It's actually really neat how closely the concept resembles the Oberth Class w/o the lower hull, as I modified from this pic taken from a screen cap on LCARS- Rapid Response Fleet.
WIP: U.S.S. Bozeman revisited--aka Unused TSFS Ship Design.
- Thread starter Gepard
- Start date
Okay, well there's some big decisions to make here--there's the possibility of a change in direction for how to handle the back primary hull/impulse engine assembly.
It was brought to my attention yesterday that there was another way to interpret the transition form saucer to impulse housing, which seems to have some advantages. So I've mocked up a basic shape for it to see how it stacks up against the prior version. There's a few problems that would need addressing, such as finding a satisfactory way to thin the impulse engine down to its former thickness while keeping the lines looking nice. I'm torn. I like both of them, but for different reasons.
Orthographic views of the new approach:
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
Comparison between old and new:
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
So. Pros: Sleeker lines, a nice tapered shape on the top of the saucer in back and a naturally-occurring slant where the pylon meets the hull, in the manner of the Reliant.
Cons: Aforementioned slant slopes the opposite direction from how it is in the painting; if the lines are kept straight, the impulse engine is much thicker than in the painting, and the secondary hull has to be moved down. An upward curve on the bottom of the rear saucer starting at the back of the pylons would fix that, though. And of course, I would have to rework most of the detailing I've already done in that area.
I may also be able to adjust the shape of the saucer I have now and join it into the impulse engine on top, to get that nice taper shape without having to remodel the whole thing.
As it stands, I like the current version as it channels a sort of "ILM" vibe, due to the use of separate shapes all kind of intersecting each other. But the newer way has a nice, TNG-era, Andrew Probert-y kind of blended elegance that works well, too.
Thoughts?
EDIT: Here's a sort of "compromise" version, created because it looks like getting the right amount of detail into the saucer mesh as-is just won't work. It's not quite as graceful as having it all be one piece, but....
click to enlarge
It was brought to my attention yesterday that there was another way to interpret the transition form saucer to impulse housing, which seems to have some advantages. So I've mocked up a basic shape for it to see how it stacks up against the prior version. There's a few problems that would need addressing, such as finding a satisfactory way to thin the impulse engine down to its former thickness while keeping the lines looking nice. I'm torn. I like both of them, but for different reasons.
Orthographic views of the new approach:
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
Comparison between old and new:
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
So. Pros: Sleeker lines, a nice tapered shape on the top of the saucer in back and a naturally-occurring slant where the pylon meets the hull, in the manner of the Reliant.
Cons: Aforementioned slant slopes the opposite direction from how it is in the painting; if the lines are kept straight, the impulse engine is much thicker than in the painting, and the secondary hull has to be moved down. An upward curve on the bottom of the rear saucer starting at the back of the pylons would fix that, though. And of course, I would have to rework most of the detailing I've already done in that area.
I may also be able to adjust the shape of the saucer I have now and join it into the impulse engine on top, to get that nice taper shape without having to remodel the whole thing.
As it stands, I like the current version as it channels a sort of "ILM" vibe, due to the use of separate shapes all kind of intersecting each other. But the newer way has a nice, TNG-era, Andrew Probert-y kind of blended elegance that works well, too.
Thoughts?
EDIT: Here's a sort of "compromise" version, created because it looks like getting the right amount of detail into the saucer mesh as-is just won't work. It's not quite as graceful as having it all be one piece, but....
click to enlarge
Last edited:
I just read through the thread quickly and I may have missed it, but why are the Primary and Secondary Hulls only connected by those 2 pylons?
I saw mention of the Oberth class, but if I recall that was a science vessel and the lower hull was a refined sensor suite crammed with lots and lots of sensor packages and scanning equipment. Manned stations exist there more than likely but I got the impression that generally the lower hull went unmanned. (I may be wrong on that, but it's what I've always thought.)
Also, the U.S.S. Titan a Luna Class Starship has a similar multi-purpose pod connected by similar pylons and it was explained that while there was a way to get from the pod to the rest of the ship, they ususally just used a site-to-site transport. (Of course this is novel continuity and some may not agree with it.)
Anyways, I just think if there is a shuttle bay that large and obviously you have people going back and forth moving material and cargo, you might want to just say screw it and connect the two hulls.
Just my $0.02
Other than that little nit, I really like it. Great work.
I saw mention of the Oberth class, but if I recall that was a science vessel and the lower hull was a refined sensor suite crammed with lots and lots of sensor packages and scanning equipment. Manned stations exist there more than likely but I got the impression that generally the lower hull went unmanned. (I may be wrong on that, but it's what I've always thought.)
Also, the U.S.S. Titan a Luna Class Starship has a similar multi-purpose pod connected by similar pylons and it was explained that while there was a way to get from the pod to the rest of the ship, they ususally just used a site-to-site transport. (Of course this is novel continuity and some may not agree with it.)
Anyways, I just think if there is a shuttle bay that large and obviously you have people going back and forth moving material and cargo, you might want to just say screw it and connect the two hulls.
