RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,629
Posts: 5,427,340
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 529
Newest member: Rom

TrekToday headlines

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Fandom > Fan Art

Fan Art Post your Trek fan art here, including hobby models and collectibles.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 14 2009, 04:41 PM   #796
Psion
Commodore
 
Psion's Avatar
 
Location: Lat: 40.1630936 Lon: -75.1183777
View Psion's Twitter Profile
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

I think the point behind the visible lifeboat hatches was to have justifiable detail on the hull. No one wants Star Wars-style nurnies all over a Starfleet ship, but there's an instinctive need in SFX people to give us little details for scale reference and to break up smooth surfaces. So in later Trek productions, there's a search for excuses for details ... escape pod hatches, phaser emitters, photon torpedo launchers. Sensor palettes, tractor emitters, transporter arrays -- until eventually we get ships like the 1701-E and 2009 Enterprise that are practically covered with nurnies.
__________________
Twinkies are back. I knew they couldn't stay away from me for long.
Psion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 05:23 PM   #797
FlapJoy
Lieutenant Commander
 
FlapJoy's Avatar
 
Location: Unhooked.
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Can I just say Vektor, I love this design, it's indeed series/movie quality... but I think the photon tubes at the front of the saucer section are a bit overkill. There's already so many weapons platforms in your design. It's a neat area for some nice detail, well cut out without being a distraction, I just think it could have another use like a sensor array or small forward shuttle bay, although that sounds a bit boring and just as redundant I guess. Mabye an open atrium with windows accross the front edge with skylights, or some other observation deck configuration.
FlapJoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 07:10 PM   #798
Vektor
Rear Admiral
 
Vektor's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA, USA
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Venardhi wrote: View Post
The escape pods being different colored never made much sense to me anyways, they could easily be the same color as, and flush with, the hull and only discernible from a seam around them.
FalTorPan wrote: View Post
One possibility might be to "hide" escape pod hatches by making them a subtle color/specularity/something variance of the hull's main color, rather than making them stick out like a sore thumb. I'm not sure why they should be colored differently than the main hull anyway.
This is more or less the direction I’m leaning in. I want to keep the escape pods, I just don’t want them to be quite so obtrusive as they are on, say, the Sovereign class.

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
There are plenty of ways of providing "escape capability" for the ship. Anything from using lots of shuttlecraft, to having little "torpedo tube coffins" with hybernation support, to having rooms of the ship itself (complete with their local hull skinning) slip out. I know you don't get to decide every detail of this ship, but if it IS going to have escape pods in the conventional sense, maybe you can try having multiple pods which launch from a single hatch (sort of a "subway cars launching on rails" concept?).
The idea of distributed escape pods is more logical to me than shuttlecraft alone. All it takes is a few good hits on the hangar bay or key access ways leading to the bay to doom large numbers of the ship’s crew to destruction. By the same token, coffin-style escape pods seem like overkill and not very conducive to long-term survival. I think lots of escape pods designed to hold 6 or 8 people spread around the ship make the most sense, and I like the stacked escape pods concept for keeping the number of external hatches down.

Professor Moriarty wrote: View Post
That's what I always figured that "rust ring" on the upper surface of the TOS Enterprise saucer was... a ring of lifeboat hatches flush with the hull surface.
I had a similar idea, though I envisioned those as blow-away hull plates that would expose the lifeboats underneath. I may still do something like that on my Modified TOS Enterprise model.

FrontLine wrote: View Post
To that end you could just outline the pod doors with white and red striped lines like is done on modern aircraft and ships. Just an idea.
It’s a thought, but I don’t think red and white—or black and orange—stripes would help much in reducing the obtrusiveness of the escape pods unless they were very small scale. I haven’t ruled something like that out, though.

Psion wrote: View Post
I think the point behind the visible lifeboat hatches was to have justifiable detail on the hull. No one wants Star Wars-style nurnies all over a Starfleet ship, but there's an instinctive need in SFX people to give us little details for scale reference and to break up smooth surfaces. So in later Trek productions, there's a search for excuses for details ... escape pod hatches, phaser emitters, photon torpedo launchers. Sensor palettes, tractor emitters, transporter arrays -- until eventually we get ships like the 1701-E and 2009 Enterprise that are practically covered with nurnies.
Undoubtedly true, although I would dispute the last point. The new Enterprise from Trek ‘09 was relatively sleek and uncluttered, compared to the Sovereign class and most other late 23rd century designs anyway.

