Some Stuff I've Been Working on...

[Atolm]

Aye but you guys all forget that the main navigational deflector would technically hinder bussard effectiveness...
Bussards, if you wanted to be used properly, should be at the front of the ship. The problem is that's were you would also want the deflector ideally...
That's why at warp(where the deflector is the most useful) the bussards are probably playing "catch-up", rather than acting as actual ramscoops. as the particles that are getting passed the deflector will then be caught by the bussards(because the would be actually pulling more hydrogen from the wayside than the front).

In trek there are also a lot of inconsistencies and other hinders, such as the saucers themselves. It could be the reason why (technically) the defiant, Curry, NX, Ent-J, and very similar designs are probably the most efficient at compromising for Starfleet ships...

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I think the front end should be a classic saucer - this design does not give a clear line of sight to the ram-scoops.

Who says Roddenberry's Rules are canon (have appeared onscreen)?

Well, I say that this rule HAS appeared on screen.

Screencap or transcript.

 

[YARN]

Aye but you guys all forget that the main navigational deflector would technically hinder bussard effectiveness...
Bussards, if you wanted to be used properly, should be at the front of the ship. The problem is that's were you would also want the deflector ideally...
That's why at warp(where the deflector is the most useful) the bussards are probably playing "catch-up", rather than acting as actual ramscoops. as the particles that are getting passed the deflector will then be caught by the bussards(because the would be actually pulling more hydrogen from the wayside than the front).

In trek there are also a lot of inconsistencies and other hinders, such as the saucers themselves. It could be the reason why (technically) the defiant, Curry, NX, Ent-J, and very similar designs are probably the most efficient at compromising for Starfleet ships...

Why would a starship need to be streamlined? Why the prevalence of saucer shapes?

It's just the "look" of a starfleet ship.

In the Trek universe there must be some "good" reason why the Bussard's a clear line of sight to the front or it would not be a design feature. Those long gangly struts that push those orange caps above the primary hull have an implied purpose. Even as the struts have gotten smaller the clear view of the Bussards on the front orthogonal of Federation ships bespeaks a necessity (albeit a fictional one).

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

The domes being the particle collectors are a fanon retcon of the 80s/90s anyways.

I suspect they were originally intended to convey the energies involved in a warp engines, what with the spinning and the flashing, with some other detail on the nacelles or the hull serving that purpose.

 

[erifah]

When I draw spaceships for my own enjoyment and for my own "universe", I never worry about Bussard collectors or command bridge domes on the tops of saucers.

That's exactly why I enjoy dabbling with Star Trek stuff - half the fun is seeing if I can comply with the "rules" (and stretching them almost to their breaking point) whilst coming up with something cool - and having a good time doing it.

That said, I don't see why having a saucer rim in front of a Bussard is a big deal. This isn't a smartass question: is it a "ramscoop" or is it a "collector"? Seems to me that a "collector" could just pick up ambient atoms from the general all-around vicinity, without needing to have the area directly in front of it in the clear.

On the OTHER hand, I DO see where the area behind the business end of an impulse drive should be clear. (*cough-cough-John-Eaves-Enterprise-B-cough-cough*)

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

On the OTHER hand, I DO see where the area behind the business end of an impulse drive should be clear. (*cough-cough-John-Eaves-Enterprise-B-cough-cough*)

Where else are the crew supposed to dry their hair after a shower?

 

[YARN]

The domes being the particle collectors are a fanon retcon of the 80s/90s anyways.

I suspect they were originally intended to convey the energies involved in a warp engines, what with the spinning and the flashing, with some other detail on the nacelles or the hull serving that purpose.

Again, it does not matter if there is a "real-world" reason behind it or fannon or a TNG retcon. What matters is that it is a common design feature that bespeaks functional purpose in that universe. There is a clearly discernible implicit rule (i.e., on the front view the nacelles have a clear line of sight) evidence in the TV shows and films.

You want the visual proof? Fine. Find me Starfleet Starship that does not conform to this implicit rule.

 

[Avon]

you cant see the voyager nacelles from the front when at warp.