Just my $0.02
Other than that little nit, I really like it. Great work.
Got some additional details on, and cleaned up the mesh in a bunch of areas. Once rendered, and with the extra detail work, I think this take on the back hull is pretty nice. 
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
I also think I need to move the cameras around; I'm getting kind of sick of the same angles over and over again.
And, just because I wanted to:
click to increase festivity
click to increase festivity
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
I also think I need to move the cameras around; I'm getting kind of sick of the same angles over and over again.
And, just because I wanted to:
click to increase festivity
click to increase festivity
Gep - I am enjoying your work on this. One thing that has come up a couple of times in this thread is that there is no way to get from the primary hull to the secondary hull.
Based on the initial painting, it is possible that there is a neck/interconnecting dorsal assembly between the two hulls, but hidden by the port nacelle strut as a result of the angle of the painting. That being the case, it is entirely possible that you could put one in and still remain consistent with the original painting. This way you avoid the point to point transporter issue.
Just my $0.02. I am enjoying your work on this and look forward to seeing the final product.
Based on the initial painting, it is possible that there is a neck/interconnecting dorsal assembly between the two hulls, but hidden by the port nacelle strut as a result of the angle of the painting. That being the case, it is entirely possible that you could put one in and still remain consistent with the original painting. This way you avoid the point to point transporter issue.
Just my $0.02. I am enjoying your work on this and look forward to seeing the final product.
Last edited:
A single tube between the two hulls, at their closest point, might be interesting, though, and it would do the job.
I think the point that the struts can house turboshafts has been made.
However, I still don't think that it makes much of a difference. Especially in a crisis. You lose either of those pylons and the ship crumples.
Maybe throw a neck on there just to see if what it looks like.
However, I still don't think that it makes much of a difference. Especially in a crisis. You lose either of those pylons and the ship crumples.
Maybe throw a neck on there just to see if what it looks like.
Personally, I like the ship as-is. The whole point of this project, IIRC, was to convert a ship that appeared in one concept painting into a 3D model. The illogical parts of the design are part of its charm.
Agreed. And frankly, Trek ship design has never been very logical to begin with. Yeah, if you lose a strut in battle you're in trouble, but if you lose the neck of a Constitution-class, you're just as screwed. (I'm reminded of John Eaves' comment about TWOK, that if the Reliant had just sliced the neck of the Enterprise a little farther up for a little longer, the whole saucer would have snapped off.)
And anyhow, my intention here is to create a model that could conceivably have been built by ILM in the '80s, and as we know from the Grissom, they had no problem with ships that had no way for the crew to get from the primary to the secondary hulls!
I've been fiddling with the saucer yet more; one issue that the newer version has is that the angle on the sides is so steep that the back lost a lot of the volume it formerly had, which you can see if you compare this with this. It looks a little...shrimpy for what's supposed to be a heavily armed perimeter patrol ship.
So I curved the back edges of the saucer and filled the diameter of the dish back out to its full width at the span from the running lights to the pylons. Not sure if it works, but here's a quick grab:
click to enlarge
Thoughts?
Some more work on the secondary hull. I had to refreeze and redetail the lower half at a higher level of detail to compensate for some smoothing errors that had begun to creep in. So this is actually a new, improved, much higher-resolution mesh. With windows!
Also:spot the Constitution-class starship component.
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
Also:spot the Constitution-class starship component.
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
Sojourner - Yeah, I saw that, but the angle on the picture didn't convince me that the nacelle struts were any larger than they are on the Enterprise (refit). 
Turbolifts may not fit, but Jeffries tubes most certainly would. Just being anal retentive again. 
It's academic anyways (albeit fun to talk about). I was just pointing out that the angle of the painting did not exclude the possibility of a neck.
Gep - You are doing a great job with this model, including the latest updates. Can't wait to see the final version.
Turbolifts may not fit, but Jeffries tubes most certainly would. Just being anal retentive again. It's academic anyways (albeit fun to talk about). I was just pointing out that the angle of the painting did not exclude the possibility of a neck.
Gep - You are doing a great job with this model, including the latest updates. Can't wait to see the final version.
Alright, people keep asking for it, now you get it: a neck. A motherfrakking neck.
Behold!
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
Okay, so it's not horrible, but it's not great.
And just for fun, here it is without the pylons:
click to enlarge
Which looks kinda cool. Keep the nacelles but lose the lower half of the pylons and this might make a very serviceable variant. It's something to keep in mind...
Behold!
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
click to enlarge
Okay, so it's not horrible, but it's not great.
And just for fun, here it is without the pylons:
click to enlarge
Which looks kinda cool. Keep the nacelles but lose the lower half of the pylons and this might make a very serviceable variant. It's something to keep in mind...
I like it better without the neck, personally. Screw turbolifts. It's a small sacrifice to make for a cool, elegant ship. In the words of someone else, "When you look this cool, nothing else really matters".
Edit: And I totally dig the TOS-saucer style sensor array
Edit: And I totally dig the TOS-saucer style sensor array
