How is this for a concept?

[RedSpar]

Been doing some 3d sketches and came up with this concept of a TOS Shuttle/Attack Carrier.

I've sliced out 2 flat launch/catapult areas out of the main saucer. Added a launch control tower overlooking each one in the middle.
There is a large landing fantail where the impulse engines would be (Haven't figured out where to put those yet)

Shuttles would landing on the rear fantail, get serviced in the large bay behind the bridge then get sent out a door on the side of the launch platform when needed.

I have no idea what kind of engineering hull or how the nacelles will be placed. I'm just going for a naval aircraft carrier feel. I wanted your feedback before I go on.. Worth continuing?

 

[Patrickivan]

I'm not a big fan of Star Trek fighters, but it's cool looking and fun...

Have you considered giving the rim of the saucer a 3rd deck to increase the working space needed (due to the loss of space from the two main shuttle decks)?

When making your secondary hull, whatever it may be, keep those big volatile nacelles out of the way of that landing area!

 

[Klaus]

Very interesting... With the flight paths you'd want to have the secondary hull/nacelles mounted below, of course.

 

[RedSpar]

I'm not a big fan of Star Trek fighters, but it's cool looking and fun...

Have you considered giving the rim of the saucer a 3rd deck to increase the working space needed (due to the loss of space from the two main shuttle decks)?

When making your secondary hull, whatever it may be, keep those big volatile nacelles out of the way of that landing area!

Well it doesn't necessarily need to be fighters.. It could be a marine landing carrier using large numbers of administrative shuttles.

Not sure about a 3rd deck, but more likely move more workspace in the secondary hull.

 

[publiusr]

Now I like the ide of observation platforms, just not to either side of the saucer. On the back of a McQuarrie style hull--that I can see. Just personal taste, but saucer details are best when inset, to go with the flow.

 

[Starship]

I like it very much! Go ahead!

 

[Forbin]

Looks fun, but of course the question is, why an external runway-style landing deck in an airless zero G environment where every small craft can take off vertically and the crews don't usually wear space suits?

 

[Vektor]

I was about to make the same comment. Runway-style landing decks make little sense in this context. I'd suggest going back to the base concept of a shuttle/fighter carrier and reconsider exactly how launch and recovery would be more realistically handled.

By the way, it's interesting the resemblance this has to the Bonaventure concept from the 2008 Ships of the Line calendar.

 

[Kaziarl]

A runway style landing deck could work for Rescue and Recovery. Say a ship launches escape pods and shuttles in the middle of a battle, and while the battle still wages this thing swoops in and collects them, getting the injured to safety. You draw in the pods with a tractor beam, land the shuttles, magnetize them to the hull, and warp out of there faster then getting each one into a shuttle bay.

EDIT: But a thought that crosses my mind right after I posted that, really any surface on the ship could work for that.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Those cut-out areas could be covered with something semi/transparent.

Overall it has the "through deck" carrier idea, but with the saucer instead of the secondary hull.

 

[The Axeman]

I think the whole idea behind such a ship is a fascinating insight into planning and the Trek universe. The only reason you'd need small craft for an invasion or evacuation is because transporters are inoperable due to shielding, a condition on the planet or of the substance needing transported. With recovering people from escape pods, there's nothing to stop the survivors being transported aboard, I dont think they'd reuse escape pods or go collect them right away.

For planetary assault you'd only need small ships if there were some field or shielding stopping transporters but not small ships. Even then the primary target would be the device shielding the area, and once down the assault would progress very rapidly. This assumes a pretty full on invasion against a foe who has dug in but lost air/space superiority, not something you really associate with the Feds. It's more Star Wars, and that makes me wonder what the Feds would use instead of an AT-AT.

Building such a ship for emergencies and evacuations makes little sense. What's the chances it would be in the right place at the right time in an emergency? Take as an example the destruction of Vulcan in the last movie, how quickly could you have contacted such a ship, got it in place and started the operation? If you have enough warning on the rare occasions something is going to happen and you have time to get assests in place, it's more likely going to be every ship in the area with transporters and shuttles, and probably the best would be passenger and cargo ships drafted in.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I think it would be reasonable to assume that pretty much every other spacefaring culture would throw up fields to scatter transporters if they were under attack from space. Transporters have proven themselves very susceptible to a very wide variety of phenomenon, even bog-standard electrical storms. I wouldn't want to risk beaming myself down onto a battlefield, when there's literally thousands of ways the enemy could scramble my molecules.

 

[judexavier]

I like this idea. I've toyed around with something vaguely similar, a retake on the old standard shuttle bay replaced with
a "navy-ship-helipad-looking" magnetic? deck, with guide markings, elevator/hatches, etc...
(No reason behind it, I just thought it looked different/cool Actually I think it had something to do with "safety factor"; slowly lifting off a deck, instead of flying out of a bay. Which of course opens up all sorts of debates about tech/capabilities...)
Anyway,
This could really expand on that type of thing.
And what the hell, fighters would be fun too

Looking forward to more.

 

[Vektor]

It's true that fighters just don't fill much of a role in the Trek universe. We saw a few of them thrown into the fray in some of the more desperate battles against the Dominion, and they do seem popular among smaller governments and guerrilla forces like the Maquis, but galactic powers like the Federation seem to favor direct projection of power through large, heavily armed starships.

