Greetings!

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

3DSovereign Suggestions?

12467

Posts

  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    Basically this is covered by the Bussard ramscoops, a sort of constant in-flight refueling. Interstellar hydrogen is present in quantities that make this quite viable. The ST:TNG tech manual even goes into detail on how this "regular" hydrogen is turned into anti-hydrogen for use in the warp core (albeit inefficiently, thus the preference for anti-matter refueling stations).

    Also, don't forget the majority of the time the ship will either be (a) at warp, going from place to place or (b) in orbit of whatever it is observing or interacting with. Impulse drive would be used pretty sparingly, so fuel wouldn't likely be an issue.



    I agree this has been used poorly throughout the TV and movie series. However, Federation ships have *three* propulsion systems, not two. One is the warp drive, obviously non-Newtonian. One is impulse, which is Newtonian but augmented (according to ST:TNG tech manual). The last is "thrusters" which seem to be used only in low-speed, close-quarters stuff like leaving spacedock. The thrusters appear to be situated on the periphery of the ship -- fore, aft, port, and starboard, both ventral and dorsal -- which makes reversing no big deal.



    The gist of the impulse drive is a standard fusion rocket, but augmented by a little warp technology. Without quoting the ST:TNG manual verbatim, it goes like this: the Newtonian fusion rocket is given a boost by a low-level warp field which alters the mass of the action/reaction equation. This makes the impulse rocket behave as if it were a much higher performance rocket than it actually is. But it's still Newtonian in nature.

    Yes the Bussards are supplements to fuel. However.

    The sun's Local Fluff is 0.03 atoms per cubic centimeter. It's a barren cavity in the normal interstellar medium 30 ly wide. So a ship would travel a days time at warp 9 to bank much less than a glass of water for the effort. Even if tech allowed 40,000 x that accumulation it comes to 9.4 Cubic meters of hydrogen (a pool), far less than the 62,500 m3 the Galaxy class can hold.

    Voyager completely ran dry in Four years of constant travel.
    So that tells you how efficient Warp Drive is. But they rationed at year one...and limited travel speed to warp six so they collected far less hydrogen in as much time.

    -The Tech manual doesn't really say how impulse engines work.
    Warp fields around the exhaust would of course work but reducing the mass of the ejecta would not drive the ship any faster...it would have the opposite effect. (The Manual says this on page 75 "with disappointing results.")


    The tech manual does talk of an advance impulse engine
    Essentially it seems they are just Fusion Rockets.
    But no Rocket could move a ship to 25% light speed.
    And if it could it would require a considerable amount of fuel. Less than Combustion far more than Warp drive.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    Thanks, again. I believe, prolonged travel above about 1/3 light speed without some sort of warp envelope would ruin your family life and make your ship obsolete at a unacceptable clip anyway. Still it's safe to say the stardrive can have smaller exhaust nozzles base on warp system augmentation of the impulse drive. With regard to fuel, I should error on the side of more storage. I suppose we can and should only spend so much time on this sort of thing. It only matters to the extent it supports a good story.
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    I would say it matters a great deal to represent reality in Sci Fi. I enjoy truth in story telling. Every moment is opportunity to expand and learn. I can bring these details to you because I researched it when I designed my own ship.

    Ultimately, while I chose to relate Trek closer to reality, I also realized the rules as they are, are already in place.
    I also hope it helps others to be more detailed and thoughtfully aware.

