quote: It's not a very good example, i used an older shader and didn't make the model with it in mind, but I may alter it to suit later if I do an animation.
I actually quite liked that shot, in fact I might just steal it and incorporate it into the development logo whenever I get around to it.
posted
Like Cel-shaded stuff, eh? OK then guys, check out the little fly-by below, the shuttle in the lead with another Reverend/Mitchell collaboration brining up the rear. I played with it in Lightwave and after effects, so it should look reminiscent of the series, let me know if I got near the look. One problem is how well the ships fly, not quite the same as hand drawn stuff, but you can't stop progress, eh?
posted
Er... d'ya think you could link to that big pic instead, Reverend?
The pilot's cabin layout seems... well, quite luxurious. I suppose that I wouldn't think that if I had to spend six weeks stuck in there, but it still seems as if there could be a bit more room devoted to the engine space instead -- like combining the washroom and bunk, or something.
Also, how would a pilot make repairs on his own in interstellar space? Is there some kind of accessway to the engines, or would the guy have to rely on the ever-present Starfleet for assistance? (Actually, that might make sense -- Starfleet builds shuttlecraft that can't be repaired by their pilots so their starships will be called in to render assistance, thus providing fodder for future television episodes. )
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Excellent stuff! You should try posting this up on the 3D Gladiators forum, they have more 3D artist types there so you should get a solid critical response.
Those registry maps on the Ptolemy's nacelles and cargo container have always bothered me, for some reason they seam as if they have been stretched vertically. Maybe some day I'll do some new ones that compensate for this.
posted
Don't worry about the nacelle maps, I can adjust those myself in Lightwave no problem, I'll just make them a little smaller on the Y-axis is all. I wouldn't dare post this little piece of Hokum somewhere that a real 3D artist might see it, it's not worth the paper it's not printed on, it's just a piece of fun.
-------------------- Kenny Mitchell, Amateur 3D animator and gynaecologist
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Nice. One note, though. TAS "One of Our Planets is Missing" established that vessels of this era had matter and antimatter stored and tapped directly in the nacelles themselves, rather than in a central reactor.
-MMoM
Is this the same TAS that had away teams with personal force fields, strange women who hummed at doors to open them, a negative universe where ships fly backwards and a 50ft Mr Spock?
I think TAS ought to be grateful that anyone is paying attention to it at all and if I were TAS I wouldn't push my luck with implausible statements about engineering.
posted
Actually, I believe that TOS actually established the concept, but it was never really brought up as a focus point in an episode.
TAS has no worse (or better) record with strange and only partially-sensical tech than TOS, and I don't know why you find it so easy to disregard. It is and always will be as valid a part of Star Trek as any other show, regardless of what Richard Arnold---the first-rate dick head who was Roddenberry's "archivist" (read as "personal lackey") and who was responsible for spreading the probable falsity (see recent discussions on the TrekBBS) that GR wanted TAS "decanonized" (a ridiculous idea, to be sure) in the first place---and anyone at Paramount who listened to his bullshit says.
And just what do you find so implausible about this particular idea, anyway?
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote: Er... d'ya think you could link to that big pic instead, Reverend?
Whoops, I forgot to size them down before exporting. No matter, we're on a different page now.
quote: The pilot's cabin layout seems... well, quite luxurious. I suppose that I wouldn't think that if I had to spend six weeks stuck in there, but it still seems as if there could be a bit more room devoted to the engine space instead -- like combining the washroom and bunk, or something.
Six weeks is just how long it will take to travel 5 light years, I'm sure there are much longer journeys which this shuttle may be required to make, some could last three times that. Regardless I'd hardly call 5 square meters of floor space a luxury, more like the bare essentials for a 6 week+ trip. I purposely kept the head and sonic shower (that's what's in the opposite compartment) separate from the cabin so the poor bugger has some room to walk around in there, maybe even have a table and chair so he can play solitaire or zero-G darts. I also thought that the cabin could double as the galley and mess room, not to mention the cargo hold for any bulky goods that need transporting.
quote: Also, how would a pilot make repairs on his own in interstellar space? Is there some kind of accessway to the engines, or would the guy have to rely on the ever-present Starfleet for assistance?
There are a set of EVA suits in those lockers either side of the pilot's chair (among other things) so the pilot can drop out of walk and make external repairs if need be. Plus I imagine that all of the habitable compartments have emergency pressure garments stashed away in case of a hull breach. I suppose the rear wall of the cabin could include removable panels that can give limited access to the shuttle's systems. Probably just the impulse reactors, life support systems and computer core though, since most of the warp engine's components are located right at the back, so they'd have to be accessed from outside.
quote: Actually, I believe that TOS actually established the concept, but it was never really brought up as a focus point in an episode.
TAS has no worse (or better) record with strange and only partially-sensical tech than TOS, and I don't know why you find it so easy to disregard. It is and always will be as valid a part of Star Trek as any other show, regardless of what Richard Arnold---the first-rate dick head who was Roddenberry's "archivist" (read as "personal lackey") and who was responsible for spreading the probable falsity (see recent discussions on the TrekBBS) that GR wanted TAS "decanonized" (a ridiculous idea, to be sure) in the first place---and anyone at Paramount who listened to his bullshit says.
