No I haven't but I will definitely look it up, thanks.
But I did try to design some with my limited skill. Nothing that probably used as the enterprise. But there in my album.
Design the Next Enterprise
- Thread starter Shikarnov
- Start date
No I haven't but I will definitely look it up, thanks.
But I did try to design some with my limited skill. Nothing that probably used as the enterprise. But there in my album.
No, actually, I can see your points, and I always respect your very erudite take on things. The truth is, if I had it do over again, I would probably go with option C rather than B. I think I realized that somewhere near the end of the below-front 3/4 view, but I was pretty much comitted at that point. I was trying to do some things differently than had been done before, namely the front-loaded secondary hull, the quad nacelles and the downward-angled support struts. Some of it worked and some of it didn't. Maybe, on the off-chance I manage to win this thing, there would be an opportunity to make a few minor adjustments.
I have to disagree with you about the "waddle,"though. I'm just not seeing it that way. The deflector is actually one of my favorite things about this design. I might consider "tightening it up" a little, making it a little less deep, but otherwise I'm pretty satisfied with it. If I were going to change anything at this point, I would probably extend the underside of the secondary hull a ways further back beyond the rear edge of the saucer, more like option C.
Whether the design wins or not, I'll probably go back and do a few of those things, as well as building my own 3D model of it. Really gotta finish the Grandeur and the Polaris first, though.
The deflector is the most unique feature. It makes the design and for som reason works with the uber nacelle look.
They are splines, lines and ellipses and they were cloned from the 3D model precisely. The detail however is my own yet to be applied to the model.
If you need any help just let me know.
I can walk you through the troublesome opperations and give you tiips on better operations to use as well as ACAD's more annoying errors and hicups.
Others have said the Engines are too large so a bit of reflection. That may be the case.
yeah definitely. my grandfather who gave it to me will help me as well, but it might be in my best interest to see if there is some autocad for dummies thing, becuase it will be a lot of questions.
Ooof. That's a bit underhanded aient it? Why not just tell the guy yourself.
Nope not me I like his design. I hope it makes it into the next round. I hope mine makes it as well.
indeed
it's been said before, but I really hope that Cryptic has someone who knows the fan art community and can weed out all the stolen art and previously published ones so all the truly legitimate entries can have a chance
I haven't seen that one. How does it compare to Vektor's?
Yeah bring yours on.
Saquist
Commodore
No, actually, I can see your points, and I always respect your very erudite take on things. The truth is, if I had it do over again, I would probably go with option C rather than B. I think I realized that somewhere near the end of the below-front 3/4 view, but I was pretty much comitted at that point. I was trying to do some things differently than had been done before, namely the front-loaded secondary hull, the quad nacelles and the downward-angled support struts. Some of it worked and some of it didn't. Maybe, on the off-chance I manage to win this thing, there would be an opportunity to make a few minor adjustments.
I have to disagree with you about the "waddle,"though. I'm just not seeing it that way. The deflector is actually one of my favorite things about this design. I might consider "tightening it up" a little, making it a little less deep, but otherwise I'm pretty satisfied with it. If I were going to change anything at this point, I would probably extend the underside of the secondary hull a ways further back beyond the rear edge of the saucer, more like option C.
Whether the design wins or not, I'll probably go back and do a few of those things, as well as building my own 3D model of it. Really gotta finish the Grandeur and the Polaris first, though.
The deflector is the most unique feature. It makes the design and for som reason works with the uber nacelle look.
They are splines, lines and ellipses and they were cloned from the 3D model precisely. The detail however is my own yet to be applied to the model.
If you need any help just let me know.
I can walk you through the troublesome opperations and give you tiips on better operations to use as well as ACAD's more annoying errors and hicups.
Others have said the Engines are too large so a bit of reflection. That may be the case.
yeah definitely. my grandfather who gave it to me will help me as well, but it might be in my best interest to see if there is some autocad for dummies thing, becuase it will be a lot of questions.
Bring it on. If you're on a messenger the correspondence would be easy and I'm exceedingly good at giving instructions in CAD so beginners can understand.
I can help you with Google Sketch up too but I'm no pro.
Frankly I think we were all trumped. His design aspect is so...functional. it has a subtle yet firm aesthetic quality. Definitely worthy of the name ... Enterprise.
I'd like to offer Olympus Class. It has a greek look to it.
I'm sure they will.
No. The Vektor is smart. The Vektor makes good ships go. The Vektor will make us strong.
ok. i just drew this. i felt i should, sorry for lack of computer skills.
(also i really like vektors other stuff.)
^needs the other nacelle and details, but the angle is tricky to get right and its 2 in the morning and i'm tired.
Side view.
not sure what would go in the traditional deflector area. bunch of torpedo launchers maybe?
(i hope this works)
(also i really like vektors other stuff.)
^needs the other nacelle and details, but the angle is tricky to get right and its 2 in the morning and i'm tired.
Side view.
not sure what would go in the traditional deflector area. bunch of torpedo launchers maybe?
(i hope this works)
First, I really appreciate the comments from everyone who liked my design and I respect the opinions of the ones who didn't. I do think it's pretty silly, though, to start awarding grand prizes to me or anyone else at this early date. I'm actually quite impressed at the quality and variety of submissions that ultimately turned up for this contest--several from the denizens of this very forum--which is something I had my doubts about early on. I think it's going to be a tough competition.
Sorry, I can't resist pointing out that you didn't get the spelling right, but I'll give you an A for effort.
