Is this reasonable? I'm just going mostly by the published exterior views posted at EAS. One shows the warp-core ejection port, and some others show the impulse engines.
Saber class
- Thread starter Bill Morris
- Start date
All right, I did that in a rush. I'll redo the torp launchers.
It's okay. They looked goofy. And I moved that impulse engine up, too. Anything else?
We haven't really seen the torp launchers in action, so their locations are rather speculative.
There doesn't seem to be an obvious opening for the bow one in the CGI model on that location, but it's still as good a place as any, because it's nicely below the "beak" that could indeed hide such features. However, I'd perhaps split the aft tube in two and place the tubes much lower on the transom, because the stern has a double feature there that could be used.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/stmagazine/saber-side-front-rear.gif
It would be a somewhat snug fit with the core - but then again, such snug fit is for some reason treknologically advantageous on the Constitution refit at least...
Timo Saloniemi
There doesn't seem to be an obvious opening for the bow one in the CGI model on that location, but it's still as good a place as any, because it's nicely below the "beak" that could indeed hide such features. However, I'd perhaps split the aft tube in two and place the tubes much lower on the transom, because the stern has a double feature there that could be used.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/stmagazine/saber-side-front-rear.gif
It would be a somewhat snug fit with the core - but then again, such snug fit is for some reason treknologically advantageous on the Constitution refit at least...
Timo Saloniemi
Well, Timo, those ports near the warp core I would think rule out a pair of torp launchers, being so close together and so close to the established position of the warp core. They could be for emergency antimatter ejection, though.
But moving the forward launcher below or next to the deflector may not be a bad idea, even though there sre no exterior clues to support that. I'm certainly not thrilled about where I have it now.
What do you think? Below the deflector? To the side, as seen on the Intrepid class?
But moving the forward launcher below or next to the deflector may not be a bad idea, even though there sre no exterior clues to support that. I'm certainly not thrilled about where I have it now.
What do you think? Below the deflector? To the side, as seen on the Intrepid class?
I actually quite like the current location... Perhaps one deck down, right in between the two shuttlebays, would be my first choice, but that's difficult to portray in MSD format.
Whether this thing even has an aft launcher is debatable. The Saber is among the smallest starships out there, and it might do justice to her dramatic purpose to reflect her small stature with a reduced amount or variety of onboard equipment, too. One might drive home the small size by using a somewhat larger forward torpedo launcher...
Timo Saloniemi
Whether this thing even has an aft launcher is debatable. The Saber is among the smallest starships out there, and it might do justice to her dramatic purpose to reflect her small stature with a reduced amount or variety of onboard equipment, too. One might drive home the small size by using a somewhat larger forward torpedo launcher...
Timo Saloniemi
Sounds like it's okay as it is, all done.
LCARS 24, I know you said you're all done with the Saber..., but maybe it is possible to put the nacelle down below and aft, apart from the ship, like your MSD of the Intrepid-class. Or with any MSD with a ship class whose structure has the nacelle integrated with the primary hull (Steamrunner), or any MSD where the nacelle's natural position would interfere with seeing what is in that section of the ship blocked by the nacelle (lower decks of the Luna).
Sure, but you know what the hidden part looks like from what is shown, and this clarifies its postion on the ship. This is really just an overall information display.
...One wonders, though, just what information is being shown. If the display is supposed to tell the user how the warp engine is faring, then it would probably be essential to see all the coils at one glance, not obscured by other graphics.
Of course, we basically never see any meaningful information displayed on the MSD, except in brief picture-in-picture insets in some first-season TNG episodes. Perhaps on the rare occasion that the MSD really has something worth showing, a PIP always emerges, or the nacelle pops to the foreground, or something like that. If so, it would actually be advantageous that the default mode of the MSD hides all the crucial features, so that their sudden emergence would be all the more noticeable!
Timo Saloniemi
Of course, we basically never see any meaningful information displayed on the MSD, except in brief picture-in-picture insets in some first-season TNG episodes. Perhaps on the rare occasion that the MSD really has something worth showing, a PIP always emerges, or the nacelle pops to the foreground, or something like that. If so, it would actually be advantageous that the default mode of the MSD hides all the crucial features, so that their sudden emergence would be all the more noticeable!
Timo Saloniemi
Yes, but these are not MSDs. They are just pages in the LCARS 24 libary, to give users a very general overview of each vessel, etc. covered.
If I were making an LCARS system for a real spacecraft, it would have only MSDs of the vessel using that sytem. And they would change dynamically according to the status of each and every system and component displayed in as much detail as the vessel's own diagnostic sensors could provide.
In that kind of scenario, having a nacelle displayed like that on the Voyager MSD would be more appropriate, to show the status of each coil, etc. and because those trained crew members don't have to be shown its position in relation to the main hull. And it would be wise to show both nacelles.
If I were making an LCARS system for a real spacecraft, it would have only MSDs of the vessel using that sytem. And they would change dynamically according to the status of each and every system and component displayed in as much detail as the vessel's own diagnostic sensors could provide.
In that kind of scenario, having a nacelle displayed like that on the Voyager MSD would be more appropriate, to show the status of each coil, etc. and because those trained crew members don't have to be shown its position in relation to the main hull. And it would be wise to show both nacelles.
