Greetings!

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

3DAmbassador-class Variant

2»

Posts

  • darkthunderdarkthunder377 SwedenPosts: 84Member
    Not all ships need a battle bridge. Most bridge functions can be routed to main engineering or an auxilary control room, if needed. Looking at the above, I'd absolutely believe it can both separate and reintegrate on it's own (like Galaxy Class). Nothing in canon says Galaxy was first afaik. Prototyping must've started somewhere. Why not an Amby?
  • johnl2112johnl211225 Posts: 29Member
    Battle bridge should be somewhere deep inside the secondary hull. Heck, when I make my ship, the saucer "bridge" is only going to be a ceremonial/harbor pilot sort of bridge, with the actual bridge deep inside the saucer.
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    edited September 30 #34
    johnl2112 wrote: »
    Battle bridge should be somewhere deep inside the secondary hull. Heck, when I make my ship, the saucer "bridge" is only going to be a ceremonial/harbor pilot sort of bridge, with the actual bridge deep inside the saucer.

    Heh. I have always found it funny that a helmsman having a bad day could shave off the bridge, the officer's quarters...basically the entire chain of command, in one little flight accident! :lol:
    Post edited by new_purple on
  • count23count23298 Posts: 720Member
    If you stick with the ambassador's "canon" thruster assembly, the big thick blocks. You could argue the ship was only designed to separate it's saucer as an emergency life-raft, and the heavy duty thrusters are to assist with planet-fall.

    Honestly, i don't see a realistic way for a saucer-sep on the Amby to be anything _but_ disaster scenario.

    In a scenario like this, i don't think an Amby has a battle bridge so much as an Auxiliary Control centre, in-case the bridge is too heavily damaged.
    Formerly Nadesico.

    Current Projects:
    Ambassador Class
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    edited September 30 #36
    count23 wrote: »
    Honestly, i don't see a realistic way for a saucer-sep on the Amby to be anything _but_ disaster scenario.

    Yeah. I think that was the big step-up for the Galaxy-class. The idea that 'separated flight mode' could be a routine thing, and that both sections could operate as independent craft.

    So yeah. Giant lifeboat. But I also think at some point the designers went back and said "You know, we shouldn't need a starbase to reattach the saucer if/when the disaster has passed."

    I did try play around with modeling small impulse engines with the aft thruster blocks. It didn't look good, IMHO.

    Post edited by new_purple on
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    Started playing with the aft shuttlebay this morning. It was either going to be TMP-style clamshell doors, or a Voyager-style garage door.

    Went with similar doors to the Yamaguchi model, but trying to put more of the TMP details. Still much more to do, but I like the basic shape.

    29bof7fn9wjy.png
    Lizzy777
  • rwkingrwking180 Posts: 168Member
    I can see this fitting into the timeline nicely.....Whereas the earlier ships needed a star-base repair facility to reattach a separated hull, this could be the start of the technology needed for the ship and saucer to separate and then rejoin without aid from a star-base.
  • count23count23298 Posts: 720Member
    I was going to stick with the E-C's 1701 inspired doors myself, but i realized that the thicker Yama hull woul make that look ridiculous.
    new_purple wrote: »
    Started playing with the aft shuttlebay this morning. It was either going to be TMP-style clamshell doors, or a Voyager-style garage door.

    Went with similar doors to the Yamaguchi model, but trying to put more of the TMP details. Still much more to do, but I like the basic shape.

    29bof7fn9wjy.png

    yea, the Yama's are essential basically if you're using the thicker hull, the E-C's hull whittled down that a TMP based hangar would look ok, not so much on the wide butt edition.

    One thing worth musing while you're setting that up, it might be worth embedding a galaxy-class aft torpedo launcher where the spine detail ends above hte shuttlebay as well. the Canon Ambassador model has it embedded in the undercut below the saucer, but embedded in the spine also evokes a Galaxy class motif.
    Formerly Nadesico.

    Current Projects:
    Ambassador Class
  • NevetsNevets192 EarthPosts: 119Member
    The separated sections remind me of the Enterprise-C from the AMT kits that featured three Enterprises (B, C & E).

    27fvx973k45l.jpg
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    Nevets wrote: »
    The separated sections remind me of the Enterprise-C from the AMT kits that featured three Enterprises (B, C & E).
    Neat! I had the AMC Ent-C kit done up with fiber optics, but I never saw the B,C,D pack.


    count23 wrote: »

    One thing worth musing while you're setting that up, it might be worth embedding a galaxy-class aft torpedo launcher where the spine detail ends above hte shuttlebay as well. the Canon Ambassador model has it embedded in the undercut below the saucer, but embedded in the spine also evokes a Galaxy class motif.

