Got an F in starship design...

[LordSarvain]

I had briefly thought about entering this in that contest, but I don't play the game, don't know anything about the game, and I doubt my knowledge of Trek is sufficient to design a ship as carefully thought out as some of those submitted by the greats from these boards. That being said here's my design, just for fun and not for competition lol...

I tried to bring back some of the elements I really liked from the upgraded ship from TMP but still give it a new look. I don't think I necessarily moved it forward enough to be the successor to the E model (didn't stop me from calling it F though lol) but I still like the design, regardless of where it should fit in between B-E...

 

[erifah]

I like it.

She looks small - not that that's a bad thing. Sort of like what would happen if the Powers-That-Be decided to get rid of bloated excess, and make an Enterprise that's mean & lean.

Like mine, she's too close to the design of the "J" to be the immediate successor to the "Enterprise E". I see it as an "Enterprise G".

 

[RoJoHen]

Ooh, I like it a lot. It's obviously familiar but also has a very unique shape. I'd love to see it with a lot more detail.

 

[BlobVanDam]

I agree that it feels smaller. The saucer and nacelles definitely give it a leaner small ship feel to me, although the engineering section and shuttle bay opening would suggest a much larger size. Either way, it looks great. The nacelle design has a great style to it.

And I wish my models looked that smooth.

 

[LordSarvain]

Yeah I see it as being a bit smaller than the E. The measurements I came up with were 660 meters long x 369 (giggidy) meters wide and 117 meters high... But each of the sections are a lot less voluminous than the E. The landing bay is going to be a split level job like my Planet of the Titans ship. Hopefully, the finer details will help to bring the ship into proper scale. I didn't see any need to ratchet up the size (there was a good post about that over in the designing the F thread), aircraft carriers aside, seems that as technology advances, ships become smaller... so I should have probably thought about scaling it down a peg or two...

 

[BolianAuthor]

I like it a lot as well... and I love the fact that it's also a smaller ship. With a little more work, this could be an awesome ship.

 

[The Axeman]

I think it's tough to tell from some of these views, a straight side and top shot would be nice so we can see it as a whole. I really like certain elements of the nacelles and body design, but the saucer looks awfully like the J version, and I am no fan of the J version at all. Until I can see the entirety it's tough to tell if it all gels together, with the wide saucer, deep thin body and stubby nacelles. Or are they?

 

[Avon]

it sort of looks nova sized.

 

[Kaiser]

Looks like good design to me but definaly more of a Latter Enterprise than F to me possibly between G-I

 

[LordSarvain]

I thought the saucer was more like the D than the J... but here's the latest work. I started on the bridge/command structure, recessed the sensor array so it doesn't seem so tacked on, added the phaser strip to the lower hull and started on the torpedo bay. And here's a top, bottom and side view.

 

[MadMan1701A]

Man, this thing is weird and awesome.

It seems a little "droopy" in the side views, though... what would it look like if that hard edge going to where the pylons are was straight?

Really cool, either way, though.

 

[Santaman]

Nice design, very happy that its impulse engines aren't aimed straight at anything important (are ye listening Eaves?!)

 

[Avon]

does the bridge area clip onto the side of starbases?

 

[Kaiser]

very good new images of your design

 

[The Super Brando]

Very cool Enterprise F design! Reminds me a lot of this one, which is my favorite starship fan design ever:

 

[erifah]

I think you are really on to something really cool and amazing here - don't f**k it up!

That knife-edge on the front of the secondary hull intrigues me. It ain't where it needs to be yet refinement-wise, but I'm not sure where you should go with it either. I'm thinking you should look at the hulls of sailboats, and take some design cues from them. Explore the studio space!

Keep up the good work!

 

[The Axeman]

Now that I can see the side and top views I'm liking it more and more. The saucer is still more J than D to me because it's not only eliptical, it's very flat as well. To me the only parts that don't really fit the whole look are the nacelles. You have a deep, thin keel for a secondary hull, a long thin upper hull supporting a wide thin saucer, and then nacelles which are relatively rounded and chubby.

 

[Saquist]

I thought the deflector nose would be the biggest problem with the design. (interupts natural flow of the field lines so it's either unstable at high warp or a warp 8.8 - warp 9.5)

But that skinny secondary hull has functional and tactical problems. Other than that it does look good especially as a concept.

 

[sojourner]

I thought the deflector nose would be the biggest problem with the design. (interrupts natural flow of the field lines so it's either unstable at high warp or a warp 8.8 - warp 9.5)

But that skinny secondary hull has functional and tactical problems. Other than that it does look good especially as a concept.

Maybe we should put a model into a warp tunnel for testing?

Sorry Saquist, but I find comments like this in regards to what is essentially just art to be silly.

 

[LordSarvain]

Thanks for the comments everyone!

@MadMan1701A - Yes the droopage... I know it's there but I've come to accept it, I can only tell you that it's been worse than what you're seeing here but in order to keep the configuration and look that I wanted for the other views I had to just learn to live with it. This is something I've found with a number of models (not just my own), seems they have one totally craptastic view that you promise yourself you'll never show, then someone goes and asks for a profile view, lol. Bringing a straight line to the struts interrupts the "Atlantic bow" look of the secondary hull. In order to avoid that, I'd have to raise the struts to the warp engines which then puts them in the path of the impulse engines. So then I'd have to move the impulse engines or push the struts out and before you know it I'd have the NX-01 lol.

@junxon - LOL... nice

@The Axeman - Did you just call my warp engines fat? I kinda like the nacelles, they're not finished of course but, for me, they work. I think they match the flow of the ship and harken back to Proberts TMP warp engines. But the pics should do all of the convincing, so I won't try to convince you with words.

@Saquist - See this is where I falter with Trek, I have no idea what the conventional wisdom is on warp fields. I watched the original series in it's entirety, all the movies, I think I saw all of The Next Generation and a good chunk of the Deep Space Nine series, a few of the Voyager episodes and a couple of Enterprise episodes. I've got me a Technical Manual, and a Next Generation Technical Manual, and a few more manuals and a couple of novels. So I am by no means a Trek expert, but I can follow most of the conversations, kinda like "I can understand it but I can't speak it".

But now you've gone into some deep jungle native dialect that I'm completely unfamiliar with. I don't see how the deflector being mounted where it is would interfere with the warp field or create instability any more than it being mounted at the front of the secondary hull. I know I've seen other designs with this configuration, is there something that needs to be added or subtracted to make this work?

What would the functional and tactical problems be with the secondary hull?

I hope this doesn't come off as overly sensitive, because I'm not offended at all, if I didn't want any criticism I wouldn't have posted this here, I'm just genuinely curious.