    (A note on Travel at sub light)
    @ Full Impulse it would take just under a day to leave the solar system.
    @ 100% Light speed 6 hours 55 minutes.
    (this is a big solar system)
    Not quite as fast a Trek Portrays in in ST:TMP or TNG: BoBW

    ----

    But the problem of the missing impulse engines is probably best solved by placing an Galaxy like IMF unit (tailored for Sovereigns look) on Sovereign hump back for separation. It's in the center of the ship's general mass and the location is do nothing critical on the original design. It might look pretty interesting.
  • StormcloudStormcloud1 Posts: 0Member
    just to weigh in on the impulse engine thing - the warp field is i believe applied to the ship not the fusion exhaust - thus lowering the mass of the ship resulting in higher power to weight ratio - i dont think you have to worry overly much about time dilation until you riding pretty damn close to the speed of light half the speed of light the difference is marginal at best

    edit:
    jsut thought about it some more if your ignore how thin the pylons are the trailing edge looks like it could have some sort of exhaust built in - combined with warp field effect from the nacelles themselves and ready supplie of plasma from the warp corp - and could act as a impulse engine perhaps at the expense of warp performance - not sure that makes sense in a ship that would be in combat - but then neither did the idea you would send off half the ship with half the weapons.......
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    @ 25% c the time dilation is roughly 5%. (This means time passes normally for you but from your perspective time passes more quickly outside your ship) If it takes 24 hours to get out side the solar system, Earth would experience and extra hour. This would be acceptable.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    Saquist, you are a great source of information. I am uncertain what a IMF is but looking at the galaxy it see a third Impulse system where you describe. This requires consideration. The existing nozzles are so large and none of my changes thus far feel that dramatic. Immediate Ideas include the belly as well hump and you've said, and voyager like strakes with exhaust on the pylons. Basically, I'm favoring a radical pylon redesign and a impulse engine or two in the secondary hull or new pylon design. I'll need to scale down my work reactor size, maybe significantly. Thanks.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    Screenshot (7).jpg Just a exporting an idea. Not a winning look. Probably, look better pushed out like on the Intrepid. Ideas?
    103907.jpg
  • StarscreamStarscream229 Posts: 1,049Member
    Much better :)

    I know I'm a bit late to this party, but it'd be nice to see a bit more in common with the Intrepid-class overall, IMO. I've always felt that that was much better designed and executed in comparison to Eaves' take on the E-E.
  • Bmused55Bmused55177 Posts: 486Member
    I'm going to pretend I didn't read such utter bullcrap.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    I was already working on intrepid details like inset sensor arrays and other visual details of unknown function when Saquist brought me back to the impulse drive question. I can use the work as a collection of greebs for the separation plain area if not used as on the intrepid. My own opinion, comparatively the Sovereign was executed poorly but I have not given intrepid as much scrutiny. Starscream, are there feature that come to mind for implementation on the sovereign? Bmused55, you obviously feel strongly and your opinion is valued. Please, give us thoughts?
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    Screenshot (9).jpg Intrepid style inset sensor.
    103922.jpg
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    Intrepid was better thought out.
    They new the size, number of decks and hard points. The design was never modified.
    I like the second version. Separated those engines won't be pushing the entire mass of both ships and serve rather nicely as back up propulsion units to the main impulse engines. It also makes the rather scrawny pylons of Sovereign seem more substantial and I concur with Starscream. Intrepid and Sovereign should be progressive designs. The impule engine position likens it back to Intrepid nicely.

    Sovereign was clearly meant to be the replacement Excelsior while Galaxy served as the Ultimate Capital ship and Intrepid a new light or medium class capital ship.

    -Galaxy Fleet Role: Battleship (13 well positioned Phaser arrays.)
    -Intrepid Fleet Role: Reconnaissance & Interceptor (speed and surveillance)
    -Sovereign Fleet Role: Best placement should be Destroyer or Guided Missile Cruiser (6 Turrets and 1 Quantum turret)

    J.R, it's quite possible your redesign could be the definitive MKII to the original Sovereign class Starship. Maybe it will be it's true realized form. I'm glad you're taking time with it.
  • StarscreamStarscream229 Posts: 1,049Member
    Bmused55 wrote: »
    I'm going to pretend I didn't read such utter bullcrap.

