Design the Next Enterprise

Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by Shikarnov, Nov 17, 2010.

  1. Saquist

    Saquist Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    Starbase Houston
    But not very attractive.
    Or rather less attractive than C Version

    That's my deal with Dac ship.
    It's just too busy. I think yours has a much better chance at being chosen likely in any of those forms...and so far the best that has shown up her on this thread.

    But you haven't shown us much detail on the deflector and that the very area that is what i call a make or break on most ship from ugly to gorgeous. Sovereign isn't a beautiful look in the deflector area...but ships like Intrepid, Enterprise Class and Excellsior do a good job present these ubrupt faces with class especially Interprid whose deflector is bigger by ship size than most. Yours is going to stick out alot at the front of the ship..

    That could be good if the design of the deflector is great but if it ends up like Sovereign it'll jump out in the perspective.
     
  2. Titan Designer

    Titan Designer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Update 12-5-10
    Refined Profile Images. Added front view.
    On both designs I incorporated Slipstream (Aventine) Elements to the design. Both Ideas have a "Neck".
    Now to work on the Bottom and Back views.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  3. Dac

    Dac Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Location:
    The Essex wastes...
    Vektor, I like B, but I don't like the downward nacelle pylons. If you ask me, they gotta at least be flat like in A, but preferably upward.

    Titan Designer, I actually prefer A over B now. Its still a little extreme, but I think thats why I like it. The front view is definitely better anyway.
     
  4. Dac

    Dac Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Location:
    The Essex wastes...

    Err, Saquist. I think you missed the memo. Vektor has a 100% better chance than me because he can actually submit his :guffaw:
     
  5. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    Personally I prefer option A. I like the side profile and the top view. I like the nacelles. I like the overall concept. Now I know this is a preliminary sketch, but I have one small suggestion.

    My quibble is most apparent in the forward and aft views. Where the secondary hull meets the primary saucer the bottom of the saucer is too flat for my taste. It looks fine and dramatic from the side, but from the front or rear it looks odd. The upper part of the saucer looks visually top heavy. My small suggestion: make the upper surface of the saucer a bit less bulky or top heavy and the bottom of the saucer not quite flat, but with an ever so gentle angle or taper from the saucer edge to where it meets the secondary hull.

    Otherwise I think it's cool. :techman:

    One thing that appeals to me about this design is the idea that advancing technology would allow the nacelles to get smaller in relation to the overall size of the ship. This means less mass to lug around when maneuvering and less energy expended in getting that mass to move. Now I've no idea what you have in mind in terms of scale, but I don't see this being larger than the TNG E-D. Indeed I could envision it being a bit smaller with more advanced tech and facilities requiring a smaller complement, maybe a third to a half smaller complement.

    Yet again the ideas I'm seeing here are better than what we've often seen in Trek on film and TV for quite some time. I don't know anything about STO, but some of these designs would be fine for a new 26th century Trek series.
     
  6. Vektor

    Vektor Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2001
    Location:
    Spokane, WA, USA
    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the front-loaded secondary hull, it just doesn't fit within the silhouette we're all so familiar with.

    People have certain expectations about what an Enterprise should look like. The trick of this design is going to be fulfilling most of those expectations without winding up with the starship equivalent of a "forehead of the week." It needs some really distinctive features to set it apart from the previous ships named Enterprise as well as the competition.

    Who says they gotta be upward? I guess the designers of the Miranda and Akira classes weren't aware of that, to name just two. Yes, I know, all of the previous Enterprises had upward oriented nacelle pylons, but I'm not interested in designing just another Enterprise with a few cosmetic changes and I don't think that's what the judges are going to be looking for either.

    By all means, be aware of the box. Know the box. Respect the box. But don't constrain yourselves to only think inside the box. ;)
     
  7. Science Officer

    Science Officer Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Out of Vektors drawings, I like Config B with the C side profile.

    The one thing that does interest me is that are no new configurations being proposed. No matter how busy or alien some of the proposals are, they stick to the underlying Enterprise configuration.

    I have now knowledge of STO or the background to this competition, but is there a chance to propose something different whilst sticking to Trek science?


    An idea (stuck in my head for now) is to use more symmetry:
    • A saucer a bit like Enterprise-F or Voyager from the top. But with the top half symmetrical to the bottom half.
    • Warp nacelles mounted centrally in the y-axis.
    • Instead of two warp pylons, there would be four. Two attached to the rest of the hull from the top and the others from the bottom. Kind of like a squashed tube. The volume between the two nacelles and pylons will be empty.
    • No neck.
    • Two deflectors - same size and roughly semi-circular in shape. Mount halfway down the z-axis of the ship and at the rear of the saucer.
    • Four impulse drives, one mounted on each of the four warp pylons.
    • Two secondary hulls, one behind each deflector and attached to two of the four warp pylons.
    Devation from symmetry would be fine after that.

    If I had time and a scanner, I'd put together a few rough drawings!

    Cheers,

    S.O.
     
