NX-TECH BRIEFS!
- Thread starter miraclefan
- Start date
Re: NX-TECH BRIEFS! BRIDGE MODULE!
I’m not sure the NX-class bridge is a true modular design like later federation starship bridges? In TOS-era ships and later, the bridge is a detachable module that be can replaced when a ship is undergoing an overhaul.
I’m not sure the NX-class bridge is a true modular design like later federation starship bridges? In TOS-era ships and later, the bridge is a detachable module that be can replaced when a ship is undergoing an overhaul.
Re: NX-TECH BRIEFS! BRIDGE MODULE!
Is it? That's what some backstage sources claim, but we have never seen onscreen evidence for such a thing.
Really, what would be the point of having a modular bridge? Wouldn't it make much more sense to have a modular Main Engineering, or a modular Torpedo Deck, or a modular Shuttlebay? Those things have to adapt to new developments in hardware in order to remain competitive. And the hardware to be adapted is of appreciable size there: a torpedo launcher is probably the size of a semi truck, while a warp engine is the size of a house.
In contrast, a bridge only has to undergo minor redecoration and swapping of some computer interfaces - things that can be achieved by a busy pair of hands much more easily than by a giant space crane that pulls out the entire structure, a factory that builds a replacement, and again said crane that then inserts the replacement. Why move a house-sized object merely for recarpeting or the installation of a new viewscreen?
Timo Saloniemi
Is it? That's what some backstage sources claim, but we have never seen onscreen evidence for such a thing.
Really, what would be the point of having a modular bridge? Wouldn't it make much more sense to have a modular Main Engineering, or a modular Torpedo Deck, or a modular Shuttlebay? Those things have to adapt to new developments in hardware in order to remain competitive. And the hardware to be adapted is of appreciable size there: a torpedo launcher is probably the size of a semi truck, while a warp engine is the size of a house.
In contrast, a bridge only has to undergo minor redecoration and swapping of some computer interfaces - things that can be achieved by a busy pair of hands much more easily than by a giant space crane that pulls out the entire structure, a factory that builds a replacement, and again said crane that then inserts the replacement. Why move a house-sized object merely for recarpeting or the installation of a new viewscreen?
Timo Saloniemi
Drex Files Warp Delta pictorial!
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/ste-warp-delta-pictorial/ WOO-HOO I love this design! I wish we saw MORE of it on ENT!
What do you guys think?
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/ste-warp-delta-pictorial/ WOO-HOO I love this design! I wish we saw MORE of it on ENT!
What do you guys think?
Last edited:
Re: Drex Files Warp Delta pictorial!
Looks like the X-33 Space Plane with warp engines and impulse engines attached to it.
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/ste-warp-delta-pictorial/ WOO-HOO I love this design! I wish we saw MORE of it on ENT!
Looks like the X-33 Space Plane with warp engines and impulse engines attached to it.
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
Here's the link! http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/25/eureka-iss-emette/#comment-6939 What do you gays/gals think?
Here's the link! http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/25/eureka-iss-emette/#comment-6939 What do you gays/gals think?
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
DrexFiles is the nexus for trek fans at this moment.
Doug rocks!
DrexFiles is the nexus for trek fans at this moment.
Doug rocks!
Last edited:
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
It took THIS long for this??? Wow, a great Trek moment!
RAMA
Code:
DrexFiles is the nexus for trek fans at this moment.
Doug rocks!
It took THIS long for this??? Wow, a great Trek moment!
RAMA
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
I can so see the evolutionary lines here... Initially, most of Earth's combat warpships would be of a type that takes off from planets, hence the lifting body shape. They'd perhaps need to roost on a surface installation since there wouldn't be suitable spaceborne facilities yet for servicing these complex things - but they'd be more ruggerized than their civilian equivalents, and more generalized as well. Landing on a faraway planet, be it own or enemy, would be on the agenda, even if that planet didn't have a proper starport.
The Emmette would have a relatively primitive sublight propulsion system, and perhaps wouldn't be completely armored but would only have an armored bow section (as outlined on the model). The Iceland would have the proper impulse engines and the complete polarizable armor cover. It would only be after this that Starfleet would move towards completely spaceborne starships - echoing how combat submarines went from briefly diving submersibles to completely underwater-fighting vessels during WWII.
Perhaps the Emmette and the Iceland would be largely incapable of interstellar operations, using their warp engines for rapid insystem transit instead, and doing a lot of stuff in planetary atmospheres. Only in desperate situations, such as "Twilight", would these relatively slow vessels try to reach another star system.
Young Nat Archer's model ship might not be a combat vessel yet, given the NASA style paint job. The shape (and the black-white surface finish suggestive of heat shielding) would reflect the need to do maintenance back on Earth's surface, though, or perhaps suggest a mission of landing on other atmospheric worlds such as Mars or Venus or Titan.
None of these lifting-body ships have bays for auxiliary craft in evidence, and could be argued not to need any. All sorts of sliding panels on the hull could still be postulated, hiding weapons and sensors and docking ports. The need for such smooth paneling would be decreased on the Intrepid, Enterprise and Columbia because those wouldn't spend much time in atmospheres, so the weapons on those would also be more in evidence. But we could blame residual "must-cover-everything" thinking from Iceland on the sparsity of visible weapons on the Intrepid (which only has the two bow torpedo tubes and none of the naked gunports of the Enterprise).
Timo Saloniemi
I can so see the evolutionary lines here... Initially, most of Earth's combat warpships would be of a type that takes off from planets, hence the lifting body shape. They'd perhaps need to roost on a surface installation since there wouldn't be suitable spaceborne facilities yet for servicing these complex things - but they'd be more ruggerized than their civilian equivalents, and more generalized as well. Landing on a faraway planet, be it own or enemy, would be on the agenda, even if that planet didn't have a proper starport.
