posted
Yeh that's a good point. The forward facing deflector array of the Federation has a number of smaller arrays as well, so these could well be sensors, the dish, the deflector. I'd have to guess the aft dish is also a sensor. Here's an orthographical pic of the model here, gripes aside I'm still a fan of this ship.
Cheers for the Loknar link. Funny, I did a Google search after my last post and came up with the exact same page. I've since started on a Loknar model. A new thread is about to open, I could use your creative input Harry...
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
To illustrate what I am saying, I direct you to the following scans of the Star Fleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph at The Guardian of Forever.
1. I really must plead the case that you should make two separate drawings for the Saladin and Hermes, as the one is precisely correct to neither. The Hermes should not have the two photon torpedo tubes on the bridge mound, and the Saladin should have phaser mounts on the upper surface of the saucer.
2. The "dish" emplacement was designed to be the main sensor in TOS, and that's what the Joseph diagrams (seen as computer displays in TWOK) clearly indicate them as being on these ships. The Federation has two sensor dishes (fore & aft) and two smaller dishes (obviously recessed into the hull, so as not to appear in the side view ) in the front, which are the tractor beam and navigational deflector, respectively. However, I must dispute Topher's notion that the "dish" on the refitted Connie seen in the films was also a sensor. Unless I am very much mistaken, it was designed to be the nav-deflector.
3. Your Federation is missing its phaser banks on the upper saucer surface. Also, the saucer rim looks a little too thick.
4. I'd love to see a starliner-type pod for the Ptolemy, as depicted in the FJ Manual.
I am very enamored with the quality of your drawings and am very glad to see these designs again. Excellent!
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
If the TMP-refit of the Enterprise did make the dish the nav-deflector, why still have the deflectors on the sides and bottom? I still say that the dish is a sensor and only a sensor.
As for the Constellation, it has neither a dish nor the deflector thingies, so *shrug*
As for the NX-01, it has a dish and blue glow behind it, so a big *shrug* to that.
-------------------- I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Okie, after some reviewing of schematics and a talk with Shik, it would appear as though I was mistaken. However, my theory worked very well when describing why the Miranda has no dish.
As can be seen, I will admit to being wrong, unlike some forumites.
However, I still say that on the unrefit Enterprise and the Federation, the dishes are sensors, and the deflectors are elsewhere. It would seem to fit with the aft dish on the Federation.
-------------------- I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh Mighty Monkey: IIRC, there were no visible phaser banks on the 1701 model and FJ made them up himself. Thus, that difference between the Hermes and Saladin is irrelevant, because 'really' neither of the two ships have visible phaser banks. Thanks for bringing up the torp launchers, though. Oh, and the same thing also goes for the Federation, I didn't forget to add them, they just aren't visible.
To avoid all the sensor/deflector mess, I'm just going to draw the Federation as depicted in the SFTM.
Oh, and about that saucer rim, FJ's schematics are not very accurate at all, and if the Federation's saucer is made of Constitution parts, this rim is correct, and his is too thin. HA!
posted
I would also love to see what you would do with the Decatur prototype. I've done three or four tries over the years attempting to work out what the secondary hull would look like in a plan and bow view. I've never fully been satisfied with any of them. Unfortunately, I'm a self-taught draftsman, so I don't really know how to fix what I think is wrong. I would really love to see someone else's take on the layout.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Ha. You're right. The fore and aft views are a few pages away from the side view, so I missed them .
I've updated the Federation WIP. I've decided to go for a double intercooler on the top nacelle, simply because Joseph's assymetrical nacelle looks strange.
Update I've added the Larson intercooler, and the Hermes has it's own schematic, without the torp tubes.
posted
Here's a quick question... just why do so many people seem to take FJ's phaser bank counts as definitive, especially for the Constitution?
I've never really understood the limited phaser coverage provided by only three dual-emitter banks. (Dorsal port/starboard, and ventral forward.) This leaves can some rather glaring blind spots in the forward arc -- to say nothing of the rear arc. Given that the Constitution was partially a warship, I'd prefer to think that even the original Enterprise had the same basic phaser bank arrangement as the refit version did -- three double banks both top and bottom of the saucer.
And of course, there were no phaser banks on the actual filming model anyway, were there?
(I can't confirm it at all, but wasn't there one episode where Kirk orders "aft phasers"? I don't remember for certain.)
-------------------- “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
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
whats the problem with the inner nacelle detail pointing up on the the Federation or pointing down on the Saladin/Hermes? i thought the specs that showed it like that worked best.
and youre not going to win any 'the dish in TOS was something else' arguments, since ENT is probably going to establish that the dish has always been a deflector, even before TOS.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Oh Mighty Monkey: IIRC, there were no visible phaser banks on the 1701 model and FJ made them up himself. Thus, that difference between the Hermes and Saladin is irrelevant, because 'really' neither of the two ships have visible phaser banks. Thanks for bringing up the torp launchers, though. Oh, and the same thing also goes for the Federation, I didn't forget to add them, they just aren't visible.
To avoid all the sensor/deflector mess, I'm just going to draw the Federation as depicted in the SFTM.
Oh, and about that saucer rim, FJ's schematics are not very accurate at all, and if the Federation's saucer is made of Constitution parts, this rim is correct, and his is too thin. HA!
Okay, I can completely understand why one would want to make the Connie herself more accurate to the model than to FJ's drawings. But as to the other three FJ ships, the only thing ever seen of them onscreen was the FJ schematics themselves. (Well, not the Federation, but...) Your premise of making them all constructed solely of Connie parts is flawed, in that this is not the factual case. While the Connie might not have had phaser mounts visible, the Saladin and Federation did. And, why assume that the Federation saucer is constructed of two Connie saucer halves? Is its secondary hull a modified Connie piece? No. The thin rim on the drawing indicates it is a design-specific piece.
I definitely appreciate your work and apologize for nitpicking. Sorry.
-MMoM
P.S.
Could you perhaps also make an alternate sketch showing the Federation with its proper one-intercooler nacelle?
-MM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Your premise of making them all constructed solely of Connie parts is flawed
Ummm.... the last time I checked, the saucers, nacelles, deflector dish (or sensor, whatever), and neck assemblies were all identical. The proportions of those components are identical to the Constitution.
The only major differences: The Federation's saucer is made up of two lower halves of the Constitution saucer, and has a different secondary hull. The nacelles are still the same size, though.
Furthermore, FJ's Constitution schematics from the same source are identical in their details (such as phaser banks visible on the hull) that have already been disproved on the "real" ship from the show. Therefore, such similar features on the Saladin, etc are nothing more than inaccuracies that are present in ALL of FJ's ship schematics.
There IS such a thing as being too literal, Mim.
-------------------- “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
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) in the front, which are the tractor beam and navigational deflector, respectively. However, I must dispute Topher's notion that the "dish" on the refitted Connie seen in the films was also a sensor. Unless I am very much mistaken, it was designed to be the nav-deflector. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
