Victory class SD model

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-24 09:14pm

Would liek to see a top down view of the bridge now to see why it's become circular before I pass judgment

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-24 09:15pm

I'm thinking the same thing. Like I said earlier, I'm having trouble visualizing how it will look in final form.

By the way, the "screw" look is from how the Acclamator pod appears when viewed bow-on. The tower will probably have some stuff glued to it to give it a slightly different appearance, texture-wise.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-24 09:24pm

Top view.

I may give it a straighter profile, since it looks like the bow of a submarine at the moment.

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-24 10:08pm

I'm starting to like it more and more. It DOES look too much like a submarine right now,but thats understandable, and I can visulaize it in my head with far more detail on it.. I think what we need to do now is try and figure out WHY a company would go from making a Bridge Kuat Style.

I just had a really nice idea on the bridge! Give me a second and I'll e-mail it

EDIT: Ok! E-mail sent, forgot to add on it. concerning the round Submarinish nose... If I were to change something, I'd 'squash' it a bit, so its not fully circular, maybe shape it a bit more like the Acclamators.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-24 10:16pm

Crossroads Inc. wrote:I'm starting to like it more and more. It DOES look too much like a submarine right now,but thats understandable, and I can visulaize it in my head with far more detail on it.. I think what we need to do now is try and figure out WHY a company would go from making a Bridge Kuat Style.

Actually, think of it as KDY building Rendili-style bridges on its ships.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-24 10:17pm

EDIT: Ok! E-mail sent, forgot to add on it. concerning the round Submarinish nose... If I were to change something, I'd 'squash' it a bit, so its not fully circular, maybe shape it a bit more like the Acclamators.

I may give it some flat facets. The change to the front edge of the hammerhead is interesting, though.

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-24 10:29pm

Thanks

Seriously I can't wait to see this thing come to fruition, and if you ever make a Kit out of it, I will be your first customer

Cabwi Desco · Post by **Cabwi Desco** » 2005-04-25 12:29am

Not to bash your idea man, but I just can't abide the tail... its just says something wrong to me. As if its supposed to be like a tail rudder. And starships don't need rudders. Also it just seems wrong somehow to have just four engines instead of the seven, I mean this thing is supposed to be the next step before traditional ISDs not the step after acclamators. After all its two different corporations, one being rothana heavy engineering the other being Rendili Star Drive.

Its like the acclamator came first and made the base design for the venator but before the venator came the VicStar a new design that wasnt tested so they went ahead with venators anyway, venators were seen as not so good so they're phased out in favor of the VicStar Design enlarged with a few modifications to become the ISD.

Just saying, though its too late at this point, I would go for a total redesign.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2005-04-25 05:09am

I don't like the tail either. It seems like ruining a classic shape. A different destroyer class with a tail, sure, perhaps with a lower set conning tower too, would be nice, but I don't imagine vicstars with tails.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-04-25 05:35am

I'm saddened that you dropped the sensor arm...

That was like my favourite thing about the Victory-class.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-25 08:13am

Cabwi Desco wrote:Not to bash your idea man, but I just can't abide the tail... its just says something wrong to me. As if its supposed to be like a tail rudder. And starships don't need rudders.

That's why I put it up to a vote.

I can't decide between either, though to be honest, I lean towards the tailless design, myself. It's already established that the KDY models contain their hyperdrives in the tail section, and I thought that could be justification for Rendili's design (a bit of industrial espionage).

Also it just seems wrong somehow to have just four engines instead of the seven, I mean this thing is supposed to be the next step before traditional ISDs not the step after acclamators. After all its two different corporations, one being rothana heavy engineering the other being Rendili Star Drive.

Which is one reason it has four engines. It would look too much like an ISD clone with all seven, anyway, and I've seen several instances where the ship's shown with only four engines. And I always considered the Venator to be a faster ship with her four primaries, two secondaries and four+ verniers, anyway.

Just saying, though its too late at this point, I would go for a total redesign.

It's not too late to make revisions (I don't even have the kit yet). Any ideas?

I'm saddened that you dropped the sensor arm...

I'm probably going to keep the antennae arrays, and likely the sensor boom (perhaps add something to the port side to balance?) I'm mainly bugged out by the tail and bridge shape issues. IP has provided some decent advice on the the former, and I'm leaning back to an ISD-esque tower.

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-25 11:48am

*reads above*
I thought this was the whole point of the Vic-I and Vic-II? The first was the orginal, like a prototype. This would be a tailed version with the more Acclamator style bridge. The Vic-II would have the tail parts internal and have the more KDY type bridge.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-25 03:08pm

The purpose of the poll was to help me decide whether or not to add a tail to the ship. Since it was fairly mixed, I'm still indecisive. Others have made valid points as to why the tail shouldn't be included. If they could agree that the Mk. I version of the design (or at least the first block) had a tail, I could accept that.

