posted
Well, ive never really created anything for this era, so, today I sat down and took a shot at it. Of course this isnt really original at all, but hey, i wanted to get the look and feel down. Let me know what you think!
posted
Why do something that has been done time and time again? Could you not have picked a better ship? Let's be honest, the NCC-1701-A is shit.
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by aneurysm: Why do something that has been done time and time again? Could you not have picked a better ship? Let's be honest, the NCC-1701-A is shit.
Bah! The NCC-1701-A/refit has been the best ship in Trek - beautiful, elegant, functional, sleek, brilliant!
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
quote:Originally posted by Dat: While I think it's a good design, it could do with some improvements. Some are a thicker neck, better phaser coverage, and aft torpedo coverage
I agree: Improvment #1 needs to be the thickening of those scrawny nacelle pylon connections to the secondary hull!! If that "near miss" torpedo would've struck the pylon in STII, the entire nacelle probably would've been blown off!
Man, I hate that part of the design!
It would be nice to have an aft torpedo as well: the ship's rear is pretty light on armament.
And thicken up the neck!
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by aneurysm: Why do something that has been done time and time again? Could you not have picked a better ship? Let's be honest, the NCC-1701-A is shit.
quote: Improvment #1 needs to be the thickening of those scrawny nacelle pylon connections to the secondary hull!! If that "near miss" torpedo would've struck the pylon in STII, the entire nacelle probably would've been blown off!
Yeah, cus the wider pylon helped Reliant hold on to her nacelle when it was hit by a torpedo...
...NOT!
Marian
PS: The original Enterprise did just fine without an aft torpedo. She's an explorer, not a warship.
Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by aneurysm: Why do something that has been done time and time again? Could you not have picked a better ship? Let's be honest, the NCC-1701-A is shit.
Blasphemy!
BURN THE Blasphemer!!! NO ONE expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Explorers should ideally be as heavily armed as their spaceframes will tolerate, though.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MarianLH: Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
quote: Improvment #1 needs to be the thickening of those scrawny nacelle pylon connections to the secondary hull!! If that "near miss" torpedo would've struck the pylon in STII, the entire nacelle probably would've been blown off!
Yeah, cus the wider pylon helped Reliant hold on to her nacelle when it was hit by a torpedo...
...NOT!
Marian
PS: The original Enterprise did just fine without an aft torpedo. She's an explorer, not a warship.
Well, he meant a thicker pylon. And the E-D was also an explorer, and she had families and better weapons coverage, including an aft launcher.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
A very nice drawing, Wes, I especially like the shadow work.
If you're going to do another sideview, my pick would be the Ambassador Refit. I've studied the sideviews of all starfleet ships and come to the conclusion that it is the nicest. Especially the little bulge under the aft shuttle bay. Almost sensual in its curve, like a soft hip.
After looking at it for a while and then switching over to a Constitution sideview, the Connie looks like a turd with "shrunken-saucer" complex in comparison.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
