Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
Is it called the Emmette Class?
Is it called the Emmette Class?
NX-TECH BRIEFS!
- Thread starter miraclefan
- Start date
Re: NX-TECH BRIEFS! BRIDGE MODULE!
The NX bridge is also considerably larger than the Defiant's. How can it be a "redress?"
The NX bridge is also considerably larger than the Defiant's. How can it be a "redress?"
Drex Files is asking you! Ship Survey!
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/drex-files-ship-survey/ He want's to know which ship YOU the fans would like him to find next to put on his website for all are veiwing pleasure!
I asked for more ENT-J, Half-Saucer NX-Type & the S.S. CONESTOGA!
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/drex-files-ship-survey/ He want's to know which ship YOU the fans would like him to find next to put on his website for all are veiwing pleasure!
I asked for more ENT-J, Half-Saucer NX-Type & the S.S. CONESTOGA!
Re: Drex Files is asking you! Ship Survey!
Nebula-Class.
Nebula-Class.
Concept Art of the starships from EXPANCE!
http://johneaves.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/the-starships-of-expance/#comment-1792 What do you Guys ''n'' Gals think? personaly I love them ALL! except for that ''Steroid inhanced NX-Class'' Down there, that one just made me go?
http://johneaves.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/the-starships-of-expance/#comment-1792 What do you Guys ''n'' Gals think? personaly I love them ALL! except for that ''Steroid inhanced NX-Class'' Down there, that one just made me go?
Re: Drex Files Warp Delta pictorial!
Here's the link!http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/ste-warp-delta-pictorial/ WOO-HOO I love this design! I wish we saw MORE of it on ENT!
Looks like the X-33 Space Plane with warp engines and impulse engines attached to it.
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Re: Drex Files Warp Delta pictorial!
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
I'm enjoying a bit of speculation on how the appearance of this ship infers the sort of tech it utilizes in what is probably the mid to late 2060's.
The more or less aerodynamic shape without any obvious aerodynamic control surfaces or VTOL thrusters suggests landing capability involving gravimetric stator grids embedded in the hull - likely since there's probably similar gear pinning everything to the deck(s) inside for the first time (as I've alluded to in my last post above).
That lovely, star destroyer style collection of traditionally shaped rocket engine nozzles is perhaps indicating that this ship has sublight propulsion that pre-dates subspace field enhanced impulse drives with their characteristic, often asymetrical "emission grid" exhaust vents. Despite this it already seems to lack much hull volume devoted to fuel storage - a common trait of trekships. This indicates that some form of high density fuel storage tech is already in use by the mid-21st century. Reaction mass requirements would be minimal with the use of "warp hops" on interplanetary runs, which would probably constitute most of the operational envelope of this class, and the gravimetric landing system wouldn't be spewing anything but gravitons, aside from the RCS thrusters.
If we assume one powerplant per nozzle, I'd think 3 deuterium-He3 fusion plants backed up by 4 gas core fission units would be the go. These would provide sublight propulsion and also power the warp drive in lieu of a M/AM reactor, the first of which would probably be tested on the contemporary series of unmanned probes including Friendship One. The energy density benefits of early (ie. risky) M/AM systems would only be justified for interstellar applications, so I'll pick the Conestoga as the first manned ship where people desperate enough to leave post WWIII earth decided to role those dice. Fusion fuel would be readily available from lunar He3 mining, not to mention all those fusion friendly isotopes of hydrogen waiting to be scooped from the upper atmospheres of any of the gas giant planets during a bussard run.
I'm enjoying a bit of speculation on how the appearance of this ship infers the sort of tech it utilizes in what is probably the mid to late 2060's.
The more or less aerodynamic shape without any obvious aerodynamic control surfaces or VTOL thrusters suggests landing capability involving gravimetric stator grids embedded in the hull - likely since there's probably similar gear pinning everything to the deck(s) inside for the first time (as I've alluded to in my last post above).
That lovely, star destroyer style collection of traditionally shaped rocket engine nozzles is perhaps indicating that this ship has sublight propulsion that pre-dates subspace field enhanced impulse drives with their characteristic, often asymetrical "emission grid" exhaust vents. Despite this it already seems to lack much hull volume devoted to fuel storage - a common trait of trekships. This indicates that some form of high density fuel storage tech is already in use by the mid-21st century. Reaction mass requirements would be minimal with the use of "warp hops" on interplanetary runs, which would probably constitute most of the operational envelope of this class, and the gravimetric landing system wouldn't be spewing anything but gravitons, aside from the RCS thrusters.