This makes a lot of sense if you think about it. There's very little a fighter can do that a starship can't with their powerful deflector shields to protect them. They can stand toe-to-toe with other ships in fleet engagements and assault ground targets from orbit equally well. Fighters might still have a swarming advantage under certain tactical conditions, but it hardly seems worth it to build and maintain something like a dedicated carrier vessel. As The Axeman pointed out, it doesn't even make much sense to have that kind of vessel for evacuation purposes when transporters could do the job much more quickly and efficiently.

Then again, it wouldn't be surprising if Starfleet had used carriers in the past, perhaps before advanced deflector shield technology made capital ships so much more defensible. Maybe your version is a holdover from those days, still in use for cadet training and such. Either way, though, I wouldn't do the runway-style landing decks, I'd go with something more like multiple launch/recovery bays around the circumference of the primary hull. A thicker saucer, like Picard's old USS Stargazer, would be ideal for that.

Edit - I can actually see something like a troop carrier with bays full of drop ships rather than fighters for landing ground troops on planets protected by transporter scramblers and the like.

 

[RedSpar]

OK made some changes and I will explain some of the concepts.

I moved and expanded the "control tower" to the rear and added another pod to overlook the landing fantail as well.

Shuttles will stick to the hull via magnatomic adhesion pads (will add later)

You can see in the next pic the shuttles have docking modules so no EVA is needed to board the shuttles. Shuttles can take off straight up if needed (I may also add a catapult type launcher if I can make it look plausible):

And before someone says something, these shuttles have doors on both sides.. (special carrier version)

The carrier can accommodate larger craft as well (my Jefferies shuttle seen here). I'll add a pressurized "deck mule" with a docking module to board center craft. Or maybe one that rises from the deck in the middle...

I haven't duplicated the other side so you see an asymmetrical version ATM


High res images here:
http://www.redspar.com/pics/carrierproto5_big.jpg
http://www.redspar.com/pics/carrierproto6.jpg
http://www.redspar.com/pics/carrierproto7.jpg

 

[Maurice]

I like the idea of a carrier. I just don't think it works in this format. It's also opposed to Jefferies design principle that everything important in accessibly from inside the ship.

I'm probably in the minority in that I've never been a fan of designs where the saucer is sliced and diced. Why bother with the shape at all if it's all chopped up? It never feels logical to me.

 

[RedSpar]

I like the idea of a carrier. I just don't think it works in this format. It's also opposed to Jefferies design principle that everything important in accessibly from inside the ship.

I'm probably in the minority in that I've never been a fan of designs where the saucer is sliced and diced. Why bother with the shape at all if it's all chopped up? It never feels logical to me.

It's analogous to the first real life aircraft carrier the USS Langley. They just took a cargo ship and stuck a deck on top of it to make it a carrier.

This ship is something that got rushed into service because of an immediate need to field a military shuttle carrier.

Connie primary hulls were already cranking off the assembly lines at Utopia Planitia around Mars. They didn't have time to design a purpose built carrier from scratch so they took an existing Connie saucer section and modified it for carrier work.. Looks funky but gets the job done quickly and cheaply. Maybe after this I could make a dedicated carrier from scratch.

 

[Maurice]

I like the idea of a carrier. I just don't think it works in this format. It's also opposed to Jefferies design principle that everything important in accessibly from inside the ship.

I'm probably in the minority in that I've never been a fan of designs where the saucer is sliced and diced. Why bother with the shape at all if it's all chopped up? It never feels logical to me.

It's analogous to the first real life aircraft carrier the USS Langley. They just took a cargo ship and stuck a deck on top of it to make it a carrier.

This ship is something that got rushed into service because of an immediate need to field a military shuttle carrier.

Connie primary hulls were already cranking off the assembly lines at Utopia Planitia around Mars. They didn't have time to design a purpose built carrier from scratch so they took an existing Connie saucer section and modified it for carrier work.. Looks funky but gets the job done quickly and cheaply. Maybe after this I could make a dedicated carrier from scratch.

That doesn't change my opinion. If you're going to ask people what they think, not everyone is going to like it.

 

[Robert Simmons]

I'm more fond of the balcony track system from SFB for CV's. I'm having a hard time seeing this on the saucer as well. But mass indivdual balconies lining the equator on the secondary hull like on the Fed CVA I think is more in tune with TOS than mangling the elegant lines and curves of the saucer.

Neat idea through. Don't hate it...just felt the seconday hull was more of the support / logicistics part of the ship where I think a CV deck would be more suited. I'm not particularly keen on the through deck designs I've seen on some blueprints. A longer external recieving deck on the secondary hull would work for a CV like your deck on your model. But for launching I like the idea of each shuttle has it's own individual balcony that can be behind a closed door and then extended whe the door is open. that way there is no glut / traffic jam launching all the shuttles at once.

 

[RedSpar]

That doesn't change my opinion. If you're going to ask people what they think, not everyone is going to like it.

Not trying to change your mind, just trying to tell you my line of thinking on my design concept. Actually agree with you to a point.. But I am trying to do something different with Trek ships...they are starting to all look the same..