Refit Dreadnought.... Question?

[Wingsley]

Turning that whole thing around, has anyone ever drawn a super-heavy Federation starship equipped with only the more widely used two nacelles, but those two engines being larger? (In other words, one possible example might be a ship like the Federation class, but with only two super-sized nacelles) Wasn't there a variant of the TOS-style nacelles drawn in fanon that simply took the nacelles of the Constitution-class and made them longer? I have to admit I perfer the symmetry of two-nacelle designs.

Maybe another approach to this is to question what the term "dreadnought" means in the context of a Federation starship anyway. Fanon designs have been conjuring up progressively bigger and more heavily equipped super-sized battleships dating back to the 1970's, and then DEEP SPACE NINE came along and the deadliest Federation warship ever made turned out to be that dinky little Defiant.

Don't get me wrong, though. If you want to look at uber-heavy battlewagon designs, Vance's "Couer De Leon" is probably the most elaborate.

 

[Griffworks]

Wingsley said:
Turning that whole thing around, has anyone ever drawn a super-heavy Federation starship equipped with only the more widely used two nacelles, but those two engines being larger? (In other words, one possible example might be a ship like the Federation class, but with only two super-sized nacelles) Wasn't there a variant of the TOS-style nacelles drawn in fanon that simply took the nacelles of the Constitution-class and made them longer? I have to admit I perfer the symmetry of two-nacelle designs.

Maybe another approach to this is to question what the term "dreadnought" means in the context of a Federation starship anyway. Fanon designs have been conjuring up progressively bigger and more heavily equipped super-sized battleships dating back to the 1970's, and then DEEP SPACE NINE came along and the deadliest Federation warship ever made turned out to be that dinky little Defiant.

Don't get me wrong, though. If you want to look at uber-heavy battlewagon designs, Vance's "Couer De Leon" is probably the most elaborate.

I have to admit to not being 100% certain about "Vance's "Couer De Leon"" being different than what I'm thinking, but if it's a CGI model of a four nacelled Miranda-esque variant, than that would actually be Forbin's most excellent battleship U.S.S. Coeur de Lion, named for Richard the Lion Hearted. Now, that would make for a most interesting model in 1/350 scale!

 

[KirkTrekModeler]

I'd have to say I'm leaning toward the Starleague version vaderman, I know it's your baby, but I could knock out that engineering section in no time.

I'll get you some screencaps of the one from the guys at SpacestationK7. I would probably have to build up the saucer a bit too.

vaderman1701 said:

137th Gebirg said:
There were several refits - even variations on the original FJ design as it initially appeared in the Technical Manual. Here's the chronology:

Federation Class Dreadnaught "Proposed" - Initial FJ Design (for comparison)
Federation Class Dreadnaught "Production" - Modified FJ Design (with rotated tertiary nacelle 90 degrees for warp field symmetry and continuity)
Federation Class Dreadnaught Upgrade "Proposed" (Starstation Aurora)
Federation Class Dreadnaught Upgrade "Production" (someone thought the engine pylons were too low on the first version, so they raised them and made them horizontally linked across the top of the secondary hull - a sensible mod, IMHO)
Star League Class Dreadnaught (Jackill's version - more true to the FJ original with the forward-facing shuttlebay)

And the short answer - aside from the fact that (IIRC) one FJ-named dreadnaught was mentioned in comm traffic out of Epsilon 9 in ST:TMP, all these designs are largely considered non-canon.

These are exactly what I was looking for. I think for now, I will work with the Starstation Aurora version, but I wouldlove to kitbash a Star League version and possible kit it.

Scott

:thumbsup:

 

[aridas sofia]

Wingsley said:
Turning that whole thing around, has anyone ever drawn a super-heavy Federation starship equipped with only the more widely used two nacelles, but those two engines being larger?

Not with uber-nacelles (though that was a variant, never pictured but it was discussed). A TMP-era blend of my Ariel carrier's saucer with the frigate layout, creating an alternate-architecture dreadnought.

Kirov, from my Starship Recognition Chart. I don't know who did this illustration of the ship, but it is very close to the pencils I used to create the silhouette on that chart. I've altered it a little to make it even closer:

 

[Relayer]

Forbin said:
For my money, a refit DN would have to have the same features as the FJ DN - larger primary and secondary hulls, and foreward-mounted shuttlebay. Note that the FJ DN's primary hull has no undercut, and a "dome" shape that is equal top and bottom. To be true to the concept, one would have to create whole new parts from scratch!

I'm in total agreement. It's a refit of the TOS dreadnought not a refit of the TMP Enterprise. I'd probably get imaginative on the rear sensor array. Since an active deflector dish mounted on the rear seems unnecessary.

 

[aridas sofia]

At the time, the dish was the sensor array. It was labeled such in Jefferies' TMoST illustrations. In TMoST the deflectors are described as being activated by the sensors, and that is where the connection between that dish and a deflector probably came from.

FJ must have though so, because he labeled the dish "main sensor and navigational deflector". The question is, what part is the sensor and what part is the deflector?

The dreadnought had fore and aft dishes, but not the ring structures behind the dishes. Why? It is arguable that the rings were the deflector part, and that since they faced aft, the other sensor array didn't need them. This would fit with the fact that in TMP the dish is gone and yet the deflector remains.

If this is the case, the dreadnought has fore and aft sensors, but navigational deflectors that sweep forward.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Forbin said:
Thabnks for the plug, Jeff.

Me, I never understood the Ascension class - why make a DN with a secondary hull that's SMALLER than a Conny's? Don't make no sense.

Well, I always took it that the Ascension secondary hull was nothing but engine space and a hangar with a pair of shuttles... no cargo, no living space, no botanical stuff, none of that stuff. Just a pair of engine cores, cooling hardware, controllers, etc... but nothing else.

Basically, the Ascension would be the "stay close to base" version of the Command ship and the Federation(r) would be the "distant deployment" version.

Both are equivalent in combat and C&C capability, but one has longer range and can serve in a few "multi-purpose" roles (due to the cargo space) and one is a bit faster (due to reduced mass).

That's the way I've always seen it at least.

 

[aridas sofia]

Basically, the Ascension would be the "stay close to base" version of the Command ship and the Federation(r) would be the "distant deployment" version.

That was my impression as well, though I can't say with certainty whether I got that from the "horse's mouth" or not.

 

[Forbin]

aridas sofia said:.

The dreadnought had fore and aft dishes, but not the ring structures behind the dishes.

Can you say that for sure, based only on the ortho 3-view in the TM? Tom Sasser interpreted them as existing, and his resin model has shallow rings under the aft dish:
http://www.inpayne.com/models/dominion2.html

 

[aridas sofia]

You raise an interesting point, because in the TM he calls the larger forward-facing dish the main sensor, and the smaller flanking dishes the deflectors. I got the impression the rings weren't there because the extensive housing that is around them on the heavy cruiser is not apparent, and the deflector function is being handled by those smaller dishes (which clearly weren't on the aft of the hull).

 

[Griffworks]

Cary L. Brown said:

Forbin said:
Thabnks for the plug, Jeff.

Me, I never understood the Ascension class - why make a DN with a secondary hull that's SMALLER than a Conny's? Don't make no sense.

Well, I always took it that the Ascension secondary hull was nothing but engine space and a hangar with a pair of shuttles... no cargo, no living space, no botanical stuff, none of that stuff. Just a pair of engine cores, cooling hardware, controllers, etc... but nothing else.

Basically, the Ascension would be the "stay close to base" version of the Command ship and the Federation(r) would be the "distant deployment" version.

Both are equivalent in combat and C&C capability, but one has longer range and can serve in a few "multi-purpose" roles (due to the cargo space) and one is a bit faster (due to reduced mass).

