Not everything has to be a dish, it turns out:
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/mirror-shape.jpg
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/O..._New_Telescope_Mirrors_Get_New_Shape_999.html
Pre TOS starships....
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Not everything has to be a dish, it turns out:
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/mirror-shape.jpg
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/O..._New_Telescope_Mirrors_Get_New_Shape_999.html
Loys of detailing to go, but main components are in place.
Despite many similarities with my Constellation design there really isn't much in the way of identical shared components between the two designs. In the new concept the spherical main hull is actually a bit smaller in height while retaining the same diameter. The central afte extending aft section doesn't taper as it does on the Constellation. The impulse units are pretty much the same only there are now only two rather than three. The space warp nacelles are similar in shape, but the new ones are larger in diameter, distinctly longer and subtly different in shape (the aft taper isn't as severe).
The aft secondary hull is notably different and supplants the Constellation's third nacelle. It also shows the hangar facilities have been moved out of the spherical hull and into the new section where it could be expanded. The support hull also allows for more systems and supplies to support extended mission profiles.
And this is what really distinguishes this design from the previous tri-nacelle arrangement. There is the distinct advancement of having a sustainable warp field with only two nacelles rather than three or a ring system. But the new design allows for extended ranges. My idea is the new design isn't any faster than the previous ship, but it can go farther and stay out longer. At this stage the new ship isn't quite as maneuverable as the previous class or as responsive on impulse (given the Constellation is technically over powered on impulse with the three drive units).
These ships are primitive compared to the ship's of the mid 23rd century, but they are immediately recognible in terms of modern starship design.
Despite many similarities with my Constellation design there really isn't much in the way of identical shared components between the two designs. In the new concept the spherical main hull is actually a bit smaller in height while retaining the same diameter. The central afte extending aft section doesn't taper as it does on the Constellation. The impulse units are pretty much the same only there are now only two rather than three. The space warp nacelles are similar in shape, but the new ones are larger in diameter, distinctly longer and subtly different in shape (the aft taper isn't as severe).
The aft secondary hull is notably different and supplants the Constellation's third nacelle. It also shows the hangar facilities have been moved out of the spherical hull and into the new section where it could be expanded. The support hull also allows for more systems and supplies to support extended mission profiles.
And this is what really distinguishes this design from the previous tri-nacelle arrangement. There is the distinct advancement of having a sustainable warp field with only two nacelles rather than three or a ring system. But the new design allows for extended ranges. My idea is the new design isn't any faster than the previous ship, but it can go farther and stay out longer. At this stage the new ship isn't quite as maneuverable as the previous class or as responsive on impulse (given the Constellation is technically over powered on impulse with the three drive units).
These ships are primitive compared to the ship's of the mid 23rd century, but they are immediately recognible in terms of modern starship design.
I love these designs!
I wish Enterprise (ENT) could have had a more retro feel like this.
It certainly would have helped feel more distinct from the shows that came before.
Detailing will help the overall look I think. That said I've never really cared for the Deadalus concept. The added aft section looks like a drag on the overall design. To that end I prefer the tri-nacelle configuration.
But it's still a viable design idea so I will see it through to the finish.
But it's still a viable design idea so I will see it through to the finish.
Not sure if it's intentional or not, but from the side view the large secondary hull looks almost like a bolted on fuel tank, kind of adding drag to the sleekness of the rest of the design. This is not necessarily a bad thing however, as too sleek and it wouldn't have that "predecessor of the Enterprise" look. Also, the other views do not look as bulky
Looking forward to more!
Looking forward to more!
