I think the best strategy is to break the idea down into it's basic components -- i.e. what is desired in the ship
- Saucer: Already covered
- Neck: Like the Venture Class, though I'm starting to think of another concept based on a design built by Andrew Hardin/Dmitri which was called the Legacy Class Mk. II which might be easier to work around. I can provide a picture of the design (it had a neck didn't go all the way to the nav-dome like on the Sovereign Class)
- Engineering Hull Aft Section: Like the Sovereign Class
- Engineering Hull Upper/Mid-Section (The Hump): Like the Sovereign Class
- Engineering Hull Ventral and Forward Section: Like the Venture Class
Remember way back when I said you need to be more specific?
That.
The problem here is that what you call a hump is more like a line scribed on the hull. if you follow the hull curve the resulting shape isn't interrupted by any hump.
At a point just behind the saucer, this "hump” spreads out and blends with the saucer, but so does the secondary hull. Essentially it is the Enterprise D's neck radically squashed on the z axis and blended with both hulls.
This is important because the design you are asking for already has a neck, and that neck extends back down the hull far beyond where the "hump" ends. Adding a neck to the Sovereign's secondary hull and trying to retrofit the Ventures front end isn't a simple kit bash. A number of things have to be solved to make that happen that the parameters have to be specific.
Right now they aren't.
I could see several ways to do it, but each will require an investment of time I'm unwilling to commit in order simply ask if it is right.
If this were a production of some kind that would be exactly what we would be doing, so it might seem I'm being churlish. I'm not. Indeed, I'm not even upset. The difference between this and production is that if this were a production you would be paying me. You aren't. I'm lending you skills you don't have.
I'm not trying to be mean in anyway. I'm trying to hammer home the need for details. What you've given is a parts list. A parts list won't do because there are literally thousands of ways to kitbash a starship. Even with the same basic configuration the results of different artist's ideas will be radically different.
If you need an example, look at the Polaris thread and follow the design from the beginning to now. A lot of the change in the ship is due pure to Vektor's skill, but if you look beyond the presentation to the underlying hull form you'll see that Vektor's
interpretation of that hull form also left a mark, radically different from the original.
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear before. This is not a collaboration. If it were, I'd be more inclined to experiment. This is curiosity, on my part, whether or not the idea in your head is any good, to be totally frank. In order for that to happen, you need to stop giving parts lists, and start using the images I've given you to specifically call out the flow (or other images, or something).
You can list as many parts as you like, but if you don't tell me, in detail, how you see those parts melding together, the list is useless.
To put my money where my mouth is, I'm going to demonstrate what I mean wrt to the "hump"
As shown here, the hump really is a lie. Duplicating this on the venture or any other secondary hull would be more of flare out than a hump. Simply referring to "the hump" isn't specific enough.
Here, I point out a major opportunity for confusion. The Nemesis Sovereign does have a "hump of sorts, where the ship did not, before. But only of sorts. This "hump" is actually a pair of walls extending out from the sides of the shuttle bay and following the line of the flare/hump. So while it might be hump from the profile, it's hollow, making it more of a divot.
Lastly, I asked earlier if you wanted proportions fit to the Venture hull or the Excelsior and you said "sovereign, which wasn't an option, or more correctly was effectively "Venture." You answer missed the point. The proportional issue stems from the SHAPE of the saucer. A round saucer and an oval one result in radically different proportions. The images in my last post were, foremost meant to do two things:
1) Demonstrate the issue visually
2) Show how the venture's neck interacts with the hull.
This is no minor point. Your input in the last posts doesn't address the fact that the "Excelsior" variant's hull is quite close, to the Sovereign in cross section. The profile is different, but that's merely a minor issue wrt to where the undercut starts. In effect, you answers do not answer the question.
To be very clear, given the new information the questions are:
How does the "hump" factor into the hull form?
How do you intend to deal with the fact that the neck intersects the "hump"?
How is the "hump" supposed to blend with the front of the hull?
How is the ship's cross section supposed to look, given the "hump"? (In other words, does the hull flare out at the top, below and around the neck?)
How is the neck supposed to interact with the saucer?
How is the ship going to deal with the difference in proportion caused by the saucer’s shape? (If you still do get this the issue is proportion between width and length. The oval saucers on the two exemplars are much longer than they are wide. if the replacement is scaled to the length, the result is a very skinny looking secondary hull--see my first five images. If it is scaled to the width, this makes the secondary hull much larger--the second set of images uses 'excelsior' proportion which means the secondary hull got wider but not taller. Actually scaling the hull in both the x and z axes would result in yet another different look...one not supported by any of the exemplars.)
At minimum these need to be addressed and they need to be addressed clearly. Draw a picture if you have to. As I said, I'm not upset, but this takes time I could use on other things. To be worth my while, you need to respond with specific feedback I can use, so that I don't have to compound the time already spent explaining why I don't know what you are talking about.