    You can pretend whatever the hell you like, I never asked for your approval. Keep your inane comments to yourself next time.
  • StormcloudStormcloud1 Posts: 0Member
    i gotta disagree on the sovereign being a destroyer analog - when it came into service it was the most powerful ship in the fleet - the galaxy i always saw as an exploration ship - big and heavily armed but designed in a period of peace and stability for the federation, the soverign by constrast was designed during a period where the federation has been at war, in a time when the federation knows about new threats like the borg etc, its bound to be a more militaristic vessel with both stronger offensive and defensive capabilities

    the sovereign is a battleship far more than the galaxy
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    Battleships are known for tonnage and long range guns.
    Sovereign didn't have the phaser arrays to be classified as a battleship. 13 Galaxy as opposed to 9 When Sovereign Enterprise was launched. It had very, very poor firing arcs.

    Galaxy's Phasers were extremely powerful vaporizing parts of Borg Cubes and whole ship and very easily fighters. Sovereign's phasers just haven't proven to be any where close to that against it's opponents. Many say Sovereign has Starbase level phasers but if that were true the Scimitar wouldn't have been half the problem for Enterprise.

    -We see normal phaser power against the Borg (unshielded)
    -Normal phaser power against the Sona' (though the Enterprise clearly out classes their smaller ship
    -Normal phaser power against the Scimitar

    Clearly Sovereign's advantage is in regenerative shields. (Regenerated twice against the Scimitar)
    And Quantum Torpedoes (which still weren't THAT effective against the Scimitar Shields)

    Most importantly Sovereign has not been shown to be capable of the AWESOME Galaxy Class Alpha Strike which Enterprise could preform at least twice in the space of five minutes! It's effectiveness seems unparalleled.

    ---Remember these are only Fleet Roles that fit the ships arrangement and abilities. Sovereign is a Warship and can hold it's own in battle far more than Galaxy. Galaxy is actually a Defender Dual purpose (multiroled) ship (like Intrepid) Fleet ships are role ships. Star Fleet is composed to cruisers (Solitary "single" mission) ships. They aren't disadvantaged when out side the fleet role.
  • StarscreamStarscream229 Posts: 1,049Member
    Saquist I'll go with designer's intent over whatever that particular script writer's needs were at the time, any day. Nemesis is at best a poor example of a Trek film, and should probably be declared apocryphal just as STV was declared to be by Gene Roddenberry, IMO.

    Not only is the Ent-E a newer generation warp core (regardless of whether I like it or not), but it also has multiple forward launchers which we should expect would be capable of the same kinds of launch rates as the older Galaxy class. And a newer, more powerful core certainly suggests it'd be capable of powering the new Type-X-whatever Phaser Arrays.

    Please don't take this the wrong way, but you seem to be presenting a lot of opinion as hardcore facts, with no supporting links. For example, what the heck is a "Galaxy Class Alpha Strike"? Who says the Sov doesn't have enough phasers to be a battleship? Where are you obtaining your designations for "Defender Dual Purpose"? And so on. Do you have links to back up any of your assertions?
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    Starscream wrote: »
    Saquist I'll go with designer's intent over whatever that particular script writer's needs were at the time, any day. Nemesis is at best a poor example of a Trek film, and should probably be declared apocryphal just as STV was declared to be by Gene Roddenberry, IMO.

    Not only is the Ent-E a newer generation warp core (regardless of whether I like it or not), but it also has multiple forward launchers which we should expect would be capable of the same kinds of launch rates as the older Galaxy class. And a newer, more powerful core certainly suggests it'd be capable of powering the new Type-X-whatever Phaser Arrays.

    Please don't take this the wrong way, but you seem to be presenting a lot of opinion as hardcore facts, with no supporting links. For example, what the heck is a "Galaxy Class Alpha Strike"? Who says the Sov doesn't have enough phasers to be a battleship? Where are you obtaining your designations for "Defender Dual Purpose"? And so on. Do you have links to back up any of your assertions?

