The huge bridge-dome either suggests an enormous bridge or two levels/decks or a rather small hangar. Unlike the one on Forbin's version, your hangar-structure also seems too short. Modelling-wise this looks very good.
I came up with the hangar idea initially and did a quick Photoshop of it by grafting the existing hangar section in place. From that Forbin built his kitbash. But it was a quick-and-dirty photomanip job just to get the idea across. Later I redid the Photoshop image and put a different hangar idea in place. I did measure this out and the hangar area I have is the same as the one on the Constitution-class. It just has a different end arrangement. Yes, the bridge dome is larger because it's from the Pike era version of the Enterprise. And it does suggest that there is an extra level with the bridge moved up a bit higher. The saucer is meant to be the same size as a Constituion saucer. hull. But because the ship is of a different class and with different mission profiles the interior arrangement would be mostly quite different.
That clears that up. Is the bridge on the lower level (like on the JJverse Enterprise) or in the more traditional place on the very top under the skylight/sensor-dome?
^^ The bridge is the uppermost level although it actually doesn't fit all the way at the very top because there isn't enough room for the turbolift to clear up there, so it's a little lower. Impulse section and running lights in place.
Starting to work on the dorsal. Funny how the Alan Sinclair and Charles Casimiro drawings differ so greatly on the cross-section of the dorsal. Fortunately having the 1/350 model kit on hand solves the issue. I also have David Shaw's drawings as reference and his cross-sections match the model kit and Casimiro's take. A small note. The clamshell hangar doors are not the same as those on the Constitution-class. The only part of the Connie's hangar I borrowed was the homing beacon dome above the hangar and the general amount of volume taken by the Connie's hangar section. Otherwise once I established the space I had to work in I fabricated everything from scratch to make it fit. Initially I was thinking of a roll-up door or sideways sliding panels, but then it would have been quite problematic because to integrate the new section with the existing B/C deck structure I needed to follow the latter's contours. That cuts into the available space for a large door opening. One alternative would have been to make the new section extend straight back from the forward B/C deck structure, but because the lower part of the section flairs outward it would have made the back end rather wider and looks odd in the end result (I sketched it out enough to see that). The other option would have been to fabricate a new B/C structure but I couldn't find another shape I thought fit well in there so I finished resorting to a door system that could fit a very curved roofline. My final solution (as I've built it) looks like it extends straight back from the B/C structure, but when you see it in plan view you can see it doesn't.
An interesting dilemma and puzzle. Having the nav deflector housing as round or as a cylinder won't give me the shape I want when it merges with the dorsal. To get the desired shape and end result means adding a small centre section between the two cylinder halves so the sides of the cylinder intersect with the sides of the dorsal in the desired fashion. Viewed from head on the cross section of the housing looks like a rather squat race track or lozenge shape. Weird.
I also have to tweak the nacelle diameter. Fact is once you attach the nacelle to the dorsal it looks just a bit overwhelmed. It doesn't look quite as hefty as it does when hung up all by itself on a slender support pylon. So I've moderately increased the diameter of the nacelle without changing any of the other dimensions. Oh, the length increased a very small bit because of a slightly larger nacelle dome and aft cowling. At first glance I doubt most will notice any difference. The increase in diameter is about 4.7 percent and the increased length will be equally marginal. If one wished to rationalize this difference from the Constitution-class nacelles it could be explained as a necessity since a single unit needs to do the job of two so consequently there are modifications within to account for the slight increase in size.
