TAS made real....

[Warped9]

The more I look at this design the more I feel it fits quite well within TOS. It has a more utilitarian look to it while stil fitting within TOS' Starfleet design language. By chance or by intent the TAS illustrator did quite well with this. I think the Huron freighter works as well.

The trick, I think, is to make it look somewhat less cartoony (in how it was drawn) and adding the right detail and colours to fit within the TOS aesthetic while not copying TOS designs verbatim. For example the warp nacelles. The nacelles of the Class F shuttlecraft are similar in pronciple to the Enterprise, but they differ distinctly in detail. Other Starfleet and Federation space warp nacelles should also differ otherwise it just looks like a direct kitbash.

 

[Warped9]

Some added detail. Added the nav deflector--and odd how in some drawings the deflector is missing). Added more detail to the nacelles. And finally added an impulse drive tucked in unobtrusively under the aft structure.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

I always liked this fugly little workhorse ever since I espied it on my favorite Saturday morning TV show over forty years ago. (Jeez I'm old AF.) Looking good!!

 

[Henoch]

Envisioning other purposes for the ship, the large "windows" on the square hull structure suggests the vessel can be (is) configured for personnel transport as well as cargo freighter. Possible passenger accommodations and recreation lounges could be around the outer rim of the square to take advantage on the picture windows. This ship-type could also be the AstraI Queen from TCOTK.

Or, those are not windows but cargo hatches, then, never mind.

 

[Warped9]

It’s not really clear if they’re windows or hatches. It’s not clear what the scale is either. The nacelles are not exactly the same as the Enterprise and I suspect it’s a smaller ship overall.

I will say I think this is a more faithful reproduction of the ship than what they did in TOS-R. They made quite a few changes to that one, making it narrower and a lot of other detail changes.

In TOS-R I think the Huron style ship would have made more sense as the Antares in “Charlie X,” but then I ignore TOS-R anyway.

In “The Ultimate Compute” it’s referenced the Woden was an old freighter converted to automation therefore this class of vessel has not only been around for awhile, but also can be crewed.

So this and/or the Huron design could have been seen as the Antares, the Astral Queen, the Beagle and the Dierdre.

These two TAS designs are much more credible then the shuttlecraft we saw.

 

[BK613]

@Warped9 Nice interpretation of the robot ship. We do know its scale though, by one of the disabled ships being nestled up between the Enterprise's nacelles:

http://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/105-BR/moretribblesmoretroubleshd0248.jpg
http://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/105-BR/moretribblesmoretroubleshd0249.jpg

 

[Warped9]

@Warped9 Nice interpretation of the robot ship. We do know its scale though, by one of the disabled ships being nestled up between the Enterprise's nacelles:

http://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/105-BR/moretribblesmoretroubleshd0248.jpg
http://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/105-BR/moretribblesmoretroubleshd0249.jpg

Cool! I had forgotten about that.

 

[Henoch]

@Warped9 Nice interpretation of the robot ship. We do know its scale though, by one of the disabled ships being nestled up between the Enterprise's nacelles:

http://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/105-BR/moretribblesmoretroubleshd0248.jpg
http://tas.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/blu-ray/105-BR/moretribblesmoretroubleshd0249.jpg

Not quite "between", rather fully behind the Enterprise since the hangar area is also in front of the cargo ship.

 

[Atolm]

beautiful work on this bro! Oh and forgive my error on the other smaller vessel...I confused it as Mudd's vessel.

 

[BK613]

Not quite "between", rather fully behind the Enterprise since the hangar area is also in front of the cargo ship.

nah, it's butt-up against the fantail, with a force-field/tractor beam umbilical providing access.
YMMV.

 

[Warped9]

nah, it's butt-up against the fantail, with a force-field/tractor beam umbilical providing access.
YMMV.

It’s shameful what they let kids see on television these days. The world is going to hell.

 

[Henoch]

This looks better (on so many levels):

 

[Warped9]

I am hard pressed to know what additional detailing I might add. Part of me wonders about adding more convincing detail and part of me leans to staying more true to what the TOS production crew might have actually done for something that would have ben onscreen only briefly.

