Another spare parts bash
- Thread starter Forbin
- Start date
A rearwards sensor.
Behold the 1975 ST Tech Manual dreadnought, from which this derives and homages:
http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/dreadnaught_federation_prop.jpg
Somehow, I think a Starfleet carrier would look a lot different than has customarily been presented (i.e., not the fugly ship shown previously).
Frankly, I think such a ship would probably bear a closer resemblance to the Galactica.
Frankly, I think such a ship would probably bear a closer resemblance to the Galactica.
CRA makes a point, although I would prefer not to trash Forbin's design. The Themistocles-class starship fits into Forbin's interpretation of the TREK Universe better than FJ's original Federation-class dreadnought did.
As I recently suggested in this TrekBBS Tech thread, I would expect a true Starfleet fighter/shuttle carrier to actually be a highly modified warptug's cargo container-vessel, carried around by warptug/transport-type starships, probably multiple such carrier-containers along for the ride at a time. Their huge capacity would make them the ideal form of deep space transport for such smaller "extra vehicular" craft.
I think it would be far more interesting (and perhaps quite a challenge) to take Forbin's spectacularly excellent Sultana concept and make a special version of it as an armed super-warptug with extra-long nacelles, then attached carrier-pods to such a ship. This would seem to add a new dimension of logic to how things would work in the TOS/TMP-era rather than building dedicated carrier-starships.
As I recently suggested in this TrekBBS Tech thread, I would expect a true Starfleet fighter/shuttle carrier to actually be a highly modified warptug's cargo container-vessel, carried around by warptug/transport-type starships, probably multiple such carrier-containers along for the ride at a time. Their huge capacity would make them the ideal form of deep space transport for such smaller "extra vehicular" craft.
I think it would be far more interesting (and perhaps quite a challenge) to take Forbin's spectacularly excellent Sultana concept and make a special version of it as an armed super-warptug with extra-long nacelles, then attached carrier-pods to such a ship. This would seem to add a new dimension of logic to how things would work in the TOS/TMP-era rather than building dedicated carrier-starships.
^^^
In fact, why not base ALL Starfleet ships on this concept? Buld a bunch of generic primary-hull saucers, and then mate them up with whatever specialized container/module you need for whatever mission you need to be performed at the time?
At the same time you have a stock of various module types stored at Starbases and so forth.
Example: This week USS Musgrave is mated with a science lab module and is supporting a planetary survey. Three weeks from now, the same ship has gone back to base swapped modules for a carrier module and is conducting fighter ops along the neutral zone.
One class of ship adaptable to a number of contingencies rather than a lot of varied classes with reletively limited utility. Franz Joseph showed us the way with the Transport Tugs 36 years ago.
In fact, why not base ALL Starfleet ships on this concept? Buld a bunch of generic primary-hull saucers, and then mate them up with whatever specialized container/module you need for whatever mission you need to be performed at the time?
At the same time you have a stock of various module types stored at Starbases and so forth.
Example: This week USS Musgrave is mated with a science lab module and is supporting a planetary survey. Three weeks from now, the same ship has gone back to base swapped modules for a carrier module and is conducting fighter ops along the neutral zone.
One class of ship adaptable to a number of contingencies rather than a lot of varied classes with reletively limited utility. Franz Joseph showed us the way with the Transport Tugs 36 years ago.
Last edited:
While I'm all in favor of modularity, I also like a bit more variety.
For one thing, most ships don't really need that ginormous saucer section, while something like a big carrier might need something even bigger.
For one thing, most ships don't really need that ginormous saucer section, while something like a big carrier might need something even bigger.
The saucer section would have whatever permanent crew quarters the ships needs, regardless of mission. It would also have the primary propulsion and support systems the ships needs.
Anything else would be in the mission sprecific module/container. For example, a carrier module would have the quarters/life support for the extensive flight crews, as well as the hangar/manintenance space for the smallcraft being carried.
And sure, variety is good art (or teevee), but practically, this is the direction Starfleet would go logically. IMO. YMMV.
