A Trek Ship design!

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-11-30 08:34pm

Hello all! I'm working on a kinda line-drawing at the moment for a starship design (in the end it will be an example entry for a competition I'm holding on my site). The ship is supposed to be something like the USS Titan, both in size and function, my main 'inspirational' influences were the Prometheus and Sovereign, and I've tried to go for something half way between them.

http://www.jonreid.co.uk/stuff/ships/jonship3.jpg

The ship is supposed to be 'new' as of around 2400, but there's no 'uber' tech, standard warp drive and weapons compliment one would expect for a ship this size.

Anyway, just wondered what people thought, any suggestions would be useful, I think I'm more or less settled on shape now, just need to start adding the details, and come up with a frontal view. I'm stuck with what to put in the back half of the 'saucer' and on the nacelle pylons, atm.

Cheers.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2005-11-30 08:45pm

If it was me, I'd take the impulse drive, and mount it directly on the hull, not on a pylon. The shape of the drive is great, but I think it would make more sense to have it coming out of the hull. Plus it would look sleeker.

For the warp pylons, you could put additional impulse drives, or dorsal/ventral phaser strips (kinda like a Galaxy).

Old Plympto · Post by **Old Plympto** » 2005-11-30 08:48pm

Are the main sublight thrusters on that pod riding its neck? I'm not too sure about such things, but I think that might impart some measure of stress on the pod's attachment to the main hull.

Edit: Doh! Arrow beat me to it.

TheMuffinKing · Post by **TheMuffinKing** » 2005-11-30 09:37pm

I think that looks really cool, nice work with lots a detail!

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-11-30 11:34pm

You know, 9 out of 10 times when I see "Fan made Trek ship" I usually cringe... But this is really good! It looks like a Pocket Promethi. Again, intagrating the Impuse drive is nice, but other then that a fairly nice and practile design... (for trek)

Comando293 · Post by **Comando293** » 2005-12-01 01:15am

It looks kinda squishy front to back. Maybe lengthen it some and slide the pylons behind the dome? Looks good.

lukexcom · Post by **lukexcom** » 2005-12-01 03:26am

The design looks pretty lean and compact looking at the top view.

However, is it just me or does that saucer design look a little...phallic?

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2005-12-01 03:36am

If I'm not mistaken, the guidelines for Trek ships state that the warp nacelles should have 50% visibility to each other, in other words, there should be direct line of sight between the two.

That can, of course, be ignored if you want.

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-12-01 06:57am

Thanks for the comments so far, the 'pod' does look a little like it's on a flimsy pylon, but the idea is that's more of a 'sturdy' neck, then a thin strut supporting it, orignially it was just supposed to be a nebula type sensor pod, or miranda style weapons roll bar, but I thought the impulise engines would be cool up there. I might mess around with it and see how it looks integrated into the secondary hull. Thanks for the ideas, on that.

However, is it just me or does that saucer design look a little...phallic?

lol... it is a little, pointy, but it's really the only shape I could fit between the nacelles which worked with the side profile (which I did first without having a top view in mind)

Crayz9000 wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the guidelines for Trek ships state that the warp nacelles should have 50% visibility to each other, in other words, there should be direct line of sight between the two.

That can, of course, be ignored if you want.

I think on this occasion, I will, the ship is supposed to be comissioned some 25/30 years after the Sovereign class, so I don't know, perhaps there have been advances in subspace field dynamics which aleviate that design issue :p

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2005-12-01 07:46am

Crayz9000 wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the guidelines for Trek ships state that the warp nacelles should have 50% visibility to each other, in other words, there should be direct line of sight between the two.

That can, of course, be ignored if you want.

Since the ship designers themselves didn't follow Roddenberry's rules (Freedom class, Niagara class), you can safely ignore them

Kenny_10_Bellys · Post by **Kenny_10_Bellys** » 2005-12-01 10:19am

Nice work, I usually cringe when I see fan designs and this is definitely not cringeworthy.

I have to second (third? fourth?) the comment concerning the large impulse pod. While I like the fact there's something there to break up the lines of the ship and fill out the rear it really does look like a clunky afterthought compared to the rest of the sleek design. If it were me I'd try ad integrate the engines more into the strongback of the ship, and have a sleeker weapons or sensor pod in the mounted position.

The only other gripe is the rear of the saucer area, the rounded aspect of which is probably what makes it look a little phallic to some folks. I'd prefer to see a smoother blending into the secondary hull rather than the bulge. Apart from that, very nice. Looks compact and powerful.

Red Star · Post by **Red Star** » 2005-12-01 05:39pm

Really cool looking ship, maybe you could add a little more colour just to give it an extra edge in your competition.

One problem, need more phaser banks, every trek ship doesn’t have enough (except maybe the Defiant). Also curve the name on the front to follow the "saucer", and keep the shape of it as well, it looks really fast like that.

What is its role, exploration, science, defence, assault, or deep space exploration?

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-12-03 06:07pm

I like the overall look, and I agree with comments thus far regarding the impulse pylon.

I was going to agree with the suggestion that you could possibly make the lower superstructure smaller and flatten the disc a mite since the side view is more suggestive of compact resilience and the overhead view more suggestive of elegance... but that isn't really a problem looking at it more closely.

Perhaps the wings could be made thicker to suggest that they are a part of an organic whole the way you have merged the engineering and disc sections.

lukexcom wrote:However, is it just me or does that saucer design look a little...phallic?

<sigh> What is it with all these people who think of penises whenever they see something vaguely oblong and/or pointy?

