Hey folks, Some of you may remember me (very small chance, I've been AWOL for years), and as for those who don't...yo. Once upon a time I used to whip up starship and shuttlecraft concepts using only MSPaint. Then I would post them here so everyone could suffer along with me. Well, I still haven't found a freeware 2D program I really like, and have stuck with MSPaint in the meantime. Luckily, the Windows 7 version has a few extra features...though my pointer finger still feels like it's gonna fall off. Okay, I'll cut to the chase. After years of inactivity, I'm back at it. Here is a WIP of what I'm presently calling the Legacy-class. I have yet to come up with anything more than what you see here, including dimensions and specifications. It's literally just an artistic design at this point. I'm completely open to suggestions on filling the ship's guts, and on other design elements. Obviously, I'll be posting updates and more complete schematics as I "finish" them. Any comments, questions, epithets, and/or random gutteral intonations are greatly appreciated. ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
Actually, that's kinda cool. Is the saucer real wide a la the Galaxy or is it thinner like the Sovvie? --Alex
Actually, that's one of the things I've been debating. With any 2D drawing, certain parameters remain open ended until you add the dorsal view. However, judging by the length, I'd say it would have to be more narrow than a Galaxy. Otherwise, the saucer section would be vastly disproportionate to the engineering hull. I'm going to try to make it a little less elongated than the Sovereign-class. You may see inspiration from both Galaxy and Sovereign in this design (bussard collectors and engineering hull, respectively), and that's intentional. The more I think about it, the more this ship fits the classic flagship mold, and it's funny that it didn't start out that way. A large multi-role cruiser. Hell...just looking at the scale of the engineering section (based on viewport placement), it's a pretty big ship. Granted, the saucer has less mass than the typical design...especially once you see its ventral configuration. There will be a ring impression angling upward into the primary hull along the ventral surface of the saucer, with inset windows. This would allow someone standing in the aft areas of the ship's "Ten Forward" analog to look down on the main deflector array...but still allow me to keep that "flat" side profile. Still figuring out how to portray that in two dimensions. Thanks for the comments. More coming soon (dorsal view). ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
Yeah, lets see a dorsal view at least so we can see what the proportions look like. The side view looks interesting, no doubt about it.
Great design! Did you ever try Inkscape? it's freeware and vector based instead of being pixel based like MSpaint.
I have not, but I'll definitely look into it. Pixel-based makes duplicating certain elements easier, but gives the final images a rugged look I'd like to eliminate in future designs. And here is an extremely rough dorsal view (the paint on my guide lines isn't even dry yet ): The saucer hull plate rings are definitely off...I'll be fixing/changing that in the next update. In this shot you can see the unfinished bridge section, main shuttlebay, and just above that...the aft-dorsal torpedo launcher. I enjoy creating the internal tech just as much as the external structure, though I'm not crazy enough to do a deck-by-deck. My eyes would go so crossed I'd be staring at the inside of my skull. That being said, I'll make a comment on the torpedo launcher design. Instead of a burst-fire launcher type, I'm toying with a rotary system consisting of at least four tubes set in a cylindrical assembly. Very similar loading system to a burst-type (multiple projectile loading), but obviously tailored to fit the rotary system. What this means is I will be foregoing the classic side-by-side tube placement, or single tube placement of Galaxy and Sovereign-classes, in favor of a single launcher at four points (forward-dorsal/ventral, aft-dorsal/ventral). However, each launcher has at least four "barrels" which can be loaded independently. Thus, the firing sequence for a single launcher would go something like this: 1.) Load barrels 1-4, Tactical Officer's discretion (selectable loadout per tube). 2.) Lock target. 3.) Fire tube 1 (variable load, from 1-10 torpedoes per tube). 4.) Autorotate launcher assembly (1 second/rotation). 5.) Lock target (if necessary). 6.) Fire tube 2. 7.) Repeat. It occurs to me that, if the loading system was set up correctly (and capable of completing the process within the time constraints), one could also reload spent tubes while other tubes were firing. Basically, I'm applying the principle of a rotary cannon or "minigun" to a torpedo launcher, but slowing the whole process down considerably. It's not an autolauncher. I'm just making it possible to burst-fire up to forty torpedoes within roughly four seconds from a single launcher. Ridiculous, right? I agree. But the concept is so incredibly simple, requiring virtually no new technology...I can't resist. True, you would deplete your total torpedo capacity really, really fast at that ROF, but the whole system can be scaled down to fit the Tactical Officer's needs. From overwhelming firepower, all the way down to a single torpedo loaded per tube (firing rate of four torps in as many seconds), or even reloading the SAME tube repeatedly without rotating the launcher assembly. All of this is, of course, still up in the air, but I've been playing with the concept for about a decade, now. ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
I would really really like this more if the nacelles where above the engineering section... So since you're making this for me, how about it? Just kidding. I really like it though (aside from the nacelle placement). Very gracefully looking.
Awesome. I actually think that if you flipped the warp nacelles so that the "top" is the "side", then it would actually work much better.
I thought about it. Frankly, with the bearing of the engineering section as it sits beneath the saucer, I don't think the overall design would balance itself out half as well if I switched the nacelles to an overhead configuration. Moreover, I'm going for something familiar, yet visibly different with this design. Overhead would be a bit too traditional for my taste...with the way the nacelles look, I think it would conjure too much Galaxy. Appreciate the input, nonetheless. You mean something like this? With the nacelle pylon and the nacelle body forming a sort of t-junction (out of view from this perspective, obviously)? Not sure if it works. In 3D it would definitely look more interesting, but it makes the lateral view look a bit...ungainly. Interesting thought, though. I'll consider it, as well as an angled alternative...the nacelles canted downward in a sort of compromise between this and the original configuration. Thought I'd take this opportunity to discuss the saucer phaser array design. You may have noticed the peculiar-looking leading "edge" of the saucer. I'm toying with the idea of getting rid of the dorsal/ventral arrays as we know them, in favor of an edge array that can cover virtually the same firing arc. I may or may not supplement with point defense arrays (pulse phasers and the like) as secondary or backup systems. Haven't decided yet. Some input would be great. My inspiration for this particular design element stems from the Enterprise refit...specifically, her "clean" saucer hull. ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
^ Here's a really rough job of an angled nacelle configuration. Sort of. I just skewed it as a 3D object in After Effects. I'll take the time to do a proper version later. ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
Update! Obviously we have a fully assembled dorsal view in this one, complete with saucer section impulse engines, redrawn gridlines, nacelle pylons, and increased tertiary details throughout. And just to add a little eye candy... ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
^ I'm so behind on trek tech right now...did the so-called quantum slipstream drive ever go anywhere that didn't induce rolleyes in the community? I ask because I'm compiling the specifications for this ship class as we speak, and am open to serious suggestions. ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous
Others would know better than me. But the fake USS Dauntless from VOY had a similar look to it. I imagine it needed to be more streamlined even if it were real.
Small update, dorsal view only. Regarding propulsion...I'm not sure QSD is established enough to incorporate as the main propulsion system. However, I will definitely be utilizing a dual-core design that Rick Sternbach and I discussed a number of years ago. Almost a decade, really. How time flies. In short, the saucer section will feature a scaled version of the primary warp engine, and a secondary engineering compartment to house it. This limited second warp core will make the saucer warp capable when separated from the engineering section. We have learned from Enterprise-D, haven't we? And viewports are a pain in the ass. Especially in MSPaint. Angle and aspect...argblargahhhh. ~Belisarius --------------------------- "All life is struggle, from first breath to last." - Anonymous