Okay, we have a status update. Here's a quick look at where things stand. All the major elements are in place. It's now a matter of working the details into place. Candidly I'm finding this model to be somewhat less involved than my original designs, probably because the greater bulk of the designing was already done. Wow. Who'd have thought some forty years after I first glimpsed this in Franz Joseph's Star Fleet Technical Manual that I'd be fleshing it out and modeling this design? I'm also starting to toss around some possible names for this puppy. These are just off the top of my head. USS Masao USS Fury USS Sabre USS Lightning USS Javelin USS Polaris USS Repulse USS Severige USS Corsair USS Skipjack USS Skate USS Mercury USS Courage USS Reprise USS Tiger USS Spectre USS Elusive USS Katana USS Claymore USS Scimitar USS Spruance USS Ranger USS Swiftsure USS Vanguard USS Viscount USS Buccaneer USS Aventura USS Ki Yang USS Iroquois USS La Frontier USS Le Terrible USS Tenacious USS Lirpa USS Ahn-Woon USS Sehlat USS Llmatya USS Cougar USS Cheetah USS Kodiak USS Samurai USS Krieger USS Lockheed USS S'Task USS Cheyenne USS Scorpion USS Cobra
What's a Masao? Are you the kind of guy who tries to have a consistent theme for all the ships of a class or do you use whatever sounds good? You have all sorts of names here.
Good question. I have no idea, but it has a nice exotic sound to it. It certainly could reflect Starfleet's representing the diversity of the Federation's member worlds. It could be a person, a place, a descriptive of a quality of character, a predatory animal or even a weapon. Masao could be of human origin or Vulcan or Andorian or something else. At this point I was just tossing names out although I find certain names and sounds appealing. Some I would dismiss after further consideration. Truth is I could never really find any theme, rhyme or reason to Starfleet's method of naming ships. The original idea behind the Connie's seemed to be carriers or warships and the shuttlecraft (at least those of the Enterprise) were named after explorers or astronomers or scientists. After that it seemed like anything goes.
Ah! I can finally see it now that I'm not on my work PC. Looks great! I'm digging the different shape of the hangar opening.
The area aft of the bridge, atop the shuttlebay is rather flat. In a refit version I can see the vulcan shuttle going there...maybe some blow out panels...
It looks flat, but it actually curves gently downward. I'm thinking of adding a touch of detail there later. Presently I'm trying to get all the major elements done first.
Slow and steady progress. Some upper saucer detail. I took some small liberties: although it's hard to see if you look really close you might see that some of that surface detailing is either raised or recessed only very subtly. I wanted to add a bit more visual texture without being obvious.
I just thought I'd share this little thing with you. This is what my work space in SketchUp looks like. Essentially I have a wall of imported images (in this case Casimiro's drawings) from which I work from to get accurate measurements (or close enough) and to draw my shapes to turn into 3D objects. Sometimes I have to draw something (particularly if it's small) in more detail in Illustrator and then I temporarily import that in expanded size. This is because images in SketchUp can sometimes get a little blurry when you're trying to nail down really fine detail. A current case in point is the detail that's supposed to go on the bridge dome. The only drawings I have of that detail cannot be seen clearly in Casimiro's drawings. I will have to refere to the decals and decal placement of the Round2 1/350 scale model as well as screencaps to get more accurate dimensions and shapes. When I want to render my model for a more finished look then I select everything that is part of my wall of plans and hide it from view (basically turned invisible). Presently, after the bridge details, what remains is the detailing of the dorsal, windows and then signage. The final step will be trying to get the most accurate colours I can. For that I'll probably use the recommended colour plan of the 1/350 model for my primary guide.
^ whenever I use reference drawing/images, I create a layer just for them. Since layer visibility can be toggled in the Layer manager, it makes it real easy to hide/show them. Nice job, BTW.
For about an hour or so today I was having a mini panic attack, so to speak. I couldn't for the life of me remember where the instruction sheets were for my 1/350 TOS Enterprise kit. I recall taking them out of the box to study them when I'd first received the kit, but I was sure I'd put them back in the box afterward. Well, no, apparently I hadn't and I know I've cleaned up some papers and stuff since. So I was going all over trying to find those sheets. I told myself to calm down and had myself some lunch. After lunch on a hunch I looked amongst some books I had moved some months back and PRESTO! there they were. Whew! Anyway these are the sections I was particularly interested in because they give me a better view of the markings on the Pike era bridge dome. From these I can draw more accuracte lines and then translate that to my 3D model.