quote:Originally posted by coatlantis1745: ...or we could simply have one of our talented artists here present the Hermes Class as it was presented and intended from the FJ tech manual (Federation Class DN included). This constant desire to revise our understanding about ships we have come to learn about and respect in the past is very troubling.
Yeah, sure. We all know that EVERYTHING is perfect, and it's much better to assume that the 600 hours of Trek published since 1975 are wrong, and some unofficial book which has been decanonized is absolutely correct.
It's an unfortunate flaw that there are inconsistencies in Trek, but it's basically unavoidable when you've got such an incredible volume of work being made. The whole point is to make the facts fit in as well as possible. As many of them as possible.
-------------------- “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
This is the final version of my Hermes completed a few days ago (before the most recent posts). With the help of the FJ original and my own front and top views I revised the deflector pod to have the proper taper and length. Also the neck is a bit longer, but I used the extra length to increase the size of the dish rather than to separate it from the nacelle. Fixed the windows too.
But I'm not going to work on this anymore. I had just wanted to include a few side views in my Connie/PV article without much comment. If someone else wants to take a shot, please be my guest!
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by coatlantis1745: ...or we could simply have one of our talented artists here present the Hermes Class as it was presented and intended from the FJ tech manual (Federation Class DN included). This constant desire to revise our understanding about ships we have come to learn about and respect in the past is very troubling.
Yeah, sure. We all know that EVERYTHING is perfect, and it's much better to assume that the 600 hours of Trek published since 1975 are wrong, and some unofficial book which has been decanonized is absolutely correct.
It's an unfortunate flaw that there are inconsistencies in Trek, but it's basically unavoidable when you've got such an incredible volume of work being made. The whole point is to make the facts fit in as well as possible. As many of them as possible.
But what is it that doesn't "fit" between FJ's ships and other Trek that we've seen? Not much that I can see. All the changes being made seem to be done simply to appease the aesthetic sensitivities of the individual artists. ("I never really liked the way such and such looked...") Of course, that's what artists do and there's nothing wrong with it. Rev and Harry and Masao and whomever else are free to tinker and play with things as they please. But personally happen to love these old FJ designs, and I too would love to see a straight rendering of the ships in their original configurations.
Besides, need I remind you that the Hermes, Saladin, and Ptolemy were all seen on computer displays in TWOK and TSFS?
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I agree w/MMoM's post above. The only thing I never really liked about the FJ designs was the sensor array on the ass-end of the secondary hull. However, I can still live w/that for the reasoning given.
Make changes as you see fit, for all I care. However, why bash the ideas of others...?
Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
The only thing I really disagree with regarding the Hermes is the deflector dish, which IMO makes absolutely no sense. It's not the aesthetics, it's the equipment. Does it really make sense to have such a crucial component hanging from a little thread with no support? Even with structural integrity fields, that don't make no sense!
-------------------- “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
This is the final version of my Hermes completed a few days ago (before the most recent posts). With the help of the FJ original and my own front and top views I revised the deflector pod to have the proper taper and length. Also the neck is a bit longer, but I used the extra length to increase the size of the dish rather than to separate it from the nacelle. Fixed the windows too.
But I'm not going to work on this anymore. I had just wanted to include a few side views in my Connie/PV article without much comment. If someone else wants to take a shot, please be my guest!
Actually - why does the deflector have to be round? Couldn't it be eliptical instead (like the NX-01)? That way, the dish can be large enough, and the dorsal strut can stay about the same length...
Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Trying to mix concepts from "Enterprise" and the Starfleet Museum is like trying to mix fire and water.
Seriously, part of the point of Masao's stuff is that it's NOT reliant on the latest "genius to come from B&B. But within that lone exception, it does try to encompass all the rest of Trek.
I'd say that non-circular deflector dishes don't come into use until the 2330's, at the earliest. As far as canon designs go, the earliest ship I recall with an elliptical dish would be the New Orleans -- and even that one was based on the Galaxy Class project.
Of course, that doesn't mean there AREN'T any elliptical dishes out there earlier... but IMO an elliptical dish would kind of ruin the elegance of the TOS aesthetics.
-------------------- “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
StarCruiser: Yeah, you're not likely to see any elliptical dishes on my ships (or variations of other people's ships). My idea of the TOS design aesthetic is that it relies on fairly simple circles and straight lines. So, I will continue to work within my TOS parts box without borrowing fromTNG or ENT. As Dax said: "I love classic 23rd century design." Of course, your idea of what TOS looks like may differ from mine.
Another editorial comment: If I were FJ, I might be surprised that anyone took my work as some sort of gospel that must be religiously adhered to. If he were still around, he would readily admit that his schematics have numerous inaccuracies in relation to onscreen images and perhaps even illogical components (such as the dish on a stick).
I'm disappointed. Is no one going to bitch about the registry? (adapted from TAS)
PS to MM: It's oil and water.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Horray for design in the Matt Jefferies vein! It is so nice to hear that you won't use the TNG design aesthetic in your designs. I hope that everything continues to look like 1960s modern. THINK 1960s.
Is the ship's registry your attempt to reform the NCC registry scheme in Star Trek universe? Who can quibble about the number you painted on the side, when the registry system is a complete and absolute mess? Just as long as you don't give your ship a number that has not been used by another, I think you can get away with a lot.
I am assuming that it is an S for "scout." Just as long as you are consistent with your fanfiction contribution, I think you should be OK.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Masao, I noticed it. Isn't the NCC-S585 a survey designation? The "S" is for survey like on the Bonaventure. Wasn't the registry on the Bonaventure NCC-S1100?
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Here are the revisions I suggested, quickly done:
Nothing major. Just a smaller deflector, and tapering the cylindrical deflector housing to smoothly integrate with the dorsal. I hope you don't mind, me being a newbie and all.
posted
Aridas: Newbie, Shmewbie! It don't matter! We judge on the content of your posts, not on the height of your member number.
I redrew the deflector housing by referring to the top and front views. Since the housing is smallest if it has a circular front profile, it extends furthest aft where it is widest, which is at the midpoint. I'm not sure how you would end up with a square rear like in your revision.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by aridas: Thanks for the welcome, Jim NCC1701A!
quote:Captain Mike, I only published them as silhouettes because they were slated for volumes 7-10 of the FRS and the compilation, neither of which were ever published. The way they appear will be revealed at some point, however...
Well, that's whetted my appetite. I've got FRS issues 1 through 6. Really liked your tidying up of the Renner class corvette - the original looked a little too hand-drawn (although I'm not trying to bash the artist or his work).
-------------------- It's life Jim, but not as we know it...
Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Yeah, sure. We all know that EVERYTHING is perfect, and it's much better to assume that the 600 hours of Trek published since 1975 are wrong, and some unofficial book which has been decanonized is absolutely correct.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
