|
Sprinkler Systems
Uhaul move
Lawn care
Roses and trees
Ford Parts
Chrysler Parts
Lake Powell
New IPod Touch Apps
New IPhone Apps
IPhone Apps
IPad Information
IPad Apps
Android APPS
Android Games APPS
Android Systems
Android Tablets APPS and Beyond
Smartphone Apps
Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools
Tablet PC
Car Sharing Car Leasing
Tabler Pc
Fly Fishing
Toyota Cars
Vacation Rentals
Stock market
NYSE
SSE Stock
Freight & Shipping News
Gluten
Lactose
Gout
My Coupon Life
Campgrounds Check
Outdoor
Kitchen Design and Redoo
Bath Remodeling
Palm Springs
Las Vegas Vacation Tipps
Lake Powell Boating
Homes for lease
Electric and green Car Blog
Pearls and diamonds
Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App
Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
|
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » New Federation starship with diagram
| New Federation starship with diagram [message #34556] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 07:50 |
|
A post dominion-war design.
This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
nacelles.
The specifications have also changed.
Remember to click on the picture to expand it to full size!
Here is a direct link to the diagram:
http://img185.echo.cx/my.php?image=fearlessclassdreadnoughts tarfl.gif
Comments and criticisms are very welcome!
Abbreviated specs below:
Type : Heavy Dreadnought
Commissioned : 2395
Production : U.S.S. Fearless NCC-91101 plus eight additional vessels.
Dedication Plaque Motto : "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night" -
Dylan Thomas, Earth
MISSION :
Ability to engage and destroy large-mass (battleship hull class and
greater) Threat vessels. Extended offensive and defensive engagement
capability against multiple large-mass Threat vessels utilizing primary
AND secondary shielding. Ability to incorporate the Heavy Assault
Phaser Lance weapons system which produces a 2,100,000 terrawatt phaser
beam capable of penetrating through a large-mass Threat vessel's
shields, armor and superstructure in a single beam strike. Ability to
maintain an extended defensive and offensive engagement with multiple
small-mass, highly maneuverable Threat vessels (fighter hull class and
similar.) Ability to deploy and fully support up to 500 Peregrine
medium fighters/interceptors.
DIMENSIONS :
Length (Overall): 2975 meters; Beam: 1136 meters; Height: 374
meters; Decks: 82; Mass: 38,950,634 metric tons
CREW :
9,800 (250 Officers; 3250 Enlisted Crew; 5,600 Military Troops and / or
Special Forces; 100 Fighter Pilots; 600* ExoComps -Sentient artificial
life forms)
*Number may exceed 600 by replication if the ship has critical damage.
PROPULSION :
Sustainable cruise velocity: Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency velocity: Warp
Factor 9.2 for 18 hours; Impulse drive velocity: 0.74 c (Max.)
Type : 2 x Class 13 matter/antimatter reactor rated at 18,750,000
terrawatts at 100% power output. Combined Class 13 reactors output
37,500,000 terrawatts at Red Alert power configuration. Emergency
output is rated at 120% for a time period never to exceed thirty
minutes. Sustainable cruise velocity of Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency
velocity of Warp Factor 9.2 is sustainable for a time period not to
exceed eighteen hours. Warp nacelles (Heavy armored enhanced
survivability type) to meet 62% driver coil efficiency at warp 7.0.
Warp drive efficiency at emergency warp is rated at 38%. Warp drive
efficiency after deployment of warp nacelle armor panels is 0%.
Secondary (impulse) propulsion system to provide sublight velocities up
to 0.74 lightspeed ( c ). Type : 48 x YPS 9000 series fusion drive
motors. Eight fusion drive motors allocated for sublight propulsion.
Forty fusion drive motors designated for auxiliary power generation.
Type : 40 x High-output thruster quad rated at 8.6 million Newtons of
exhaust. Reaction control system (thrusters) provide both standard
operational capabilities and combat maneuvering (fast reaction / rapid
three- axis movement) for optimal deployment of the forward heavy
assault phaser lance system. Thirty backup RCS thruster quads in the
primary hull and aft engineering hull are recessed behind ejectable
armored blast plates and are deployed only when the primary RCS has
failed.
COMPUTER SYSTEMS :
Type : 4 x Hyper Bio-Neural (Mod III) computer core. (1 forward primary
hull; 1 aft primary hull; 2 engineering hull) All computer subsystems
throughout the ship incorporate Bio-Neural Gel Packs for maximum data
processing capacity.
TACTICAL :
Assault armament -
1 x Mark one heavy assault phaser lance
Offensive armament -
14 x Multi-vector quadruple torpedo launcher (56 tubes) rated for use
with Quantum MK I;II; III; Photon Type I; II; III; IV; Tri-cobalt
device and Class I to VX probes
08 x Quantum torpedo rapid-fire turret
04 x Mark two heavy graviton beam
06 x Direct-fire photon torpedo tubes
50 x Tri-cobalt device
02 x Combat tractor beam system
48 x Combat transporter
Defensive armament -
36 x Type 12 phaser array
26 x Heavy pulse phaser cannon turret
500 x Type 16 antimatter mine
500 x Type 19 antimatter mine
500 x Self-replicating cloaked mine
100 x Class 12 holographic decoy
Enjoy!
My apologies if I miss a question or reply, as my news server is under
attack by Borg nanoprobes :( That's why i'm posting via google.
Rear Admiral Johnny
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34564 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 10:59 |
|
In the original "Star Fleet Technical Manual", didn't a Dreadnaught class
starship have 3 nacells?
ITTOD
<john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>A post dominion-war design.
>
> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
> nacelles.
>
> The specifications have also changed.
>
> Remember to click on the picture to expand it to full size!
>
> Here is a direct link to the diagram:
> http://img185.echo.cx/my.php?image=fearlessclassdreadnoughts tarfl.gif
>
> Comments and criticisms are very welcome!
>
> Abbreviated specs below:
>
> Type : Heavy Dreadnought
>
> Commissioned : 2395
> Production : U.S.S. Fearless NCC-91101 plus eight additional vessels.
> Dedication Plaque Motto : "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night" -
> Dylan Thomas, Earth
>
> MISSION :
> Ability to engage and destroy large-mass (battleship hull class and
> greater) Threat vessels. Extended offensive and defensive engagement
> capability against multiple large-mass Threat vessels utilizing primary
> AND secondary shielding. Ability to incorporate the Heavy Assault
> Phaser Lance weapons system which produces a 2,100,000 terrawatt phaser
> beam capable of penetrating through a large-mass Threat vessel's
> shields, armor and superstructure in a single beam strike. Ability to
> maintain an extended defensive and offensive engagement with multiple
> small-mass, highly maneuverable Threat vessels (fighter hull class and
> similar.) Ability to deploy and fully support up to 500 Peregrine
> medium fighters/interceptors.
>
> DIMENSIONS :
> Length (Overall): 2975 meters; Beam: 1136 meters; Height: 374
> meters; Decks: 82; Mass: 38,950,634 metric tons
>
> CREW :
> 9,800 (250 Officers; 3250 Enlisted Crew; 5,600 Military Troops and / or
> Special Forces; 100 Fighter Pilots; 600* ExoComps -Sentient artificial
> life forms)
> *Number may exceed 600 by replication if the ship has critical damage.
