posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by the Mighty Monkey of Mim:
The E-B MSD also completely omits the large protrusions on the secondary
hull.

---

quote:

---

Good point, but I think there's probably enough space in between for
whatever exhaust there is to dissipate without causing any bussard
damage.

---

Uh-huh. So you've got superheated ionized gas roaring out of the exhaust port at relativistic speeds straight into the engines. Anyone else out there think it's going to cool off to tolerable temperatures in the space of about 70 meters?

Guys, if we're going to go a few more rounds on this question, let's give it its own thread and go back to discussing the DS9 frankensteins, ok?

--------------------
The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.

posted                      

quote:

---

Then again, just because the 23rd century shipwrights might have been able to build ships that
separate and reattach doesn't mean they would want to. Even in the 24th century, this
capacity is considered a novelty, and a curiosity of little operational value.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shik:
What if it's both.

Now, before you start conjuring up images of toasted shuttles flying into fusion plasma wake, hear me out. What if the extended box structures can be shuttlebays OR impulse decks? The former can provide extra evac room & the latter extra STL maneuverability. When I built my Juno-class model, I used the E-B saucer & I made the boxes shuttlebays because I had a better place to put the impulse deck. Why can't it be that on the E-B & Lakota they were IPS, but on, say, the Livingston & the Berlin they wanted extry shuttles?

Time & time again, we're told that every Starfleet ship is "modularly adaptable." Here's a new module. Here's more adaptability.

---

Who says that the shuttles have to leave through a door? what if the platforms on top of the bay are the starting ramps for the shuttles, much like the DS9-Runabout bays? If that's the case. the red-glowing plates could be additional exhaust ports for the ship's engines.

--------------------
"This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peregrinus:
In the spirit of that, I've been noodling over a lot of stuff about the Centaur in my modelling endeavours. First of all, I've always known I wanted to base it off the E-B saucer so I would have those boxes for shuttlebays...

I've always had a problem with the screengrabs of the Centaur from "A Time To Stand". The windows visible on the bottom of the saucer would have to be on the floor. So I left those off for the time being.

Now with these pics from Mr. Drexler, I've been able to get a good layout for the windows on the top of the saucer. I did the port side first, and then mirrored the ones from the starboard side over to supplement, and am then using the resulting layout as a guide for the starboard side in its entirety. And hopefully, that's not unclear. I noticed in laying them out that there are clear spots for two radial corridors each port and starboard which have no windows above them.

The problem of scale I'm proposing be solved by keeping the saucer the same size as a stock Excelsior saucer. The Miranda-style bridge is then reworked to be simply a raised superstructure behind the forward cowling, and the bridge dome I've replaced with the domed prototype bridge module of the NX days of the Excelsior. Fits perfectly. And that forward cowling, as I said elsewhere, makes a spectacular navigational deflector.

Lastly, I'm resculpting the remaining four dorsal phaser banks into four mini phaser strips, of Ambassador tech, but still very primitive. The ventral phasers are still ball turrets.

I just wanted to share all this as a suggestion for other modellers and drafters out there, to get feedback, and also to get ideas for what I should do about the ventral windows, the phaser cannons, and the torpedo pod... Also, to get your views on what I should use for the dorsal side greeblies.

--Jonah

---

I think those are no windows at all. No matter if the saucer is Excelsior-size or the bridge is Miranda-size, those windows don't fit. The wall is too flat - the windows would be on the floor - and there are too many.
So either the ships has been constructed for a species that is roughly 50 centimeters 'tall' or they serve a different purpose. Maybe some exhaust ports. Or predecessors of the Intrepid-sensorplates.

[EDIT] Just want to test something...



[EDITED AGAIN] Arrr... it seems my new web host works.

[ March 18, 2002, 08:06: Message edited by: Cpt. Kyle Amasov ]

--------------------
"This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by The_Tom:
A front view would be pretty cool.

---

Here it is:

front view

Hehe, what do you say? Wrong ship? Oops.
Let me see what I can do for you, but first of all I wanted to try another kitbash or the Freedom-class or something totally different (Norway anyone?)

quote:

---

Oh, and while we're at it, would anyone become shocked and dismayed if I said I've actual come to like this ship quite a bit? It (along with the Connie-based affair) is perhaps the best of the ATtS kitbashes, and would fit in quite OK as a standard ship design from the late 23rd/early 24th centuries. Certainly seems a bit unfair to continue calling it the Medusa, no?

---

I like it, too, that's why I did it.

--------------------
"This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."