That's the way I've always seen it at least.

Not to jump on the bandwagon or anything, but that's how I figured it for the Ascension, as well. I was basing that thinking more off of the Strike Cruiser role for the Belknap-class, however. Less flexibility for both of those classes of ship than the refit Constitution- or Avenger/Miranda-class vessels. Minor cargo capacity in the secondary hull, room to stow two shuttlecraft at the most, as well as perhaps have one or two on-deck and ready for short notice deployment.

 

[Griffworks]

aridas sofia said:
You raise an interesting point, because in the TM he calls the larger forward-facing dish the main sensor, and the smaller flanking dishes the deflectors. I got the impression the rings weren't there because the extensive housing that is around them on the heavy cruiser is not apparent, and the deflector function is being handled by those smaller dishes (which clearly weren't on the aft of the hull).

Perhaps those were added to the primary deflector behind the dish due to the size of the Federation-classes hull silhouette? And then technology advanced beyond the need, perhaps? I dunno, just reachin', but enjoyin' the Trek Tech angle it's taken.

Regardless, I always thought that the need for the "sensor dish" was a bit too "retro", even in the early 1970's watching Trek in syndication. In fact, my first 18" 1701 model got the dish knocked off of it and I left it off, thinking it looked better with out it being there.

 

[SonicRanger]

This is the dreadnought to me:

http://www.well.com/~sjroby/lcars/images/TOS/dread1.jpg

 

[Relayer]

I didn't state myself too clearly. The active (as in glowey) deflector assembly from the TMP Connie probably shouldn't be put onto the rear of the 2ndary hull to replace the rear "sensor dish" on the TOS Dreadnought. Some imagination would need to be used for the rear sensor array, IMO.
From what you are suggesting though that the 2 small dishes on the TOS Dreadnought are the deflectors and the large dish is the main forward sensor we'd need to be imaginative at both ends.
Do you think that maybe the lit ring set back and around the outside of the TMP deflector might possibly be the forward sensor array? If so I have a mental picture of how a Dreadnought with the forward shuttle bay might look.

 

[Wingsley]

I never saw the logic of FJ taking the basic Constitution-class starship design, fattening it up, and then moving the hangar bay from the rear of the secondary hull to the front in the Federation class. Looks like an invitation to crash shuttles.

FWIW, the content of TOS always seemed to suggest to me that Kirk's Enterprise *was* a "dreadnought", only they called it a starcruiser.

 

[aridas sofia]

Yes. FWIW I never liked the idea of dreadnoughts, or three-nacelled designs. That might seem like blasphemy, but it explains why most of the DN designs came from Guenther and why I, when pressed to come up with one, just drew a scaled-up heavy frigate as something that seemed to make the most sense.

Interestingly, I was the fan of the one-nacelled designs, which Todd abhorred. Go figure.

 

[137th Gebirg]

aridas sofia said:

Wingsley said:
Turning that whole thing around, has anyone ever drawn a super-heavy Federation starship equipped with only the more widely used two nacelles, but those two engines being larger?

Not with uber-nacelles (though that was a variant, never pictured but it was discussed). A TMP-era blend of my Ariel carrier's saucer with the frigate layout, creating an alternate-architecture dreadnought.

Kirov, from my Starship Recognition Chart. I don't know who did this illustration of the ship, but it is very close to the pencils I used to create the silhouette on that chart. I've altered it a little to make it even closer:

That would be me, Aridas - did it for the SSDB. I always thought it was a cool design. I hope I did it justice.

 

[aridas sofia]

You did a fine job. Thank you. I hope you don't mind me messing with your illustration? I had to get rid of that third nacelle and do a few other little tweaks.

 

[Captain Robert April]

SonicRanger said:
This is the dreadnought to me:

http://www.well.com/~sjroby/lcars/images/TOS/dread1.jpg

 

[KirkTrekModeler]

I don't think we'll be using that design.