>
> PROPULSION :
> Sustainable cruise velocity: Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency velocity: Warp
> Factor 9.2 for 18 hours; Impulse drive velocity: 0.74 c (Max.)
>
> Type : 2 x Class 13 matter/antimatter reactor rated at 18,750,000
> terrawatts at 100% power output. Combined Class 13 reactors output
> 37,500,000 terrawatts at Red Alert power configuration. Emergency
> output is rated at 120% for a time period never to exceed thirty
> minutes. Sustainable cruise velocity of Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency
> velocity of Warp Factor 9.2 is sustainable for a time period not to
> exceed eighteen hours. Warp nacelles (Heavy armored enhanced
> survivability type) to meet 62% driver coil efficiency at warp 7.0.
> Warp drive efficiency at emergency warp is rated at 38%. Warp drive
> efficiency after deployment of warp nacelle armor panels is 0%.
>
> Secondary (impulse) propulsion system to provide sublight velocities up
> to 0.74 lightspeed ( c ). Type : 48 x YPS 9000 series fusion drive
> motors. Eight fusion drive motors allocated for sublight propulsion.
> Forty fusion drive motors designated for auxiliary power generation.
>
> Type : 40 x High-output thruster quad rated at 8.6 million Newtons of
> exhaust. Reaction control system (thrusters) provide both standard
> operational capabilities and combat maneuvering (fast reaction / rapid
> three- axis movement) for optimal deployment of the forward heavy
> assault phaser lance system. Thirty backup RCS thruster quads in the
> primary hull and aft engineering hull are recessed behind ejectable
> armored blast plates and are deployed only when the primary RCS has
> failed.
>
> COMPUTER SYSTEMS :
> Type : 4 x Hyper Bio-Neural (Mod III) computer core. (1 forward primary
> hull; 1 aft primary hull; 2 engineering hull) All computer subsystems
> throughout the ship incorporate Bio-Neural Gel Packs for maximum data
> processing capacity.
>
> TACTICAL :
> Assault armament -
> 1 x Mark one heavy assault phaser lance
>
> Offensive armament -
> 14 x Multi-vector quadruple torpedo launcher (56 tubes) rated for use
> with Quantum MK I;II; III; Photon Type I; II; III; IV; Tri-cobalt
> device and Class I to VX probes
> 08 x Quantum torpedo rapid-fire turret
> 04 x Mark two heavy graviton beam
> 06 x Direct-fire photon torpedo tubes
> 50 x Tri-cobalt device
> 02 x Combat tractor beam system
> 48 x Combat transporter
>
> Defensive armament -
> 36 x Type 12 phaser array
> 26 x Heavy pulse phaser cannon turret
> 500 x Type 16 antimatter mine
> 500 x Type 19 antimatter mine
> 500 x Self-replicating cloaked mine
> 100 x Class 12 holographic decoy
>
>
> Enjoy!
>
> My apologies if I miss a question or reply, as my news server is under
> attack by Borg nanoprobes :( That's why i'm posting via google.
>
> Rear Admiral Johnny
>
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34569 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 13:21 |
|
john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com wrote:
> A post dominion-war design.
>
> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
> nacelles.
>
> The specifications have also changed.
>
> Remember to click on the picture to expand it to full size!
>
> Here is a direct link to the diagram:
> http://img185.echo.cx/my.php?image=fearlessclassdreadnoughts tarfl.gif
>
> Comments and criticisms are very welcome!
>
> Abbreviated specs below:
>
> Type : Heavy Dreadnought
>
> Commissioned : 2395
> Production : U.S.S. Fearless NCC-91101 plus eight additional vessels.
> Dedication Plaque Motto : "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night" -
> Dylan Thomas, Earth
>
> MISSION :
> Ability to engage and destroy large-mass (battleship hull class and
> greater) Threat vessels. Extended offensive and defensive engagement
> capability against multiple large-mass Threat vessels utilizing primary
> AND secondary shielding. Ability to incorporate the Heavy Assault
> Phaser Lance weapons system which produces a 2,100,000 terrawatt phaser
> beam capable of penetrating through a large-mass Threat vessel's
> shields, armor and superstructure in a single beam strike. Ability to
> maintain an extended defensive and offensive engagement with multiple
> small-mass, highly maneuverable Threat vessels (fighter hull class and
> similar.) Ability to deploy and fully support up to 500 Peregrine
> medium fighters/interceptors.
>
> DIMENSIONS :
> Length (Overall): 2975 meters; Beam: 1136 meters; Height: 374
> meters; Decks: 82; Mass: 38,950,634 metric tons
>
> CREW :
> 9,800 (250 Officers; 3250 Enlisted Crew; 5,600 Military Troops and / or
> Special Forces; 100 Fighter Pilots; 600* ExoComps -Sentient artificial
> life forms)
> *Number may exceed 600 by replication if the ship has critical damage.
>
> PROPULSION :
> Sustainable cruise velocity: Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency velocity: Warp
> Factor 9.2 for 18 hours; Impulse drive velocity: 0.74 c (Max.)
>
> Type : 2 x Class 13 matter/antimatter reactor rated at 18,750,000
> terrawatts at 100% power output. Combined Class 13 reactors output
> 37,500,000 terrawatts at Red Alert power configuration. Emergency
> output is rated at 120% for a time period never to exceed thirty
> minutes. Sustainable cruise velocity of Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency
> velocity of Warp Factor 9.2 is sustainable for a time period not to
> exceed eighteen hours. Warp nacelles (Heavy armored enhanced
> survivability type) to meet 62% driver coil efficiency at warp 7.0.
> Warp drive efficiency at emergency warp is rated at 38%. Warp drive
> efficiency after deployment of warp nacelle armor panels is 0%.
>
> Secondary (impulse) propulsion system to provide sublight velocities up
> to 0.74 lightspeed ( c ). Type : 48 x YPS 9000 series fusion drive
> motors. Eight fusion drive motors allocated for sublight propulsion.
> Forty fusion drive motors designated for auxiliary power generation.
>
> Type : 40 x High-output thruster quad rated at 8.6 million Newtons of
> exhaust. Reaction control system (thrusters) provide both standard
> operational capabilities and combat maneuvering (fast reaction / rapid
> three- axis movement) for optimal deployment of the forward heavy
> assault phaser lance system. Thirty backup RCS thruster quads in the
> primary hull and aft engineering hull are recessed behind ejectable
> armored blast plates and are deployed only when the primary RCS has
> failed.
>
> COMPUTER SYSTEMS :
> Type : 4 x Hyper Bio-Neural (Mod III) computer core. (1 forward primary
> hull; 1 aft primary hull; 2 engineering hull) All computer subsystems
> throughout the ship incorporate Bio-Neural Gel Packs for maximum data
> processing capacity.