    The Galaxy Class Alpha Strike has been observed several times.
    It was employed against the Husnock Warship and the Borg Cube.
    An Alpha Strike is merely a military term for a massive all-out attack.
    ("Fire all phasers with simultaneous spread of photon torpedoes"
    Such an assault is only possible with cluster fire tubes on the Galaxy. In other words only Galaxy can deliver phasers and all torpedoes "Time on Target" in a synchronized simultaneous single strike.

    Battleships are out dated today and have been replaced with longer range Guided Missile Ships or Destroyer. They tend to be smaller, faster and armed with a variety of anti ship and anti air missiles and torpedoes. This is the perfect description for Sovereign in it's current form. It carries both Quantum and Photon torpedoes with more launchers than Galaxy. And as said before it's phaser arcs are poorly position. Sovereign has two massive Nacelles in it's aft field of view limiting it's aft fire to directly back and up. While the pylon phasers remedy that problem it's still doesn't compare to the Galaxy.

    -Galaxy can fire five arrays forward and 8 of the minor arrays aft including it's primary Saucer array and it's Nacelles do not block it's firing arcs because they rest between the Secondary Hull and Primary Hull. In short Galaxy makes MAXIMUM use of it's
    massive hull configuration. Galaxy fits the Warship Classification of Battleship because of the strength of it's phaser arcs, the ship isn't made to maneuver and it's low number of torpedo tubes.

    Defender vs Warship is my own classification system.
    A Defender is any ship with a multi-role configuration. In other words If your ship can run cargo, attack , conduct Scientific exploration and intercept then the ship really has no one single purpose. Therefore it's not a warship, cargo ship, patrol or science ship.

    Warships have one purpose. Like Defiant and Prometheus they are designed to engage and destroy the enemy. They don't have science facilities, vast cargo decks and have a considerable amount of fire power for their size.


    Photon Tubes aren't the same as Photon Turrets.
    Modern tubes may not fire cluster fire but they can load a continuous string. Tubes also have huge Torpedo storage rooms centralized for the sake of anti matter safety and are directionally aimed instead of aiming the entire ship.

    -Turrets are smaller and strictly single fire and reload. They are Likely smaller casings with smaller yields for faster fire. (because turrets will have separate magazines with a limited supply of warheads since antimatter isn't loaded until ready to fire.) Remember that the Turrets were installed because Sovereign wasn't properly designed with aft torpedoes so they had to make do with the limited locations and space. The ship had to augment it's offensive abilities. It's unlikely they removed massive living spaces were suddenly able to miniaturize massive equipment into overhead turrets.

    Sovereign has only one set of tubes (lower front of the Secondary Hull.)
    Galaxy's tubes have been the only cluster fire tubes we've seen on screen. Not even the Nebula has shown such ability and likely lacks it. If the Nebula Registries are to be believed they came before the Galaxy which would explain why the Nebula's have the huge array of Torpedo tubes in the pod and Galaxy has the improved cluster fire single tubes.

    What is not conclusive is just because Sovereign is newer that is better in every respect to the Galaxy.
    Sovereign clearly has many physical, tactical short comings and apparently can't out run larger bulkier ships like the Scimitar.
    All of these conclusions can easily be drawn from on screen evidence.

    ~TNG TECHNICAL MANUAL

    The USS Enterprise is categorized as an Explorer, the largest starship in a classification system that includes cruiser, cargo carrier, tanker, surveyor, and scout. While most starships may be adapted for a variety of mission types, the vessel type designation describe their primary purpose.
  • StormcloudStormcloud1 Posts: 0Member
    from what i read on the wiki the sovereign came packing 12 phaser arrays out of spacedock and 16 after its refit - with 6 aft torpedo tubes -3 forward and 1 forward quantum torp launcher

    as pointed out sovereign is packing a more modern more powerful warp core so it would seem unlikely that they would install less powerful phaser arrays - and the destructive power of the galaxy's phasers against the borg is not really an argument as we never saw a sov against a borg ship that had never encountered a federation ship before

    the firing arc's of both ships are very similar but the sov is less massive so we can assume more maneuverable and its faster while packing superior shielding and if i'm not mistaken ablative armour too - its all around a superior warship
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    Stormcloud,

    That is correct. I mistakenly combined arrays and missed the two aft on the saucer. 11 of the 12 original arrays were on the saucer and four of the arrays were repetitive arcs in a repetitive position on the saucer which should have been repositioned to the Star Drive. The Star Drive originally only had 1 Phaser and only had the forward torpedo tubes. Galaxy's and Sovereign's arcs can't be similar if Sovereign is carrying superior forward arcs and Galaxy superior aft arcs.

    I don't know if Sovereign has a more powerful Core. That's certainly a possibility. In Star Trek Insurrection Sovereign maintained 75% shield strength even without it's warp core. In seeming contradiction in Nemesis, Enterprise was crippled after losing main power.

    The Evidence Comparing Scimitar's hits against the Enterprise as a measure, the shields take more abuse during the main attack than the ship did at warp. Once on impulse the shields had returned and were much stronger than when they took the first assault. This may imply that Enterprise's Reactor was maxing out supplying shields weapons and the Warp Drive with Full Power.

    So it could be that the ship has a powerful core. The problem is that the evidence isn't particularly conclusive. Regenerative shields has to take much more power than standard shields. The problem is I can't assume Enterprise has stronger shields than the Galaxy. No Dialogue or action gives us any clue. Thus since the Enterprise clearly had problems outrunning the Scimitar to that both Shinzon and Picard knew speed wasn't a factor for Enterprise I'm not sure I can conclude the ship has a much more power core.

    (Note that DS9: The sound of Her Voice links speeds above warp nine with the need of power diverted to Structural Integrity Fields. And this from a ship that generate far more power for it's size that a cloaking device can't fully hide it.)

    Phasers
    No matter the target Galaxy has show it's effective phaser strength time and time again.
    The withering assault on a Galor by two Galaxy's in DS9. Sacrifice of Angels
    The instant one shot disabling of a Galor Class in TNG: Phoenix and a Ferengi Maurader
    The withering barrage of phasers against the K'vort class in Yesterdays Enterprise.

    NOTE: In Nth Degree The phasers were ramped up so high they increased in brightness by an order of 5x normal. This while powering the shields. If this is any indication of how much these arrays can put out we haven't seen anything like that from Sovereign and that may be the most solid indication that it's core isn't that much superior if at all, in power. I certainly can't imply Sovereign had phaser power less than the Galaxy Type X but I certainly can't support anything above it either.


    My conclusion is that Sovereign wasn't worth building as a Space Frame. You can make components better but did we really need another ship that big? If Sovereign isn't faster...If the core isn't a major upgrade from Galaxy (that already had a core upgrade) if it's not a superior weapons platform and it's not sporting the sensor package of the Intrepid Class, why build this ship?

    *P.S
    And Sovereign has never been said to have ablative armor.
    It makes no sense to coat a ship with that many windows with armor.
    Prometheus, Defiant and Voyager all had ablative armor and of course a dramatic reduction in hull penetrations.
  • StormcloudStormcloud1 Posts: 0Member
    against saying what the galaxy class enterprise did or didn't do cant be used as a comparison since we didn't see a sov in the same situations - what we know is that the enterprise e was the most advanced ship in the fleet as of first contact

    and the sov speed was supposed to be 9.975 same as intrepid - far in excess of galaxy's 9.7 i think it was

    again saying what the sov did against the scim is also not a viable comparison point as we didn't see a galaxy in same situations

    that combined with storys being written for plot effect rahter than based off a physical model of what each vessel was supposed to be capable of leaves us with the fact that the sov is the newer flagship of the fleet - the most advanced ship in starfleets arsenal

    throwing specs at it well the sov phaser arrays are supposed to be type XII over the type X on the galaxy - and she's packign quantum torpedo's in addition to standard photons

    sov is the galaxys replacement - to me that says it all
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    @ jrhottel