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-12-03 06:27pm

Bounty wrote:
Crayz9000 wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the guidelines for Trek ships state that the warp nacelles should have 50% visibility to each other, in other words, there should be direct line of sight between the two.

That can, of course, be ignored if you want.
Since the ship designers themselves didn't follow Roddenberry's rules (Freedom class, Niagara class), you can safely ignore them

That could be realized with downward-slung warp pylons (like the SG X-303 or Deathglider). I don't know if that would make the ship look better, though.

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-12-04 01:36am

I've tried a few different ways of combining the impulse pod with the hull, not really happy with the results so far but I'll keep experimenting with that, might get rid of it all together and chcuk the engines on the back of the 'saucer', but I do quite like the idea of the pod, maybe as a sensor or weapons platform, but I don't want the ship to be too 'overpowered'.

Next it's time to try and add some colour, this is going to be fun

I'd thought of downward pointing pylons too, but looking at that ship which won the Titan contest really put me off.

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-12-09 02:46pm

Just thought I'd give a brief bump. Few changes, I totally replaced the shuttlebay and increased the size of the escape pods and windows to make this ship appear a little smaller. I've also redesigned the bridge module with the same thought in mind. Started on the view from the front... I'm worried about the length of the pylons but I can't really see any other way to attach them to the hull in their current position.

http://jonreid.co.uk/stuff/ships/jonship5.jpg

I'm yet to draw the 'pod' into the front view because I've still not decided what action to take with that and it's being mounted on the back... it doesn't look much better moved down and piggybacking on the hull... but I don't want to remove it all together, might mess around with that later. I'm also worried that the front view doesn't translate the side view too well, thoughts? Is it a bit too Ent-E, for the shape?

Thanks.

Vicious · Post by **Vicious** » 2005-12-10 04:38am

If you don't mind, a few points.

From the front, you should consider adding a slight upangle to the nacelle wings, as having them stick straight out seems to convey some bad juju. Even a five-degree angle would give it a much more predatory look.

For the side shots, move the impulse pod/hanger bay (if that's what it is, which is what it looks like) forward and down slightly. To put it visually, bring it so that the top of the pod and the top of the bridge align along the horizontal plane, and move the pod forward until it's lower edge is just behind the half-circle phaser strip (again, if I'm identifying that part correctly. It's the half-circle behind the bridge). While these changes would have no bearing on the vessel's flying properties, they would make the craft more asthetically pleasing to the eye (though it is already a very well-designed vessel) and you would reduce the exposure of the impluse pod to fire coming from the front. Whether you move the pod or keep it where it is, that half-circe phaser isn't all that useful except for shooting straight up and maybe off the the sides. It seems it would be more effective to run a pair of phaser strips along the join between the nacelle "wings" and the main hull. If you do this, reorient the wing phasers so that they follow the faint grey markings near the ends of the wings. Paired with the suggested phasers, this would give it some serious rearward punch and make swinging around the back very dangerous for an enemy. Also, with this kind of an arrangement, an arguement could be made for lowering the wings in relation to the saucer section, so that you can expose the rear phasers so they can fire forward, again making it a much more lethal combatant.

*shrug* It's 4am and thats what I can think of right now. Again, it's a very beautiful craft as is, and these changes would merely enhance the sleek design and slightly improve it's combat capability.

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-12-11 01:35am

Hey Vicious, some very interesting suggestions, I'll try and do something like that in my next reivision, I think. I added the pod to the front view;

http://www.jonreid.co.uk/stuff/ships/jonship6.jpg

and it does look a little... out there. I think lowering it and moving it up the hull a bit is the way forward, I might reshape it a little too. Cheers. On the phaser issues... one thing I don't want is to make what is a relatively small, non-front line ship look over powered, but it can't hurt to rearrange what I have already.

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-12-15 04:53pm

Me again!

So, I uhm started to colour the ship in;

http://www.jonreid.co.uk/stuff/ships/jonship8.jpg

I'm pretty pleased with how it is turning out at the moment, and would appreciate any criticism as I progress. I know the pod is pretty much in the same position as it was, and it's still mounted- but I have altered the shape some, attempted to make it look more sturdy as per suggestions- otherwise it just didnt dit if I tried to make it hug the hull, and I wanted to keep it so just scrapping it wasn't an option. I removed the 'cresent moon' phaser strip from behind the bridge (with a view to implement it in a better way), and even though I'm colouring I'm still looking for ideas for what to put on the empty rear half of the saucer, other than more 'lines and windows'.

Cheers.

Braedley · Post by **Braedley** » 2005-12-15 05:45pm

Let me first say that I like it, but there's something about it that is just screaming "I'm not a Star Fleet ship," and I think it has to do with the transition from the saucer section to the engineering section. It seems too straight from the side view, and should slope back a la Intrepid class. This also helps to better define the saurcer section.

Also, still looks like it could use 2 or 4 more escape pods

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-12-16 09:44am

I've added a kind of staggered band between the engineering hull and saucer around the top (kinda similar to what was around the neck of the Excelsior). I think that helps to define the seperate sections, but I want to make it have some practical use, especially with the 'gold' things I have either side of it, which again right now I have no purpose for.

Since the ship is supposed to be 'new' 20 years after Nemesis, perhaps they can have something to do with deployable hull armour, but then things start to sound fanboy.

Braedley · Post by **Braedley** » 2005-12-16 11:01am

Oh man, just doing that makes a world of difference.