posted
What are the criteria for a successful spaceship design for a science fiction series?
I'm speaking generally, rather than in specific instances. What boxes must a new design tick to be a good choice for an on-screen "hero" ship? There are many ways to do the hero ship idea. Just consider the differences in approach between Star Trek, Firefly and Galactica, for instance.
I have read of the so-called "Squint test" that was developed by someone working on Star Trek. This sounds like a damn good idea to me, and must surely be considered as one of the critical factors that contribute to the success of a design.
Essentially, if you were given the task of designing a ship from first principles for a show using non-specific technology*, what approach would you take?
* unlike in Star Trek, in which lip-service is usually paid to having things that perform specific functions according to established rules of "trek-nology".
Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
I'd do whatever I felt like within the rules of the universe. if there are no rules, then....
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
But would you consider things like the squint test, which essentially amounts to giving the ship a recognisable identity, or would you construct a blocky lump covered in pipes and radar dishes just 'cause you felt like it?
I suppose this question has only arisen since the Enterprise and Millenium Falcon debued on-screen. Both broke the mold in many ways by introducing the concept of the ship itself as a character, and as a result distinctive designs were adopted for them so they would stand out and be memorable.
Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
posted
As with any design, you have to begin with a premise and go from there. Here is how I would start.
1. What is the major purpose of the ship? Is it a warship, transport, scout, or serve some special function? 2. Where will this ship operate? Does it operate from a local base and only need short range? Or is it's mission exploration, research, or military? 3. Based on its mission, what type of support crew is needed to man the vessel? Does it require specialized training? 4. What is the duration of the vessel in mission time? Are there support facilities available for it in its intended area of operation or will it have to return to a location with specialized facilities for replenishment/refit. 5. What is the expected lifespan of the hull? Is it designed for modular replacement/upgrades?
Crew complement, armor, weapons, & engines will be tweaked to provide optimum efficiency for the parameters above. Once you have a rough idea, I'd start with how the functions interact just as I do in Architecture. You try to design so there is a natural flow to the functioning of the ship, avoiding bottlenecks and incongruous operations next to one another. After that, its anything goes.
-------------------- There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
You're asking a question with too many variable parameters left open. A hero ship is different from a background ship is different from a realspace-based ship is different from an unobtainium-based ship.
Y'see.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Well I suspect he's asking about a hero-unobtanium ship. I mean given the TTA link from the other thread. (Which was very cool, btw)
I've been developing a show for a long-ass time and one thing a design-partner mentioned during a brainstorming session was that for the ship to become a character, the anthropomorphism element was important. So that when you look at it, a ship has a head and a body and legs. I realize this isn't true 100% of the time, but if you look at the hero ships from the 3 shows you mentioned in your initial post, they all fit this basic idea. Star Wars ships seem to much less and frequently those ships tend not to be characters so much. Of course the prime exception being the Millenium Falcon and obvious parallels to that vessel and a hand doing the Vulcan greeting have been discussed ad vomitum elsewheres.
I really do think that function follows after, I mean for fictional ships, of course and all those questions WizArtist Zwei posted become relevant. But for basic shapes, I'd say it's something to consider at least...
I'm getting the impression you maybe are doing some ship design or interested in it. Got a particular project or anything?
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
Every time I design a ship, it always ends up looking far too Trek. I guess I have a lack of imagination or possibly I'm FLOODED...
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Lurker Emeritus: I'm speaking generally, rather than in specific instances. What boxes must a new design tick to be a good choice for an on-screen "hero" ship? There are many ways to do the hero ship idea. Just consider the differences in approach between Star Trek, Firefly and Galactica, for instance.
Well, the ships you mentioned are all actually quite similar in their general design. They all have what are equivalent to a saucer section, a stardrive section and two nacelles. The differences with those ships are in the design of each of those components and their purpose.
If it can really be boiled down to something so simple and specific as criteria, then there's a certain difference between what would be a realistic ship and what would look good on screen. An important criteria for all the Trek hero ships has been that they look good from virtually any angle. That probably wouldn't be a real world concern in the Trek universe.
quote:Originally posted by Johnny: Well, the ships you mentioned are all actually quite similar in their general design. They all have what are equivalent to a saucer section, a stardrive section and two nacelles. The differences with those ships are in the design of each of those components and their purpose.
Very interesting. I hadn't noticed those parrellels. That jibes with bX's comments about anthropomorphism, although rather than thinking about "head" "arms and "legs" I wonder if these ships simply share design features which we're all culturally programmed to look upon as being "cool"? The twin nacelles look denotes powerful outboard engines, speed etc. An obvious habitation or bridge section tells the observer where the main stage for the character drama is going to take place. The stardrive section is the big bulging bonnet (hood) with the engine and other guts of the machine and again, nicely demarcates the human side of the ship from the mechanical side. Hmm... I smell a thesis cooking ;-)
I apologise for beginning this thread with a somewhat loose frame of reference. Yes, I am indeed focusing primarily on those designs which we see both in literature and in cinema with a view to identifying exactly what it is that makes the successful ones work.
However, I'm approaching this from a real science-based point of view, as in, using currently understood technology (including technologies we expect to master given time and adequate funding), could you construct a believable spacecraft design that embodies the X factor of popular hero ships in fiction whilst addressing the real world needs of space travel. I'm thinking of modularity, centrifugal gravity systems, fuel tanks and solar cells and other such clutter, big obvious exhausts of the kind that Star Trek aesthetes dislike, that kind of thing.
To answer bX's final question, I'm indulging myself in a personal project to develop such a design, in part inspired by the TTA and other such series. I started wondering what the ingredients would be and whether anything made from those ingredients could exist in real life, or whether X factor hero ships must of necessity be works of fiction because in real life the designs are unworkable or impractical.
Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
Printer-friendly view of this topic
