Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

3DBattlestar Prototype

VK08VK083 Posts: 0Member
edited November 2010 in Work in Progress #1
Had to be done :)
85730.jpg
Post edited by VK08 on

Posts

  • LonewriterLonewriter236 Posts: 1,078Member
    Nice start.
  • JennyJenny2 Posts: 0Member
    Some of your launch tubes are inverted?
  • Capt DaveCapt Dave0 Posts: 0Member
    Walkyrje wrote: »
    Some of your launch tubes are inverted?
    Ya, I was wondering the same thing...
  • BuckaroohawkBuckaroohawk2 Posts: 0Member
    I noriced that, too. There were inverted tubes on the Pegasus, but that was because it had (in effect) two stacked, independent sets of landing bays on each side; one was "rightside up" like on the Galactica and the other was "upside down." Each of these bays had their own launch tubes oriented the same way. It was a very cool idea that played with the reality that there is no "up" or "down" in space, but I always wondered how they resolved this notion within the ship itself. I mean, if you landed your Viper on the "upside down" bay, but had to get to the "rightside up" bay for some reason you would eventually have to do a 180 degree head-to-toe flip in order to be oriented to the upper bay's gravity.

    Anyway, back to your image. It is indeed a good start and it looks great. I must remind you, though, that aside from the inverted launch tubes, the Galactica had that ribbed, framework structure because the ship had been decommissioned and its outer hull was in the process of being removed when the Cylons attacked. The Pegasus hull was fully intact because it was still in service. I don't know if you want to bother worrying about that for your design, but I wanted to remind you just in case.
  • VK08VK083 Posts: 0Member
    I know , I'm still in the process of putting in the armour plating. The plates that are currently there were a test to see how something was done.

    I had a great chance to look up close at the way both Pegasus and Galactica were made, and I have to say the way they did the armour was incredible, basically trying to recreate that, and the ribbing plays a very big part in it at least on Galactica.

    As for the inverted tubes, my understanding is that a viper can launch however, as long as it's from a "propelled" situation. It's actually a mistake when I was cutting the booleans, but decided to leave it there as a reminder of a really dumb blonde moment. (some girls get em more than others LOL, i'm one of em when it comes to Lightwave)
  • AresiusAresius359 Posts: 4,171Member
    I wonder anyway, how they managed the gravity-plating. Because if you want to have a landing deck, you inavertedly need an up and a down, or at least create one.

    Nice work though, looking forward.
  • AresiusAresius359 Posts: 4,171Member
    I wonder anyway, how they managed the gravity-plating. Because if you want to have a landing deck, you inavertedly need an up and a down, or at least create one.

    Nice work though, looking forward.
  • BuckaroohawkBuckaroohawk2 Posts: 0Member
    Aresius wrote: »
    I wonder anyway, how they managed the gravity-plating. Because if you want to have a landing deck, you inavertedly need an up and a down, or at least create one.

    I don't know if the landing bay itself had gravity or not. The way the Vipers and Colonial One moved within the bay suggested there wasn't any kind of artificial gravity. It only seemed to take effect once the Vipers were lowered into the maintenance/launch bay. It seems to me (and I'm just guessing here) that it wouldn't be such a good idea to generate a gravity field inside the landing bay. Viper pilots would have to work hard to keep their ships under control flying from space into the bay because the gravity field would cause a sudden drag on the planes. Not a lot of fun, especially if your ship is damaged and difficult to control in the first place. Come to think of it, this would have been a big problem on the original show as well. I'd never considered that before.
  • PagrinPagrin171 Posts: 0Member
    That is always assuming that Gravity is a constant.
    If you can create gravity, you can also define how much you produce. If you wanted a have a landing area, then you might put 1G worth of drag at the landing point, but the approach might tapper off. So the bay is near to zero-G at the entrance, increasing as you move deeper into the bay.
    This could also help slow the incoming craft slightly depending on the direction of Down at any given part of the bay.
    Also if you take this into account, then you allow for better cargo handling because if you can vary the level of Gravity in different parts of the bay, you can make a Viper almost weightless and push it around the parking area, then turn the gravity back on and "lock" it into place on the deck for repairs.

    It's always been one of the odd things of Sci-fi shows that they generally fail to treat gravity and its production as a useful tool. It's almost always either on or off, never lower. They tend to have their decks running the wrong way as well, but that's another issue. Most shows fail to remember that a starship is a contained environment, were every aspect is controlled, and created by that ship.
    For example when was the last time a ship was boarded and the captain simply ordered the gravity in the local area turned up to 10G. They often remember to lock the bulk heads, but who dropped the oxygen level low enough to knock 'em all out? Or fills the room ahead of the enemy with CO2?
    But I digress, sorry about the rant guys.
    But if you want to build starships, I just ask that you really think about the design, and the tech. Lets go places the shows can't afford to.
Sign In or Register to comment.