RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,364
Posts: 5,356,016
Members: 24,625
Currently online: 683
Newest member: 3d gird

TrekToday headlines

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25


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 July 20 2009, 09:29 PM   #31
JuanBolio
Admiral
 
JuanBolio's Avatar
 
Location: Florida Keys, USA
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

I love these. Very well done, sir. There's a pre-Constitution design in the new movie that mirrors the look of your Valiant/Farragut very well.
__________________
Never fear! JuanBolio wuz here!

This has been an official JuanBolio post. You are now stronger, smarter, and a better human being for having read it. Congratulations.
JuanBolio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 20 2009, 10:53 PM   #32
Kaiser
Rear Admiral
 
Kaiser's Avatar
 
Location: Boyertown, PA as of July 2011
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Kaiser Send a message via Yahoo to Kaiser
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

I like your version of the Bonaventure cus it reminds me of the Botany Bay

and your Vailiant looks interesting as well
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/groups/112860258811333/ For all your Sci-fi ship model and mini goodness 3DS Friend code: 0731-4800-6817
Kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 21 2009, 12:54 AM   #33
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

I think the Bonaventure is an awesome start... has a nice DY-100 pedigree, but has an engineering hull and an aesthetic that feels closer to the utility deco of the good ol' 1701. It's very cool, but at the same time, yeah something does seem off about it.

The Valiant is pure win. I'd love to take her for a spin round' the ol' galaxy.
__________________
"What?" - { Emilia }
Herkimer Jitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 21 2009, 01:18 AM   #34
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

Herkimer Jitty wrote: View Post
I think the Bonaventure is an awesome start... has a nice DY-100 pedigree, but has an engineering hull and an aesthetic that feels closer to the utility deco of the good ol' 1701. It's very cool, but at the same time, yeah something does seem off about it.

The Valiant is pure win. I'd love to take her for a spin round' the ol' galaxy.
Re: this version of the Bonnie...



There are two "big bugaboos" I see there.

First, the underslung secondary hull could be a bit shorter, overall... start at the same place in front but not extending quite as far aft.

Second, the warp drive nacelles don't have "75% or better line-of-sight" between them. They need that, as far as I'm concerned. Tilting them upwards, just enough to clear the primary hull (which is what I'm calling the entire top section) would fix that, and would also help "balance out" the design (compensating for the underslung secondary hull).

Those are my initial thoughts.

Of course, I still like my version of the Bonnie better...
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 21 2009, 11:30 AM   #35
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

I have a different idea for the Bonaventure although I did try to have the nacelles evoke those seen on the TAS version including the number on the sides.

I like how the Valiant came out.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2009, 02:56 AM   #36
cbp44189
Commander
 
cbp44189's Avatar
 
Location: Jax, Fl.
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

I love them both. The Boneventure looks as if it's following the evolution of TOS ships, and the Valiant looks fantastic!
cbp44189 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2009, 11:31 AM   #37
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

Here is the thing: the ships shouldn't look too close to the TOS era because we're talking about a 150-200 year difference in approach to space warp dynamics (my bit of tech doubletalk). My thinking is that in the early decades of space warp science and tech there could likely have been a lot of experimentation going on to figure out what worked best. And of course by the 23rd century we still see different configurations likely coming out of different solutions by different approaches and stressing different goals, perhaps like stability of space warp fields over speed.

The Bonaventure as seen in TAS makes no sense because it's just so obviously a play on the familiar E design. But in designing a live-action version I still wanted to try evoking elements of the TAS ship. But maybe it's best just to start with a clean sheet.

The Valiant design was easier because I had a sort of focus to it. I figured the ship was not a warp capabale ship before and so how should it look like as a fast relativistic ship. Then I retrofitted it with immense space warp coils like the ringship E, figuring this was one of the approaches of early warp design. I tried it with nacelles and thought it looked silly. The whole ship might be about the size of the TOS E's saucer hull or about 400-500 feet in length. The Valiant's design is actually a play on the V2 like rocketships of the '40s and '50s sci-fi, much like the ships in Destination: Moon and When Worlds Collide. But that general projectile type shape makes sense as a relativistic ship because you need something like that to pierce the stuff in the interstellar medium at 90% of light even with some sort of navigational deflection system.

In fact I like the Valiant enough that I'm thinking of making more images for it from different angles. Of course there's the depiction of the ship encountering the energy barrier. I've also got an image in my head of a miles long exhaust trail as the ship engages its sublight drive (its own space warp engines burnt out) to put distance between the ship and the energy barrier.

Scotty's reference that the Bonaventure was the first ship with warp drive has to be interpreted. When Cochrane introduces his space warp tech it could be that folks were strapping it onto all sorts of things in a hurry to get going. Maybe what Scotty really meant was that other than Cochrane's prototype the Bonaventure was the first ship to have been designed from conception with warp drive. In that way it makes even less sense that the ship would look like what we saw in TAS. Then again I look at TAS as something of an animated storyboard of live-action events from the TOS universe. (-: The more I think about it I feel that I'm not really that far off in my general idea for the Bonaventure, but that it shouldn't be much bigger than the Valiant either.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?

