View Single Post
Old September 30 2008, 03:32 PM   #45
Re: Renaissance class U.S.S. Aries

Curry/Raging Queen: There's absolutely no good reason why the ships' nacelles were giganto-sized versions of the Connie nacelles.
So simply assume that the saucer was smaller than the Excelsior one - easy to do when there are no docking ports, scant portholes, and even the bridge is missing. And then assume that the same type of saucer was used on the Centaur, on which the Miranda bridge module nicely supports the idea of a small saucer, and the torpedo pack underneath offers further proof.

Yeager: Upscaling the Maquis raider to double or triple its original size, and then slapping it onto an Intrepid saucer is just too ridiculous to take seriously
Why insist that the nondescript secondary hull is a "Maquis raider", though? The real life is chock full of examples of naval merchant vessels that look exactly like each other, down to the shape of the hull, the cranes, and the superstructure, only one is three times the size of the other. And essentially, a destroyer, a cruiser and even a battleship in WWII would often have been scale models of each other.

The "Maquis raider" hull has no scale-establishing features as such, save perhaps for the aft torpedo tubes. And there's nothing wrong with large torpedo launcher muzzles for standard caliber torps, as the Galaxy class nicely demonstrates.

And I'd like to believe in at least two different sizes from the manufacturer of those Maquis ships anyway - the small two-seater flown by Ro, and the large thirty-seater flown by Eddington and Chakotay.

In short, the end result IMHO perfectly justifies the means...

3-nacelled Excelsior: Although the only upscaling done was the use of the Connie pylons, the design is just, BAD. I mean come on, the pod that connects the upper nacelle pylons is hanging half off the ship!
Oh, I think this looks no worse than the undercut of Constitution secondary hulls. And some of the (lacking) details can always be attributed to battle damage.

The basic idea of an Excelsior that lacks a secondary hull, in effect an "Excelsior Miranda", sounds plausible as such. That there'd be a third nacelle added requires some explaining, but I'm willing to go for that if it allows me to believe in the basic concept.

Centaur: Although there's an upscaling issue with the Miranda weapons pod and connectors, the coolness of the design makes it forgivable
Me, I'd prefer downscaling the saucer. After all, something the size of an Excelsior shouldn't have had that much trouble with one tiny Jemmie battlebug, and shouldn't necessarily have run even from three.

As for the saucertop "shuttlebay" (and the equivalent structures on the Curry/Raging Queen), no necessity of thinking that they are shuttlebays, and going through the scaling hoops that would result. They could just as well be stylish deflector dishes, what with them pointing forward like that and all.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote