Ah, thanks! I remember that pic, we discussed it on another board and the conclusion was that it definetly is not an msd, but that it does show four nacelles. Which means that it was absolutely not intended to be an Oberth-class vessel from the beginning.
Question for Rick Sternbach about the Oberth class
- Thread starter Dukhat
- Start date
Interesting. Does it necessarily have to be interpreted as four nacelles though? Suppose this station simply shows two separate diagrams of a pair of nacelles? It's difficult to judge on such a small resolution. But it does seem clear that the bottom half is just an inverted version of the top half.
Just to be clear: I never thought this display was meant to be an MSD. I was just being funny. 
As for the "four-nacelle" issue: I believe that there was a rumor started after this diagram was seen that the Pegasus was supposed to be a Cheyenne class ship. However, I'm pretty sure it was just as rumor based on said diagram, and the fact that the only known TNG-era four-nacelled canon design was the Ahwahnee from "BoBW pt.2" led people to think this. Add to that fact that the Cheyenne class had hi-liter pen nacelles, not the usual GCS nacelles the diagram refers to. I'm sure Rick could tell us if a four-nacelled design was ever in the works, although the Ambassador-era design suggests not.
Seriously though, besides the "Ambassador-type" Pegasus concept I posted, I'd be interested to know if there was any other concept art for this ship. Although I like Rick's design, I think that a ship that large would not have been conducive to mutiny. There would have been simply too many crewmembers to allow Riker & Pressman to escape that easily without being captured first. The small-ship idea would have worked best; I just wish the small ship would have not been the Oberth.
As for the "four-nacelle" issue: I believe that there was a rumor started after this diagram was seen that the Pegasus was supposed to be a Cheyenne class ship. However, I'm pretty sure it was just as rumor based on said diagram, and the fact that the only known TNG-era four-nacelled canon design was the Ahwahnee from "BoBW pt.2" led people to think this. Add to that fact that the Cheyenne class had hi-liter pen nacelles, not the usual GCS nacelles the diagram refers to. I'm sure Rick could tell us if a four-nacelled design was ever in the works, although the Ambassador-era design suggests not.
Seriously though, besides the "Ambassador-type" Pegasus concept I posted, I'd be interested to know if there was any other concept art for this ship. Although I like Rick's design, I think that a ship that large would not have been conducive to mutiny. There would have been simply too many crewmembers to allow Riker & Pressman to escape that easily without being captured first. The small-ship idea would have worked best; I just wish the small ship would have not been the Oberth.
Don't believe there were any other 4-nacelle designs for the Pegasus specifically, if that's the question. I don't know what the deal was with the engineering display or if those shapes were meant to be four separate nacelles or different subsystems within each of two nacelles. The only major four nacelle ships I can recall working on were the Stargazer and the Prometheus. Might have been others, but the mists of time are thickening.
As to the Ambassador-type shape for the Pegasus, it could be argued that a miniature or CG ship based on that class could have been modified to appear smaller, as in populating the surface with bigger windows and changing the size of the bridge module, etc. We've done that in the past, with varying levels of success. To truly convey a smaller size, one really has to take into account all familiar surface features and scale them appropriately, but that's a topic for another day.
Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com
Quite true; I had forgotten about that. Ed Miarecki's kitbashes for BoBW (except for the Melbourne) all had larger bridges, windows, and escape pod hatches to suggest a smaller ship. However, the Ambassador-ized Pegasus design would have to have a smaller shuttlebay in order for that to work, as it currently suggests the regular Ambassador size. Either that, or the shuttles were really, really small.
Of course, this is all moot, since we got the Grissom.
...Or then not quite moot, because at least one issue remains relevant: where could one put a large shuttlebay on the Grissom?
The three lighted squares on saucer rim might be just about sufficient for small shuttlepods. Or then the dark grilleworks on the ventral pod or on top of the blocky hull aft of the saucer are rolling doors that can reveal anything from an array of telescopes to a shuttlecraft or two...
In that sense, any model other than Grissom would have made more sense: she's really the only one without an obvious shuttle hangar!
Timo Saloniemi
The three lighted squares on saucer rim might be just about sufficient for small shuttlepods. Or then the dark grilleworks on the ventral pod or on top of the blocky hull aft of the saucer are rolling doors that can reveal anything from an array of telescopes to a shuttlecraft or two...
In that sense, any model other than Grissom would have made more sense: she's really the only one without an obvious shuttle hangar!
Timo Saloniemi
I'd be more inclined to believe the linked deck plans if they weren't so redundant. Why would a ship with a crew of thirty need four shuttles and seven work/killer bees? Can they afford to man and field all those craft simultaneously AND fly the ship? And why is there a movie theatre / stage on deck ten that can seat thirty two comfortably? Ditto for the mess hall - with a minimum three shift rotation, do you need tables for everyone simultaneously?
Put bunk beds in those little staterooms, shrink down the shuttle bay to two each of shuttles and bees, and reduce some of the other overly large spaces, and I see no reason why they can't have a crew of eighty in there with facitlities still more luxurious than a typical USN warship.
And hey, remember the Equinox? She had crew quarters that bunked six to a room...
Mark
Put bunk beds in those little staterooms, shrink down the shuttle bay to two each of shuttles and bees, and reduce some of the other overly large spaces, and I see no reason why they can't have a crew of eighty in there with facitlities still more luxurious than a typical USN warship.
And hey, remember the Equinox? She had crew quarters that bunked six to a room...
Mark
I'm willing to cut a lot of slack for USS Thagard. As the RPG backstory goes, she's something of a flagship for the survey fleet, and as such is perfectly justified in taking aboard all the bells and whistles - even if this actually limits her capabilities. Also, if nothing else, the layout of the Thagard nicely shows all the configuration alternatives in one shot.
The important thing for me is the use of the 120 m vessel in proving that reasonable (in addition to unreasonable) facilities can be fitted within. Ditch (most of?) the shuttlebay, leave the Marine honor guard ashore, plant the trees somewhere else, and expand the crew quarters and laboratories into the remaining space, and you have something that might be USS Grissom. Use a slightly different modular interior and you get the Vico or the Pegasus.
Timo Saloniemi
The important thing for me is the use of the 120 m vessel in proving that reasonable (in addition to unreasonable) facilities can be fitted within. Ditch (most of?) the shuttlebay, leave the Marine honor guard ashore, plant the trees somewhere else, and expand the crew quarters and laboratories into the remaining space, and you have something that might be USS Grissom. Use a slightly different modular interior and you get the Vico or the Pegasus.
Timo Saloniemi
