posted
...But the design just yells for a third set of landing legs. (Although then it would look like a squashed bug.)
And the matter remains that we can't see the upper deck on screen, at least not to the left of the landing struts. So why not at least flip the whole design around so that the bow of the ship is to the left, and the stern to the right?
Yes, I know the characters turn left at the outer door. But there could be a cargo hold to the right of the door or something - a space that isn't exactly personnel-accessible, as possibly evidenced by the partial-door-thing on the outer wall (Martin's drawings have a crane of some sort protruding from there). The characters would have to go left to access a central corridor that eventually takes them to whichever spaces they desire to access.
Or then the characters could simply be on their way to the extreme bow of the ship, which could be the runabout aft cabin reversed. What we see through its windows wouldn't be treetops, but rather the sort of bushes you get in the decade after your ship has felled the earlier trees...
Why do I gripe? Because I still don't much like the idea of an upper deck, or the aesthetically and functionally annoying low relative ground clearance resulting from such a large ship. And because for this once, the unseen component of writer/artist intent isn't all that bad. If the bow of the ship is to the left, it could well be the Martin design reversed and with two quite ordinary nacelles stuck above the stern, to the unseen right.
And the "four times runabout" ratio would be internal volume against internal volume - presumably sufficient because a runabout can pack something like sixty people in discomfort, so four should be able to pack thirty and their luggage in comfort...
posted
First off, there WILL be an extra set of landing gear for the aft section, I just have to wait until I've plotted out the ventral view so I can find a sensible place for them to go (not as simple as you might think.)
As for the visibility of the upper deck, as I've already explained I designed the bridge with an eye towards it being dismantled and used as a balcony by the colonists - note that the deck level of the bridge is about a meter lower than the outer dorsal hull, so it wouldn't be visible from the ground - as for the rest of the upper deck, it's far enough back so that it wouldn't be visible in the screen shots.
I did think about flipping the whole thing 180 to have the upper deck on camera left but it causes more problems than it solves. For one thing yes, there could be a central corridor, but with a ship this small it just doesn't make sense to have THREE hallways running parallel and it would make it impossible to place the passenger cabin set (the one they had meg in) anywhere inside the hull. Believe me, you're not suggesting anything I haven't already considered and eliminating the upper deck altogether just makes it worse as you have less space for passenger cabins and cargo bays.
As far as the ground clearance goes, I may yet extend the belly to ground level, or add retractable parallel skids along the entire length, I haven't decided yet and again, it will have to wait until the ventral view is sorted.
As for the Danube's capacity, 60 would be at EXTREME discomfort and strictly short term. This is a civilian personnel transport, so it requires at LEAST one bunk for every two passengers and a seat in an escape pod for every person aboard, with room to spare. So the internal volume to passenger ration goes up compared to a runabout. Then you need somewhere for them to eat and socialise, hence the midship mess hall and you need to see to their hygiene and any medical issues, so that means a sonic shower room and a very small infirmary with a stasis pod. It's as small as it's going to get and any bigger and it becomes two big for the "about 4x the size of a Danube" to be valid.
posted
I'm toying with the idea of removing the front set of lading support arms. What do you think? Better, or worse? In a weird way I think it looks more balanced than before.
I would have hoped that the ship could be developed into something better looking than a flounder, but with only one deck there were definitely not many options.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
