Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by Warped9, Jun 30, 2011.
I remember when Gremlins were new. They were homely even then.
Better a Gremlin than a Pacer...
Presently I can't think of what else needs to be done to this but transfer the views to the finished sheets.
Overall you could say I sharpened up the detail that wasn't clear onscreen in addition to tightening up the overall look into something still recognizable yet scaled more credibly. The only real additions I made that weren't seen onscreen are a number of service access panels and the impulse drive at the aft end.
The onscreen version had something of a small sensor dish hanging out the front end. I thought it looked silly although I did play around with a few different dish like appendages. In the end I went with something that could be taken as some sort of sensor apparatus with the notion that this could be something that was interchangeable and could be swapped out with different pieces of equipment depending on the mission profile.
Finally here are some hard numbers.
Class L Shuttlecraft (heavy lander):
Length = 10.159 M (33.331 FT.)
Width = 4.899 M (16.074 FT.)
Height = 2.864 M (9.396 FT.)
Class J Shuttlecraft (scoutship):
Length = 9.015 M (29.58 FT.)
Width = 4.349 M (14.269 FT.)
Height = 2.374 M (7.854 FT.)
And here is something for the eye, a direct size comparison.
It's interesting how visually deceptive the designs are. The Galileo looks like it should have quite a bit of interior space in relation to the other designs. But it loses interior room because of its unusual design that isn't really apparent until you see the ship in a longitudinal cross-section. It also loses cabin space because a good portion of the aft end is taken up by the vehicle's impulse engines and system components. Seeing how these turned out one could make the argument for scaling up the TAS designs just a bit more...maybe.
Here is the beginning. I finally opted to try working with the existing design albeit adapted and with modifications. I still think the onscreen version looks silly and not remotely aquadynamic or hydrodynamic or whatever---it just doesn't look like it belongs in the water. Nonetheless anything else I could do would simply depart too far from the recognizable overall shape. So I've decided to try making the onscreen design as workable or more credible as possible. I quite like the top plan and side elevation. The bow view seems at first the most departure from the onscreen version because I've thickened up the pontoon like sections on the sides in order to get some visual heft and also make room for mechanicals: ballast tanks, antigrav drive and hydrojets for surface and submerged propulsion. Although not apparent here there is going to be quite a thick under-the-deck section as well for other mechanicals. I modified the main viewport as well to gain more cabin space. The access hatch will be set aft and in two parts similar to what I did with the scoutship. with the lower section serving as a a gangway. The upper section can also be opened separately for conducting experiments or deploying equipment while on the surface. There will be some external components in view to represent the antigrav drive, but don't expect nacelles like the onscreen version. Nacelles would just create unnecessary weight and drag in the water. No impulse engines either. I cannot imagine the idea of submerging warp and impulse drives and components---it just strikes me as too ridiculous. As such this vehicle is strictly an orbit-to-surface craft and needs to be ferried from planet to planet or star system to star system. It is, after all, primarily a research vehicle and not a space transport. The craft can accommodate four personnel and with sufficient space for gear and research equipment.
Although the bow elevation is set in overall shape and structure don't accept the detail presently seen as set---it's still a work in progress.
Why would it be called "Class M" and not "Class A"?
Class "M" sounds too much like "Class M planet ahead". Just saying.
I was loosely thinking along the lines of "marine auxiliary." I'm thinking that the term "aquashuttle" is more a common descriptive name used rather than an actual vehicle designation.
You could call it Class O, Class P or Class N.
What isn't apparent here but will be in cross-section is that the cabin takes up a bit more than the upper two thirds of the craft's height. The total interior space will be similar to that of the Class F shuttlecraft. Under the cabin (as I mentioned earlier) will be quite a bit of the craft's mechanicals and systems. I'm thinking small mini-probes could also be deployed from underneath. The bow will be similar to the lander in housing a lot of specialized sensor arrays. And the pontoons (as mentioned earlier) will house the antigrav drive, ballast tanks and hydrojet motors.
I've already started finessing the bow details. The centre section will feature a large illumination panel for subsurface operation when visibility starts to deteriorate.
Are you going to add phasers like the aquashuttle had in TAS?
I've been thinking about that. Traditionally shuttlecraft throughout Trek haven't been shown with armament with exception of the DS9 runabouts. And the aquashutle is pretty much solely a research vehicle...but we did see it with phasers. I think we could rationalize that shuttlecraft usually aren't armed, but that perhaps they can be fitted with phasers for specific missions or that some shuttlecraft are equipped with armament for specialized assignments where there may be a higher possibility of risk to the craft and personnel.
I would think the Class F shuttlecraft wouldn't be armed since they are strictly transports and science reconnaissance craft. The heavy lander is also a purely scientific research vehicle so I doubt there would much need for it to be armed. Of course both of these craft might utilize phasers for other reasons than defense or combat. I think the scoutship could be fitted with phasers because although it's primarily a fast transport it could also be used for limited covert missions and reconnaissance, situations where some defensive armament, even if limited, could be welcome. And since the aquashuttle is meant to go into unknown environments where something could conceivably threaten it then some weaponry could be useful.
The bigger question in my mind isn't whether the aquashuttle could be armed, but how are energy weapons supposed to work under water anyway???
Done. My originally planned interior gave me an unexpected surprise of a craft that would have been quite a bit smaller than I thought I would get. So after finishing the plans I opted to up the scale a bit that also gives me more interior space. and a 6ft. ceiling interior cabin. In place of the nacelles seen onscreen I've put antigrav housings on both sides which are smaller in profile and designed for less hydrodynamic drag. Indeed for less drag I've opted for more rounded off edges all around, most particularly in the bow area.
I've yet to start labeling the drawing for the sheets, but you should be able to recognize certain things. The band that goes across the top of the bow and down onto the sides is meat to be a set of environmental sensor arrays. On the top and bottom you can also see that craft's ballast valves. From the from you can see a large subsurface illumination panel behind which are a collection of powerful lamps to pierce failing visibility as the craft descends to greater depths. To each side of the illumination panel are the navigational as well as the space and planetary sensor arrays.Just under the illumination panel you can see a small panel which is where the (usually) recessed phaser emitter is located. From aft you can see the field directional controls similar to what I have on the scoutship. You can also clearly see the round exhaust ports of the twin hydrojet motors... DOH! I just realized I forgot to add the hydrojet intakes---gotta fix that. Underneath you can see the antigrav stabilizers as well as the lower ballast valves. And finally on the port side of the lower hull you can see the research package deploy hatch for releasing mission specific miniprobes.
Here is a sense of scale. The crewman is 5'-10".
On a side note, could someone, anyone, still on hobbytalk.com tell Griffworks to check his message folder over here? I'm seeing a lot of juicy discussions over there (including a cousin of this one) that I can't jump in on until he lifts that permaban.
Starting to put the set together and what the sheets will look like. While I'm doing this I'm thinking about how I want to tackle the vehicles' interiors.
Note that the drawing on the sheet and the accompanying scale bar are 5% smaller than the other sheets so that I can fit the drawing comfortably within the border.
Thanks for keeping it in line drawings with no shading.
I hope to do some other drawings, perhaps in perspective, that will have shading to give a different effect.
Separate names with a comma.