    I just read this from Memory Alpha:
    According to John Eaves, the Enterprise-E was to have been retrofit at the end of Star Trek Nemesis but due to budgetary reasons and script changes the Enterprise was only seen being repaired in dry dock. "For the end of the film the badly destroyed and damaged E is being rebuilt in space-dock. This is where the opportunity was given to really fix all the lines and flow to match the roots of where the original drawing had left off. Not too often does one gets the chance to rework a beloved piece of art, and I was so happy to get the chance regardless of how minor the changes were."

    "The drawings were done and to be seen as the E leaves the space-dock at the end of Nemesis, with what we were hoping to get approval on being the new aztec patterned paint job, that was so prominent with all the preceding variations of the Enterprise. As production went on, it was becoming clear that Nemesis was going to be the last of the TNG movies and thus, the E would fly no more. Very sad thoughts, and I was so hoping to at least to get to see that final version fly off into spaceA… Budget and script changes kept the E in the bay under repair so all that exists of the big finish only exists on paper as a bunch of plans.


    I think this is a remarkable opportunity. Ideally I'd wish John Eaves would apply this third refit to the Sovereign class. You remember of course my run down of Sovereign inadequacies in detail that directly effect it's ability...Well this comparison to Galaxy my serve as a way to create the third and final refit that Eaves never did. It may garner considerable attention.


    My Recommendations:


    I wouldn't try to make Sovereign the Biggest, Fastest do everything starship. It's too fanboy. That's clearly the Galaxy Class. But I do standby my observations that Sovereign is a space frame that struggles to justify it's size and expense.

    -Size
    Sovereign's size has to be justified. I think your concept as a carrier is a good idea to that purpose. It's true that Galaxy is a better fit for a carrier but it's using so much space for family, diplomatic quarters and etc that it's internal configuration might as well be set in stone for an efficient Carrier.

    Saucer
    While we haven't talked about it and I'm sure this is too radical, I think Sovereign needs Saucer Warp engines if you're going to use it as a carrier. The Galaxy's purpose in the Saucer was a life boat. If you're adding saucer separation does it really make sense to make it a life boat stuck on impulse? Considering you want it to house your fighter squadron rather than the engineering hull do you really want your mother-ship stranded at impulse while the fighters are warp capable? That doesn't make sense. Even the biggest warships can keep pace with the rest of the fleet.

    Otherwise the saucer would be regulated to defense behind the lines of battle securing planets and setting it's self up as a makeshift starbase. That's not a bad idea but if the need arises fighters are usually not going to be enough against a considerable capital ship threat. (This isn't Star Wars.) The Tech manual has given us ways to make this happen for impulse engines.

    -Warp Speed
    I wouldn't worry about Sovereign's slow speed. I think that's a consequence of it's size and it's dedication to offense over movement. It doesn't incorporate Intrepid s Advanced articulation frame nor any field enhancers, nor Galaxy's stabilizing obtuse saucer. If these things were leading edge they should be there. The acute saucer it has can be good for short burst of speed if required, say 9.7 at 6 hours.

    -Torpedoes.
    I would get rid of the turrets. (or reduce them) It's just a patch. Give it some tubes. Heck after this discussion I think it needs the cluster fire tubes forward for the ultimate Alpha Strike with Quantum and Photon torpedoes.

    Power
    I've played with Dual Cores before and I'm still yet to do it because I'm just not sure how that would look or work in engineering but when you consider that the Real Enterprise had 8 reactors it's sort of nonsensical that Star Fleet still operates single core ships. Alternatively I would suggest a radical core upgrade to give Sovereign the power it needs to get above warp 9 and power the shields and weapons at once.

    Conculsion
    I think these additions combined with the necessary impulse engines the Stardrive lacks, a Intrepid/Defiant sensor package (or at least a Galaxy level sensor Package) and a properly planned separation plane Sovereign could be the beast it was supposed to be.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    Saquist, awesome input. Thanks. I tend agree with Stormcload, we've never seen a apples to apples comparison of Sovereign and Galaxy. Likewise, it makes little sense that Starfleet should intentionally build a less capable design, though I'm warm to the Idea that it may not have lived up to expectations. As said before, I'm designing the hero ship depicted in a audio drama. The carrier function was thoroughly written into the plot and I'm just trying to depict it as plausibly as possible. I remember reading the Arc Royal, renamed Enterprise, was refitted immediately with a new generation warp core. I don't remember the source. I intend to reduce the size of the turrets significantly. They should operate on micro torpedo of approximately a foot in length that can be carried by some shuttle-craft.

    Here's where, I'm presently taking things. I'm thinking ship is relatively late in her service life. Specialized, and militarized as compared to the galaxy class. A marine detachment on board. Specialized cargo modules with ground vehicles and ect for the runabouts. I have long thought multiple cores make more sense but it seems the die has been cast and given the apparent size of the core en-closer and cooling towers space is a consideration. While a warp capable saucer may make good sense in future design I don't think the time has arrived owing to space, historic design conventions, and routine plots involving main engineering. The stardrive, Is going to be rebuilt with modest changes, additional tubes among them. I'm planning a retro paint scheme but may change my mind. I think the Intrepid style sensors are looking good. images soon.

    Saquist, with all the thought you give to designs, I'd love to know the vision behind your Enigma design?
  • LonewriterLonewriter232 Posts: 1,067Member
    I like what you've done in adding your own touches to the Sovereign class. I did the same when I had my Nova mesh built and the Lightwave version is still getting improvements now. For instance, I had added two rear torpedo launchers since the original mesh didn't have any. I think it's smart to add the Intrepid style sensor array to the Sovereign saucer. I'm having them added to the bottom of my Nova mesh to replace the blocks that were there. I can't wait to see yours finished. I have IRML Enterprise E and it looks like yours is going to look just as good. BTW, I love your added impulse engines. As for all the treknobabble, I wouldn't worry to much because this is still science fiction.
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    jrhottel wrote: »
    Saquist, awesome input. Thanks. I tend agree with Stormcload, we've never seen a apples to apples comparison of Sovereign and Galaxy. Likewise, it makes little sense that Starfleet should intentionally build a less capable design, though I'm warm to the Idea that it may not have lived up to expectations. As said before, I'm designing the hero ship depicted in a audio drama. The carrier function was thoroughly written into the plot and I'm just trying to depict it as plausibly as possible. I remember reading the Arc Royal, renamed Enterprise, was refitted immediately with a new generation warp core. I don't remember the source. I intend to reduce the size of the turrets significantly. They should operate on micro torpedo of approximately a foot in length that can be carried by some shuttle-craft.

    Here's where, I'm presently taking things. I'm thinking ship is relatively late in her service life. Specialized, and militarized as compared to the galaxy class. A marine detachment on board. Specialized cargo modules with ground vehicles and ect for the runabouts. I have long thought multiple cores make more sense but it seems the die has been cast and given the apparent size of the core en-closer and cooling towers space is a consideration. While a warp capable saucer may make good sense in future design I don't think the time has arrived owing to space, historic design conventions, and routine plots involving main engineering. The stardrive, Is going to be rebuilt with modest changes, additional tubes among them. I'm planning a retro paint scheme but may change my mind. I think the Intrepid style sensors are looking good. images soon.

    Saquist, with all the thought you give to designs, I'd love to know the vision behind your Enigma design?

    Sovereign has the distinct disservice of being designed by an Artist and the Writers. No one sat down and planned out this ship's capabilities. There is nothing official in abilities but what we have on screen. Short of seeing both ships in a shooting range this is the best we've got to make a comparison.


