Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Star Trek
Byrne Robotics > Star Trek Page of 3 Next >>
Topic: 3D Modeling for TREK (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 29 June 2008 at 11:42pm | IP Logged | 1  

Dusting off the modeler for the first time since the move, to play around
with some designs for possible ships for my IDW stuff. This one is for an
"old clunker" that predates April's Enterprise by about 40 years.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 September 2006
Posts: 7374
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:36am | IP Logged | 2  

I like the vaguely squid-like design. Makes it look fast, strange and dangerous. To me, at least.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Wayde Murray
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 October 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 3115
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 3:54am | IP Logged | 3  

With the large impulse engines it looks like a ship designed for long periods of sub-warp speed. What do you envision as its primary mission, JB?

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 4:33am | IP Logged | 4  

Grunt work, Wayde.

The episode "Relics", on ST:TNG brought home a point for me, a flaw in
the STAR TREK concept (as it has evolved) that springs entirely from this
not being the real world, but series television in which something new
and different has not happen every week.

In "Relics" the crew discovers a Dyson Sphere, an enormous artificial
structure that completely surrounds an alien star, its shell being about as
far from the primary as the orbit of Earth is from the Sun. They poke
around for a bit and then this ship and crew whose most important
mission is supposed to be scientific research. . . leave. They could have
spent decades exploring and cataloging the sphere, but instead they
move on to the next episode, presumably leaving the scientific grunt
work for others.

Which struck me as inverted. Smaller scout ships should be zipping
around looking for things for the big, better equipped starships to come
and investigate -- but that isn't how it seems to work in the TREKverse.
So this ship is my compromise, built for deep space travel, but equally
adept at puttering around within a system.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9707
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 4:55am | IP Logged | 5  

Nifty design and rationale.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9707
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 4:57am | IP Logged | 6  

Pre-dating the Constitution class by 40 years would... assuming the
Constitution class is roughly 23 or so years old by the time Kirk takes
command of the Enterprise... would place this ship design at roughly
20-30 years after the decommission of the Daedalus class ships. Any
chance we'll see any of those zipping around?
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 5:20am | IP Logged | 7  

Since I modeled that one long ago, you can pretty much count on it!


Back to Top profile | search
 
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9707
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 6:02am | IP Logged | 8  

Sweet! I love that design.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steven Cassidy
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 February 2008
Posts: 614
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 8:40am | IP Logged | 9  

Does Archer's Enterprise NX-01 factor into any design choices or do you strictly reverse engineer TOS designs ?


Back to Top profile | search
 
Al Cook
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 December 2004
Posts: 12739
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 9:00am | IP Logged | 10  

Me too! Reeaaly looking forward to this!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Thomas Cummins
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 June 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 173
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 9:12am | IP Logged | 11  

Whatever it's use I think that design has a very attractive aesthetic for use in any universe.

Edited by Thomas Cummins on 30 June 2008 at 9:13am
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 9:52am | IP Logged | 12  

…do you strictly reverse engineer TOS designs ?

••

Yes.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 11294
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 10:19am | IP Logged | 13  

Great design!
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9707
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 10:28am | IP Logged | 14  

The nice thing about this design is that it's a neat cross-engineering design between the Daedalus
and Constitution with the "grunt work" utility aspect factored in. I like it. How large of a vessel
would you say it's supposed to be, JB, given the conceit that the Daedalus housed a crew of around
230 people and the Constitution originally contained a crew of 200 ("The Cage") and later 430
("Tomorrow is Yesterday")?

(And the conceit that the Daedalus was 100m long and the Constitution was 289m?)

(I'm really nerding it up today...)
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 11294
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 10:35am | IP Logged | 15  

For comparison...

 

Pike's Enterprise:

Daedalus:

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:12pm | IP Logged | 16  

How large of a vessel would you say it's supposed to be, JB(?)

••

I figure the semi-circular forward hull is a little over one deck thick, say 3
meters, allowing for hull plating and internal stuff. So the whole thing
would be about 80 meters, or around 190 feet.



(Notice I decided to scale down the impulse engines. Makes it a bit sleeker.)
Back to Top profile | search
 
Mike Baswell
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1760
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:22pm | IP Logged | 17  

My eyes/mind want to flip the ship over for it to be right side up. Weird feeling.
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:33pm | IP Logged | 18  

My eyes/mind want to flip the ship over for it to be right side up.

••

That was my original configuration. Then I decided it looked more
interesting with the "fin" down the back rather than the belly. Perhaps I
should reconsider.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 11294
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:33pm | IP Logged | 19  

I figure the semi-circular forward hull is a little over one deck thick, say 3
meters, allowing for hull plating and internal stuff. So the whole thing
would be about 80 meters, or around 190 feet.
++++++++++

So about 3/4 of the length of the Enterprise's saucer section, then.

 

Still, this design would also look good in a larger scale, too.

But it's important to remember that the Constitution-type vessels were supposed to be the biggest and most advanced ships in the fleet during the TOS era. So any other ships from that time (or earlier) should be smaller and clunkier. The Franz Joseph designs are a bit of a cheat, I think, since they're just rearrangements of the existing Enterprise parts.

 

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 11294
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:35pm | IP Logged | 20  

That was my original configuration. Then I decided it looked more
interesting with the "fin" down the back rather than the belly. Perhaps I
should reconsider.

++++++++

I think the "belly fin" orientation looks a bit better because we're so used to seeing the angle of the Enterprise's connecting dorsal, which the "belly" look echoes.



Edited by Greg Kirkman on 30 June 2008 at 12:35pm
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:37pm | IP Logged | 21  

The Franz Joseph designs are a bit of a cheat, I think, since they're just
rearrangements of the existing Enterprise parts.

••

Agreed. And since they are not strictly canonical, I felt I could mess around
a bit.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Mike Baswell
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1760
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:41pm | IP Logged | 22  

Of course, now I see the flip side of this orientation. Lose the nacelles and you have echoes of a Cardassion Galor class ship, at least to my eyes. Don't get me wrong, I like it either way, I just think my mind has been pre-conditioned by too many years of watching the ships on TV.
But my opinion is suspect anyway, because it was years before I realized there was a difference between the Cage Enterprise and the series Enterprise. So there ya go.

Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:44pm | IP Logged | 23  

…it was years before I realized there was a difference between the Cage
Enterprise and the series Enterprise.

••

Since they mixed and matched footage with rugged, manly abandon, no
surprise there! As I mentioned in another thread a while back, I had finally
decided the spherical shapes on the rear of the warp nacelles were simply
retractable. Only way to explain their here-they-are-there-they-go
appearance.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Next!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 93932
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:46pm | IP Logged | 24  

I think the "belly fin" orientation looks a bit better because we're so used to
seeing the angle of the Enterprise's connecting dorsal, which the "belly" look
echoes.

••

I could mess with your heads, of course, by drawing it from both angles, and
never actually establishing which side is "up". It IS outer space, after all!!!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 11294
Posted: 30 June 2008 at 12:48pm | IP Logged | 25  

Since they mixed and matched footage with rugged, manly abandon, no
surprise there!

++++++++++++

Yeah, there's a lot of mix-and-match footage of the ship. My own personal take is that the ship "really" looked like the series production model throughout the series, despite the visual inconsistentcies (and the remastering crew has replaced all of the pilot shots with CG shots of the series version, too).

 

I hope to see JB's design all tricked out with windows and markings at some point. That would be neat! Kinda surprised that the nacelles don't have sensor spikes like those seen on the pilot versions of the Enterprise, though.



Edited by Greg Kirkman on 30 June 2008 at 12:50pm
Back to Top profile | search | email
 

Page of 3 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login