>
> TACTICAL :
> Assault armament -
> 1 x Mark one heavy assault phaser lance
>
> Offensive armament -
> 14 x Multi-vector quadruple torpedo launcher (56 tubes) rated for use
> with Quantum MK I;II; III; Photon Type I; II; III; IV; Tri-cobalt
> device and Class I to VX probes
> 08 x Quantum torpedo rapid-fire turret
> 04 x Mark two heavy graviton beam
> 06 x Direct-fire photon torpedo tubes
> 50 x Tri-cobalt device
> 02 x Combat tractor beam system
> 48 x Combat transporter
>
> Defensive armament -
> 36 x Type 12 phaser array
> 26 x Heavy pulse phaser cannon turret
> 500 x Type 16 antimatter mine
> 500 x Type 19 antimatter mine
> 500 x Self-replicating cloaked mine
> 100 x Class 12 holographic decoy
>
>
> Enjoy!
>
> My apologies if I miss a question or reply, as my news server is under
> attack by Borg nanoprobes :( That's why i'm posting via google.
>
> Rear Admiral Johnny
>
Well,"rear admiral," the dorsal view looks like a penis with an over
sized head!
James
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34571 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 13:58 |
|
john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com wrote:
> DIMENSIONS :
> Length (Overall): 2975 meters; Beam: 1136 meters; Height: 374
> meters; Decks: 82; Mass: 38,950,634 metric tons
Almost 3 kilometers long? Aren't those windows ginormous?
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34579 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 15:36 |
|
<john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>A post dominion-war design.
>
> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
> nacelles.
And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of their
personal opinion on the design??
Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34596 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 16:58 |
|
On 13 May 2005 22:50:14 -0700, john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com wrote:
>A post dominion-war design.
>
>This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>nacelles.
>
>The specifications have also changed.
>
>Remember to click on the picture to expand it to full size!
Very nice work, John. You've obviously put a lot of thought and
effort into your design.
--
The Merry Piper
[http://tmpiper.livejournal.com]
If you want to dance, you'll have to pay ... me!
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34598 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 17:09 |
|
Snake wrote:
> <john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> A post dominion-war design.
>>
>> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>> nacelles.
>
> And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
> considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of
> their personal opinion on the design??
>
> Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>
> Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
Yeah. Agreed. Great details! I wish I could do something like that!
Only the best way to view it is really to blow up the image. Otherwise its a
bit blurry.
In stead of 'neutron layered' I would have gone with 'neutronium layered'.
Thinking about 'The Doomsday Machine' and 'Thinktank'.
I really love the thing about the holographic decoy!
It looks tough! Not something to mess with!
--
www.Wouter.Valentijn.name
www.zeppodunsel.nl
www.scifics.com
www.nksf.nl
liam=mail
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34599 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 17:18 |
|
Snake wrote:
> <john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote...
>>A post dominion-war design.
>>
>>This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>>nacelles.
>
>
> And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
> considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of their
> personal opinion on the design??
>
> Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>
> Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
I'm sorry. It *is* excellent work.
But I still think the windows are monstrous...
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34619 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 20:01 |
|
john1n2... [at] hotmail.com wrote:
> A post dominion-war design.
>
> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
> nacelles.
>
> The specifications have also changed.
>
> Remember to click on the picture to expand it to full size!
>
> Here is a direct link to the diagram:
> http://img185.echo.cx/my.php?image=fearlessclassdreadnoughts tarfl.gif
>
> Comments and criticisms are very welcome!
>
> Abbreviated specs below:
>
> Type : Heavy Dreadnought
>
> Commissioned : 2395
> Production : U.S.S. Fearless NCC-91101 plus eight additional vessels.
> Dedication Plaque Motto : "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night" -
> Dylan Thomas, Earth
>
> MISSION :
> Ability to engage and destroy large-mass (battleship hull class and
> greater) Threat vessels. Extended offensive and defensive engagement
> capability against multiple large-mass Threat vessels utilizing
primary
> AND secondary shielding. Ability to incorporate the Heavy Assault
> Phaser Lance weapons system which produces a 2,100,000 terrawatt
phaser
> beam capable of penetrating through a large-mass Threat vessel's
> shields, armor and superstructure in a single beam strike. Ability
to
> maintain an extended defensive and offensive engagement with multiple
> small-mass, highly maneuverable Threat vessels (fighter hull class
and
> similar.) Ability to deploy and fully support up to 500 Peregrine
> medium fighters/interceptors.
>
> DIMENSIONS :
> Length (Overall): 2975 meters; Beam: 1136 meters; Height: 374
> meters; Decks: 82; Mass: 38,950,634 metric tons
>
> CREW :
> 9,800 (250 Officers; 3250 Enlisted Crew; 5,600 Military Troops and /
or
> Special Forces; 100 Fighter Pilots; 600* ExoComps -Sentient
artificial
> life forms)
> *Number may exceed 600 by replication if the ship has critical
damage.
>
> PROPULSION :
> Sustainable cruise velocity: Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency velocity:
Warp
> Factor 9.2 for 18 hours; Impulse drive velocity: 0.74 c (Max.)
>
> Type : 2 x Class 13 matter/antimatter reactor rated at 18,750,000
> terrawatts at 100% power output. Combined Class 13 reactors output
> 37,500,000 terrawatts at Red Alert power configuration. Emergency
> output is rated at 120% for a time period never to exceed thirty
> minutes. Sustainable cruise velocity of Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency
> velocity of Warp Factor 9.2 is sustainable for a time period not to
> exceed eighteen hours. Warp nacelles (Heavy armored enhanced
> survivability type) to meet 62% driver coil efficiency at warp 7.0.
> Warp drive efficiency at emergency warp is rated at 38%. Warp drive
> efficiency after deployment of warp nacelle armor panels is 0%.
>
> Secondary (impulse) propulsion system to provide sublight velocities
up
> to 0.74 lightspeed ( c ). Type : 48 x YPS 9000 series fusion drive
> motors. Eight fusion drive motors allocated for sublight propulsion.
> Forty fusion drive motors designated for auxiliary power generation.
>
> Type : 40 x High-output thruster quad rated at 8.6 million Newtons of
> exhaust. Reaction control system (thrusters) provide both standard
> operational capabilities and combat maneuvering (fast reaction /
rapid
> three- axis movement) for optimal deployment of the forward heavy
> assault phaser lance system. Thirty backup RCS thruster quads in the
> primary hull and aft engineering hull are recessed behind ejectable
> armored blast plates and are deployed only when the primary RCS has
> failed.
>
> COMPUTER SYSTEMS :
> Type : 4 x Hyper Bio-Neural (Mod III) computer core. (1 forward
primary
> hull; 1 aft primary hull; 2 engineering hull) All computer
subsystems
> throughout the ship incorporate Bio-Neural Gel Packs for maximum data
> processing capacity.
>
> TACTICAL :
> Assault armament -
> 1 x Mark one heavy assault phaser lance
>
> Offensive armament -
> 14 x Multi-vector quadruple torpedo launcher (56 tubes) rated for use
> with Quantum MK I;II; III; Photon Type I; II; III; IV; Tri-cobalt
> device and Class I to VX probes
> 08 x Quantum torpedo rapid-fire turret
> 04 x Mark two heavy graviton beam
> 06 x Direct-fire photon torpedo tubes
> 50 x Tri-cobalt device
> 02 x Combat tractor beam system
> 48 x Combat transporter
>
> Defensive armament -
> 36 x Type 12 phaser array
> 26 x Heavy pulse phaser cannon turret
> 500 x Type 16 antimatter mine
> 500 x Type 19 antimatter mine
> 500 x Self-replicating cloaked mine
> 100 x Class 12 holographic decoy
>
>
> Enjoy!
>
> My apologies if I miss a question or reply, as my news server is
under
> attack by Borg nanoprobes :( That's why i'm posting via google.
>
> Rear Admiral Johnny
-----
Excellent!! I mean it is very well done!! I have just one critisim.
Your discription of its capabilities is too militaristic. You have to
remember that Starfleet is an diplomatic/ expoloritory organisation
forced to take on a military component. Imagine NASA with guns. I am
sure if you ask anybody in Starfleet they would gladly have their
vessels unarmed, but the realities of the Galaxy dictate otherwise.
Still they would play up the peaceful uses of such a ship and play down
the military capabilities. However, that does not mean they wouldn't
have them, not with the Borg still being a threat, and Capt. Janeway's
report about Speicies #whatever lurking out there...
---->Hunter
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34621 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 20:28 |
|
> Excellent!! I mean it is very well done!! I have just one critisim.
> Your discription of its capabilities is too militaristic. You have to
> remember that Starfleet is an diplomatic/ expoloritory organisation
> forced to take on a military component. Imagine NASA with guns. I am
> sure if you ask anybody in Starfleet they would gladly have their
> vessels unarmed, but the realities of the Galaxy dictate otherwise.
>
> Still they would play up the peaceful uses of such a ship and play down
> the military capabilities. However, that does not mean they wouldn't
> have them, not with the Borg still being a threat, and Capt. Janeway's
> report about Speicies #whatever lurking out there...
Not neccessarily. Look at the Defiant, it was specifically designed to be a
combat assault ship, to fight against the Borg.
The Federation and Starfleet have had to deal with increasing threats from
all over. It stands to reason that they would better equip their ships to
defend the Federation.
Starfleet is still thought of primarily as a tool of exploration, but it is
equally a tool of defense. Wolf 359 and the Dominion War have taught
Starfleet valuable lessons about having to make sure their ships are
prepared for whatever they encounter out there.
(I always thought it was stupid - "It's a science vessel" or "It's a medical
ship" "it has minimum armament" Why? Scientists and doctors don't need to
defend themselves?)
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34623 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 21:18 |
|
Wouter Valentijn wrote:
> Snake wrote:
>
>><john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>A post dominion-war design.
>>>
>>>This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>>>nacelles.
>>
>>And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
>>considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of
>>their personal opinion on the design??
>>
>>Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>>
>>Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
>
>
> Yeah. Agreed. Great details! I wish I could do something like that!
> Only the best way to view it is really to blow up the image. Otherwise its a
> bit blurry.
> In stead of 'neutron layered' I would have gone with 'neutronium layered'.
> Thinking about 'The Doomsday Machine' and 'Thinktank'.
> I really love the thing about the holographic decoy!
> It looks tough! Not something to mess with!
>
I would note that the holographic decoy is borrowed from the Star Empire
project of the events in and surrounding the _Dreanought_ incident
chronicled by noted Future Historian Diane Duane.
--
CaptJosh
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34625 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 21:19 |
|
First Fallen wrote:
>>Excellent!! I mean it is very well done!! I have just one critisim.
>>Your discription of its capabilities is too militaristic. You have to
>>remember that Starfleet is an diplomatic/ expoloritory organisation
>>forced to take on a military component. Imagine NASA with guns. I am
>>sure if you ask anybody in Starfleet they would gladly have their
>>vessels unarmed, but the realities of the Galaxy dictate otherwise.
>>
>>Still they would play up the peaceful uses of such a ship and play down
>>the military capabilities. However, that does not mean they wouldn't
>>have them, not with the Borg still being a threat, and Capt. Janeway's
>>report about Speicies #whatever lurking out there...
>
>
> Not neccessarily. Look at the Defiant, it was specifically designed to be a
> combat assault ship, to fight against the Borg.
>
> The Federation and Starfleet have had to deal with increasing threats from
> all over. It stands to reason that they would better equip their ships to
> defend the Federation.
>
> Starfleet is still thought of primarily as a tool of exploration, but it is
> equally a tool of defense. Wolf 359 and the Dominion War have taught
> Starfleet valuable lessons about having to make sure their ships are
> prepared for whatever they encounter out there.
>
> (I always thought it was stupid - "It's a science vessel" or "It's a medical
> ship" "it has minimum armament" Why? Scientists and doctors don't need to
> defend themselves?)
>
>
BTW, the species number that Hunter was trying to think of is Species 8472
--
CaptJosh
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34629 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 22:05 |
|
I liked the older version actually. And don't worry about James, some people
see penises everywhere they go, it's some kind of psyco-sematic syndrome
that will hopefully be wiped out by the 23rd century. Hope you don't mind
that I'll be going back to the older nacelle version when I get around to
that part of the model.
--
Bill
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billcarey/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/redeyesxbl/
"James Ascher" <jwa1968 [at] earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:hblhe.638$Ri4.189 [at] newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com wrote:
>> A post dominion-war design.
>>
>> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>> nacelles.
>>
>> The specifications have also changed.
>>
>> Remember to click on the picture to expand it to full size!
>>
>> Here is a direct link to the diagram:
>> http://img185.echo.cx/my.php?image=fearlessclassdreadnoughts tarfl.gif
>>
>> Comments and criticisms are very welcome!
>>
>> Abbreviated specs below:
>>
>> Type : Heavy Dreadnought
>>
>> Commissioned : 2395
>> Production : U.S.S. Fearless NCC-91101 plus eight additional vessels.
>> Dedication Plaque Motto : "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night" -
>> Dylan Thomas, Earth
>>
>> MISSION :
>> Ability to engage and destroy large-mass (battleship hull class and
>> greater) Threat vessels. Extended offensive and defensive engagement
>> capability against multiple large-mass Threat vessels utilizing primary
>> AND secondary shielding. Ability to incorporate the Heavy Assault
>> Phaser Lance weapons system which produces a 2,100,000 terrawatt phaser
>> beam capable of penetrating through a large-mass Threat vessel's
>> shields, armor and superstructure in a single beam strike. Ability to
>> maintain an extended defensive and offensive engagement with multiple
>> small-mass, highly maneuverable Threat vessels (fighter hull class and
>> similar.) Ability to deploy and fully support up to 500 Peregrine
>> medium fighters/interceptors.
>>
>> DIMENSIONS :
>> Length (Overall): 2975 meters; Beam: 1136 meters; Height: 374
>> meters; Decks: 82; Mass: 38,950,634 metric tons
>>
>> CREW :
>> 9,800 (250 Officers; 3250 Enlisted Crew; 5,600 Military Troops and / or
>> Special Forces; 100 Fighter Pilots; 600* ExoComps -Sentient artificial
>> life forms)
>> *Number may exceed 600 by replication if the ship has critical damage.
>>
>> PROPULSION :
>> Sustainable cruise velocity: Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency velocity: Warp
>> Factor 9.2 for 18 hours; Impulse drive velocity: 0.74 c (Max.)
>>
>> Type : 2 x Class 13 matter/antimatter reactor rated at 18,750,000
>> terrawatts at 100% power output. Combined Class 13 reactors output
>> 37,500,000 terrawatts at Red Alert power configuration. Emergency
>> output is rated at 120% for a time period never to exceed thirty
>> minutes. Sustainable cruise velocity of Warp Factor 8.2. Emergency
>> velocity of Warp Factor 9.2 is sustainable for a time period not to
>> exceed eighteen hours. Warp nacelles (Heavy armored enhanced
>> survivability type) to meet 62% driver coil efficiency at warp 7.0.
>> Warp drive efficiency at emergency warp is rated at 38%. Warp drive
>> efficiency after deployment of warp nacelle armor panels is 0%.
>>
>> Secondary (impulse) propulsion system to provide sublight velocities up
>> to 0.74 lightspeed ( c ). Type : 48 x YPS 9000 series fusion drive
>> motors. Eight fusion drive motors allocated for sublight propulsion.
>> Forty fusion drive motors designated for auxiliary power generation.
>>
>> Type : 40 x High-output thruster quad rated at 8.6 million Newtons of
>> exhaust. Reaction control system (thrusters) provide both standard
>> operational capabilities and combat maneuvering (fast reaction / rapid
>> three- axis movement) for optimal deployment of the forward heavy
>> assault phaser lance system. Thirty backup RCS thruster quads in the
>> primary hull and aft engineering hull are recessed behind ejectable
>> armored blast plates and are deployed only when the primary RCS has
>> failed.
>>
>> COMPUTER SYSTEMS :
>> Type : 4 x Hyper Bio-Neural (Mod III) computer core. (1 forward primary
>> hull; 1 aft primary hull; 2 engineering hull) All computer subsystems
>> throughout the ship incorporate Bio-Neural Gel Packs for maximum data
>> processing capacity.
>>
>> TACTICAL :
>> Assault armament -
>> 1 x Mark one heavy assault phaser lance
>>
>> Offensive armament -
>> 14 x Multi-vector quadruple torpedo launcher (56 tubes) rated for use
>> with Quantum MK I;II; III; Photon Type I; II; III; IV; Tri-cobalt
>> device and Class I to VX probes
>> 08 x Quantum torpedo rapid-fire turret
>> 04 x Mark two heavy graviton beam
>> 06 x Direct-fire photon torpedo tubes
>> 50 x Tri-cobalt device
>> 02 x Combat tractor beam system
>> 48 x Combat transporter
>>
>> Defensive armament -
>> 36 x Type 12 phaser array
>> 26 x Heavy pulse phaser cannon turret
>> 500 x Type 16 antimatter mine
>> 500 x Type 19 antimatter mine
>> 500 x Self-replicating cloaked mine
>> 100 x Class 12 holographic decoy
>>
>>
>> Enjoy!
>>
>> My apologies if I miss a question or reply, as my news server is under
>> attack by Borg nanoprobes :( That's why i'm posting via google.
>>
>> Rear Admiral Johnny
>>
>
> Well,"rear admiral," the dorsal view looks like a penis with an over sized
> head!
>
> James
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34632 ] |
Sa, 14 Mai 2005 23:53 |
|
CaptJosh wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> Snake wrote:
>>
>>> <john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> A post dominion-war design.
>>>>
>>>> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>>>> nacelles.
>>>
>>> And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
>>> considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of
>>> their personal opinion on the design??
>>>
>>> Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>>>
>>> Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
>>
>>
>> Yeah. Agreed. Great details! I wish I could do something like that!
>> Only the best way to view it is really to blow up the image.
>> Otherwise its a bit blurry.
>> In stead of 'neutron layered' I would have gone with 'neutronium
>> layered'. Thinking about 'The Doomsday Machine' and 'Thinktank'.
>> I really love the thing about the holographic decoy!
>> It looks tough! Not something to mess with!
>>
>
> I would note that the holographic decoy is borrowed from the Star
> Empire project of the events in and surrounding the _Dreanought_
> incident chronicled by noted Future Historian Diane Duane.
Ah, yes, I remember now!
Great novel!
--
www.Wouter.Valentijn.name
www.zeppodunsel.nl
www.scifics.com
www.nksf.nl
liam=mail
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34637 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 00:46 |
|
"First Fallen" <nope [at] nope.com> wrote in message
news:Lrrhe.1350398$Xk.1167951 [at] pd7tw3no...
> (I always thought it was stupid - "It's a science vessel" or "It's a
> medical
> ship" "it has minimum armament" Why? Scientists and doctors don't need
> to
> defend themselves?)
Because that's the way it was always done in the Navy (Roddenberry's a Navy
pilot, remember?) and the Navy does that due to a particular pattern of
logic. Frigates, destroyers...each one, each design, is optimized for that
purpose. There is only so much room on a ship for materials, equipment,
propulsion, crew space. By deciding the use the space is optimized for that
usage. You cannot have maximum science lab abilities if you are giving room
for large weaponry and the storage space necessary for war. A medical ship
needs causality space, lots of it, plus subsystems designed to support the
systems that help the sick (power systems routed to medical devices),
therefore away from weapons and self-defense.
The only time you can get all of the above is when you design a ship so
massive that you have room for all of the above, or at least a goodly
majority of the above. But a larger ship is less maneuverable and takes
more resources - in outfitting, supplying, building - meaning you have less
ships overall due to larger capital ships. A large capital ship is not the
best thing to go into combat with - please see the conversion of ocean
liners into auxiliary cruisers during WWII. For most the conversion did not
last long - the Admiralty realized that the ship was just too big, too much
a target. They were generally reconverted into troop transports and medical
ships.
War has it's own rules, and naval design is generally governed by war needs.
I guess Star Trek's designers still remember those needs and design ships
based upon the necessary need - therefore optimized to reduce requirements
to build but optimize return.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34677 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 06:05 |
|
----------
In article <Cdvhe.882$_f7.730 [at] trndny01>, "Snake"
<fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.net> wrote:
> Because that's the way it was always done in the Navy (Roddenberry's a Navy
> pilot, remember?)
No, Army Air Corps.
D
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34678 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 06:11 |
|
"D" <Z5rkonic [at] nonearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:QTzhe.3204$w21.376 [at] newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> ----------
> In article <Cdvhe.882$_f7.730 [at] trndny01>, "Snake"
> <fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Because that's the way it was always done in the Navy (Roddenberry's a
>> Navy
>> pilot, remember?)
>
> No, Army Air Corps.
Right. Sorry. Brain death. Bad day.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34682 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 06:37 |
|
Snake wrote:
> Because that's the way it was always done in the Navy (Roddenberry's a Navy
> pilot, remember?)
Army Air Corps. Forerunner of the Air Force. He was a bomber pilot.
Tony
--
Anthony J. Bryant
Website: http://www.sengokudaimyo.com
Effingham's Heraldic Avatars (...and stuff):
http://www.sengokudaimyo.com/avatarbiz.html
Grand Cross, Order of the Laurel:
http://www.cafepress.com/laurelorder
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34709 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 14:55 |
|
CaptJosh wrote:
> I would note that the holographic decoy is borrowed from the Star
Empire
> project of the events in and surrounding the _Dreanought_ incident
> chronicled by noted Future Historian Diane Duane.
Uhh...not sure I had anything to do with this. More likely the source
you're thinking of is Diane Carey.
Best -- Diane
---
Diane Duane | The Owl Springs Partnership | Co. Wicklow, Ireland
http://www.youngwizards.net | http://www.owlsprings.com
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34713 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 15:57 |
|
diane.duane [at] gmail.com wrote:
> CaptJosh wrote:
>
>> I would note that the holographic decoy is borrowed from the Star
>> Empire project of the events in and surrounding the _Dreanought_
>> incident chronicled by noted Future Historian Diane Duane.
>
> Uhh...not sure I had anything to do with this. More likely the source
> you're thinking of is Diane Carey.
Indeed!
She wrote 'Dreadnought!' and 'Battlestations!'
Highly action packed.
One of the last things I read from her was that 'New Earth' stuff.
--
www.Wouter.Valentijn.name
www.zeppodunsel.nl
www.scifics.com
www.nksf.nl
liam=mail
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34726 ] |
So, 15 Mai 2005 17:44 |
|
Snake wrote:
><john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>>A post dominion-war design.
>>
>>This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>>nacelles.
>>
>>
>
>And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
>considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of their
>personal opinion on the design??
>
>Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>
>Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
>
>
>
>
Agreed. Lots of work done on that design, very impressive. IMHO it's
ugly as hell and totally non-Trek to even think of such a beast of
destruction, but looking past that, excellent detail, well done!
Will there be any 3D renderings? I like pretty pictures :)
Erwin
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34842 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 11:00 |
|
I'm very slowly working on a model, but it's a inbetween project. If anyone
beats me to it, that's okay.
I agree it's nothing the prissies in the TNG would have wanted to build, but
Kirk would have drooled over it. Different times, different attitudes.
--
Bill
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billcarey/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/redeyesxbl/
"Erwin" <roosjen [at] quicknet.nl> wrote in message
news:614a$42876e91$d47fe366$25487 [at] news.multikabel.nl...
> Snake wrote:
>
>><john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>A post dominion-war design.
>>>
>>>This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>>>nacelles.
>>>
>>
>>And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
>>considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of their
>>personal opinion on the design??
>>
>>Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>>
>>Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
>>
>>
> Agreed. Lots of work done on that design, very impressive. IMHO it's ugly
> as hell and totally non-Trek to even think of such a beast of destruction,
> but looking past that, excellent detail, well done!
> Will there be any 3D renderings? I like pretty pictures :)
>
> Erwin
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34843 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 11:41 |
|
Bill Carey wrote:
>
> "Erwin" <roosjen [at] quicknet.nl> wrote in message
> news:614a$42876e91$d47fe366$25487 [at] news.multikabel.nl...
>> Snake wrote:
>>
>>> <john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1116049814.000186.270520 [at] g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> A post dominion-war design.
>>>>
>>>> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>>>> nacelles.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
>>> considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of
>>> their personal opinion on the design??
>>>
>>> Jeez, Trek fans /have/ changed.
>>>
>>> Congrats. The diagram, and associated details, look great.
>>>
>>>
>> Agreed. Lots of work done on that design, very impressive. IMHO it's
>> ugly as hell and totally non-Trek to even think of such a beast of
>> destruction, but looking past that, excellent detail, well done!
>> Will there be any 3D renderings? I like pretty pictures :)
> I'm very slowly working on a model, but it's a inbetween project. If
> anyone beats me to it, that's okay.
Good luck with that!
>
> I agree it's nothing the prissies in the TNG would have wanted to
> build, but Kirk would have drooled over it. Different times,
> different attitudes.
>
Okay, but I think The Sisko (also 24th century) would like it also.
--
www.Wouter.Valentijn.name
www.zeppodunsel.nl
www.scifics.com
www.nksf.nl
liam=mail
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34851 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 16:06 |
|
"Bill Carey" <notachance [at] yeahright.com> wrote in message
news:jo6dnbaQReRn_RXfRVn-3w [at] comcast.com...
> I'm very slowly working on a model, but it's a inbetween project. If
anyone
> beats me to it, that's okay.
>
> I agree it's nothing the prissies in the TNG would have wanted to build,
but
> Kirk would have drooled over it. Different times, different attitudes.
With respects, that is certainly not correct. NCC-1701 was designated a
/Heavy Cruiser/ - Roddenberry was *very* explicit in NOT identifying the
Enterprise as a highly developed, focused warship. He wanted versatility in
the design, but most importantly downplay the weapons aspects to show that
the Federation, Earth and humans have evolved to focus on peace -
exploration - and not military victories.
Enterprise always had a particular look - elegant, strong but yet, somehow,
not "visually life threatening". The newest TNG ships certainly do not have
those qualities.
Please be careful in re-interpreting Roddenberry's express wish with his
ships. Try to balance those desires as best you can.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34852 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 16:11 |
|
> Please be careful in re-interpreting Roddenberry's express wish with his
> ships. Try to balance those desires as best you can.
>
Just put a Peace symbol on the photon turrets and you're good to go. ;-)
Red Shirt
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34855 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 16:46 |
|
diane.duane [at] gmail.com wrote:
> CaptJosh wrote:
>
>
>>I would note that the holographic decoy is borrowed from the Star
>
> Empire
>
>>project of the events in and surrounding the _Dreanought_ incident
>>chronicled by noted Future Historian Diane Duane.
>
>
> Uhh...not sure I had anything to do with this. More likely the source
> you're thinking of is Diane Carey.
>
> Best -- Diane
>
> ---
>
> Diane Duane | The Owl Springs Partnership | Co. Wicklow, Ireland
> http://www.youngwizards.net | http://www.owlsprings.com
>
DOH! Sorry Ms. Duane. I've not been getting much sleep lately.
--
CaptJosh
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34871 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 20:06 |
|
Snake wrote:
> Enterprise always had a particular look - elegant, strong but yet, somehow,
> not "visually life threatening". The newest TNG ships certainly do not have
> those qualities.
Agreed. Modern Trek starships (post Ent-D) don't have that "friendly
but powerful" look. They look like aggressors, not protectors.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34874 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 20:24 |
|
"Chris Basken" <-> wrote in message
news:Y42dnVrzP_qBfBXfRVn-rg [at] giganews.com...
> Snake wrote:
> > Enterprise always had a particular look - elegant, strong but yet,
somehow,
> > not "visually life threatening". The newest TNG ships certainly do not
have
> > those qualities.
>
> Agreed. Modern Trek starships (post Ent-D) don't have that "friendly
> but powerful" look. They look like aggressors, not protectors.
Boy to I agree with that. I have never liked E, and that got me a lot of
flack from a lot of people back when I made that stand. It is far too
aggressive to be both a "protector" and "diplomatic" - certainly diplomatic.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34876 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 20:46 |
|
Snake wrote:
> "Chris Basken" wrote...
>>Snake wrote:
>>>Enterprise always had a particular look - elegant, strong but yet,
>
> somehow,
>
>>>not "visually life threatening". The newest TNG ships certainly do not
>
> have
>
>>>those qualities.
>>
>>Agreed. Modern Trek starships (post Ent-D) don't have that "friendly
>>but powerful" look. They look like aggressors, not protectors.
>
> Boy to I agree with that. I have never liked E, and that got me a lot of
> flack from a lot of people back when I made that stand. It is far too
> aggressive to be both a "protector" and "diplomatic" - certainly diplomatic.
I like Ent-E, but it makes me think different things than D does. E
makes me realize more Klingons must be working for Starfleet these days,
and not just a few have been assigned to the UP Shipyards...
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34898 ] |
Mo, 16 Mai 2005 23:45 |
|
CaptJosh wrote:
> diane.duane [at] gmail.com wrote:
>> CaptJosh wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I would note that the holographic decoy is borrowed from the Star
>>
>> Empire
>>
>>> project of the events in and surrounding the _Dreanought_ incident
>>> chronicled by noted Future Historian Diane Duane.
>>
>>
>> Uhh...not sure I had anything to do with this. More likely the source
>> you're thinking of is Diane Carey.
>>
>> Best -- Diane
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Diane Duane | The Owl Springs Partnership | Co. Wicklow, Ireland
>> http://www.youngwizards.net | http://www.owlsprings.com
>>
>
> DOH! Sorry Ms. Duane. I've not been getting much sleep lately.
Damn, me too.
Must be epidemic.
I blame Usenet for keeping me up. ;-)
--
www.Wouter.Valentijn.name
www.zeppodunsel.nl
www.scifics.com
www.nksf.nl
liam=mail
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34900 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 00:07 |
|
Umm.... E was built to fight the Borg. It's basically a war ship. Maybe they
could put some fuzzy dice on the view screen. And I still think Kirk would
have built a "Fearless" class in a heartbeat when the war with the Klingons
started heating up, before the kabosh was put to the whole thing.
While TOS strived to be peaceful, there was still a clear 'don't screw with
me' attitude throughout the series and on into the movies. The Clinton-esque
attitude of retreating when pushed didn't come until part way through TNG's
run. Remember, Kirk chased down the Romulans so as not to show weakness.
Picard would have turned around and raised diplomatic hell.
--
Bill
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billcarey/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/redeyesxbl/
"Snake" <fluidNOstatesSPAM_REMOVECAPSTOREPLY [at] mindspring.com> wrote in
message news:Bz5ie.5287$_f7.3161 [at] trndny01...
> "Chris Basken" <-> wrote in message
> news:Y42dnVrzP_qBfBXfRVn-rg [at] giganews.com...
>> Snake wrote:
>> > Enterprise always had a particular look - elegant, strong but yet,
> somehow,
>> > not "visually life threatening". The newest TNG ships certainly do not
> have
>> > those qualities.
>>
>> Agreed. Modern Trek starships (post Ent-D) don't have that "friendly
>> but powerful" look. They look like aggressors, not protectors.
>
> Boy to I agree with that. I have never liked E, and that got me a lot of
> flack from a lot of people back when I made that stand. It is far too
> aggressive to be both a "protector" and "diplomatic" - certainly
> diplomatic.
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34903 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 00:26 |
|
Bill Carey wrote:
> Umm.... E was built to fight the Borg. It's basically a war ship. Maybe they
> could put some fuzzy dice on the view screen. And I still think Kirk would
> have built a "Fearless" class in a heartbeat when the war with the Klingons
> started heating up, before the kabosh was put to the whole thing.
Do we know that the Ent-E was designed to fight the Borg? Seems awfully
quick. They never said that onscreen anywhere.
The Defiant was popped out fast, too, but it's a much smaller ship.
> While TOS strived to be peaceful, there was still a clear 'don't screw with
> me' attitude throughout the series and on into the movies. The Clinton-esque
> attitude of retreating when pushed didn't come until part way through TNG's
> run. Remember, Kirk chased down the Romulans so as not to show weakness.
> Picard would have turned around and raised diplomatic hell.
Never suggested a Fed Starship should be weak, only that more classic
designs had a look that didn't yell it out. Klingons are aggressive and
snarly and pointy and sharp-edged and all that, and the Ent-E's
*appearance* seems to have been designed with that attitude in mind.
Must be that Klingon exchange program...
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34910 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 02:06 |
|
As a matter of fact, they did say that. Watch first contact again.
As for the Klingon exchange program, you could be right! But a little
Klingon goes a long way in a trek universe populated by the dominion and
borg. The borg want to destroy your entire world, you build the biggest and
most powerful ships you're capable of and keep them close to home. Keep
exploring, but have a few Fearless's around just in case.
--
Bill
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billcarey/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/redeyesxbl/
"Chris Basken" <-> wrote in message
news:CtCdnXD7YOZogBTfRVn-hw [at] giganews.com...
> Bill Carey wrote:
>> Umm.... E was built to fight the Borg. It's basically a war ship. Maybe
>> they could put some fuzzy dice on the view screen. And I still think Kirk
>> would have built a "Fearless" class in a heartbeat when the war with the
>> Klingons started heating up, before the kabosh was put to the whole
>> thing.
>
> Do we know that the Ent-E was designed to fight the Borg? Seems awfully
> quick. They never said that onscreen anywhere.
>
> The Defiant was popped out fast, too, but it's a much smaller ship.
>
>> While TOS strived to be peaceful, there was still a clear 'don't screw
>> with me' attitude throughout the series and on into the movies. The
>> Clinton-esque attitude of retreating when pushed didn't come until part
>> way through TNG's run. Remember, Kirk chased down the Romulans so as not
>> to show weakness. Picard would have turned around and raised diplomatic
>> hell.
>
> Never suggested a Fed Starship should be weak, only that more classic
> designs had a look that didn't yell it out. Klingons are aggressive and
> snarly and pointy and sharp-edged and all that, and the Ent-E's
> *appearance* seems to have been designed with that attitude in mind.
>
> Must be that Klingon exchange program...
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34911 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 02:11 |
|
Bill Carey wrote:
> As a matter of fact, they did say that. Watch first contact again.
Can anyone confirm this? I lent my FC DVD to my father.
I've seen FC a number of times. I remember Riker saying Picard's
experience with the Borg makes him the perfect man to lead the fight. I
remember Geordi saying the Ent-E is the most advanced ship in the fleet
and that they're "ready" to fight the Borg. But I don't recall them
ever saying the Ent-E was actually designed as a Borg-fighting ship,
like the Defiant was.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34912 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 02:25 |
|
"Chris Basken" <-> wrote in message
news:taCdncUkCoY_qxTfRVn-iQ [at] giganews.com...
> Bill Carey wrote:
> > As a matter of fact, they did say that. Watch first contact again.
>
> Can anyone confirm this? I lent my FC DVD to my father.
>
> I've seen FC a number of times. I remember Riker saying Picard's
> experience with the Borg makes him the perfect man to lead the fight. I
> remember Geordi saying the Ent-E is the most advanced ship in the fleet
> and that they're "ready" to fight the Borg. But I don't recall them
> ever saying the Ent-E was actually designed as a Borg-fighting ship,
> like the Defiant was.
E wasn't specifically designed as a borg killing machine, but given that it
was the most advanced ship in the fleet it would incorporate all the
technology designed to counter the borg.
I have to ask myself what would be better, one soverign class or the four
defiant class ships you could build with the same amount of material.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34920 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 04:04 |
|
Eric Nichols wrote:
> "Chris Basken" <-> wrote in message
> news:taCdncUkCoY_qxTfRVn-iQ [at] giganews.com...
>
>>Bill Carey wrote:
>>
>>>As a matter of fact, they did say that. Watch first contact again.
>>
>>Can anyone confirm this? I lent my FC DVD to my father.
>>
>>I've seen FC a number of times. I remember Riker saying Picard's
>>experience with the Borg makes him the perfect man to lead the fight. I
>>remember Geordi saying the Ent-E is the most advanced ship in the fleet
>>and that they're "ready" to fight the Borg. But I don't recall them
>>ever saying the Ent-E was actually designed as a Borg-fighting ship,
>>like the Defiant was.
>
>
> E wasn't specifically designed as a borg killing machine, but given that it
> was the most advanced ship in the fleet it would incorporate all the
> technology designed to counter the borg.
> I have to ask myself what would be better, one soverign class or the four
> defiant class ships you could build with the same amount of material.
>
You have the capability of packing more power into the Sovereign Class
starship by far.
Yes, Defiant packs a big punch, but she does it mainly by energy savings
elsewhere; like having a small infirmary, not a state of the art
sickbay; having basic sensor arrays, but no labs per se; hard hitting
weapons, fairly heavy shields for her size, but the crew quarters look
like something from 668 boat(That's a Los Angeles Class SSN(Nuclear
Attack sub) for those who are not avid fans of Tom Clancy) and there are
no state rooms. No shuttles per se, no frills, no gimmicks, no factory
extras.
OTOH, a Sovereign Class ship not only has a much bigger and more
powerful primary reactor, she also has better impulse power, room for
auxilary fusion reactors, and a hell of a lot more batteries. She can
cary more torpedoes, pack more/heavier phasers, and can generate more
powerful shields because she's got more room for shield generators. She
also has more room for auxilary shield generators.
Yes, a small maneuverable platform is great, but the Defiant doesn't
last long in a real slugging match. That's why you have heavier ships
than what is essentially an escort frigate.
--
CaptJosh
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34924 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 04:21 |
|
"CaptJosh" <jbelanger [at] insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:Cicie.608$796.590 [at] attbi_s21...
> Eric Nichols wrote:
> > "Chris Basken" <-> wrote in message
> > news:taCdncUkCoY_qxTfRVn-iQ [at] giganews.com...
> >
> >>Bill Carey wrote:
> >>
> >>>As a matter of fact, they did say that. Watch first contact again.
> >>
> >>Can anyone confirm this? I lent my FC DVD to my father.
> >>
> >>I've seen FC a number of times. I remember Riker saying Picard's
> >>experience with the Borg makes him the perfect man to lead the fight. I
> >>remember Geordi saying the Ent-E is the most advanced ship in the fleet
> >>and that they're "ready" to fight the Borg. But I don't recall them
> >>ever saying the Ent-E was actually designed as a Borg-fighting ship,
> >>like the Defiant was.
> >
> >
> > E wasn't specifically designed as a borg killing machine, but given that
it
> > was the most advanced ship in the fleet it would incorporate all the
> > technology designed to counter the borg.
> > I have to ask myself what would be better, one soverign class or the
four
> > defiant class ships you could build with the same amount of material.
> >
>
> You have the capability of packing more power into the Sovereign Class
> starship by far.
>
> Yes, Defiant packs a big punch, but she does it mainly by energy savings
> elsewhere; like having a small infirmary, not a state of the art
> sickbay; having basic sensor arrays, but no labs per se; hard hitting
> weapons, fairly heavy shields for her size, but the crew quarters look
> like something from 668 boat(That's a Los Angeles Class SSN(Nuclear
> Attack sub) for those who are not avid fans of Tom Clancy) and there are
> no state rooms. No shuttles per se, no frills, no gimmicks, no factory
> extras.
>
> OTOH, a Sovereign Class ship not only has a much bigger and more
> powerful primary reactor, she also has better impulse power, room for
> auxilary fusion reactors, and a hell of a lot more batteries. She can
> cary more torpedoes, pack more/heavier phasers, and can generate more
> powerful shields because she's got more room for shield generators. She
> also has more room for auxilary shield generators.
>
> Yes, a small maneuverable platform is great, but the Defiant doesn't
> last long in a real slugging match. That's why you have heavier ships
> than what is essentially an escort frigate.
>
I agree with all you said, however, I wonder at the thought of building a
warship that would be going into dangerous situations where there was a good
chance it wouldn't survive, and then making it so big that it takes a crew
of 800+ to run it.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34925 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 04:33 |
|
> Yes, a small maneuverable platform is great, but the Defiant doesn't
> last long in a real slugging match. That's why you have heavier ships
> than what is essentially an escort frigate.
She actually never had to last real long in a slugging match as the match
was generally over in about 4 seconds.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #34930 ] |
Di, 17 Mai 2005 05:37 |
|
Eric Nichols wrote:
> I agree with all you said, however, I wonder at the thought of building a
> warship that would be going into dangerous situations where there was a good
> chance it wouldn't survive, and then making it so big that it takes a crew
> of 800+ to run it.
That's not Starfleet's thought process. If it was, they wouldn't have
built just one Defiant. We would have seen squadrons of them attacking
at once. The Defiant was designed to survive.
Starships and crews are huge investments of time and resources. Your
goal would be to make sure that investment returns home.
|
|
|
| Re: New Federation starship with diagram [message #37631 ] |
Mi, 18 Mai 2005 02:54 |
|
<john1n2w3e [at] hotmail.com> announced:
>>A post dominion-war design.
>> This is a revision of my previous design, with more detail and new
>> nacelles.
On Sat, 14 May 2005, "Snake"
<fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.net> editorialized:
>And not a single person congratulated him on the design and diagram,
>considering the incredible amount of work involved, regardless of their
>personal opinion on the design??
Oh, so everyone who replied in April is married?
(rim-shot)
Actually, one person *did* reply. Me. On 23 April 2005. At length.
Given the vagaries of Usenet propagation, however, it's possible the
post was missed at some locations.
Google Groups copy of the two-message thread:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J2195281B
I do object to John's choice of five-group cross-posting, though; I've
trimmed alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise and rec.arts.startrek.current,
because this design is relevant to neither.
/- Phillip Thorne ----------- The Non-Sequitur Express --------------------\
| org underbase ta thorne www.underbase.org It's the boundary |
| net comcast ta pethorne site, newsletter, blog conditions that |
\------------------------------------------------------- get you ----------/
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 26 11:59:58 CEST 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,05231 Sekunden |