Last edited by Warped9; July 22 2009 at 11:50 AM.
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2009, 04:37 PM   #38
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

Warped9 wrote: View Post
The Bonaventure as seen in TAS makes no sense because it's just so obviously a play on the familiar E design. But in designing a live-action version I still wanted to try evoking elements of the TAS ship. But maybe it's best just to start with a clean sheet.
Well, we only see the Bonaventure from one angle in TAS. My own approach to this was to try to match up the TAS "view" with something that's still quite a bit different from the TOS Enterprise, and clearly a lot more crude (someplace where ENTERPRISE failed, I think... they tried to make an "older ship" that was simulataneously "more advanced" than the TOS ship.)
Scotty's reference that the Bonaventure was the first ship with warp drive has to be interpreted. When Cochrane introduces his space warp tech it could be that folks were strapping it onto all sorts of things in a hurry to get going. Maybe what Scotty really meant was that other than Cochrane's prototype the Bonaventure was the first ship to have been designed from conception with warp drive. In that way it makes even less sense that the ship would look like what we saw in TAS. Then again I look at TAS as something of an animated storyboard of live-action events from the TOS universe.
Well, this is, to me, yet another bit of corroborating evidence that "warp drive" and "faster-than-light-propulsion" aren't synonymous... that "warp drive" is just one possible FTL propulsion system, and is fairly recently developed (in TOS terms).

This goes along with the "more technical" description of warp drive used under Pike's command, and with Jose Tyler's comment about there having been a propulsion-system breakthrough, and with the concept that the Romulan war was fought with ships using "simple impulse," and on and on.

It's really pretty clear to me that "warp drive" was developed a few decades prior to the Enterprise (under Pike) arriving at Talos.

If that's the case, it makes a lot more sense for the Bonaventure to have been the first ship with that particular form of FTL propulsion. Doesn't mean it's the first FTL ship.

Either way, though, we have to "retcon" "ENTERPRISE" a little bit. In my case, I can watch it just fine, and simply refer to what they call "warp drive" as "FTL drive." In your case.... I'm not sure.
(-: The more I think about it I feel that I'm not really that far off in my general idea for the Bonaventure, but that it shouldn't be much bigger than the Valiant either.
That depends...

The Bonaventure shouldn't have had a big crew, but should have had some self-sufficiency that other ships (perhaps like the Valiant) wouldn't have had.

Remember, the ships in the "Delta Triangle" had been stranded there for decades, yet they weren't all starving to death (yet). Obviously, they'd have had to convert some portions of their ships to hydroponics and so forth... but for a ship like Bonaventure to have been a practical "long-term habitat" you'd have to accept that she had to have a lot of space for that sort of thing.

Of course, the Bonaventure ought to be smaller than the 1701, I think.

Not wanting to "hijack" the thread, but here's are a couple of images:

First, the Bonaventure as seen on-screen in TAS:


And my version of the Bonaventure, from effectively the same angle:


But it's not the same as the Enterprise, and is quite a bit more "crude"...


There have been plenty of other "takes" on the Bonaventure, some trying very hard to replicate the ship as seen on-screen (which really doesn't work very well, I think we'd all have to agree), and others trying a pure "clean-sheet" approach.

The Sternbach/Okuda take:


The "Ships of the Line Calendar" take:


I think that the trick is to try to capture the general appearance seen on-screen while still doing what you're trying to do (that is, making it distinct and less-advanced).
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2009, 09:58 PM   #39
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

I like your concepts, Warped. Thanks for bringing them to my attention. They remind me a little of my own Bonaventure design, similarly based on a presumed evolution of the DY architecture combined with Jefferies' XCV-330 ringship idea:





In my mind (and I believe in Jefferies' mind as well), the secondary hull is a kind of "extended mission pod". I think putting something based on the secondary hull on such an early ship is maybe misapplying that idea, but maybe not. Maybe the slow Bonaventure would take years to get where it was going and would need tons of supplies. But if that is the case, might it be better to try to create something that looks like a midpoint in the evolution from DY-100 containers to NCC-1701 secondary hull? Maybe pie wedges that fit together to form cylindrical drums that line up below like you have it, on an underslung "spine"?
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2009, 11:13 AM   #40
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

^^ Now that Bonaventure I like! I don't recall seeing that before. Very Cool. That looks like something I should work up an image for.

I'd like to know about the thinking and tech behind that design. Just looking at it makes me think that nacelles may be more a 22nd century development and that the ring concept was more common early on, perhaps peaking around the time of the XCV-330 ringship E or a little later in the early to mid 22nd century.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2009, 02:20 PM   #41
SonicRanger
Rear Admiral
 
SonicRanger's Avatar
 
Location: Sheffield, England
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

adrias, that is a fantastic ship -- a brilliant combination!
__________________
"STAR TREK is... Action - Adventure - Science Fiction."
-- Gene Roddenberry, 1964, top of the first page of his original pitch and outline for Star Trek
SonicRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2009, 02:38 PM   #42
Myasishchev
Rear Admiral
 
Myasishchev's Avatar
 
Location: America after the rain
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

That Valiant is sweet.
__________________

Myasishchev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 24 2009, 09:59 PM   #43
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 2 2009, 06:22 AM   #44
TOS Purist
Commander
 
TOS Purist's Avatar
 
Location: TOS Era
Send a message via AIM to TOS Purist Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to TOS Purist
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

NICE job, Warped9!! I'm especially happy to see that I'm not the only TOS Purist around here!

STAR TREK - 1964 to 1979!!
__________________
All your Trek are belong to non-canon - except for TOS!
TOS Purist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2009, 03:00 AM   #45
TOS Purist
Commander
 
TOS Purist's Avatar
 
Location: TOS Era
Send a message via AIM to TOS Purist Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to TOS Purist
Re: TOS' U.S.S. Valiant and Farragut....

Sorry to double-post, but I noticed that in your first thread, you mentioned "your" chronology. Might I ask what you're referring to?

Right now I'm working on modifying Okuda's "Star Trek Chronology" by cutting out any and all information from the movies and other Trek shows. Some of the events had to be moved around a bit in order to be closer to how TOS was and free it from TNG retconning. Is that kind of what you're doing?
__________________
All your Trek are belong to non-canon - except for TOS!
TOS Purist 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 04:29 PM.

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