If we assume one powerplant per nozzle, I'd think 3 deuterium-He3 fusion plants backed up by 4 gas core fission units would be the go. These would provide sublight propulsion and also power the warp drive in lieu of a M/AM reactor, the first of which would probably be tested on the contemporary series of unmanned probes including Friendship One. The energy density benefits of early (ie. risky) M/AM systems would only be justified for interstellar applications, so I'll pick the Conestoga as the first manned ship where people desperate enough to leave post WWIII earth decided to role those dice. Fusion fuel would be readily available from lunar He3 mining, not to mention all those fusion friendly isotopes of hydrogen waiting to be scooped from the upper atmospheres of any of the gas giant planets during a bussard run.
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
The teeny weeny fuel tanks of even the earliest Trek ships might reflect trickery with inertia rather than dense packing of fuel. Compacting the fuel will not help solve the rocket equation, as it is the mass of the fuel that will defeat the attempt at interstellar rocket-based propulsion, not its volume. But making the fuel/propellant very light when stored, yet very massive when exhausted, would nicely evict Newton from the equation...
Really, Khan's warp-less DY-100 must already have had something non-Newtonian going on, in order to reach interstellar distances and thus interstellar speeds. That kind of gravitic magic was probably discovered in the late 20th century already, and would eventually turn rockets into impulse engines - but the Emmette would have something in between, closer to Khan than Archer.
I'm fine with fusion power, and with a rocket principle, as long as some of the power is used for perverting the rocket into a gravitic miracle.
To me, the Emmette looks like she were built with these warp engines in mind; the wing structure is too well integrated to be a late add-on. Thus I'd keep the Valiant as the Greg Jein study model, and use this baby as an early military vessel; the guns we see in the Mirror Universe could also be present in the regular universe. I mean, the aerodynamic shape would probably be a liability in interstellar travel, unless you desperately need it for a particular application, such as landing an entire colony - or landing to conquer or destroy one.
Timo Saloniemi
The teeny weeny fuel tanks of even the earliest Trek ships might reflect trickery with inertia rather than dense packing of fuel. Compacting the fuel will not help solve the rocket equation, as it is the mass of the fuel that will defeat the attempt at interstellar rocket-based propulsion, not its volume. But making the fuel/propellant very light when stored, yet very massive when exhausted, would nicely evict Newton from the equation...
Really, Khan's warp-less DY-100 must already have had something non-Newtonian going on, in order to reach interstellar distances and thus interstellar speeds. That kind of gravitic magic was probably discovered in the late 20th century already, and would eventually turn rockets into impulse engines - but the Emmette would have something in between, closer to Khan than Archer.
I'm fine with fusion power, and with a rocket principle, as long as some of the power is used for perverting the rocket into a gravitic miracle.
To me, the Emmette looks like she were built with these warp engines in mind; the wing structure is too well integrated to be a late add-on. Thus I'd keep the Valiant as the Greg Jein study model, and use this baby as an early military vessel; the guns we see in the Mirror Universe could also be present in the regular universe. I mean, the aerodynamic shape would probably be a liability in interstellar travel, unless you desperately need it for a particular application, such as landing an entire colony - or landing to conquer or destroy one.
Timo Saloniemi
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
Do the nacelles look different enough to imply it's as old as the 2060s? With pieces of Earth still supposedly in their post-atomic horror and whatnot, and Conestoga already straining credibility in my mind as an effort of those days, I'd like to push this opening credits ship as far forward in the timeline as I can. The overall similarity to the warp delta suggested to me it was a good bit newer than that...maybe the 2110s or something like that.
Do the nacelles look different enough to imply it's as old as the 2060s? With pieces of Earth still supposedly in their post-atomic horror and whatnot, and Conestoga already straining credibility in my mind as an effort of those days, I'd like to push this opening credits ship as far forward in the timeline as I can. The overall similarity to the warp delta suggested to me it was a good bit newer than that...maybe the 2110s or something like that.
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
We don't know much about the "vintages" of warp nacelles from that time. OTOH, the nacelles in the late 24th century come in bewildering variety. It might be possible for a certain design to persist from 2063 to 2463, as it appears that the casing, cowling or nacelle has little effect on the performance of the actual engine.
However, I'm with you on that later dating, although the primitive rocket engines might suggest this somewhat predates the 2110s. At that time, we already had those fancy Class Y freighters with more modern-looking impulse engines. The cluster on the Emmette looks quite a bit like the one on the Conestoga, to be sure - although we never got a good Conestoga aft view for comparison.
A ship shaped like this doesn't look like a valiant early interstellar explorer to me, if you pardon the pun. There's too much purpose built in... Too little jury-rigging. And too much similarity with later UESF combat vessels.
