Starship Ajax VFX Blog

[CorporalCaptain]

Yeah I understand your reasoning Robert.

I'm no die-hard fan of ENT, but it's a shame that you have to "contradict canon" so blatantly, so to speak. That's why I was suggesting that you call your model the D6 on screen [even it it's really a SFB D5]. At least the FJ designs are canonized by the on screen references of plans in computer monitors, and by FJ registries being called out over subspace in TMP.

 

[Robert Simmons]

I hope that you'll be basing your Klingons off of Commander Kor's more samurai-like version and not TNG's drunken headbangers.

I personally subscribe to John Colicos instable and dangerous threat to everybody "take what we need" poor and huddled fighting / stealing just to live Mongolian Marauding Hoard / Barbary Coast Swashbuckler Pirate Version of the Klingons, and not the large stable Xenophobic Yamato Dynasty / Neanderthal Klingons of Phase II or the TMP or later Trek. All just like you saw them in their smooth head original TOS Trek John Colicos seedy treacherous evil "no honor amoung theives" glory....and not like the honorable structured and ordered society as depicted in later Trek.

Yeah I understand your reasoning Robert.

I'm no die-hard fan of ENT, but it's a shame that you have to "contradict canon" so blatantly, so to speak. That's why I was suggesting that you call your model the D6 on screen [even it it's really a SFB D5]. At least the FJ designs are canonized by the on screen references of plans in computer monitors, and by FJ registries being called out over subspace in TMP.

Let's just say that I have a less than favorable opinion of ENT due to their playing fast and loose with Canon. So if I contradict them I view it as a "non-sequitur" not worth bothering with. And besides...the SFB D5 has been around since 1982....almost 20 years before ENT even aired.

SPECIAL NOTE: Introduced in late 1982 in Expansion #3 of Star Fleet Battles of the 2nd edition of the rules....

page 18 reference...

184.3 KLINGON D5 LIGHT CRUISER
The Klingon Deep Space Fleet commissioned a special study in Y160 to determine if the D7 class could be made more efficient by the introduction of new technology, such as anti-drones. Of the variant proposals, one from the Kozenko Design Bureau ( known by their KDB-1104 ) was the most interesting and the most radical.
Smaller and easier to build than the D7, the KDB-1104 was ingenious in the manner of the changes made. Frontal armament was reduced by one phaser, but the heavier phaser-I's were used. The disruptor bolts were given a wider arc. The Urbitron Interface Module Was a standard feature. The "waist" Phaser -II's were declared superfluous ( as fas as the defensive purposes as originally envisioned ) and reduced to Phaser III's for drone defense only. A limited Aegis rig ( able to fire twice in one impulse ) was installed to control the anti-drones and Phaser III's. The anti-drones held 12 rounds each. The D5 can fire one drone from each rack each turn. As D6 and D7 class ships would remain in service for some time, the "Marine Landing Force" and most of the transporters were dispensed with. As a cost-saving move, the sensor-scanner suite was reduced, eliminating many of the redundant functions. While this meant loss of fire control after damage, study of prior engagements indicated that ships sustaining that amount of damage either disengaged, or were destroyed anyway. One shuttle box is equipped with ready racks for a Z-V fighter.
At the beginning of the General War, the Klingon High command ordered production of D6 and D7 types terminated to increase production of the new D5 type. Many shipyards were converted, but limited production of the D6 and D7 ships continued. After the first few months ( needed to change over the yards ) D5's were being produced in only 71% of the time needed to produce a D7.
Ships commissioned during the General War include Renegade ( class ship ) Raver, Reaver, Ravisher, Revenger, Reaper, Render, Ransacker, Rapier, Raven, Repudiator, Ravager, Ruiner, and Regulator among others. The Regulator was the ISF flagship.
D5's operated in squadrons of 3 ships. Normally one of these was a D5A, in which a SFG replaced the probe launcher ( BPV is 110 ).


So I view the conflict with ENT for adopting someone else's prior existing 20 year old Klingon ship class name. The "D5" you refer to in ENT would more qualify a Heavy Psuedo Fighter than a cruiser. Big difference.

 

[baxart]

I personally subscribe to John Colicos instable and dangerous threat to everybody "take what we need" poor and huddled fighting / stealing just to live Mongolian Marauding Hoard / Barbary Coast Swashbuckler Pirate Version of the Klingons, and not the large stable Xenophobic Yamato Dynasty / Neanderthal Klingons of Phase II or the TMP or later Trek. All just like you saw them in their smooth head original TOS Trek John Colicos seedy treacherous evil "no honor amoung theives" glory....and not like the honorable structured and ordered society as depicted in later Trek.

