Jackill's reco guides and the "Starfleet Dynamics" series from the early 90s have a bunch of similar designs to this. They have essentially the same profile but mate the two nacelles directly together, have them right-side up, and add various sensor pods, megaphaser turrets and pocket hangars to them. They share such diverse classifications as superscout, interceptor, heavy destroyer, etc.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
That is true.. but most Saladin-refits I've seen still feature one nacelle (i.e. Siva-class).. BTW the two nacelle variant I've seen of this ship was called Thunderbolt class, but also featured big Miranda phaser turrets and an extended Decatur-style neck... i decided that since it doesnt resemble any of the classes known to fandom, no use in trying too hard to make it into them
There's no reason for it to be a new class. It's just a Constitution variant. These ships are all just reconfigurations of or retakes on other vessels.
Damn, that drawing looks nice, though!
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Mim.. calling this a Constitution-variant is as accurate as calling a chimpanzee a 'human-variant' ..its a whole different animal. If that was the true state of affairs, then the Miranda and Constellation would not have class names, but be Connie-variants.. and the Nebula would be a Galaxy-variant (or vice versa ;-) )
I dont see why its necessary to perpetuate that.. like the Miranda and Constellation, it simply shares design features with the Constitution, but has a different tonnage, power output, armament, crew complement and speed.. Of course, from a construction standpoint, all these ships were truly designed as Connie variations, but of course they were assigned their own class names appropriately.
I think the term 'variant' should only be applied to those ships that differ from the original Constitution design, such as the TOS refit style (lower bridge, no nacelle spires), the TMP refit style, and the 'Booby Trap' sideways nacelle/saucer indentation version (which might even serve enough of a difference to be a new class.. see: Soyuz).. rearrangement of the pieces means a new class..
[ March 19, 2002, 15:04: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Perhaps the Conni-Refit nacelles can only work in pairs where as the original TOS units could work independantly...so when the Saladin was refitted it was equipped with 2 nacelles instead of the original 1. I don't consider all of FJ's designs to be purely fandom, the ones used in TWOK should at least be considered semi-cannon, just like some of these models
posted
Except this ship wasn't designed as a new class, it was just what they cobbled together out of the available Constitution parts.
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: I don't consider all of FJ's designs to be purely fandom, the ones used in TWOK should at least be considered semi-cannon, just like some of these models
Of course! All except for the Federation were in the film, with all they're technical specs, to boot! I love the FJ designs and I'm very happy that they are (try as Gene Roddenberry might to say otherwise ) ultimately canon.
BTW, it iscanon, not "cannon."
-MMoM
[ March 19, 2002, 15:08: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Well, even if it wasnt designed as a new class, it still ended-up as a new class.. look at it! jeeeez... If you raided Qualor for Constitution saucers and nacelles and 'cobbled' them together, youd be up shit's creek because you wouldnt have a warp core!! So what did they do.. um.. oh .. I dunno.. designed one.. whats this .. they designed this class?! how would design factor into starship construction.. in Mim's universe it happens by accident, like a snap tite model!
I dont buy that it was cobbled together either.. it seems to me like it should be an older starship, maybe a design that has been brought out of mothballs.
[ March 19, 2002, 15:27: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I've said this before, but I'll say it again...until the DS9 Tech Manual came along, the term "variant" implied that the ships in question had minor, repeat MINOR, design differences. However, even with these differences, you could still visually tell what class of ship it was. Even though the Ent-B had extra impulse engines & outcroppings on the hull, you still knew it was an Excelsior. Even though the Saratoga's roll bar was gone & replaced with two little guns on the sides, you still knew it was a Miranda.
However, the design differences of the TM ships are so extreme, that calling the ships variants would be unwarranted. It's like saying that the Miranda isn't really a new class, it's just a Constitution variant. See how silly that sounds?
Note: I realize that the only time this differs is with the Soyuz class. However, there was a legitimate reason for this, as I'm sure everyone here knows.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, that's exactly how my theory of it goes as well, I totally agree. Although the term 'variant' is a habitual word to use. I suppose it's only used here because we don't actually have a class name to give it, so we call it Connie Variant.
For some time now I've been wondering about the proto-Nebula, you know that Nebula with two tiny extra nacelles. I think that should be another class in itself - Two more nacelles, larger elongated secondary hull, it's as different to Nebula as the Miranda is to the Constitution..
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
I wouldn't say the proto-nebula is another class, more a pre-refit prototype....just like the actual model After all the design's variance is much less than that of the original Constitution and the refit.
I think it probably is a new class. The lack of a nav deflector indicates another means of particle deflection (duh) and therefore some very different internal technical arrangements. The lack of a secondary hull indicates a scout or small patrol craft, as others have also stated. Its something akin to a Coast Guard cutter: small but reasonably armed for patrol missions. Naturally, the lack of a secondary hull doesn't automatically connote a patrol craft or scout, but it sure would make the ship less habitable for long endurance missions.
The only real problem I have with this ship is envisioning where the warp conduits would go. With the torpedo tubes and loading structures taking up a good portion of the connecting dorsal, cramming the rest of the warp drive equipment would make for a tight squeeze. For that matter, where is the warp core? It must be in the primary hull, but where?
Robert
-------------------- Everything in life I ever needed to know I learned from The Simpsons.
Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, remember when Shane Johnson said that the intermix chamber went straight from the deflection crystal up top through to the antimatter pods in the ventral section? There's plenty of room in the deck for a truncated, somewhat more modern core, I'd say.
posted
Digital Domains site is www.d2.com, however you should access it from a cable or DSL line as it requires Flash 5 and is very large. Unfortunly, because of this it would take me forever to access, but someone might try to see if Ron works there and e-mail him. It's worth a good try to see if he has anything for us.
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic