quote:Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane: Jason: Are you talking about the shoehorn-looking thing on the aft saucer of the Constitution? I don't think it adds nearly as much visual interest (the real reason). And maybe because it's bridging up into the movies it's justified (the excuse). I promise not to light it with blue. (Unless lighting it with blue makes it look incredibly cool, in which case all bets are off.)
I am talking about the black shoehorn thingie (I dont know if I've ever seen a description of that part). Hmmm....I do think the crystal looks cool (and in blue), but mabye you could have a small deflector crystal at the terminator of the "shoehorn strip".... Kinda a blending of the two designs.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane: Mr. Neutron: That was an intentional departure. I wanted to imply that the rollbar and nacelle strut were the same structure, but I didn't feel TOS era ship design allowed for the trek boomerang shape that so beautifully connects the nacelle, main hull and phaser on the movie era Miranda. I suppose this is my way of uglying it up a bit so the movie era is a marked improvement.
I'm not referring to the shape...I'm referring this...
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Mars needs Women: I hadn't really considered it. But I've never seen an execution of the sensor doom (dome+boom, right?) that didn't look too 'fragile'.
Pensive's Wetness: Glad to be of service.
Cartman: But Lightwave is hard... I will likely try to mock this up in Strata as that will take, say, hours as opposed to the days that LW would take me. It's a great program, but I'm still learning.
Jason: I've never really understood/liked the shoehorn. I've got a ridge in there now. Maybe that's enough. Anyone happen to know if the Miranda's warp core is at an angle? The doodad on the bottom looks like it ought to correspond to the impulse deflection crystal thingy.
MrNeutron: Yes? I think? Yes, the angle of the rollbar riser and the nacelle strut are intended to be different in this design. It makes like an arc out of the whole shape. Basically if it looks cool, then I totally did it on purpose and if it looks dumb, then it was totally a mistake.
Speaking of looking dumb, here's the part where everyone yells at me and tells me I'm an idiot.
Teh PW
Self Impossed Exile (This Space for rent)
Member # 1203
posted
Nice but... it's too detailed now. basically i mean the sections of gagets above the landing bays and the, *ahem* Gundum Wing attena aft the bridge. a simple depression for the landing bays and a bare center spine would be better (no impulse crystal as that's really a TMP component)
but it looks nice as a intermediate version, RIGHT BEFORE full TMP production occurs across the entire fleet...
wait.... Sir? when you mean Pre-TMP... i miss understood this to mean TOS Miranda... am i mistaken and you really mean, 'Just a year or two before TMP?'
posted
Pensive: Indeed, this would be a late, late TOS version. Actually it would probably be finished towards the end or after the events of what we saw the series. Certainly towards the end of the original 5-year mission. I'm imagining 3-5 years before TMP.
And before everyone really puts their backs into telling me I am an idiot: A) I know, and B) this ship is a stellar survey ship. I imagine those strips above the shuttlebays to be recesed alcoves where interchangeable mission-specific pallets could be loaded. The hedgehog thingy is a probe-launcher as part of a cartographic pallet. I dunno about the limo antennae anymore. I liked it from the front. It's just I can't see putting on one of those GIANT Nebula backpacks.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I think that you have done a outstanding job sir. I think it looks just right(love the detail) now if somebody saw this idea and made a model out of it. Keep it up!
Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
I love everything except the boomerang antenna. That looks like it should be on Shaft's Lincon.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
U.S.S. Jive-Turkey? No, but the antenna is gone and no one will miss it. I hope.
Only placeholder textures, and very little detail so far. I just wanted to get a feel for how it would work in 3D. Lemme know what you think...
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
If I may offer my 6 grosze (that's 0.02$ ) so late in the develompent cycle...
This ship truly looks great. Indeed, this is the best interpretation of TOS Miranda looks I've seen. What huge difference rotating nacelle pylons did
However, I'm with Pensive's Wetness on this one - those probe launchers look too detailed, not to mention they look too much like smokescreen grenade launchers on modern tanks. Basically, to me, this doesn't look like 23th century equivalent of rapid-deployment equipment, but 20th century equipment slapped on the hull.
Do you actually need so many launchers? I don't think that stellar cartography requires steady rain of probes launched at unsuspecting stellar objects
-------------------- "Do I remember about my amnesia?"
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Hah! I caught you, centuries-long stellar-evolution process!
Topher: This is the new Strata Studio Pro. Probably the cheapest half-decent/full-featured 3D App. I mean if you're not going blender (and I'm not). I don't recommend Strata for modelling, but the new version can use light-dome HDRI rendering now which just makes all the difference.
Kazeite: Thanks. As for the probe/drone-launchers, I knew people wouldn't like them. Each tube would launch 3-5 little sensor drones to more easily chart an entire system at a time. These drones are self-propelled and semi-autonomous and the main reason my they're not launched out the torp-tubes is they are re-usable. They return when the charting is done and the ship moves on to another system. Even so, I realize they aren't REALLY justified. I just like 'em.
More justification/rationalization/explanation: So one of the implications of interchangeable mission modules is that these could ostensibly be developed and constructed in much less time than, say, an entire starship (and wouldn't necessarily be manufactured by Starfleet even.) So I figured that those would likely be the most advanced parts on the ship, closest to movie-era tech and provided a small (in area) departure from Starfleet aesthetics. But, really, more than anything I just think they're neato.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I've been half-following the developement.. but something just kinda-jumped out at me. The boxy structure on the tail of the hull is the right size for the movie-era impulse engines, but the smaller TOS era impulse engines look a little odd on that big square box.
Might I suggest a bevel below the impulse engine.
-------------------- joH'a' 'oH wIj DevwI' jIH DIchDaq Hutlh pagh (some days it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps in the morning) The Woozle!
Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
) so late in the develompent cycle...![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