I also have to admit that I won't know for absolute certainty how to deal with the tail until I get the model. It may be too short at 1:2256 to lengthen the bow, or there could be other problems associated with the conversion.

There's the possibility of scratchbuilding, but I'd rather not when I have a model full of details that I can use.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-25 05:05pm

This should help the design process...

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-25 05:13pm

Yes! Thats exactly what I was thinking! plus, it lets everyone win!!! Those who like the more KDY MkII can have it, Those who like the Tail on the MkI can get it!

Lord Revan · Post by **Lord Revan** » 2005-04-26 03:37pm

If ask me I think the tail is too short, as in KDY designs the tail has hyperdrive, cooling systems (or part of it) and shield elements. Also you should make block two a bit closer to the final Imperial era VSD1 (so it would seem that Rendili tried KDY design, but found it not so good and changed it).

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-26 04:02pm

Lord Revan wrote:If ask me I think the tail is too short, as in KDY designs the tail has hyperdrive, cooling systems (or part of it) and shield elements. Also you should make block two a bit closer to the final Imperial era VSD1 (so it would seem that Rendili tried KDY design, but found it not so good and changed it).

I really don't want to lengthen the tail any more than I have to, to be honest. That part of the design is more a result of copying KDY's stuff while coming up with their own design philosophy. The VSD is supposed to be slower than its cousins, anyway.

At the moment I'm working on a chart that may or may not give everyone a version they can be happy about. We'll see.

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-26 04:04pm

Firefox wrote:At the moment I'm working on a chart that may or may not give everyone a version they can be happy about. We'll see.

crosses fingers and hopes

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-27 09:46am

Oh shit.

ISD model's outlined in red. Note that I changed the hull angle to match the drawing. I still need to add a chunk of hull to the back end, and I'm still shy of 900m.

A couple of options are to add a longer, sharper prow, and/or make the tail part of the 900 meter measurement. I could also adjust the stern's sweep angle, but that would affect mass.

This goes to show that you can't make plans until you have enough facts.

EDIT: Farting around with the scale, I've come up with a compromise. I'll have to build a whole new engine section anyway, but I think I can build it without the tail (she'll still be a few meters shy of 900, but I figured that was a rounded number, anyway).

What can I say? I'm a masochist.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-27 03:45pm

Okay, further study of this thing leads me to believe it's feasible. The whole stern will go, replaced by something scratchbuilt. Tearing the pieces apart is proving to be a pain in the ass, though that's not a surprise. If there's too much damage, at least I got to study the kit before I get the unassembled model.

I'm currently working on a drawing based on the model, and should have it available for opinions in a day or so. I do appreciate all of the input I've received on this project, however.

Just to throw out a WAG, I'm guessing this thing could hold at least three squadrons of V-wings, perhaps twice that. There are what appear to be ribs separating sixteen spaces on either side of the docking bay. Each could easily accomodate a V-wing, and I'm assuming they're stored in as compact a manner as TIEs (though not hanging from booms). There could be a squadron of ARC-170s, as well as support craft.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-28 07:29am

Early draft of the new drawing. I've added all of the basics (ventral terraces, reactor bulb, docking bay, wings) to the basic hull. This is the hull following the first modifications, including thinning the brim trench and rebuilding the stern section. I'll make a number of variants from this to see which one looks best. They'll be posted as I make them.

Meanwhile, here's the furthest I went with the old design, which shouldn't be too far off from this. There will be some proportional changes, but the basics will be there.

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-04-28 09:03pm

Nice, makes a wonderful evolutionary line of the Starships and keeps certain aspects of the orginal. Nice to see the very first looking a LOT like the Acclamator. And the last one looking like the KitBash Clone of the ISD that the original Victory was

Personally, The third one down looks the nicest with the old style Tail and 'modern' bridge.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-04-30 02:02pm

Just a minor bump. I've already made orthogonal views of three of the variants. Once I'm finished with the rest, I'll either post them to hear comments, or try another poll.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-05-08 08:05pm

After about a week-long break, I decided to spend some time working on the design again. I'm leaning towards using this concept art to design the superstructure of the Mk. I variant, with the step-pyramidal four terrace design.

And here is a silhouette showing the main Mk. I and II variants. Thoughts?

Grandmaster Jogurt · Post by **Grandmaster Jogurt** » 2005-05-09 04:24am

Firefox wrote:And here is a silhouette showing the main Mk. I and II variants. Thoughts?

The bridge of the second one looks, frankly, ugly. It looks almost like a storybook witch's nose.

IMO, something more along the lines of one of these two would look better.

[Edit: Redundant wording snipped.]