  8. Vektor

    Vektor Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2001
    Location:
    Spokane, WA, USA
    I'm kinda torn between A and B, and I haven't totally ruled out C either, but B is still my favorite overall. It reminds me a bit of one of my favorite aircraft, the Lockheed Constellation. Seems like I am forever being influenced by retro design themes.


    I've been thinking along similar lines, though it's not all that different from the Sovereign class in those views. Also, the front and rear views didn't come out very accurate in the shape of the upper primary hull so I wouldn't get too concerned about it until I refine things a bit.

    I don't know if anybody has figured this out yet but there are actually four nacelles in tandem pairs. They're not huge in proportion to the rest of the ship but they are going to read as fairly massive. I wanted to convey a sense of power and speed without stretching them out. It's also something a little different for ships named Enterprise. ;)

    As for overall scale, I'm holding out 'til the 9th when we will hopefully get some more details about design parameters. If not, then I will probably set the primary hull to about the same size as the Sovereign class, plus or minus.
     
  9. Vektor

    Vektor Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2001
    Location:
    Spokane, WA, USA
    This ties in a little bit to what I was saying earlier. I'm all for defying conventions and thinking outside the box, but I do believe there are some minimum expectations that must be fulfilled for a ship named Enterprise.

    The most radical departure from the template was probably the NX-01 with its catamaran body and total lack of a secondary hull. Even still, it maintained a recognizable silhouette in some of its most commonly used angles. I also find it telling that Doug Drexler recently "upgraded" the design with a traditional secondary hull.

    I'm not sure exactly where you draw the line or how far is too far in terms of altering the template, but I guess we'll all find out at the conclusion of the contest, at least as far as Cryptic is concerned.
     
  10. Dac

    Dac Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Location:
    The Essex wastes...

    Eh, you've still got the nacelles above the saucer, so tbh its not that much of a deal breaker for me.

    If we were designing a 27th century Enterprise, then I would be experimenting with all manners of weird and wonderful shapes, but because its probably only going to be one step ahead of the E-E, I wouldnt stray too far. Which is probably what I did with my design. Oh well...
     
  11. erifah

    erifah Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    I like version "B".

    I don't care for the shuttle bay in the neck of the "A" leading out to the nacelle pylons - it breaks up and clutters the singular-purpose grace as rendered in the "B" version.

    I don't care for the way the under-slung engineering hull sits so far aft on the "C" version. It straddles the fence too much between your idea of having it entirely under the saucer, and more conventional designs. Stick with your concept in the most pure form, and develop that.

    That said, your "B" has some hints at intriguing treasures. To me, the split warp nacelles are just BEGGING to be more cleanly bisected by the saucer, so that the upper Bussard clears the top and the lower clears the bottom.

    I'm also, myself, on a design kick where I like stretched-out stuff, and I think If the B's engines were pushed back, that would enhance the grace AND the sense that "the saucer & secondary hull with all the people are over HERE, and the engines & all that powerful radioactive warp energy stuff is over THERE."

    [​IMG]
     
  12. largo

    largo Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    for STO? version A, totally. kickass uber >> sleek.
     
  13. Belisarius

    Belisarius Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2003
    Location:
    West Coast, USA
    I've decided (what the hell, right?) to enter my Legacy-class concept. (Click for full-res.)



    [​IMG]



    She's probably too close to the Sovvie to have much of a chance, but feh. No harm in trying.


    ~Belisarius
    ---------------------------
    "All life is struggle, from first breath to last."
    - Anonymous
     
  14. Titan Designer

    Titan Designer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    I don't know I kinda like it. Good Work!!!
     
  15. Science Officer

    Science Officer Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I just had to have ago. Here's a very quick hack of the layout I was trying to describe. The proportions could be a lot better and the shapes don't flow into each other.

    Cheers,

    S.O.

    [​IMG]
     
  16. Herkimer Jitty

    Herkimer Jitty Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Location:
    Dayglow, New California Republic
    Titan Designer,

    I much much prefer Version A, but I like the wider nacelle pylons on B.

    Have you experimented with wider pylons and slightly shorter nacelles? Heck, try playing around with pylon and nacelle configs. Do something weird.:techman:
     
  17. Captain_Amasov

    Captain_Amasov Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    Vektor - I'm definitely gonna go with Config B here.

    Titan Designer - I'd say Config A, the top and front views grab me the most about that version.
     
  18. Saquist

    Saquist Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    Starbase Houston


    Interesting....but unfamilar.


    Eh...I like almost everything about the shape...but the Sovereign Style that you've put on the textures takes the originality away.

    It's just an opinion.
     
  19. The Super Brando

    The Super Brando Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Location:
    Nashville
    Woah! This looks incredible. The engines are a little too bulbous for my taste, maybe make them a little sleeker to match the rest of the ship. But overall this is a beautiful design!
     
  20. Tom Riley

    Tom Riley Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Location:
    Somewhere... out there...
    Did the Romulans join the Federation? :p
    Personally I think it looks too Romulan-esque with the whole empty center. I'd be more a fan if it was a solid hull through the center with an upper and lower pylon holding each nacelle in place.
     

Share This Page