Sounds good. Although I was more thinking Tokogowa era samurai; brutal but ordered, with a rigid class structure. We don't have to understand what a Klingon would consider 'honorable,' and since Starfleet officers have no honor anyway...
And so far, New Voyages/Phase II's Kargh, was still towing the TOS line, although we haven't seen Kitumba yet.

On effects: Will you be going with Exeter's "trying to recreate 60's effects" or Kawley's "best we can give you" approach? I ask since I've seen both in the blog.
In looking at the ships again, I would recommend testing a little more hull texture. Perhaps just the suggestion of an aztec pattern. A smooth hull looked fine in lowD, but we've got HD now, and a little more eye candy might be a good idea. Now I'm not saying go as far as the movies... but the test Ajax with the extra markings does look pretty good.

 

[Robert Simmons]

The effects will be done in 1968 Desilu / Anderson TOS Effects. Henry Gibben's 1960's Ajax orbit test is virtually exactly what our effects will look like and is precisely what I want. Henry delivered above in what I wanted in what I asked for, and I am delighted in what he presented.

THe detail of the Ajax is pretty much locked in. I have no desire to change it and it is a exact reflection as I have directed Henry to build it.

I HATE AZTECING WITH A FLAMING VENGEANCE......not on the 11 foot model...nor will it be on the Ajax. I have no appetite or stomach for revisionism....which I view as royally disrespectful to the original material...and jerking others around wanting to see more faithful TOS like stuff. If I wanted aztecing...we would be doing a later era production. We have no desire to either. We are planning on a faithful indistinguishable addendum to TOS, aside from the fact that Ajax is FJ non-canon which I seek to minimalize so as to not stick out like a sore thumb. And if I want it to reflect that I have to strictly observe boundries that well so as to not blur or confuse as to what form of Trek it is subscribe ( TOS ) to, and how it is being presented as such.

As to my comments of Phase II..they were not in reference to NV/Cawley's presentation but to the draft scripts done by John Meredith Lucas where he was fumbling hard trying to get a grasp in redefining their society. ( A task I sympathize with him on due to the shift in presentation of the Klingons in Phase II is a reflection of Gene's shift in views ideologically trying to shift the Klingon Empire from one of lawlessness and pure treachury and evil...to one of moral equivalence that is just misunderstood and Xenophobic....and Lucas was I think doing what he was directed to do blind with little guidance since to feel out and redefine what little we saw of the Klingons in TOS. That is why I think this being unresolved at that time led to the TMP presentation of the Klingons a more neanderthal fearful brutes...which left the door open for future development of defining their society later. Kicking the can down the road to be dealt with later if you will...) The more he tried to flush it out...the more to me it blatantly and obviously fell apart. Had it not I am confident that Kitumba would have been the movie material for TMP instead of "The God Thing." A John Colicos KLingon Empire would have killed a Kitumba on sight since their leadership is defined by the king of the hill victor, and not a royal line. ( especially if the Kitumba is a child which would be a severe insult to a John Colicos Klingon which is a society of "every man for himself warrior" and anything goes not to be sublimated to anyone...especially a nieve helpless child.... ) The Klingon Empire of Kitumba have a honor and dignity about them that is wholesale absent in the TOS Colicos Klingons. The two are diametrically opposed to each other and would behave differently as societies within that story. The Klingon Empire that emerged in later Trek as early as Trek 4 is and in TNG and later is a middle ground compromise of some structure and value system in place, but not enough to defang them as the threat to the Federation as a reasonable society to be reasoned with to be stable. ( or at least...barely...)

Needn't worry...the Ajax Klingons won't be like the ones you mentioned out of concern...so your expectations on how we intend to present them I think are safe. We may show them drinking like in the K7 lounge. But they will not be presented as akin to a drunken bikers/ truckers bar like stereotypically seen in the movies and in TNG.

 

[baxart]

I would cast the biggest, linebacker types as Klingons, and do my level best not to let the cast see them until they're walking on set, in character, so you can get honest, gut reactions.

 

[Ensign Ro-]

You've done an incredible job of capturing the original TOS feel in both your models and your test footage. Really incredible work. Nicely done. :-)

 

[Wingsley]

Looking back on TOS, I saw the Klingons as anti-Vulcans even more than the Romulans. The TOS Klingon mentality was a kind of cold-blooded cynical logic, whereas the Klingons of TMP thru the Berman years reminded me more of a caricature of General Urko from the 1970's PLANET OF THE APES series. I can see what Robert Simmons is saying. There was concept erosion there.

