I think you've made the deflector dish too small -- considering that the original verson of the NCC-1701 from "The Cage" had a larger dish, I think that older ships would need decent-sized deflectors, rather than mini-dishes. Or you could just drop the deflector altogether and say that it's integrated in some other system (like the Miranda and Constellation).
And I still believe that the registry number needs to be a bit lower (in number, not in placement on the hull). Of course, I'm a fan of Masao's line of ships and so am thinking of it from that perspective, but the Mann looks too bulbous to be a recent predecessor of the Constitution-class. Even though there are a few ships that can be described as "bulky" (like the Olympic), the Mann just lacks that "sleekness" that TOS-era ships and beyond have, and so I'd place it closer to the Daedalus era. A number around NCC-500 would work better, IMO.
And I also like that little "plot devices" joke!
-------------------- “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
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: considering that the original verson of the NCC-1701 from "The Cage" had a larger dish, I think that older ships would need decent-sized deflectors, rather than mini-dishes.
There're some kids working for Paramount who would disagree with you on THAT!
BTW include phase lasers and particle artillery.. i know you want to!
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: There're some kids working for Paramount who would disagree with you on THAT!
Well, yes... but they're morons. No matter what equivocations they use, no matter what behind-the-scenes realities existed, the NX-01 is still a shitty design for its time period. No question. (That doesn't say I don't respect Doug Drexler's work at all, or anything like that -- I'm just talking about that damned ship's incongruity.)
Besides, didn't you read further about my comments on Masao's line of ships?
-------------------- “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
Keep that thing out of my thread, will you? We're trying to have a serious conversation here.
The deflector dish has to be small enough not to show up in the side view. Besides, there are enough designs with no dish, so a small dish wouldn't be much more of a problem.
The NCC is not entirely made up. Since I'm making these schematics for someone's chronology (a very open-minded one as far as canon is concerned), it has to fit with the numerous Fandom registries. Given a 2206 launch date for this class (the Spaceflight Chronology date corrected by adding 52), the closest unused registries are in the 1200 range. So, in the grand F**A scheme of things, this seems to be the best option.
But I agree that, with regards to Masao's ships, it would be better to make the Mann class a contemporary of the Daedalus and/or Wasp classes.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
according to "The Final Reflection" these ships were active in the 2210s-2230s, right? (excepting the old chronology, i believe the later portions of the book took place when Spock was 7 years old, circa 2237 and several parts of the book were years before that)
BTW if i credit and add a link, can i use this on my site too in the galactopedia? (i usually take the sideview and shrink it and transparency the background)
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Excellent work! The impulse engines are fine as they are, although you might want to square off the bottom of the structure a little bit where it meets the hull.
I still think the name and registry could do with being moved down some more. If it were me I'd have the reg about 3/4 the size that you have it at and position it directly below the "equator" line with the name positioned directly above.
As for the deflector, perhaps you could try doubling it in width and postioning it on the equator, it shouldn't impact on the side or front view too much if you recess it deep enough into the hull. Failing that you could ommit it altogether and say it's hidden inside the sensor dome, after all the Daedalus didn't have a visible dish.
The MSD looks fine, you just need to tidy up those lables a little bit.
From the registery I take it that you intend this to be the class ship for the U.S.S. Valiant (NCC-1223) which would be consistant with the destruction date 2217.
posted
Just thinking - maybe this ship has a lot of open internal volume?? Like large grassed areas/arboretums etc. There seems to be a lack of windows above and below the mid section.
Also - maybe you could - instead of increasing the size of the deflector - put in two - on mirroring it at the top?
ALSO - where are the Bussard collectors? Do they appear at the front like the Steamrunner - or could those red balls be them? Theoretically bussard collectors could be located anywhere on a ship couldn't they? Why do they get placed on the nacelles?
And the top view looks like its a Galaxy relative!
Another thing - where is the original picture? Is there any possibility that the nacelles are actually at the FRONT? Cause Rick had a lot of those shuttles in the TNG Tech Manual with the pointy front parts on their nacelles.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
There's also a scout of some sort that is shown next to the Constitution, and it, too, could use some reversing... Not all designs on the "timeline" need to point to the right. (Some point up, after all.)
If we say the painting shows the bow of the vessel, we're still missing a navigational deflector and a registry. But Rick didn't do registries in those paintings. And the deflectors could be those oval things near the top of the ship, shaped and sized pretty much like the three things at the bow of a Constitution.
For extra artistic touch (and for cutting down on that huge internal volume), I'd add an undercut to the stern. One that doesn't show in the side view, that is. Similar to the cut in which the Excelsior deflector dish resides... Similar indentations could house impulse engines and other typical butt enhancements.
posted
I'm not reversing it! Even if it could be reversed, all sources have it this way around. And I still want to keep this ship as consistent as possible with fandom. Even if it is a weird ugly ship.
I've deliberately left off windows in the upper and lower decks. Because of the hull curvature, those windows would become really long curvy shapes. Seeing as no-one in TOS ever even had windows in their quarters, I don't think they'd really mind.
There seems to be a general idea that my deflector dish is too small. I'll see what I can do.
Now, what else was there... *reviews thread*...ah yes.. The 'Buzzards'. There are no ramscoops on this ship. That's okay though, since they aren't really necessary. IIRC, the TNGTM says they're only used for emergency deuterium collection. It's not a vital part of the engines, so I think the ship will do fine without a pair of 'scoops.
posted
Hey that Marshall Class does look like it's missing it's saucer!! There's even a flat plained bit that could be part of the top of the 'neck'.
Also look at this class's nacelles - it TOO has the cones/points facing forwards - more creedance towards the Mann class actually having nacelles that face forward?
ALSO - what is the big red thing at the front of the Marshall class - the entrance to a shuttle bay... maybe this thing is a big fighter carrier?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It seems to me that Sternbach is not hostile to questions like "Say, Rick, in the Spaceflight Chronology, which way is ship X pointing?" I mean, if anyone should care to ask.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I e-mailed him a week ago about the Mann-class "pods," but I still haven't had a reply. Which is unusual for Sternbach, as he generally replies within a few hours or, at most, a day. Maybe he's on vacation or busy with something else.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
No matter what equivocations they use, no matter what behind-the-scenes realities existed, the NX-01 is still a shitty design for its time period. No question. (That doesn't say I don't respect Doug Drexler's work at all, or anything like that -- I'm just talking about that damned ship's incongruity.)![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