If you want to get into that kind of conversation then talk to someone else, I couldn't give a monkey's bum (no offence) about the political wranglings of a thirty year old franchise. All I know is that on the whole TAS is a load of silly nonsense (See reviews at Ex Astris).
quote: And just what do you find so implausible about this particular idea, anyway?
Well think about it for a second. You have anti-matter way up there in the nacelles and the dilithium crystals way down there in the engineering hull, now you have to pipe the antimatter all the way down the pylons to the warp reactor just so the plasma stream can go all the way back up to the nacelles. It's a bit of a run-around. Besides on a shuttle I doubt there is enough room inside those tiny nacelles to store antimatter pods safely.
posted
I'm also quite sure the shuttle designer had a completely different set of constraints to work with than the Constitution class starship designer. And I like the balance between habitable and unhabitable volume in this craft. This is a very different beast from the TOS craft, probably of much higher performance. Warp 3.5 (vs. perhaps warp 1, perhaps sublight, for the TOS craft) sounds very nice. Such high performance might also warrant a name other than "shuttle"...
Only I wouldn't stress the one-man aspect. Presumably, a two-person craft would be of more practical worth (you don't have to drop out of warp for sleeping, for one thing). Winston was just an eccentric who preferred solitude... Two beds could fit in that cabin just as well as one, in case the customer doesn't like hot-bunking. Is this the honeymoon craft of choice for the filthily rich of the 2260s?
As for the nature of the fuel system in "One of Our Planets Is Missing", it wouldn't be much of a stretch to say there was antimatter in the nacelles because it was pumped up there from a more traditional central tank. Dilithium could have been up there, delivered in its cradle by a tube-mail system from Main Engineering - or it could have been at multiple junctions of the power system, one being in the secondary hull and one in each nacelle. All of this would tie in to Sternbach's concept of "antimatter spicing" of plasma, a practice that would be abandonded later on. But that's more of a tech forum issue.
...Still trying to find my jaw from the floor. The seeming nonchalance of the above post is just due to the sheer shock of seeing all the renders. Now, what about redoing all of TAS with animations like these?
posted
OK it maybe one manned in the Winston instance - but it's configuration, the placements of parts - like the bulk-head doors. The front windows. Etc. It just looks PERFECT to be a TOS/TAS type of Runabout - ok maybe they weren't called "Runabouts" then - but I'd say that there was something of that type. I couldn't see there just being a Galileo-type Shuttle for everyone. From that little 'schematic' posted - it even has similar interntal structure to the runabout... with the little rooms/modules behind the cockpit area. I just think it's neat that it could be an early version of a Runabout.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
If we want to apply naval terminology to Trek spacecraft, then we might go for authenticity, too.
A "runabout" would be a motorboat of some speed and agility, for short-range, possibly in-harbor errands. Relatively speaking, this befits the DS9 usage; a TOS era runabout might be a vessel of significantly lower performance. A starship shuttle might be called a "gig" or a "launch". What Winston had might be a "yacht", capable of independent sorties across longer ranges.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
but runabouts are always depicted as capable of hopping to far off systems easily.. this is what makes them different from shuttles.. shuttles are intentionally limited to operations off a mother ship, while runabouts have indepedant interstellar capability, and are therefore ships of their own rather than necessarily having a mother craft. (they would be more like yachts, since they arent short range but are quite capable of leaving harbor on their own, and visiting other harbors)
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote: Only I wouldn't stress the one-man aspect. Presumably, a two-person craft would be of more practical worth (you don't have to drop out of warp for sleeping, for one thing). Winston was just an eccentric who preferred solitude... Two beds could fit in that cabin just as well as one, in case the customer doesn't like hot-bunking. Is this the honeymoon craft of choice for the filthily rich of the 2260s?
I would say that while the shuttle can be easily operated by only one person, it is certainly plausible for it to be able to carry as many as three people in this configuration. I imagined the bunk to be of a similar arrangement to the ones seen onboard the Defiant, with two or three bunks stacked on top of one-another. However I wouldn't say that a lone pilot would have to drop out of warp in order to sleep, if anything a long warp jump would be the ideal time to rest since the computer can always be programed to set off an alarm if there's some kind of problem.
quote: OK it maybe one manned in the Winston instance - but it's configuration, the placements of parts - like the bulk-head doors. The front windows. Etc. It just looks PERFECT to be a TOS/TAS type of Runabout - ok maybe they weren't called "Runabouts" then - but I'd say that there was something of that type. I couldn't see there just being a Galileo-type Shuttle for everyone. From that little 'schematic' posted - it even has similar interntal structure to the runabout... with the little rooms/modules behind the cockpit area. I just think it's neat that it could be an early version of a Runabout.
Ok, I think we need to be clear on this. To me the definition of a Runabout (a Starfleet one anyway) is a small starship geared towards scientific exploration. If you really want to pin a title on the H12 then it'd have to be a "Warpshuttle/transport" or just a simple personal Yacht. It's no more a Runabout than the Type-9A cargo shuttle seen in the tech manual or the "Spacematic" seen docked at K-7, just because they happen to be large shuttles with warp engines.
In regards to the internal layout; the main priority there was to minimise the amount of work for Kenny if he decided to model the shuttle with an opening door, or a set of transparent windows through which one could see cockpit. With the door open all you'd be able to see would be a few steps and another door, with the cockpit it'd be just a wall, a console, a door and a chair. I imagine that these same concerns are what drove the design of the Runabout set which is why they are bother compartmentalised.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