    I have been thinking about that. The snag is that the aft end of the Galaxy engineering hull had a huge pile of nothing, making it easy to add the aft torpedo launcher. Ambassador still has that shuttlebay...I'll play around a bit, but suspect the torpedo launcher will end up underneath.

    May put a couple small phaser strips to either side, too. Currently doing the phaser arrays, and aft area seems to be lacking.
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    This will probably be an exercise in frustration, but as I'm starting to think about windows, I'm starting to think about decks.

    I've seen conflicting information on the number of decks for this class. Given the size of Decks 2 & 3 on the model, window size and such, I think 36 is probably the better number. (also seen 26, 33, 40)

    So I've tried to roughly map out where the decks should be. The good news is that this mostly lines up with the reference model I was using. Even better, I can get away with my plan to do a more Constitution/Excelsior window pattern on the saucer rim. (Or at least two rows instead of one.)

    The part where it gets messy is the secondary hull. The curves of the deflector grid are totally incompatible with flat decks. The studio model (and resulting renders) had the windows follow the shield grid, which implies the decks themselves curve internally. This doesn't match ANY ship schematic we've ever seen, for any class.

    So how do I have straight rows of windows, without it looking weird against the deflector grid? I think the most likely solution is that the further I go towards the top and bottom of the secondary hull, the fewer windows I can have, in order to minimize the effect.

    4q7o6p6xmv2k.png
    1s50bbokztan.png
    Lizzy777
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    Realized it's been a while since I posted some overall progress pics, just close-ups of what I was working on. Most of my work the last couple weeks has been nit-picky stuff with the way edges and vertices line up...things that probably wouldn't be so annoying and time-consuming now if I'd had more experience building the initial meshes.

    Anyway:
    dtbn1xpgr3z0.png
    6lvjz00lqmvu.png
    ba3uatjrkpuo.png
    wu1vm85ax0ll.png
    0daiaypzxgrk.png
    wywn4yclwe95.png

    Still not sure how I'm going to do the secondary hull windows...
    Lizzy777ashleytingerMustang13Camaro68
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    tr8acffvvpzp.png
    xslm8b4dak3t.png

    Two ideas for the aft torpedoes. The TMP-traditional style launcher under the fantail. Or, as someone on here suggested, something on the spine of the secondary hull, suggesting the evolution to the Galaxy-class...
    Lizzy777
  • Lizzy777Lizzy777495 PNWPosts: 600Member
    Why not both?
    "Cry 'Havoc!,' and let slip the corgies of war!"
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    Finally got the shuttlebay looking more like a TMP-style shuttlebay and less like Marvin the Martian's helmet! Still needs some details, but much improved.

    grlf48h518cw.png
    Lizzy777
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    What was I thinking? Drop the funny back end of the spine and have it flow into the hull...
    0103lpt9gofd.png
    ashleytingerdarkthunderLizzy777
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    Did more details around the shuttlebays. I'm very happy with the way the aft shuttlebay has turned out.
    9scm22yc11jd.png


    Not so much the saucer shuttlebay. I feel like this would actually be the secondary shuttlebay, since having one on the saucer was a new thing when this class came out.
    I tried adding some details to make it match the aft shuttlebay a bit better...lights, landing indicators...even trying a Sovereign-esque contol tower. Don't think I like that bit though.
    7rilusw50zqn.png


    Suggestions?
    Lizzy777
  • StarshipStarship314 São Paulo - BrasilPosts: 1,871Member

    tr8acffvvpzp.png

    I like of the upper torp launchers!

    7rilusw50zqn.png

    I think the land bay markings looks strange this way. Maybe doing the bay recessed would help. ;)



    Lizzy777
  • count23count23298 Posts: 720Member
    Yea, the markings only really work in the galaxy because the area is flat to the bay. either lower the bay into the ground further and give it a flattened area like the D. Or just stick with C Classic and simply have the ship's registry number below the door.
    Formerly Nadesico.

    Current Projects:
    Ambassador Class
  • new_purplenew_purple51 Posts: 34Member
    Still been plugging away on this one. The past many weeks have been working on textures/shaders and UV mapping. But I'm fairly happy with the result...barely visible pattern, unless the light hits it right.

    Entire stardrive section has been mapped...just the saucer left.

    ucrpj8pmh98c.png
    4ap12uks8x4t.png
    h76bmh2w7z0f.png
    x19j33eijqb7.png
    76b91qk5hiyl.png
    Lizzy777RekkertLoophole
Sign In or Register to comment.