Post by: DH123 on February 06, 2004, 12:23:34 am
Post by: Dizzy on February 06, 2004, 12:49:58 am
Post by: Captain Ron on February 06, 2004, 01:01:30 am
Post by: Marauth on February 06, 2004, 01:22:59 am
Post by: Dizzy on February 06, 2004, 01:43:48 am
I'm really surprised we havent seen this request or model come up before...
Post by: Captain Ron on February 06, 2004, 02:21:30 am
So as it stands a TOS version is done, I never saw a TMP version though. There is a TNG version of it based off the Entprise C.
Post by: Khalee on February 06, 2004, 02:22:06 am
Scroll down till you see the USS Chicago.
Post by: Rogue NineCH on February 06, 2004, 03:25:11 am
Post by: Captain Ron on February 06, 2004, 05:16:18 am
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 06, 2004, 05:24:41 am
The ship is damaged from a fire fight but you get the idea
Perhaps this can inspire one of the many great moddlers out there
-MP
ModelsPlease@aol.com
Post by: DH123 on February 06, 2004, 11:24:05 am
Quote:
What? The Miranda not good enough for ya?
The Miranda is used for my Federation Light Cruiser, the NCA is a different hull. FS seperated the NCL and NCA in the OP+ mod.
I'm currently using the USS Churchil as my NCA (I'll post a pic tonight for those of you not familar with that ship) but that picture of the F-NCA from R10 just looks so fricking cool!! A TMP version would be even better if Kitbasked off of the P81 TMP connie.
Post by: Anthony_Scott on February 06, 2004, 01:06:55 pm
And I donot know of a source, except perhaps fleetdock13?
Semper Fi, Carry On
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 06, 2004, 01:57:16 pm
Post by: DH123 on February 06, 2004, 02:13:34 pm
Quote:
The Chicago isn't quite the same as the NCA he is referring to. If I remember correctly, the Chicage only had 2 warp engines, this one has three in the picture above.
The scanned picture is the Cover of R10: New Cruisers. That is a Cannon SFB F-NCA.
I just think it would be more appropriate with a TMP look as it comes out in 2275.
Post by: FireSoul on February 06, 2004, 02:21:10 pm
Quote:Quote:
The Chicago isn't quite the same as the NCA he is referring to. If I remember correctly, the Chicage only had 2 warp engines, this one has three in the picture above.
The scanned picture is the Cover of R10: New Cruisers. That is a Cannon SFB F-NCA.
I just think it would be more appropriate with a TMP look as it comes out in 2275.
I'm obviously interested in the results of this thread..
.. what happened to the TMP FGSC, and the idea of another FCFS model, btw?
Post by: Marauth on February 06, 2004, 02:29:30 pm
I think Nightstorm made something similar using Moonraker's NCL though it's not exact and since Eras of War is down I don't know where to get it now. I think someone put all those ships on the Starfleet Universe.
Post by: FireSoul on February 06, 2004, 02:52:30 pm
Quote:
Go to that moonraker page and you'll see he made a TMP version of the NCL (the Kearsarge) but not of the NCA - it's the same ship but with an extended rear hull, bigger impulse engines and a third nacelle below the new pseudo-secondary hull.
I think Nightstorm made something similar using Moonraker's NCL though it's not exact and since Eras of War is down I don't know where to get it now. I think someone put all those ships on the Starfleet Universe.
I don't see a Kearsarge at the link above, nor a ship that looks like you described.. sorry.
Post by: Marauth on February 06, 2004, 04:41:26 pm
Quote:
I don't see a Kearsarge at the link above, nor a ship that looks like you described.. sorry.
It's the ship directly below the Chicago class, it's labeled 'New Light Cruiser', it is his interpretation of a TMP Kearsarge NCL so obviously it's not exactly like the SFB version. Nightstorm made alternate regs for the Kearsarge and another ship which had a third nacelle and some other changes but that as I said in my last post was on his Eras of War site which is down.
Post by: Crimmy on February 06, 2004, 07:11:21 pm
Quote:
Can anyone make a kitbash out of the P81 Enterprise to make a TMP version of the Federation NCA picture below?
