posted
Here's a very early WIP of a 2250s-era Destroyer. Overall length is about 160 m but that might change. Detailing is provision too. The nacelles and supports were "liberated" from a USS Chimera design by Jason Colbert at ASDB: http://www.trekships.org/chimera-jason-sketch.jpg
Comments/criticism accepted (grudgingly)
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Great design, Masao! I prefer the two-nacelle version, myself.
A couple of suggestions, mainly pertaining to the nacelles: first, those pylons look neat, but don't really fit in the 2250's era, IMO, with the bent angles. I think the ship might look better if the nacelles were held in closer to the hull, by getting rid of that second, outer segment of the pylons.
Also, you may want to consider slimming down the nacelles themselves just a tad... say, 20% or so? I'm guessing you're wanting large nacelles because the ship itself is so small. But it looks... well, a bit strange. Though strange can be good.
I look forward to seeing further developments!
-------------------- “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
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Yummy!!
I like them both a lot...maybe you could use them both? The twin-engined one is a "fleet destroyer," able to run out to the frontier & handle large-scale fleet actions as well, while the single-engined one is more for local patrol cruisers & the like.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Yea - I would say take that extra bend out of the pylons. Keep them swept, but simpler. Extra bends and kinks may look good some times, but they often compromise strength.
I also think you may want to have both types for - perhaps - different missions (picket ship for the single nacelle version - strike ship for the twin model).
Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
Also, maybe make the impulse engines a little more prominent and as for the cannon on the twin-nacelle design, some type of a high-energy particle cannon, maybe?
Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Gee, I kind of like the kinked supports. I wanted to make this ship look ludicrously overpowered, sort of like a hot rod with an enormous engine. In particular I wanted to contrast it with that boring science ship I posted a few months ago. The extra-large, complex-looking nacelles and kinked supports add to that big-engine effect. Whether it fits in the 2250s, who knows? Constitution is from the 2240s, so this is a bit more advanced, leaning toward the refit configuration.
I decided to put the impulse thrusters on the neck. The shuttle bay prevent them from being on the top rear of the saucer, and I didn't want to split them on either side of the neck. They will be detailed more, however.
I think I will make both single-nacelle and twin-nacelle variants. The single-nacelle version should also have a big gun right above the nacelle.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Looks good....but the nacelles are a bit too streamlined for TOS. I'd make them thinner and make the bussard collector more blunt. Mabye square off the secondary hull a bit if there's no shuttlebay there.... Mabye add Connie flux chillers to the nacelles too.
My .02
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Damn. And I was almost done with the article for my Zhuhai-class to lay at your altar.
Another thing: my eyes keep adding depth to the twin-engined dorsal plan. They keep wanting to raise the cranked pylons up at a slight angle. Not a MASSIVE one...but a a gentle one; like, they slope up to the crnak & then go straight out to the nacelles. Maybe you might want to to a test run side view on that concept...just to see how it looks. You already did say it could be the start of the bridge of the refit era, so...
Where are the frigates?
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Jason: I'm going to keep the nacelles mostly the way they are, but I will try blunting the bussards a bit. Shik: I know what you mean about the nacelle supports. I haven't done the front and rear views but will probably make the wing slightly like a Corsair (gull wing). Other wise the supports are too long and straight.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Yeah...gullwingin' it would work nicely.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't know - I wouldn't put a big gun on the single nacelle model myself. Stick with lighter guns, but maybe a couple extra batteries for better coverage.
That's why I thought it might make a good picket ship (that would be like a WWII radar picket - sitting on the edge, watching for trouble, taking a pot shot if it can - otherwise - laying low).
Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Something small and nitpicky: should'nt the bridge's turbolift be larger to match the TOS Connie's? I'm sure you're working on a forward view so I'll forgo some of my other qurstions....for now.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Something small and nitpicky: should'nt the bridge's turbolift be larger to match the TOS Connie's? I'm sure you're working on a forward view so I'll forgo some of my other qurstions....for now.
The bridge module is straight off my Connie schematics. The elevator tube looks shorter because it and the back part of the bridge are slightly submerged into the hull mound.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Ah...now I sees it! I may well build this in 2500th scale....once the fore and aft views are completed, that is.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
