Huge Invisible Hand model built with Lego bricks..

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-01-22 05:11pm

wjs7744 wrote:Well, the similarities of seagoing ships don't really apply for starships. The hull shape of an ordinarry ship is greatly dependant on it's hydrodynamic qualities, something which doesn't apply in space, where there is no water.

Right. And the superstructure, not dominated by those aspects, is radically different? Form follows function. Ships that do the same thing should look generally similar.

Ships in the same tonnage and basic role like the Venator-class and Providence-class should look at least broadly similar in conception.

wjs7744 · Post by **wjs7744** » 2008-01-23 02:16am

Again, I don't see why conventions of real life shipbuilding should be expected to translate directly into starship construction. Also, if you look at this and this, you'll see that even real ships don't look identical.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2008-01-23 03:34am

A ship in space may not need the same kind of aerodynamical lines as an ocean-going vessel, but similar rules would apply due to another concern, that of being targetted by enemy ships/being able to target enemy ships more efficiently.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-01-23 10:58am

wjs7744 wrote:Again, I don't see why conventions of real life shipbuilding should be expected to translate directly into starship construction. Also, if you look at this and this, you'll see that even real ships don't look identical.

Yeah, because FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION. The former is a fleet carrier, the latter is a fast battleship. I have no problem with all SW fleet carriers looking kind of the same, and all SW fast battleships kind of looking the same.