    From what I can tell it looks like you're also designing the interior to a certain degree. (I applaud that) The interior will say a lot about your exterior features. Even as you've done so far you get high marks in my book for the choice of changes in Sovereign. From the slight modifications to the engines and lifepod insets to the impulse engines. I'm pretty sure it will be visually impressive too. I didn't expect you to go this far. Hopefully this has got your wheels spinning. Most people in art have had blocked moments and I've found the best way to break them is to jump into the details and ask why.

    Enigma Class
    I'm a drafter and designer by trade. I think on this stuff daily. Enigma was born as a concept in 1997. Like most fans it was a Fan ship and could do everything. It used to be 3 ships in one, (still have pictures on it) fastest, most powerful, cloak and quantum torpedoes and "Flux" torpedoes and gamma phasers.

    The current design is a stealth reconnaissance using passive and active stealth systems.
    -Top speed of Warp 9.91
    -Six impulse engines
    -17 Decks, 570 meters long, 6 Fore Tubes, 4 Aft, 11 phasers and forward pulse phasers, crew complement 250.

    The engines are designed to run "quiet" for short periods of time by storing heat in capacitors. That's the reason for the unusual look. I needed big long engines for sustained flight and maneuverability and the "Variable Warp Pylons for enhanced field geometry. As a result longer engines create greater drag and prevent the design from being faster than Voyager.

    Enigma is designed to gather intelligence and escape. It does have considerable offensive abilities but it's not designed to take any considerable amount of punishment.

    The saucer is warp capable and thus there are two warp cores. The Saucer can also land. All of the ship except for parts of the main Warp Engines and Aft Cargo area is in-cased in Ablative armor. The armor is relied on during stealth to reduce emission signature. The shields are appropriate for a ship this size but not as strong as Galaxy's but must stronger than Intrepid. The phaser arcs are pretty weak aft. The engines block everything but right down the rear. It also sports Intrepid's 15 light year scanning range.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    The Master Systems Display was a natural extension of working out the interior. I now have a pretty good foot print for each deck with major corridor scheme, turbo tube system, a sense of components and spaces. I short, I have a pretty good idea how this beast should work on the inside. That has mostly changed the profile. The saucer is allot taller and deeper the stardive a little shorter and will likely be yet a little wider. Separation, is works out in a sensible way that is not hideous. I'm bring back stairs. Believe it or not I've tried to be real conservative with the design. I really dislike the Sovereign nacelles but they'll stay basically as is. Don't know where this project will end up. Good quality images at least. Maybe I'll take the Interior to a game engine. I don't know how well UDK or Unity handle confined spaces. I'm not myself a gamer. I think, I'll need a new computer for any real animation effort but would really like to try my hand at it.
  • SaquistSaquist1 Posts: 0Member
    How long did it take for you to learn 3DSMax?
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    I've been playing with Max fourteen or fifteen months now. Took a six week class and then been using Digital Tutors for all it's worth. I'm redoing so much because I now understand how to build something this large with smaller parts. Basically, Many high poly parts used to make normal maps for a lower poly final mesh. I've made many mistakes but I'm learning and that's the point. I can't wait to get it into Mudbox. I ought to be able to do some great things with it there. As for Max I think I'm getting pretty good but need to work on my speed. Time is money and opportunity.
  • LonewriterLonewriter232 Posts: 1,067Member
    I had max on my old pc but could not get it to install on my new pc but I never could get the hang of using it. I now use Lightwave only. Saquist, I'm impressed with your treknology, if I ever get around to writing my Nova class technical manual, I know who to consult.
  • jrhotteljrhottel9 Posts: 0Member
    Screenshot (11).jpg The sensor insets on the outside are good. Those under the bow not so much. I'm trying to think of a more pleasing shape.
    103960.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.