This is an HWD...I have the miniature....*looks again*...yeppers....heavy war destroyer...says so right here...er there.....and yes...I'd love to see a TMP version
Post by: DH123 on February 06, 2004, 07:20:04 pm
Quote:Quote:
Can anyone make a kitbash out of the P81 Enterprise to make a TMP version of the Federation NCA picture below?
This is an HWD...I have the miniature....*looks again*...yeppers....heavy war destroyer...says so right here...er there.....and yes...I'd love to see a TMP version
The ship, 1523 Minas Gerais, was built originally as an NCL as per the Federation OOB 9I guess it was converted to an NCA?).
Why would an HDW be on the cover of R10?
Post by: NannerSlug on February 06, 2004, 07:43:26 pm
Quote:
ModelsPlease@aol.com
what class is this?
Post by: Marauth on February 06, 2004, 07:59:09 pm
Quote:Quote:
Can anyone make a kitbash out of the P81 Enterprise to make a TMP version of the Federation NCA picture below?
This is an HWD...I have the miniature....*looks again*...yeppers....heavy war destroyer...says so right here...er there.....and yes...I'd love to see a TMP version
Nopers - that is in fact an NCA - Chicago class, the HWD (DW in SFC) is kinda different - it looks like this:
http://members.aol.com/destynova02/fdw.html
and FYI I actually have a TMP version made up and on it's way to RogueNineCH once I do the registries.
Post by: Marauth on February 06, 2004, 08:02:07 pm
Quote:Quote:
ModelsPlease@aol.com
what class is this?
It isn't one. Trident (original
) is the unofficial fandom name but it's never been seen onscreen though it was made for the DS9 battle-scenes. Many have been made but none are accurate as they're all bashes - no one bothers to model any of the stuff inbetween the engines at the rear and most add torpedo launchers and all manner of other bits and pieces.
Post by: NannerSlug on February 06, 2004, 08:24:10 pm
btw, i am interested in what you might have.
Post by: NannerSlug on February 06, 2004, 08:38:43 pm
Post by: Mariner on February 06, 2004, 09:10:33 pm
I'd recommend kitbashing that model with Ent Nacelles, impulse and photons, retexturing the rest. Here's my X-periment:
Could someone perhaps try this less extensive semi-kitbash/rebuild?
Post by: Marauth on February 06, 2004, 09:23:03 pm
Quote:
btw, i redid this one with the proper saucer per trek. it isnt finished, though, as there is a part that has a hole in it that i dont know how to fix.
Don't The proper saucer is an Ent-B saucer top and the bottom-half is an Excelsior saucer top. Also there are 2 Enterprise pylons in a triangular arrangement as little sense as that makes. But I don't know what all those greeblies in the back are made from unlike the Centaur which we know exactly what it is.
Edit: Sneak peek on my interpretation of the F-DW as SFC calls it - the SFB HWD:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/bwaxtor/phpBB2/album_pic.php?pic_id=10
I wish WZ would come back and grant us mortals a Miranda to fill the light cruiser slot... Not to mention we could make so many variants and kitbashes...
Post by: Crimmy on February 06, 2004, 09:26:23 pm
Post by: NannerSlug on February 06, 2004, 09:28:06 pm
if you are talking about a connie kb, let me know die hard.
Post by: Captain Ron on February 06, 2004, 10:20:51 pm
Well we are discussing this this one is the latest from Mackie, it is still in LWO formate though
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 06, 2004, 10:31:37 pm
CHIMERA CLASS
If you went by scale being that it's an Excelsior model it would be just under 400M.But,according to DS9 it's listed at 288.33Meters.
So it could function as an FCL , FFF , or FHDW .
Chimera class
The LUG RPG supplement Ship Recognition Manual, Volume 1: The Ships of Starfleet calls this class a Fast Frigate (288m long, 15 decks, in service from 2366 - corrected to 2374 by a discussion board posting from the author, Steve Long) and makes it the triple nacelled Excelsior variant from the Deep Space Nine Technical Manual. Also listed are the U.S.S. Chimera NCC-71653, U.S.S. Ta'veret NCC-71777 and the U.S.S. Janeng NCC-72146; whilst The Dominion War Sourcebook: The Files of Armageddon mentions the U.S.S. Hephaestos NCC-73469. The Portland is not mentioned at all, combined with the dates and the registries makes this all seem a bit suspect.