In answer to your question, no, I didn't intend for the saucer to be separable. Honestly, how many times have we actually seen that done? Two or three during the entire run of TNG? I'm sure they thought it was a cool idea back in the day but I never really bought the viability of the concept. What the heck are all those escape pods for, anyway? I say let's just keep the Duras sisters from destroying the ship in the first place and save all the extra complexity and redundancy.
And by the way, Junxon, that design isn't half bad. I can see some serious potential there. I have to stop looking at it now, though, or I'm going to be tempted to add it to my "I should try to model this in 3D" list.
EDIT - Wow, I just discovered I'm actually on the Most Votes list with 46! Only 366 to go to take the top slot! I better get back to kissin' those babies!
Sorry, I can't resist pointing out that you didn't get the spelling right, but I'll give you an A for effort.
In answer to your question, no, I didn't intend for the saucer to be separable. Honestly, how many times have we actually seen that done? Two or three during the entire run of TNG? I'm sure they thought it was a cool idea back in the day but I never really bought the viability of the concept. What the heck are all those escape pods for, anyway? I say let's just keep the Duras sisters from destroying the ship in the first place and save all the extra complexity and redundancy.
And by the way, Junxon, that design isn't half bad. I can see some serious potential there. I have to stop looking at it now, though, or I'm going to be tempted to add it to my "I should try to model this in 3D" list.
EDIT - Wow, I just discovered I'm actually on the Most Votes list with 46! Only 366 to go to take the top slot! I better get back to kissin' those babies!
Last edited:
Saquist
Commodore
First, I really appreciate the comments from everyone who liked my design and I respect the opinions of the ones who didn't. I do think it's pretty silly, though, to start awarding grand prizes to me or anyone else at this early date. I'm actually quite impressed at the quality and variety of submissions that ultimately turned up for this contest--several from the denizens of this very forum--which is something I had my doubts about early on. I think it's going to be a tough competition.
Sorry, I can't resist pointing out that you didn't get the spelling right, but I'll give you an A for effort.
In answer to your question, no, I didn't intend for the saucer to be separable. Honestly, how many times have we actually seen that done? Two or three during the entire run of TNG? I'm sure they thought it was a cool idea back in the day but I never really bought the viability of the concept. What the heck are all those escape pods for, anyway? I say let's just keep the Duras sisters from destroying the ship in the first place and save all the extra complexity and redundancy.
And by the way, Junxon, that design isn't half bad. I can see some serious potential there. I have to stop looking at it now, though, or I'm going to be tempted to add it to my "I should try to model this in 3D" list.
EDIT - Wow, I just discovered I'm actually on the Most Votes list with 46! Only 366 to go to take the top slot! I better get back to kissin' those babies!
My apologies Vektor.
Any chance we'll be able to play your ship in Bridge Commander?
The modding forum
http://bc-central.com/forums/
The download forum
http://bridgecommander.filefront.com/
They'd really be interested in it.
I'd love to play it.
Don't sweat it, man. I'd say the number of people who use a 'c' instead of a 'k' is probably close to half. You're special, though, because you used both.
Maaaaaaaaaaybe. Can't say that I've done much swimming in that pond but I usually don't rule anything out.
In the back of my mind, in a locked filing cabinet somewhere, I've managed to withhold my reservations about the whole ship-separation idea too. Say your ship gets attacked by some terrorists. Is it really the best idea to put all your civilians in an impulse-only saucer and sail it away from their own principal means of defense? Imagine a ship of sea doing that. "We're under attack by Japanese Imperial war planes. . . All unnecessary extras, please make your way to the Sitting Duck to disembark!"From Vektor:
No, I didn't intend for the saucer to be separable. Honestly, how many times have we actually seen that done? Two or three during the entire run of TNG? I'm sure they thought it was a cool idea back in the day but I never really bought the viability of the concept. What the heck are all those escape pods for, anyway? I say let's just keep the Duras sisters from destroying the ship in the first place and save all the extra complexity and redundancy.
When I saw the double-rim of your 1701-F, Vektor, for a while I thought that would make a cool seam for a saucer separation. . . Then I followed your seam and noticed it wasn't contiguous, and I remembered, "Oh, that's right, he's one of those sensible guys who doesn't do the saucer-separation thingy."
I hope I wasn't all Ricky Gervais on your entry there, Vek, because I think there are gorgeous elements to it. I notice how the top line of the profile references the NX-01 just a bit, which is a nice touch. I just think That One Part of it doesn't fit for me.
I have a suggestion for Junxon and the other folks like me who have not experimented to any great extent with CAD modeling: When I was a boy, I used to carve starship models out of Ivory soap. Back then, you could buy what were called "economy size" blocks that were about 3" x 2" x 5", and the quality back then was consistent. With a dull pocket knife, you could easily create the basic shape. Getting down to the pylons was a challenge, but my mother -- not only an art teacher and an architect, but a former contestant in Procter & Gamble soap carving contests -- quite successfully used my copy of Franz Joseph's blueprints to carve the Constitution, complete with thin nacelle struts.
All right, so Ivory soap isn't what it used to be. But if modeling by computer seems out of reach, consider a good wood block. Or, as I used to do, cast a frame using those plastic containers they use for Bundt cakes and coffee cakes at your local bakery, as molds for #1 casting plaster. Plaster the parts together, then chisel them down and sand them.
My point being this: It will help you to see a fantastic ship that you can draw, if you have a basic shape in front of you that you can touch and hold. Maybe it's not a 100% perfect model, but it represents something that you can use to draw a model in perspective.
DF "That And Your Hands Will Be Completely Germ-Free" Scott
Similar threads
