-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
The major sticking point with the FJ hull design in regards to TMP-era technology is the forward shuttlebay; there really is no good way of reconciling the two. Unlike the upgraded versions of the Coronado class through-deck cruiser I've seen, the placement of the hangar at the very top of the hull doesn't allow enough room for the horizontal power transfer shaft to the outboard engines. You would need to do some major restructuring of the hull, and you'd still have a very ungainly design. It would be easier to simply relocate the hangar bay to the stern.
I did like the sensor mounts you placed on both the top and bottom of the saucer, Reverend. Do they mean that you support the idea that the upper module on the original dreadnought was not the main bridge (as the dreadnought plans set I have states)? To me, that made a hell of a lot of sense for a combat vessel.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Woodside Kid: The major sticking point with the FJ hull design in regards to TMP-era technology is the forward shuttlebay; there really is no good way of reconciling the two. Unlike the upgraded versions of the Coronado class through-deck cruiser I've seen, the placement of the hangar at the very top of the hull doesn't allow enough room for the horizontal power transfer shaft to the outboard engines. You would need to do some major restructuring of the hull, and you'd still have a very ungainly design. It would be easier to simply relocate the hangar bay to the stern.
Indeed, hence my omission of a forward shuttlebay. Also an aft facing deflector dish wouldn't do you alot of good either.
quote: I did like the sensor mounts you placed on both the top and bottom of the saucer, Reverend. Do they mean that you support the idea that the upper module on the original dreadnought was not the main bridge (as the dreadnought plans set I have states)? To me, that made a hell of a lot of sense for a combat vessel.
Yeah, while I'm not a huge fan of Starfleet having warships or indeed 3 nacelles, it dose stand to reason that a Dreadnaught's bridge would be well protected. In this case that means that the bridge would be a strictly internal structure.
quote:Harry: Franz Joseph says they're both sensors. And since he designed the ship, that's probably what they are.
posted
Yes, I know that's what the schematic says....but all of the ship designs in the manual say the same thing, even if they also another indicator pointing out the bridge. From that I infer that the "sensor array" FJ is talking about is the dome above the bridge. I meant to ask if you thought the module underneath that dome was bridge; forgive me for not stating my question clearly enough.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
yes, if you look at the bridge page youll see that the reason the bridge has a dome over it is for the upper sensor platform, on all of his Connie variants.
the fact that FJ omitted the bridge dome on the Federation could simply mean he moved the bridge to deck 2.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
If you look at FJ's schematic you'll see that on the dorsal view, that upper platform doesn't appear to have a turboshaft, like you would expect a bridge to have. For this reason I generally assume that the whole structure is ment to be identical to the sensor platform on the ventral side of the sauser. For those of you who are interested I did a more conventional version of the Dreadnaught, here.
posted
I think I like these ramscoops better. And the exposed bridge is nice, although I agree that FJ's original wasn't supposed to have one. Just restore the third nacelle to this pic, and I'll print it out in A0 or A minus 2 size for my wall...
quote: I think I like these ramscoops better. And the exposed bridge is nice, although I agree that FJ's original wasn't supposed to have one. Just restore the third nacelle to this pic, and I'll print it out in A0 or A minus 2 size for my wall...
Hmm...just for you mind, its not to be distributed...it'd screw up the history I'm writing.
quote: A Dreadnought with an Arboretum! HOORAY!!!
Yeah well...the captain's gotta grow his peppers somewhere! Besides, if a Battle Cruiser can have a garden and a huge rec deck, why can't a dreadnaught have a teeny tiny little arboretum?
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
yes and that was propaganda during the Klingon cold war... thats hardly the Federation's definition of a Connie. The Klingons called them that because they liked to engage them in battles.
The Constitution was heavy cruiser, on a mission of exploration. The basis of Roddenberry's designs was that it was NOT a battleship and that they didnt NEED battleships
quote:"The Search" [DS9] SISKO: Officially she's classified as an escort vessel. Unofficially, the Defiant's a warship. Nothing more, nothing less.
KIRA: I thought Starfleet didn't believe in warships.
SISKO: Desperate times breed desperate measures. Five years ago, Starfleet began exploring the possibility of building a NEW (my emphasis) class of starship--a Federation battle cruiser
seems like it was a new classification a century later.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