NCC-57418 U.S.S. Portland
History: In service in 2371.
Notes: DS9 "The Die is Cast" ref.
Post by: DH123 on February 06, 2004, 10:37:48 pm
Quote:
I just did a quick texture bash on Atra's NCA, and with P81's Enterprise saucer texture's, it's perfect! Better yet, even the original Enterprise neck details match up with the NCA's pseudo-hull!
Here's my X-periment:
Could someone perhaps try this less extensive semi-kitbash/rebuild?
Dude, that would be pefect with TMP nacelles. Can you do that?
Post by: Bernard Guignard on February 07, 2004, 04:57:25 am
Quote:Quote:
I just did a quick texture bash on Atra's NCA, and with P81's Enterprise saucer texture's, it's perfect! Better yet, even the original Enterprise neck details match up with the NCA's pseudo-hull!
Here's my X-periment:
Could someone perhaps try this less extensive semi-kitbash/rebuild?
Dude, that would be pefect with TMP nacelles. Can you do that?
Could we see a top view and if some one could swap the bridge module for a tmp bridge module it would make a better effect I think
Post by: Mariner on February 07, 2004, 10:05:30 am
But, it doesn't look too bad with the Ent grid lines, so just imagine that.
Could someone look into this possibly?
Post by: Azel on February 07, 2004, 11:50:28 pm
Hope this helps
Enjoy
Post by: Dizzy on February 08, 2004, 04:20:18 am
The rest is good.
Post by: Marauth on February 08, 2004, 06:42:05 am
Quote:
Whats its ass look like?
The rest is good.
's one fiine pice o' arse right there
Seriously though, reminds me of the rear hull of the Soyuz, which would fit the role perfectly IMO with modifications ofcourse.
I would only suggest using the cut-off engines from the Constellation class for the lower nacelle rather than just shortening it as I looks like some bad scaling at the moment. Just MO.
Post by: Azel on February 08, 2004, 03:16:38 pm
Quote:
Seriously though, reminds me of the rear hull of the Soyuz, which would fit the role perfectly IMO with modifications ofcourse. I would only suggest using the cut-off engines from the Constellation class for the lower nacelle rather than just shortening it as I looks like some bad scaling at the moment. Just MO.
The ventral nacelle on the SFB TOS version is like that...thats why its a that size...I cannot yous a Constellation nacelle because, believe it or not that nacelle is larger than a connie's...but I see you point
As for her rear I just TMPed the SFB miniature...the ship that you guys have posted earlier is not an NCA...but rather is an NDW ...that ship too has a very similar layout to the NCA but is much smaller...also her ventral nacelle is smaller than the 2 dorsal ones
FYI: the Soyuz is a Frigate as is the miranda...only SFC lists a miranda as a CL...but in reality she is not. The Soyuz is a science ship...those are not weapons on her those are sensors like the Saratoga variant from the pilot ep. of DS9
BTW: I totally go for and agree with the "Trident"-class as an NCA...but maybe a version with Connie nacelles???
And maybe add a shuttle bay by cutting into the mesh under the impulse assembly deck???
Post by: Klingon Fanatic on February 08, 2004, 03:29:04 pm
Quote:
Well we are discussing this this one is the latest from Mackie, it is still in LWO formate though
Please tell me that this is ready....
KF
Post by: Captain Ron on February 08, 2004, 03:45:21 pm
Either way he now has about 4-5 ships that need converting, so it will end up back logged.
Post by: Klingon Fanatic on February 08, 2004, 05:12:36 pm
Quote:
Not yet he is still modifing adding to it.
Either way he now has about 4-5 ships that need converting, so it will end up back logged.
Lets hope this and the USS K' Tinga will be done shortly
Qapla!
KF
Post by: Marauth on February 08, 2004, 08:35:17 pm
Quote:
The ventral nacelle on the SFB TOS version is like that...thats why its a that size...I cannot yous a Constellation nacelle because, believe it or not that nacelle is larger than a connie's...but I see you point
As for her rear I just TMPed the SFB miniature...the ship that you guys have posted earlier is not an NCA...but rather is an NDW ...that ship too has a very similar layout to the NCA but is much smaller...also her ventral nacelle is smaller than the 2 dorsal ones
FYI: the Soyuz is a Frigate as is the miranda...only SFC lists a miranda as a CL...but in reality she is not. The Soyuz is a science ship...those are not weapons on her those are sensors like the Saratoga variant from the pilot ep. of DS9
BTW: I totally go for and agree with the "Trident"-class as an NCA...but maybe a version with Connie nacelles???
And maybe add a shuttle bay by cutting into the mesh under the impulse assembly deck???
To my knowledge only FASA (and possibly SOTSF/Jackhills - not sure on that one) lists the Miranda as a frigate and in FASA frigates are more powerful than CLs - this is due to FASA using a different set of naval terminology to SFB/C. Also we don't know what those pods are - they may be weapons as it was never really explained in the 30 seconds the ship was onscreen.
Further the Miranda is WAAAAAY to big - in simple mass terms not to mention the amount of clearly visible firepower that it posseses in the 18 phaser banks (including the ones on the rollbar - megaphasers my arse) and the dual forward and aft firing torpedos - it outguns an Enterprise class heavy cruiser. So unless we're following FASA nomenclature then the Miranda in standard form would actually be pretty much equivalent to and NCA.
As it is SFCII has the F-NCM - the sort of accurate to the film version of the Miranda as similar in stats to an NCC The Miranda is a lot more capable than we give credit for. The Soyuz lacks the 4 phaser turrets and 4 torpedos from the rollbar not to mention the phasers under the impulse engine that no one spots anyway so it's no where near as capable in combat simply because of the lack of punch from no torpedos and the lack of phaser coverage.
My ?0.02
Post by: Azel on February 08, 2004, 10:35:15 pm
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ventral nacelle on the SFB TOS version is like that...thats why its a that size...I cannot yous a Constellation nacelle because, believe it or not that nacelle is larger than a connie's...but I see you point
As for her rear I just TMPed the SFB miniature...the ship that you guys have posted earlier is not an NCA...but rather is an NDW ...that ship too has a very similar layout to the NCA but is much smaller...also her ventral nacelle is smaller than the 2 dorsal ones
FYI: the Soyuz is a Frigate as is the miranda...only SFC lists a miranda as a CL...but in reality she is not. The Soyuz is a science ship...those are not weapons on her those are sensors like the Saratoga variant from the pilot ep. of DS9
BTW: I totally go for and agree with the "Trident"-class as an NCA...but maybe a version with Connie nacelles???
And maybe add a shuttle bay by cutting into the mesh under the impulse assembly deck???
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To my knowledge only FASA (and possibly SOTSF/Jackhills - not sure on that one) lists the Miranda as a frigate and in FASA frigates are more powerful than CLs - this is due to FASA using a different set of naval terminology to SFB/C. Also we don't know what those pods are - they may be weapons as it was never really explained in the 30 seconds the ship was onscreen.
Further the Miranda is WAAAAAY to big - in simple mass terms not to mention the amount of clearly visible firepower that it posseses in the 18 phaser banks (including the ones on the rollbar - megaphasers my arse) and the dual forward and aft firing torpedos - it outguns an Enterprise class heavy cruiser. So unless we're following FASA nomenclature then the Miranda in standard form would actually be pretty much equivalent to and NCA.
As it is SFCII has the F-NCM - the sort of accurate to the film version of the Miranda as similar in stats to an NCC The Miranda is a lot more capable than we give credit for. The Soyuz lacks the 4 phaser turrets and 4 torpedos from the rollbar not to mention the phasers under the impulse engine that no one spots anyway so it's no where near as capable in combat simply because of the lack of punch from no torpedos and the lack of phaser coverage.
My ?0.02
You are correct in the weapon number of the Reliant and possible firepower(if we assume that the miranda and connie have the exact same phaser types...I agree to this). but in real Naval terms the Connie is an Explorer vessel and is classified by the Klingons(ST3) as a Battlecruiser...the Miranda is a Frigate...Frigates are more "powerful" ships...but are mission specific...(Connie's are multimission)hence all the Types of Frigates in the NAVY.
It is a similar agument to the Galaxy vs. Sovie...Galaxy is a multimission explorer...the Sovie is a warship "heavy deterent cruiser"
Also Frigates are patrollers not deepspace mission ships...Explorers are...Constellation, Early Excelsiors, Connies, and Ambassadors to name a few
As for the Soyuz and Sarratoga...those are sensors not weapons...as it was stated in ST the magazine(not a conon source true, but the closest)
I say the Trident/Medusa Class is the most worthy choice...due to the size and era of tech...not to mention configuration
Post by: DH123 on February 10, 2004, 02:25:57 pm
Post by: Bernard Guignard on February 15, 2004, 05:50:02 am
Post by: Azel on February 17, 2004, 11:36:08 am
Quote:
I'm interested in knowing what is going on with this request
Aye me too
Post by: FireSoul on February 17, 2004, 11:55:59 am
Post by: nx_adam_1701 on February 17, 2004, 01:15:45 pm
Post by: Dizzy on February 17, 2004, 02:38:48 pm
Post by: DH123 on February 17, 2004, 06:17:16 pm
Quote:
OK here is a TMP version of the SFB TOS NCA
Hope this helps
Enjoy
That is perfect! PLEASE somebody kitbash this from the P81 Connie!!!!!
Post by: Dizzy on February 17, 2004, 07:40:52 pm
DH, the lower warp engine is like mini-me. Its disgustingly small.
Post by: FireSoul on February 17, 2004, 09:34:08 pm
Quote:
We need an ass shot. Always get the ass shot. What do they teach in College these days?
DH, the lower warp engine is like mini-me. Its disgustingly small.
The side warps offer 12 power each. The one under only offers 6. It *IS* small.
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 18, 2004, 04:51:24 am
So what's going on with this ship?-MP
Post by: DH123 on February 18, 2004, 12:54:23 pm
Quote:
Adding my $.02
-MP
Us pothetic non-moddling Mooks are trying to find somebody who can Kit-bash a TMP Chicago Class from the P81 Connie. Still looking for a modder to do it.
Post by: FireSoul on February 18, 2004, 01:07:35 pm
Quote:Quote:
Adding my $.02
-MP
Us pothetic non-moddling Mooks are trying to find somebody who can Kit-bash a TMP Chicago Class from the P81 Connie. Still looking for a modder to do it.
There's a perfectly good reason why I don't do Fed ships: the standards are too high.. sorry, Pass it on to the next person.
Post by: Marauth on February 18, 2004, 02:42:44 pm
Post by: Dizzy on February 18, 2004, 05:04:57 pm
Post by: DH123 on February 18, 2004, 05:34:15 pm
Quote:
Too high? LOL P81's stuff is crap in comparison to some of the stuff that's come out in recent times, Not to mention that hideous exagerated bump-mapping.
Please enlighten my feeble mind and show me some TMP Federation ships that look better than P81s.
Post by: Marauth on February 18, 2004, 05:40:52 pm
http://www.nightsoftware.com/omega/drs/index2.htm
Here's the link - there's loads more feds of all eras - all far superior to P81's work and some Klinks, Roms and even an Andromedan. Not to mention Skinman's TMP feds were very good, but I don't know where they're hosted, if at all.
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 19, 2004, 02:45:24 am
And personally I dig just about all the ships I've seen from the community here.I want them all.And I want more and more of them.I think it was Azel who recently said "Fresh Ideas from young minds." I agree.Now having said this.Someone PLEASE kitbash this so us Shleppies can get to flying it Thank You-MP
---------------------------------
" I'm a Model Junkie always in search of my next model fix "
ModelsPlease@aol.com
Post by: DH123 on February 19, 2004, 10:49:55 am
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 20, 2004, 03:33:51 am
Doing da Bump
Post by: ModelsPlease on February 27, 2004, 10:55:19 pm
Post by: Bernard Guignard on March 03, 2004, 05:19:52 am
Any news or takers on this beauty Azel would you mind if I drew up some cad schematics of your design you would get credit for the design of course? 
Post by: Azel on March 03, 2004, 12:51:34 pm
Quote:
Time for a Any news or takers on this beauty Azel would you mind if I drew up some cad schematics of your design you would get credit for the design of course?
Are you kidding
OF COURSE!!!
I would be Honored
Post by: ModelsPlease on March 10, 2004, 02:32:13 am
Post by: Cmdr_Kell on March 23, 2004, 09:00:29 pm
Post by: Dizzy on March 24, 2004, 03:16:59 pm
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 24, 2004, 06:41:38 pm
Post by: ModelsPlease on March 24, 2004, 06:50:00 pm
Quote:
Anything like this? I havent got around to trying out a saucer replacement yet, but the bridge and sensor dome is off a TMP Connie:
Heck yes ,that's awesome work.I'm glad to see someone building this ship.
-MP
Post by: Dizzy on March 24, 2004, 07:04:29 pm
Its getting there. Its different than the spec drawing.
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 24, 2004, 07:09:38 pm
Keep in mind this was a 10 minute bash i did, to show how easy it can be done, i have several other things need finishing before this one gets a proper look in yet
Post by: ModelsPlease on March 24, 2004, 09:03:50 pm
Quote:
Engines up actually looked worse, gave it a "spindly" look that was just plain boring lol.
Keep in mind this was a 10 minute bash i did, to show how easy it can be done, i have several other things need finishing before this one gets a proper look in yet
10 minutes??????? Holy crap.Ummmm if you could spare 10 minutes sir I have a ship that needs bashing please.I have everything needed but the talent.
-MP
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 25, 2004, 09:53:56 am
And i will be working on the TMP Chicago again when i get time, so dont give up wishing hehe.
Larson will be up for download in a few hours too.
Post by: Chrystoff on March 25, 2004, 10:38:30 am
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 25, 2004, 10:50:45 am
But yes i will get around to finishing it up, i might release it with both angled and straight top engines so you can all pick and choose...plus i have a plan to add a torpedo/weapons pod (like the miranda) on the lower engine.
Main thing really needs work is to use a different saucer section, which is the trickiest bit i have encountered so far, which is why i put a modern bridge and sensor dome on it just for now (cheapskate shortcut)
Post by: Mariner on March 25, 2004, 11:53:49 am
I have an example pic of this, but I'm at school right now so it'll have to wait.IMO, the torps should be on the bottom dome of the saucer, since putting them on the lower engine wouldn't look right. But, maybe I'll figure out how to kitbash with M6 someday (after it quits crapping out on me
)I"m sure Atra would let you, just as long as you give credit IIRC.
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 25, 2004, 01:07:46 pm
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 26, 2004, 02:54:37 pm
Post by: Wolfsglen on March 26, 2004, 03:48:38 pm
Post by: Mariner on March 28, 2004, 12:39:02 pm
The F-NCA topic is here, because I'm NOT wasting my time typing out those links, so happy surfing.
The SFB Chicago TMP-Refit: WIP - A Wolfsglen Production
Post by: Atrahasis on March 28, 2004, 12:53:00 pm
One thing I'll recommend, though: According to SFB lore, the tiny third warp engine on the bottom was a Frigate engine from probably a Burke, and I believe they may even have been cannibalized because the entire F-NCA design was an augmented Light Cruiser built at the same yards the Light Cruisers used to be built.....and so if you're making a TMP version, you may not necessarily have to make that third engine a dinky one, but a full-sized one would be OK. After all, TMP ships at that time wewre probably not cannibalized, it was all-new tech. If you were a Starfleet engineer and you could stick a full third engine on there, hey why not do it?
Post by: Age on March 28, 2004, 01:50:21 pm
Just my 0.2 cents worth
Post by: FireSoul on March 28, 2004, 01:52:32 pm
Quote:
It would use up more energy that way Two naccelles are just enough fot any ship it doesn't make it go any faster with three.It would be like putting another engine on a Boeing 767.
Just my 0.2 cents worth
They don't. However, the ship has more power. Slow down a bit and all photons can be loaded.
Post by: FireSoul on March 28, 2004, 03:11:42 pm
Quote:
LOL My feelings about the F-NCA design in general is that Gene should be rolling over in his grave because it breaks some special ship design rules he had (before anyone points it out, yes I do know he was cremated.)
One thing I'll recommend, though: According to SFB lore, the tiny third warp engine on the bottom was a Frigate engine from probably a Burke, and I believe they may even have been cannibalized because the entire F-NCA design was an augmented Light Cruiser built at the same yards the Light Cruisers used to be built.....and so if you're making a TMP version, you may not necessarily have to make that third engine a dinky one, but a full-sized one would be OK. After all, TMP ships at that time wewre probably not cannibalized, it was all-new tech. If you were a Starfleet engineer and you could stick a full third engine on there, hey why not do it?
I would still use a small engine. Looks better and is more accurate as per the SSDs.
Post by: Mariner on March 28, 2004, 05:51:12 pm
More to come.
Post by: Wolfsglen on April 06, 2004, 12:00:30 pm
PS: There is pics of a version with the bottom nacelle at full size in the link Mariner posted to EAS above, this version is finished and ready also.
Post by: Chrystoff on April 06, 2004, 01:38:31 pm
Post by: Wolfsglen on April 06, 2004, 03:16:15 pm
Post by: Rhaz on April 06, 2004, 04:23:02 pm
I haven't been keeping up with this thread, until today and I am floored by the progress on the TMP-chichago.I really lie both versions (2 nacelle w/ weapons pod and the 3 (full sized) engines)
Please, Atra, let it be released!
Post by: Wolfsglen on April 06, 2004, 04:29:01 pm
There will be 4 versions:
1: Regular Refit Chicago, no major changes other than parts upgrades, small underside warp engine (like the original had)
2: Refit Chicago with extra weapons/sensor pod, no underside warp engine
3: Refit Chicago with under-nose mounted torpedo launcher (thanks to Mariner for suggesting that, turned out great!) and underside small warp engine
4: Refit Chicago with under-nose torp launcher and full-length underside warp engine
Should be somethingfor everyone there
Working credits list (has people i need to contact and some who are ok with their models being used as long as credits are given, they are included here as well)
USS Chicago New Heavy Cruiser, TMP Era Refit Variants
Based on an original design from StarFleet Battles
--PLEASE KEEP THESE CREDITS WITH THE MODELS--
Credits: (Pod Version)
Original Mesh and Textures from Models by Atrahasis, Moonraker and Nightstorm.
New textures and work by P-81, Ganymad and The DuctTapeWonder.
Kitbashing, Hardpoint Tweaks and extra Texture Work by Wolfsglen
Credits: (3 Engined Version)
Original Mesh and Textures by Atrahasis
Extra textures (Saucer and Warp) and Parts by P-81
Kitbashing, Hardpoint Tweaks and extra Texture Work by Wolfsglen
.BRK Models for all versions by Wolfsglen.
Post by: SSCF_LeRoy on April 06, 2004, 04:33:18 pm
Quote:
Hehe thank you guys, i'll get around to finding out how to contact the guys whose parts i borrowed for permission soon, im having trouble locating some of them, so if anyone can help out, let me know.
I believe P81 gave blanket approval for the use of his models and pieces of his models in kitbashing.
Post by: ModelsPlease on April 06, 2004, 04:34:19 pm
Generic Permissions
A few of the permissions you seek are already there.
-MP
Post by: Wolfsglen on April 06, 2004, 04:36:16 pm
Tis the other fellows im not sure of at the moment, i really dont want to think of releasing without knowing i have their approval first.
Post by: The_Infiltrator on April 07, 2004, 07:27:30 am
Post by: FireSoul on April 08, 2004, 08:32:08 am
Quote:
It should be noted that all you need is to remove the lower warp engine and you'll also have the SFB NCL as well.
Not quite. The rear hull extension was shorter on the NCL..
Post by: Chrystoff on April 08, 2004, 08:39:03 am
Quote:I agree...A 2 engine version would be pretty cool. Wolfsglen, might you consider a 2 engine version of this lovely ship?
It should be noted that all you need is to remove the lower warp engine and you'll also have the SFB NCL as well.
Post by: Wolfsglen on April 08, 2004, 08:52:50 am
A refit of the NCL along the lines of the Chicago above is on my list for the future, Atra's models are too good for me to resist if i can get permission to release I will probably start it after i finish the next ship that was requested - an Akula based on Ambassador parts and another project im struggling on as well.Still need help locating some of the guys in my credits list above, they arent in the "Permissions" thread and im having probs locating them, so any help would be appreciated, as the 4 chicago variants are all ready to go once i test the brk model for each of them and get permission from them and Atra.