 

[Robert Simmons]

Henry,
You sent me a while back a index that Bill made of all the TOS special effects shots. Can you resend me the link please. I accidentally deleted the email with them when i cleaned out my mailbox. I am ready to begin assigning shots to be done for building our stock footage library. Hopefully Bill will be able to do them as well so as to not have you carry the entire load. If you have anyone else you feel is up to the task invite them on board as well to make your work load lighter. I know I am behind in getting around to doing this.

Also Bill..how is the modeling on the other ships I requested going? You are free to post the publically now since all this is pretty much out into the open public eye.

As well good work on the D5. I may want experiment with the angle the engines inward a bit more if you are open to it.

Much Thanks....
.
.
.

 

[JES]

I've always thought that the Klingons from around the TNG-era were more akin to maybe Vikings... Yeah, Space Vikings.

 

[Robert Simmons]

The guys got to work at the hangar Saturday. I stayed home and gave the shoulder a rest. I requested John get some pics to post. Andy Wood is wanting to go to the hangar Tuesday night with family after I get off work, and I plan on resuming work on the viewscreen and adjacent walls. Pics taken that night and posted as well.

Also gearing up to have Henry Gibbens and Bill Thomas begin building the stock special effects shots in advance.
.
.
.

 

[Robert Simmons]

First round of stock effects shot assignments just got sent out. - RS.
.
.
.

 

[Robert Simmons]

John...you know..the more I look at this the more it appears to better fit the F5 frigate in SFB. It's shape is virtually identical to the F5. Except "bird -of-prey-ified."

http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/D5_class
.
.
.

 

[monodox]

A long overdue update on the Ajax VFX blog:

http://ajaxvfx.blogspot.com/2011/10/and-we-are-back.html

 

[Kaiser]

Looks nice

 

[Captain Atkin]

I know I'm going to get beat up for this... lol... but I really hate the look of the dish on the saucer section. I'm not sure why the original artist did it that way. It looks like it would break off in warp, and stands out like an easy target. Visually, I just find it hard to look at from certain angles (especially from the front) because it eclipses the cap on the warp nacelle. Compare it to the Enterprise, where it was easy to focus on every angle, and it looks off. I don't know if a dish could be placed on the cap of a warp nacelle or not, but I have always felt that would look better.

The only thing that would make sense to me with the design, would be if the reflector dish were retractible.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The reality is that if phasers ever struck the deflector dish on the TOS Enterprise while its shields were down, it would (IMO) lose its ability to go to warp until the dish was repaired and likely replaced. FJ destroyers/scouts are not really more vulnerable than this.

 

[Captain Atkin]

The reality is that if phasers ever struck the deflector dish on the TOS Enterprise while its shields were down, it would (IMO) lose its ability to go to warp until the dish was repaired and likely replaced. FJ destroyers/scouts are not really more vulnerable than this.

I just find that, visually, it looks kind of weak. I also find it a bit hard to look at from certain angles (the 'eclipse effect' makes me feel like I am going cross-eyed when I look at it from the front... lol...)

I always wondered looking at the design if the deflector was retractable. I did up a quick diagram to show what I mean:

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Warp is one of those times when the dish should not be retracted.

From http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Navigational_deflector:

The navigational deflector (also called the deflector dish, the deflector array or the nav deflector) is a component of many starships, and is used to deflect space debris, asteroids, microscopic particles and other objects that might collide with the ship. At warp speed the deflector is virtually indispensable for most starships as even the most minute particle can cause serious damage to a ship when it is traveling at superluminal velocities.

 

[Captain Atkin]

Warp is one of those times when the dish should not be retracted.

From http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Navigational_deflector:

The navigational deflector (also called the deflector dish, the deflector array or the nav deflector) is a component of many starships, and is used to deflect space debris, asteroids, microscopic particles and other objects that might collide with the ship. At warp speed the deflector is virtually indispensable for most starships as even the most minute particle can cause serious damage to a ship when it is traveling at superluminal velocities.

Technically, the dish itself is not retracted in the diagram I posted; only the pole it is on. The dish is just aiming down now. I don't know if that would make a difference or not, but if it is creating a bubble around the ship, I don't see why it would make a difference.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Retracted, partially retracted, whatever.