Well, with all the background chatter in TOS and subsequent movies about frieghters, transports and the like, I'm assuming that warptugs may be one of the most common forms of interstellar transportation in the TREK Universe. Ships like the various Enterprises would be a specialized breed apart, a relative elite force.
What I never liked about most carrier concepts is the ones with an array of, like, dozens of individual hangar doors all down the sides. I mean, WTF for? REAL aircraft carriers make do with four catapults and launching one plane at a time at short intervals. In 300 years a shuttle carrier could have a couple of hangars and computer-control could squirt a shitload of shuttles out each one in short order.
For instance:
http://www.inpayne.com/models/kitbash/trekpage_saipan.html
My thru-deck, with one hangar door forward and one aft, could probably even suffice:
http://www.inpayne.com/models/kitbash/trekpage_soryu.html
Really, in what circumstance would a phaser-armed capital ship need to spit out a dozen shuttles or fighters all at once?
For instance:
http://www.inpayne.com/models/kitbash/trekpage_saipan.html
My thru-deck, with one hangar door forward and one aft, could probably even suffice:
http://www.inpayne.com/models/kitbash/trekpage_soryu.html
Really, in what circumstance would a phaser-armed capital ship need to spit out a dozen shuttles or fighters all at once?
Does anyone remember the USS Ronin concept that's been floating around for years?
It was a "Nebulized" Sovereign, with hangar bays on both sides of the saucer. Not sure if it was considered a carrier.
It was a "Nebulized" Sovereign, with hangar bays on both sides of the saucer. Not sure if it was considered a carrier.
@Forbin:
Thanks for sharing your always-interesting kitbash images and views on them.
I agree that carrier-type vessels, regardless of configuration, probably would not need to launch large numbers of small craft simultaneously. I don't think launching these ships is the issue. I think a much larger issue would be recovery and overlap (multiple bays being used so the carrier can both launch and recover multiple ships, either all at one time or to get maximum traffic to and from the carrier during a heavy traffic period). If a carrier unit has to leave a system in a hurry (either a Beta Niobe-type crisis or a retreat in combat), then multiple bays would have a practical use.
Thanks for sharing your always-interesting kitbash images and views on them.
I agree that carrier-type vessels, regardless of configuration, probably would not need to launch large numbers of small craft simultaneously. I don't think launching these ships is the issue. I think a much larger issue would be recovery and overlap (multiple bays being used so the carrier can both launch and recover multiple ships, either all at one time or to get maximum traffic to and from the carrier during a heavy traffic period). If a carrier unit has to leave a system in a hurry (either a Beta Niobe-type crisis or a retreat in combat), then multiple bays would have a practical use.
I'll have to sketch something up and start a thread, 'cause I've got a few ideas brewin'...
Being as it's an SFB design, they use fighters, which would make more sense to need to land & launch quickly.
They would need to be replenished with photorps in a major firefight and possibly need their "batteries" recharged.
They would need to be replenished with photorps in a major firefight and possibly need their "batteries" recharged.
Agreed, a great design, very easy on the eye imo
SFB not only has Heavy Carriers but also the CVL which I believe
is a Through deck carrier. The SFB CVA had a major design change in thier Last major Game revison but the customers who buy miniatures like the Old CVA miniature so much that ADB has kept it
in thier miniature stable It will be interesting to to note what happens when they Launch thier Mongoose produced Starline 2500 series which is larger than thier Starline 2200 2300 and 2400 series
is a Through deck carrier. The SFB CVA had a major design change in thier Last major Game revison but the customers who buy miniatures like the Old CVA miniature so much that ADB has kept it
in thier miniature stable It will be interesting to to note what happens when they Launch thier Mongoose produced Starline 2500 series which is larger than thier Starline 2200 2300 and 2400 series
Yeah, the Ronin class. And her base platform, the Borodin; it is hard to find good images and information about the two. I have yet to find a good enough image where I can read her registry. Those two have been around for a while, but it seems the original orthographic views, if they ever even existed, have been lost at this point.
Yeah, that's the one. There were some great pics here several years ago.
I like all those compact "versions", probably a lot fewer structural weak points.
I like all those compact "versions", probably a lot fewer structural weak points.