FlapJoy wrote: View Post
…I think the photon tubes at the front of the saucer section are a bit overkill. There's already so many weapons platforms in your design. It's a neat area for some nice detail, well cut out without being a distraction, I just think it could have another use like a sensor array or small forward shuttle bay, although that sounds a bit boring and just as redundant I guess. Mabye an open atrium with windows accross the front edge with skylights, or some other observation deck configuration.
They’re not photon tubes, they are “Wyvern cannons,” a kind of cross between the Defiant’s pulse phasers and the huge phaser cannon on the Enterprise-D from the TNG finale. The heavy armaments are consistent with its mission profile, which requires a ship capable of single-handedly projecting the power of an ordinary task force of two or three ships. It has a couple of other surprises along those lines in store as well.
__________________
www.vektorvisual.com
Vektor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 07:17 PM   #799
FlapJoy
Lieutenant Commander
 
FlapJoy's Avatar
 
Location: Unhooked.
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Vektor wrote: View Post

They’re not photon tubes, they are “Wyvern cannons,” a kind of cross between the Defiant’s pulse phasers and the huge phaser cannon on the Enterprise-D from the TNG finale. The heavy armaments are consistent with its mission profile, which requires a ship capable of single-handedly projecting the power of an ordinary task force of two or three ships. It has a couple of other surprises along those lines in store as well.
Oh... Can you make a ship that's all atriums, observation decks, and amphitheatres (with puppets)?
FlapJoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 07:41 PM   #800
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

FlapJoy wrote: View Post
Vektor wrote: View Post

They’re not photon tubes, they are “Wyvern cannons,” a kind of cross between the Defiant’s pulse phasers and the huge phaser cannon on the Enterprise-D from the TNG finale. The heavy armaments are consistent with its mission profile, which requires a ship capable of single-handedly projecting the power of an ordinary task force of two or three ships. It has a couple of other surprises along those lines in store as well.
Oh... Can you make a ship that's all atriums, observation decks, and amphitheatres (with puppets)?
That's the Enterprise -D.

I like the stacked escape pods concept for keeping the number of external hatches down.
This runs into the same problem as shuttlebay only escape. If the first pod in the system jams for some reason, all the pods behind it are doomed. Sea going vessels avoid this for the same reason.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 08:05 PM   #801
Vektor
Rear Admiral
 
Vektor's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA, USA
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

sojourner wrote: View Post
This runs into the same problem as shuttlebay only escape. If the first pod in the system jams for some reason, all the pods behind it are doomed. Sea going vessels avoid this for the same reason.
Good point, but I wasn't thinking of racking them a dozen to a tube or anything like that, probably no more than two.
__________________
www.vektorvisual.com
Vektor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 08:35 PM   #802
Professor Moriarty
Vice Admiral
 
Professor Moriarty's Avatar
 
Location: System L-374
View Professor Moriarty's Twitter Profile
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Vektor wrote: View Post
I had a similar idea, though I envisioned those as blow-away hull plates that would expose the lifeboats underneath. I may still do something like that on my Modified TOS Enterprise model.
Exactly. Much more dramatic that way... appeals to the pyromaniac that lurks inside me
__________________
My crappy blog
Professor Moriarty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 10:09 PM   #803
CaptainPipcard
Lieutenant
 
CaptainPipcard's Avatar
 
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Looks very good.
__________________

CaptainPipcard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2009, 10:10 PM   #804
Captain
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Calgary Alberta
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

You should have little "no parking" signs hanging in front of the torpedo launchers
Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2009, 05:04 AM   #805
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Captain wrote: View Post
You should have little "no parking" signs hanging in front of the torpedo launchers
Nah, go with the old military aircraft stand by "not a step"
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2009, 05:43 AM   #806
FrontLine
Nekkid Hedonistic Ethical Slut
 
FrontLine's Avatar
 
Location: Killin' Zombies!
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to FrontLine
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

[QUOTE=Vektor;3297876]It’s a thought, but I don’t think red and white—or black and orange—stripes would help much in reducing the obtrusiveness of the escape pods unless they were very small scale. I haven’t ruled something like that out, though.[q/uote]
At first I was being a smart ass, but the more I think about it, maybe it wouldnt be such a bad idea at all. I'm thinking of the border as being 6" (maybe 12") wide around the blowout panels. Considering the scale of your ship they would probably be nearly hidden but they should be just visible enough. Meh what do I know, Im stuck in a 2D world. Maybe. Like Psion I have to agree that the panels on the -E got out of control. The subtle off colored panels also makes sense as well.
__________________
THE orignal naked hedonistic glutton!

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy shit, what a ride!"

"Im happier than a tornado in a trailer park" - Tow Mater - Cars
FrontLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16 2009, 01:35 AM   #807
Psion
Commodore
 
Psion's Avatar
 
Location: Lat: 40.1630936 Lon: -75.1183777
View Psion's Twitter Profile
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Vektor wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post
I think the point behind the visible lifeboat hatches was to have justifiable detail on the hull. No one wants Star Wars-style nurnies all over a Starfleet ship, but there's an instinctive need in SFX people to give us little details for scale reference and to break up smooth surfaces. So in later Trek productions, there's a search for excuses for details ... escape pod hatches, phaser emitters, photon torpedo launchers. Sensor palettes, tractor emitters, transporter arrays -- until eventually we get ships like the 1701-E and 2009 Enterprise that are practically covered with nurnies.
Undoubtedly true, although I would dispute the last point. The new Enterprise from Trek ‘09 was relatively sleek and uncluttered, compared to the Sovereign class and most other late 23rd century designs anyway.
Sorry, Vektor -- and with the greatest respect, but the latest Enterprise is the most cluttered design yet. I've got the toy right here in front of me, and the junk all over the nacelles (especially on the cowling) is staggering. Much more so than the refit, and even more than 1701-E. And while the primary and secondary hulls aren't as cluttered, they still have more than 1701-A. Maybe even the D.

