posted
Here are pics of my Norway class U.S.S. Proctor! The model itself is made by Odyssey Slipways (I didnt scratchbuild this one- I just built and painted it. I decaled it as per the CGI model but added a few windows: I just think a cruiser as large as this needs more windows than the CGI or this physical model shows.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't particularly care for what they did with her belly, but other than that, me likey. I've always liked the Norway though.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I like the ventral side: soooo much nicer than the terrible cut-n-paste job they did in Fact Files (they just slapped Defiant chunks in there). The phasers and torp launcer are nicely done as well: not glaringly obvious but a needed addition.
Theres a pic of my little Klingon Spectre class escort as well.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Hey, did nayone ever come up with a plausable history/ mission profile for the Norway class? I need it for something I'm (thinking of ) writing into a short story set during the Dominion War and shortly thereafter.
Figure, the ship has about the firepower as an Intrepid tops (it's a light cruiser).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
I try to account for a) the weird and possibly mission-specific general shape, b) the lack of visible weaponry, c) the odd sliding nacelles and d) the sparsity of sightings outside ST:FC. I also try to work in the DS9 TM specs and stats, just for fun.
The mass figures have been �bernerdishly tooled to make the nacelle sliding thing plausible, and to match the warp coil density rule that I've used in the guide overall (basically, LN-64 weighs 300,000 tons apiece). It all makes for a really weird ship, which was the design goal, sort of. Whatever this baby is, she certainly is no light cruiser.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Umm, there's always page 202...
I try to account for a) the weird and possibly mission-specific general shape, b) the lack of visible weaponry, c) the odd sliding nacelles and d) the sparsity of sightings outside ST:FC. I also try to work in the DS9 TM specs and stats, just for fun.
The mass figures have been �bernerdishly tooled to make the nacelle sliding thing plausible, and to match the warp coil density rule that I've used in the guide overall (basically, LN-64 weighs 300,000 tons apiece). It all makes for a really weird ship, which was the design goal, sort of. Whatever this baby is, she certainly is no light cruiser.
Timo Saloniemi
Cool- well thought out as well. So...a cruiser then? I consider "heavy cruiser" to refer to ships in the Ambassador/ Akira size range and I cant see Starfleet classifing any of their ships in their "peaceful fleet" as "Assualt Ships": it's just not their jargon by the TNG era.
I'd forgotten the "sliding nacelle" idea (mainly because it serves no purpose I could fathom). I'm not real big on transforming starships or ships that -while far larger than a Connie Refit- have externally moving parts: it makes Treknology far too "anime" for my taste.
quote:The neglecting of ship-to-ship combat capability is now recognized as an error, as exemplified by the disastrous battle of Setlik in 2374 where even the presence of a heavy Nebula escort was insufficient in protecting the assault wing of eight Norways. Yet, remedies would be readily available
So (as far as your background goes), the linked model could be a later-era upgrade with the needed additions in firepower accounting for the extra phaser strips and lower torpedo launcher.
I dont know about storing landing vehicles in the nacelle "pontoons" though: theres plenty of room in the large hangarbay (and immeadeately forward of it) to house assualt craft. The sliding nacelle thing could be used in atmospheric operations: a smaller shield envelope to decrease drag in an atmosphere possibly.
Have you thought about adding multiple squad troop-transporters to the ship's design? It seems more practical that the Norways would bombard a planetary target from high orbit (accounting for it's torpedo launcher being on the Ventral side), knock out initial ground defenss/ transporter blockers and them beam down troops en masse with the assualt shuttles providing backup/evac to the squads immeadeately thereafter.
Intresting that you place the ship's origin in the Cardassian War: the design seems more recent but it could have been just ahead of it's time.
Just my .02
[ September 07, 2004, 07:17 AM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote: So (as far as your background goes), the linked model could be a later-era upgrade with the needed additions in firepower accounting for the extra phaser strips and lower torpedo launcher.
Most definitely. The battle of Setlik mentioned here is actually a reference to a S.C.E. novel which I haven't read yet, just glanced through the blurbs. It might tell more about latter-day Norways - the battle involved six Nebulas and eight Norways but no other SF ships, plus lots and lots of Jemmies. I rather expect there to be at least one reference to Norways firing torpedoes, even though there's no launcher in evidence in the "non-upgraded" design.
quote: I dont know about storing landing vehicles in the nacelle "pontoons" though: theres plenty of room in the large hangarbay (and immeadeately forward of it) to house assualt craft.
Assuming that the ship has a hangar bay. It's not really evident from the published CGI bits... (nor are impulse engines, really!)
quote: It seems more practical that the Norways would bombard a planetary target from high orbit (accounting for it's torpedo launcher being on the Ventral side), knock out initial ground defenss/ transporter blockers and them beam down troops en masse with the assualt shuttles providing backup/evac to the squads immeadeately thereafter.
I wouldn't put my life on a transporter in combat operations, especially not in a first wave, when the enemy can utilize jammers and shields. My Norway is a special-purpose first-wave ship; second-wave vessels indeed rely on transporters, once the enemy has been banished from the beam-down points.
And as far as I can tell, the Norway does not have a torpedo launcher at all! Since the only weapon ever seen firing was mounted in the dorsal bow recess, I decided the ship would attack with her frontal profile towards the enemy... Your mileage may vary a lot, though, since we saw so damnably little of the Norway.
quote: Intresting that you place the ship's origin in the Cardassian War: the design seems more recent but it could have been just ahead of it's time.
I sort of think this justifies the martial designation, and the relative absence of the ship later on: it's a ship built specifically for bloody planetary warfare in the violent fifties - and thus of little use in the peacetime sixties-seventies of TNG and early DS9 episodes, or in the deep space combat of mid-to late seventies DS9.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: And as far as I can tell, the Norway does not have a torpedo launcher at all! Since the only weapon ever seen firing was mounted in the dorsal bow recess, I decided the ship would attack with her frontal profile towards the enemy... Your mileage may vary a lot, though, since we saw so damnably little of the Norway.
I wondered if the Norway did not use (in FC) a deflector based beam when firing on the Borg. After all, Starfleet must have used something new (and likely deflector-based) to knock out the Borg subspace field prior to Enterprise E's arrival or they would have scored no damage to the cube at all!
I figure that strange new designs and "one-off" ships like the U.S.S. Elkins (with it's three deflectors) would have been made to knock out that field (not having anything to test the new tech on would have accounted for the numerous designs in the hopes that something would have the desired effect.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Another interesting fact: there are only two Norways seen in the battle. Both were unphased by the exploding Borg ship, unlike the hapless Steamrunner which suffered shrapnel damage and exploded.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
"After all, Starfleet must have used something new to knock out the Borg subspace field..."
Yes, a Plah De'viz weapon.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Mabye a "we forgot the Borg even had a subspace field" amneisa torpedo fired diectly into the writers skulls?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by newark: Another interesting fact: there are only two Norways seen in the battle. Both were unphased by the exploding Borg ship, unlike the hapless Steamrunner which suffered shrapnel damage and exploded.
Steamrunners explode with almost the same onscreen frequencey as Oberths though so.....
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
It's built mainly from a Norway hull and a pair od modified Ravenstar models nacelles ...plus it's got a Galaxy shuttlebay at the rear now. 8)
Looking at it, it's sorta a update on the Springfield design.
Opinions?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