 

[sojourner]

^Yep, Voyager not only obstructs the bussards, it actually moves them from unobstructed to obstructed to go to warp.

 

[YARN]

^Yep, Voyager not only obstructs the bussards, it actually moves them from unobstructed to obstructed to go to warp.

No kidding?

Pics or caps?

It appears to just barely clear from the orthos

 

[sojourner]

This is the only set of orthos I could find that shows them in the up position. Feel free to find your own screencaps.
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/uss-voyager-ncc-74656.php

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Sternbach, time to answer for your heinous crime.

 

[YARN]

This is the only set of orthos I could find that shows them in the up position. Feel free to find your own screencaps.
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/uss-voyager-ncc-74656.php

LOL, the exception that proves the rule. Here we only have one example (a ship design which does not get much love anyhow) of an apparent exception to the rule.

And, it is interesting to note that Voyager's connecting struts move up and down. But why? The only thing we can say is that it is implied that in Trek universe this mechanical "wing flapping" must serve some functional purpose. And when those wings are down, the nacelles have a clear line of sight on the front. If the nacelles did not need to be lower (thus giving a clear sight line to the front) in this mode, then why wouldn't the wings simply be fixed in the warp position? This is not, therefore, really an exception to the rule, but a half-exception. Half of the time, Voyager has a clear sight line for those nacelles (and we have already discarded the ram-scoop-at-warp idea on the grounds that it is a mere fannon retcon from the 80's).

Voyager was an experimental high speed cruiser - she was not meant to be a typical design. The most typical, most traditional, and most predictable condition is to find at least partial front clearance for the warp nacelles.

At any rate, I am simply arguing for an aesthetic preference on the grounds that it is a very typical feature of starship design. This is an expectation that I would prefer almost any starship design to satisfy. Ergo, I (personally) would prefer to see a saucer that would give those glowing orange bits at least a partial clear line of sight to the front.

 

[Avon]

the spoon-shape saucer creates 'subspace meta-downforce' at warpspeed that sweeps the 'whatever-particles' down the back to the nacelles. or something.

also i like the voyager design.

 

[erifah]

It's just a TV show and some movies! Ack!

There IS no science that dictates the placement of saucers and Bussards! The only reason why you SHOULD keep 'em clear of the saucer, is that it is traditional in Star Trek. It is a "rule of the game." it's FUN and CHALLENGING to follow a game's rules and try to win.

It's also fun to mix things up and change the rules from time to time.

How about this: what would Star Trek starships look like TODAY, if the designer of the 1970's Battlestar Galactica had gotten a job working for Gene Roddenberry in the 1960s, instead of Matt Jefferies? (keep in mind that he would not yet have seen the Star Wars kit-bashing greeblies.)

Now, get to work drawing!

 

[backstept]

there IS a science to it!!!!
lookcoolology!

 

[Sean_McCormick]

[...]
How about this: what would Star Trek starships look like TODAY, if the designer of the 1970's Battlestar Galactica had gotten a job working for Gene Roddenberry in the 1960s, instead of Matt Jefferies? (keep in mind that he would not yet have seen the Star Wars kit-bashing greeblies.)

Now, get to work drawing!

You do know, that the original BSG was designed by Ralph McQuarrie, who did design an Enterprise for the Planet of the Titans project, that preceeded Phase 2?

 

[erifah]

[...]
How about this: what would Star Trek starships look like TODAY, if the designer of the 1970's Battlestar Galactica had gotten a job working for Gene Roddenberry in the 1960s, instead of Matt Jefferies? (keep in mind that he would not yet have seen the Star Wars kit-bashing greeblies.)

Now, get to work drawing!

You do know, that the original BSG was designed by Ralph McQuarrie, who did design an Enterprise for the Planet of the Titans project, that preceeded Phase 2?

Indeed I do! Just IMAGINE what he might have come up with in the 1960s for Star Trek, with a totally clean slate, right as Roddenberry was wanting to get away from the typical flying saucers and cigar-shaped rocket ships!

 

[erifah]

Or how about this! What if Andy Probert had been the ORIGINAL designer in the 1960s?

 

[Atolm]

well, anyway, something different again...
Federation Aker-Class: