Dynaverse.net
Taldrenites => Starfleet Command Models => Topic started by: Atolm-Rising on December 23, 2007, 08:07:06 pm
-
Concept Federation TOS carrier:
(http://aycu18.webshots.com/image/37097/2004151381534847357_rs.jpg)
some sketches to help out:
(http://aycu26.webshots.com/image/38585/2004172295774032095_rs.jpg)
-
I like it it can make a pretty good TOS carrier as well with a few mods
-
Creative, as always. Honesty forces me to say, though, that asymetrical Feds give me the heebee jeebees...
Just not my cuppa java...sorry :(
-
I think ...
wait-a-minute ...
yeah ...
I think I like it.
Good job, man!
JM.
-
Hmmmmmm. I think I see my next project hehe.
I like it best because it is not another standard run of the mill cookie cutter fed
-
Excellent design! Its Asymmetri, but not clumsy in the least! I agree with above, it'd look sharpas a carrier.... see if you cna take it on Antyvirus, itd make a good solid ship.
-
Mind if i take a lil gorn spin on this Atolm ive got a few ideas ?
-
Hows this for a pair of reigndeer to pull Santa's new Sleigh
-
I totally love this idea. It reminds me of the Navy Carriers with the Angled Fight Deck. What I see that this design needs is a very large on one side fighter bay and door structure to warrant such an unusual side pylon config. I think the offset bridge command structure is the way to go too. One thing that always irked me about fed carriers was that many of them had bay doors that opened right up into either impulse exhaust or warp pylons. This design would solve all that. Brilliant. Why no one thought of something like this before, I dunno. Brilliant.
-
very nice and a great start to the model too
-
Don't scream, but would a variant with symmetrical nacels work?
_
/
(-()-)
_/
Just curious...
-
Again, nicely started AntiVyrus...I know you cannot see it, but you should add a second pylon that goes straight (horizontally) that would also connect into the Hull...more support :)
Oh and Kreeargh, go for it...I'd like to see how you take this
-
Thanks for the info Atolm. I'll fix that as soon as i back for going outta town for the holidays
oh and that nacelle design rocks
-
Starfighter?
(http://aycu09.webshots.com/image/37648/2000344431375667281_rs.jpg)
-
nice concept :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
Hey Atolm, Dr. Vogt would approve Im sure
(http://www.geocities.com/asymmetrics/bvlogo.jpg)
Cool page:
http://www.geocities.com/asymmetrics/bv.htm
-
loving that second concept, any chance of any final sketches? would love to see some ;)
-
Thnx all... I'll see what i can do for schematics
Lord Schtupp: Aye mate, I know that page :) Thnx
-
^^^ Oh yea I knew that - I really posted the link for the benefit of others to illustrate how the concept of asymmetry was applied in some aircraft designs, also as I know that these aircraft areone source of your inspiration as per our Luftwaffe chat sessions way back when. I encourage ppl to check it out.
-
Some updates,
Keep in mind this is just the rough blocking in still have lots of detail to go
-
the mesh is looking good!
you might want to reposition the secondary hull a bit as it is actually a bit off centre in my pics
-
you might want to reposition the secondary hull a bit as it is actually a bit off centre in my pics
You wouldn't happen to have a top view available would you?
-
I can make one available... ;)
-
Looks wicked. Very different from the norm.
-
(http://aycu06.webshots.com/image/37365/2000578024753175339_rs.jpg)
-
NO the ship has not been forgotten lol
just had a lot on my plate heres what I got so far and I believe its about finished mesh wise
-
:thumbsup:
-
I'll double that mate.
looking sweet(glad that top view helped out some)
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
Wow! I found this one on page 3.
Anyway, just to give an update, I got the carrier mapped and I'm working on the paint job currently.
Hopefully I'll have some updated pics soon.
-
Atolm
I was wondering if you had a particular registry in mind for the carrier and if so what might it be.
Thanks
-
Hmmmm...you might want to opt something in the 1800's or 1900's at most...I also don't have a class or name for her, maybe the guys here can help me out with that...
I was thinking something Russian, German, or Japanese from WW2 carriers as a class name though...
-
lol...no no :D ;)
-
My personal choice for the carrier name:
Hiryu ("Flying Dragon")
Built by Yokosuka Navy Yard. Laid down 8 July 1936, launched 16 Nov 1937, completed 5 July 1939.
Participated in the Sino-Japanese war, Pearl Harbor raid, Indian Ocean raids in 1942. Bombed by US aircraft at Midway 4 June 1942; munitions and fuel exploded on the flight deck and hangar deck, leading to uncontrollable fires; ship was scuttled 5 June 1942.
Displacement: 21,900 tons full load
Dimensions: 731.5 x 73 x 25.5 feet/223 x 22.25 x 7.8 meters
Extreme Dimensions: 746 x 88.5 x 25.5 feet/227.4 x 27 x 7.8 meters
Propulsion: Steam turbines, 8 boilers, 4 shafts, 153,000 shp, 34.3 knots
Crew: 1101
Armor: 3.5-5.9 inch belt, 1-2.2 inch deck
Armament: 6 dual 5/40 DP, 31 25 mm AA
Aircraft: 64 (73 maximum)
-
That's Cool
Go for that 8)
you can even use the completed date of 1939 as the reg
-
I like the design of this ship as it is indeed not a cookie cuter Fed ship. She looks really pretty in your sketches.
Edit: removed all my previous comments after another look and it making more sense. I have since decided I totally agree with Dizzy when he says:
I totally love this idea. It reminds me of the Navy Carriers with the Angled Fight Deck. What I see that this design needs is a very large on one side fighter bay and door structure to warrant such an unusual side pylon config. I think the offset bridge command structure is the way to go too. One thing that always irked me about fed carriers was that many of them had bay doors that opened right up into either impulse exhaust or warp pylons. This design would solve all that. Brilliant. Why no one thought of something like this before, I dunno. Brilliant.
This is a very well thought out piece of kit! That'll teach me to look more closely next time. Excellent work as always, Atolm!
-
NP, some designs don't hit you right away, and need to be seen in 3d to "get it" fully/properly.
That's why a say a schematic can look bad, but the ship can look sweet in reality. The inverse is also true of the schematic looking sweet, but in reality, it will look generic or bland.
Very few times do both the schematic and the actual, actually look sweet.