to the Bonaventure, and that the real ship of that name was some sort of Valiant-like design: a sublight Earth ship that had warp drive installed. The ship in this thread here would just be a Starfleet ship that got caught in the time-trap and happened to be on the screen with the Bonaventure. I wouldn't mind it being the design of the unseen Antares to tell you the truth. It'd make a decent scout/cargo ship.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