I guess the worst offender was the NX-01, but I'll forgive them that since a cluttered look suited a more primitive vessel.
__________________
Twinkies are back. I knew they couldn't stay away from me for long.
Psion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16 2009, 10:48 AM   #808
ST-One
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

Psion wrote: View Post
Vektor wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post
I think the point behind the visible lifeboat hatches was to have justifiable detail on the hull. No one wants Star Wars-style nurnies all over a Starfleet ship, but there's an instinctive need in SFX people to give us little details for scale reference and to break up smooth surfaces. So in later Trek productions, there's a search for excuses for details ... escape pod hatches, phaser emitters, photon torpedo launchers. Sensor palettes, tractor emitters, transporter arrays -- until eventually we get ships like the 1701-E and 2009 Enterprise that are practically covered with nurnies.
Undoubtedly true, although I would dispute the last point. The new Enterprise from Trek ‘09 was relatively sleek and uncluttered, compared to the Sovereign class and most other late 23rd century designs anyway.
Sorry, Vektor -- and with the greatest respect, but the latest Enterprise is the most cluttered design yet. I've got the toy right here in front of me, and the junk all over the nacelles (especially on the cowling) is staggering. Much more so than the refit, and even more than 1701-E. And while the primary and secondary hulls aren't as cluttered, they still have more than 1701-A. Maybe even the D.

I guess the worst offender was the NX-01, but I'll forgive them that since a cluttered look suited a more primitive vessel.
You can hardly compare a toy to the movie's CG-model.
ST-One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16 2009, 11:15 AM   #809
NIUPonyBoy
Captain
 
NIUPonyBoy's Avatar
 
Location: IL
Send a message via AIM to NIUPonyBoy Send a message via Yahoo to NIUPonyBoy
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

I don't totally understand the 'complaints' with a cluttered look. Now I could understand if you were referring to an ST ship looking like the ones in the Alien movies and Halo games (different universes and cultures built those ships so they fit with what they were goign for) But I still see ST ships as more military/scientific than anything else. And modern ships of the seas sure have a lot of 'flair' on them.
NIUPonyBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16 2009, 05:10 PM   #810
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: USS Grandeur - One... More... Time!

ST-One wrote: View Post
Psion wrote: View Post
Vektor wrote: View Post


Undoubtedly true, although I would dispute the last point. The new Enterprise from Trek ‘09 was relatively sleek and uncluttered, compared to the Sovereign class and most other late 23rd century designs anyway.
Sorry, Vektor -- and with the greatest respect, but the latest Enterprise is the most cluttered design yet. I've got the toy right here in front of me, and the junk all over the nacelles (especially on the cowling) is staggering. Much more so than the refit, and even more than 1701-E. And while the primary and secondary hulls aren't as cluttered, they still have more than 1701-A. Maybe even the D.

I guess the worst offender was the NX-01, but I'll forgive them that since a cluttered look suited a more primitive vessel.
You can hardly compare a toy to the movie's CG-model.
I don't think that's what he's doing. The "toy" has all the MAJOR components and details, but is actually quite a bit less detailed, overall, than the CGI model (and it's fair to point out that it's probably not "the model" but a series of different-resolution model versions, and even a few "partial builds of the model" just like you'd have in real-model work... each set up for slightly different purposes, and potentially having a few details subtly different).

Still, the toy is the best reference we currently have. It's pretty accurate (I'm sure that they had access to the one of the CGI models when they made it... it would be silly not to have given them that, after all.)

It IS pretty "cluttered" in terms of big, bold, structurally-pointless curvy- blobby shapes, particularly in the dorsal and nacelle areas. The dorsal area is just STUPIDLY constructed, frankly... a smooth shape, rather than the "tiered" construction, would be orders of magnitude stronger, no matter what magic-construction-materials you use. The engine pylons are covered with "graphic art geometry" as are the nacelles... the ship is just covered with stuff there just for "visual interest" (as it's usually described) without it seeming to serve any functional purpose.

Hell, even the hangar doors show this... instead of a simple rotational system, the shape they have requires the door panels to perform a "warping/bending" action as they withdraw into the ship... you can see this very clearly in the shuttle-launch sequence.

The new ship isn't designed as a functional, 3D mechanism, it's designed as a piece of 2D graphic art, with all the trademark foibles that go along with that... and that includes the "big bold curvy-shape high-lights for visual interest" one.
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.