The Emmette would have a relatively primitive sublight propulsion system, and perhaps wouldn't be completely armored but would only have an armored bow section (as outlined on the model). The Iceland would have the proper impulse engines and the complete polarizable armor cover. It would only be after this that Starfleet would move towards completely spaceborne starships - echoing how combat submarines went from briefly diving submersibles to completely underwater-fighting vessels during WWII.
Perhaps the Emmette and the Iceland would be largely incapable of interstellar operations, using their warp engines for rapid insystem transit instead, and doing a lot of stuff in planetary atmospheres. Only in desperate situations, such as "Twilight", would these relatively slow vessels try to reach another star system.
Young Nat Archer's model ship might not be a combat vessel yet, given the NASA style paint job. The shape (and the black-white surface finish suggestive of heat shielding) would reflect the need to do maintenance back on Earth's surface, though, or perhaps suggest a mission of landing on other atmospheric worlds such as Mars or Venus or Titan.
None of these lifting-body ships have bays for auxiliary craft in evidence, and could be argued not to need any. All sorts of sliding panels on the hull could still be postulated, hiding weapons and sensors and docking ports. The need for such smooth paneling would be decreased on the Intrepid, Enterprise and Columbia because those wouldn't spend much time in atmospheres, so the weapons on those would also be more in evidence. But we could blame residual "must-cover-everything" thinking from Iceland on the sparsity of visible weapons on the Intrepid (which only has the two bow torpedo tubes and none of the naked gunports of the Enterprise).
Timo Saloniemi
Re: Drex Files Warp Delta pictorial!
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/ste-warp-delta-pictorial/ WOO-HOO I love this design! I wish we saw MORE of it on ENT!
Looks like the X-33 Space Plane with warp engines and impulse engines attached to it.
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
So according to Rob Bunchune, the "Emmette" was intended to be the first warp-capable follow-on to the Phoenix, which would make it a likely candidate for the type the SS Valiant belonged to, despite the depiction in the official chronology, and we know the Phoenix didn't quite match what was pictured there.
The blunt, windowless forebody would make sense as an armoured, erosion shielding prelude to the introduction of navigational deflectors (you'd still be hoping to not ping much at speed). The saucer-esque profile of the forebody could hint at an internal grav centrifuge with a vertical axis, though depending on the size of the ship, it may be too small to prevent the crew from getting motion sickness - apparently that would have been a problem on something the size of the 2001 Discovery. The thicker hull section of the forebody could just as easily house the first "stator-grids" to provide a deck with artificial gravity (and the forerunner of all trek bridges to come), giving even more signifigance to the type and thus a place on the ENT credits honour role - I suppose that's more trek than the centrif idea.
The warp drive would still be an experimental system for short hops at least far enough out to catch a ride through the nearest spatial anomaly to the galactic barrier.
So according to Rob Bunchune, the "Emmette" was intended to be the first warp-capable follow-on to the Phoenix, which would make it a likely candidate for the type the SS Valiant belonged to, despite the depiction in the official chronology, and we know the Phoenix didn't quite match what was pictured there.
The blunt, windowless forebody would make sense as an armoured, erosion shielding prelude to the introduction of navigational deflectors (you'd still be hoping to not ping much at speed). The saucer-esque profile of the forebody could hint at an internal grav centrifuge with a vertical axis, though depending on the size of the ship, it may be too small to prevent the crew from getting motion sickness - apparently that would have been a problem on something the size of the 2001 Discovery. The thicker hull section of the forebody could just as easily house the first "stator-grids" to provide a deck with artificial gravity (and the forerunner of all trek bridges to come), giving even more signifigance to the type and thus a place on the ENT credits honour role - I suppose that's more trek than the centrif idea.
The warp drive would still be an experimental system for short hops at least far enough out to catch a ride through the nearest spatial anomaly to the galactic barrier.
Last edited:
Re: NX-TECH BRIEFS! BRIDGE MODULE!
As "detailed" as the NX-01 bridge might be, I could never respect it, because absolutely no thought went into its design. It is a blatant redress of the Defiant's bridge. The floorplan, station locations, and aft area are all identical. It is in no way an original design, and the fact that it is so obvious makes it lose credibility.
That's a big issue I have with ENT... the fact that little to no thought went into the design of the ship or its bridge. You can say that it was developed, but when you compare the NX-Class to the Akira, it's the same ship, upside-down, and the NX bridge is the same as the Defiant's bridge.
The set is nice, and the CG work on the ship is nice. It's just in no way original.
As "detailed" as the NX-01 bridge might be, I could never respect it, because absolutely no thought went into its design. It is a blatant redress of the Defiant's bridge. The floorplan, station locations, and aft area are all identical. It is in no way an original design, and the fact that it is so obvious makes it lose credibility.
That's a big issue I have with ENT... the fact that little to no thought went into the design of the ship or its bridge. You can say that it was developed, but when you compare the NX-Class to the Akira, it's the same ship, upside-down, and the NX bridge is the same as the Defiant's bridge.
The set is nice, and the CG work on the ship is nice. It's just in no way original.
Re: NX-TECH BRIEFS! BRIDGE MODULE!
Floorplan...? How does that even—? C'mon, one is a rectangle, and the other is a circle!
Floorplan...? How does that even—? C'mon, one is a rectangle, and the other is a circle!
Re: NX-TECH BRIEFS! BRIDGE MODULE!
[sarcasm]You're right. As numerous entries on The Drex Files clearly demonstrate, no one who worked on that show made any effort to make the designs in any way original.[/sarcasm]
[sarcasm]You're right. As numerous entries on The Drex Files clearly demonstrate, no one who worked on that show made any effort to make the designs in any way original.[/sarcasm]
Similar threads