Timo Saloniemi
We don't know much about the "vintages" of warp nacelles from that time. OTOH, the nacelles in the late 24th century come in bewildering variety. It might be possible for a certain design to persist from 2063 to 2463, as it appears that the casing, cowling or nacelle has little effect on the performance of the actual engine.
However, I'm with you on that later dating, although the primitive rocket engines might suggest this somewhat predates the 2110s. At that time, we already had those fancy Class Y freighters with more modern-looking impulse engines. The cluster on the Emmette looks quite a bit like the one on the Conestoga, to be sure - although we never got a good Conestoga aft view for comparison.
A ship shaped like this doesn't look like a valiant early interstellar explorer to me, if you pardon the pun. There's too much purpose built in... Too little jury-rigging. And too much similarity with later UESF combat vessels.
Timo Saloniemi
Re: Concept Art of the starships from EXPANCE!
Why in the world would anyone build a primary hull that's a ring with a big hole in it?
There would be far less room in it, it would be far more fragile, and anyone in it would have to walk around it (rather than across a saucer) to get anywhere else in it.
Why in the world would anyone build a primary hull that's a ring with a big hole in it?
There would be far less room in it, it would be far more fragile, and anyone in it would have to walk around it (rather than across a saucer) to get anywhere else in it.
Re: Concept Art of the starships from EXPANCE!
Why build a round hull at all? Boxes are more useful in general.
Perhaps there's a reason for the round shape of the saucers - and if so, then the demands could be met by a circular rim already, without the need for the fill-in. Shield envelope? Aerodynamics? Something unrelated to internal volume anyway.
I think we got the best possible choices of the six or so this time around. I'm less enamored with the Sarajevo. That design might be easier to swallow if we had seen some sort of an intermediate design, with the aerodynamic delta hull but with semi-recessed engines, to aesthetically bridge the fully nacelled (Iceland) and the fully enclosed (Sarajevo) designs.
Timo Saloniemi
Why build a round hull at all? Boxes are more useful in general.
Perhaps there's a reason for the round shape of the saucers - and if so, then the demands could be met by a circular rim already, without the need for the fill-in. Shield envelope? Aerodynamics? Something unrelated to internal volume anyway.
I think we got the best possible choices of the six or so this time around. I'm less enamored with the Sarajevo. That design might be easier to swallow if we had seen some sort of an intermediate design, with the aerodynamic delta hull but with semi-recessed engines, to aesthetically bridge the fully nacelled (Iceland) and the fully enclosed (Sarajevo) designs.
Timo Saloniemi
Re: Concept Art of the starships from EXPANCE!
well to be fair, he said those two where "two more horrible designs." Even he admitted they where stupid.
well to be fair, he said those two where "two more horrible designs." Even he admitted they where stupid.
Re: Concept Art of the starships from EXPANCE!
I always thought of starfleet's use of a saucer shaped primary hull as being the best use of space given their view of "warp dynamics"
I always thought of starfleet's use of a saucer shaped primary hull as being the best use of space given their view of "warp dynamics"
Re: EUREKA! Mysterious ''ENT Opening credits'' ship discoverd!
Of course, there are examples against my argument, too, like Atlas rockets. But my point is that assuming any Star Trek vehicle's type should be referred to as "____ Class", with the word "class" and all, with the class named after the first ship, simplifies a vast universe too much.
That's why I don't get behind arguments to rename the "NX Class" the "Enterprise Class". For once we are seeing a different designation system, in a time where it makes sense that the future designation system wouldn't exist. It makes things less homogenized, and thus the universe seems more fleshed out and believable.
I'm a bit uncomfortable using 23rd century-type "class" naming systems for a ship that would have been the earliest or one of the earliest ever human warp ships. It would be like calling the space shuttle the "Columbia Class". Unless different types of vehicles with the same function become extremely commonplace, 21st century society favors descriptive names with, perhaps, a nickname. Hence, "Space Transportation System", "Space Shuttle" and "orbital vehicle" instead, or, in the case of numerical code systems, "F-117".
Of course, there are examples against my argument, too, like Atlas rockets. But my point is that assuming any Star Trek vehicle's type should be referred to as "____ Class", with the word "class" and all, with the class named after the first ship, simplifies a vast universe too much.
That's why I don't get behind arguments to rename the "NX Class" the "Enterprise Class". For once we are seeing a different designation system, in a time where it makes sense that the future designation system wouldn't exist. It makes things less homogenized, and thus the universe seems more fleshed out and believable.
Similar threads