Two things do come to mind in terms of wanting something under ideal conditions. What we see onscreem shows us the ship's registry only on the nacelles, but like we see on the Enterprise and Galileo there are registry markings on multiple sides. So I like the idea of adding the registry to a couple of other places to make the ship seem more complete and in line with what we saw on TOS. The other issue is running lights--a ship of this size would ideally have running lights even if a miniature used only once or twice didn't have such lights added.

Thoughts anyone?

Finally there is the issue of colours: In the past I have basically eyeballed colours for my 3D models, trying to decently approximate familiar colours for Starfleet ships. But this time I'm trying to use the actual colours as those used on TOS' miniatures. If these miniatures had actually been made then it's likely they would have used many of the same paints they used on the Enterprise and Galileo.

 

[Warped9]

This looks better (on so many levels):

Ah, so thats where TNG got the idea for visible tractor beams while TOS' were invisible.

 

[Henoch]

Ah, so thats where TNG got the idea for visible tractor beams while TOS' were invisible.

The tractor beam seems to be emitted from the hangar:

1. Tractor beam emitters are on the outer edges of the stern of the ship. This also allows shuttles (or space objects) to ride the beam up to the hangar and hand off to the interior ceiling system, or just tow bigger things.
2. Each door panel could be a phased array gravity emitter. Questionable if this works with the hangar doors open.
3. There are tractor beam emitters on each side of the doors in those neat nooks. Works like option 1. Because of the deep recess, I don't think it can steer to the side of the ship.
4. At first I thought that it may have come from the rectangle window above the doors, but the beam is too low to come from that spot.

I support option 1.

 

[Henoch]

Thoughts anyone?

Since the cargo vessel is not a ship of war, then it should not get the pendant on the hull. Its name should be on it someplace; perhaps on the flat top surface between to tower features and the bow. A script name on the tower side a la the Galileo would be cool. Blinking lights are tight! This view shows white lighted windows and the two rear curved things are white. Red stripes on bottom and top break up the dull grey nicely. The I.D. number is NCC-61465 (or is it G1465); more than enough numbers for high volume ships. The dish looks mounted to the primary hull; lower center location.

 

[BK613]

This looks better (on so many levels):

That's the second ship. The first ship (the one I posted) was emptied and cut loose.

SCOTT: Well, sir, we've managed to transfer all the grain aboard, but it severely limits us. We filled the shuttlecraft hangars, all our extra holds, and we've even got containers of that wheat, that quintrotriticale, in the corridors of the ship.​

 

[Warped9]

Since the cargo vessel is not a ship of war, then it should not get the pendant. Its name should be on it someplace; perhaps on the flat top surface between to tower features and the bow. A script name on the tower side a la the Galileo would be cool. Blinking lights are tight!

Yeah, but we see the Starfleet pennant on the nacelle onscreen so it sorta belongs. I could simplify it by removing the yellow boomerang usually associated with the red pennant although the boomerang is present on the TAS version.

Note how on the TOS shuttlecraft the pennant on the nacelle has no yellow boomerang, but the pennant on the hull does.

Re: the registry number. Besides the nacelles I could put on the upper surface of the aft platform structure (a lot of blank surface there) and on the forward hull. I could put simple running lights on each side of the ship.

Note: we tend to think of TOS’ miniatures (excluding the Enterprise and Galileo) as static unlighted models, but the original Romulan Warbird from “Balance Of Terror” purportedly did have working lights. If we use that as a precedent for other (sadly never built) miniatures then including lights on some of these TAS designs is not out of bounds.

 

[StarCruiser]

On the issue of the pennants - it's quite possible that these are actually in Starfleet service as auxiliary ships rather than civilian freighters.

As to running/navigation lights - there are no hints in the original artwork so - I'd say "go with your instincts".

 

[Warped9]

The TAS designs do leave out a lot of detail. The TAS shuttlecraft are notoriously scant on detail. The two freighters are much better detailed, but there are things missing. Even the TAS version of the Enterprise lacks some of the detail of the original 11 footer.