short Q about the shipdesign in the screenshots

[KL0k]

just curious, what is this (ugly) small bridge between the warp nacelles for (also seen in the trailer)? just to make clear "its a refit"? or is there a "real" reason behind it?

[Genex]

I thought it was an inpulse engine housing / Torpedo launcher (Like the Akira)

But i doubt its a bridge as theres no practicality of have 2 bridges on a ship that does loose its main bridge through seperation

[Mr.Taboo]

I think he meant bridge as in a bridge over a gap like a river or something not a command bridge.

.

[KL0k]

yeah, thats what i meant. could have said "link" instead, but im kinda tired today, so my brain acts a bit funny :D

hm, never thought about this torplauncher. good guess tho. but maybe its for the hyper-impulse-drive? cause the new nx-model has it too.

[LordDave]

Could be the hyper impulse drive, extra warp field amplifier, torpedo bay, sensor pod, ect...
Frankly speaking, we just don't know.

[Mr.Taboo]

It's TOP SECRET , need to know basis type stuff.

.

[tnerehocni]

Maybe it's a module mounting point, allowing different configurations ala the Nebula-class.

[Anichent]

Its the new NX-91001, which is a new class of ship....but unfortunately is almost identical to the Sovereign class....very disappointing.

[H8Hydrant]

....but unfortunately is almost identical to the Sovereign class....very disappointing.

I whole heartily agree. Overall I like the direction the game is going in, but this Sovereign class on steroids is a complete lack of imagination- no way around it. I don't mean to trash the devs, just calling it like I see it. If this is an example of how the rest of the ships in the game are going to look, then its time for red alert. I'm still buying the game, but as you say, very disappointing. This "design" is like those socks you get from Grandma every Christmas. Yeah, it feels pretty much like that.

[Freejack]

Maybe it's just a structural brace?
:confused:

[Trekkie]

I don't really think it is "ugly" but I'd like to know what it is - though it's probably just a design feature.

[JamesDBurke]

It's probably a sensor pod or weapons pod.

And yeah it looks alot like a Sovereign but the equipment sound a helluva lot better. ;)

[Anichent]

It seems to me like this new class of starship is comletely unecissary. If they wanted to make the NX-19001 the way it is, the designers should have just made it a Sovereign-refit, not an entirely new class (which NX denotes...and maybe it is a refit and the devs just used NX wrong?)

[DerManiac]

Maybe it's just a structural brace?
:confused:

Wow. Now that would be bad design.
A: "Hey, the ship is falling appart if we fly with full impuls!"
B: "Yeah, that comes from putting the necelles so far away from the rest of the ship!"
A: "But it looks cool... So what are we going to do?"
B: "I have an idea. Why not put a strut from all over there... to here!"
A: "You're crazy..."

Reminds me of Pontifex! Remember? These old bridge builder games, where you construct an obscure bridge, with the only goal that ONE car can pass without the bridge falling apart.

[Freejack]

Wow. Now that would be bad design.
A: "Hey, the ship is falling appart if we fly with full impuls!"
B: "Yeah, that comes from putting the necelles so far away from the rest of the ship!"
A: "But it looks cool... So what are we going to do?"
B: "I have an idea. Why not put a strut from all over there... to here!"
A: "You're crazy..."

Reminds me of Pontifex! Remember? These old bridge builder games, where you construct an obscure bridge, with the only goal that ONE car can pass without the bridge falling apart.


Starship Captain: We keep losing our nacelles due to shock wave impacts.

Starship Architecht: Maybe we can fix that by supporting the structure with a third beam that creates a triangular stress support system that has been proven to be more stable ever since Pythagoras.
:cool:

An arch is just an infinite numer of triangles all resting upon each other.

[Silverspar]

It's an impulse drive unit, it's obvious watching the STO Trailer. This is most likely the Hyper Impulse Drive described in the technical schematics. I don't see it full-filling much of a role as a sensor pod in it's location, between two warp nacelles the warp field would generate such a distortion as to make any viable scanning at that particular point of the ship pointless.

[DerManiac]

Starship Architecht: Maybe we can fix that by supporting the structure with a third beam that creates a triangular stress support system that has been proven to be more stable ever since Pythagorus?
:cool:


Starship Architecht 2: Yeah, and for that use the thinnest possible strut, so that it is a harder target to hit!
Starship Captain: Wouldn't it break apart just by one torpedo?
Starship Architecht 2: Ahh, they never gonna get that idea. It would also be neat to put the impuls drive there.
Starship Architecht: But then the whole stress from the propulsion would be on that single strut.
Starship Architecht 2: Come on, it's stylish. We use the warp engine all the time anyways, it doesn't matter!

[Freejack]

Starship Architecht 2: Yeah, and for that use the thinnest possible strut, so that it is a harder target to hit!
Starship Captain: Wouldn't it break apart just by one torpedo?
Starship Architecht 2: Ahh, they never gonna get that idea. It would also be neat to put the impuls drive there.
Starship Architecht: But then the whole stress from the propulsion would be on that single strut.
Starship Architecht 2: Come on, it's stylish. We use the warp engine all the time anyways, it doesn't matter!

Click Here to Apply (http://www.crypticstudios.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=202&Itemid=46)

:cool:

[DerManiac]

Click Here to Apply (http://www.crypticstudios.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=202&Itemid=46)

:cool:

Hell, I wasn't complaining. I just thought Star Trek community can take a joke.

[The_Padre]

I whole heartily agree. Overall I like the direction the game is going in, but this Sovereign class on steroids is a complete lack of imagination- no way around it. I don't mean to trash the devs, just calling it like I see it. If this is an example of how the rest of the ships in the game are going to look, then its time for red alert. I'm still buying the game, but as you say, very disappointing. This "design" is like those socks you get from Grandma every Christmas. Yeah, it feels pretty much like that.

I'm indifferent to the ship however we've seen a good number of very different looking ships in the trailer already, here's a better look at one of them:

Version 1 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot23a.jpg)

Version 2 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot24a.jpg)

Version 3 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot25a.jpg)

Original link: MMOZone (http://www.mmozone.nl/content/view/1446/85/)

[KL0k]

I'm indifferent to the ship however we've seen a good number of very different looking ships in the trailer already, here's a better look at one of them:

Version 1 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot23a.jpg)

Version 2 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot24a.jpg)

Version 3 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot25a.jpg)

Original link: MMOZone (http://www.mmozone.nl/content/view/1446/85/)

i really love these screenshots, specially the ones on the planets surfaces - good level of detail :)

but while looking at the ships.. i feel... mhm.. concerned? i dunno if its the right term.. but the ships look more like a concept-art with textures. cant describe it better.. i mean.. i can see its starfleet ships, but they dont really feel like it.. aesteticly. i had the same feeling in the tng episode with the galaxy refit of the future, with the third warp nacelle. its just "too much" you know? overstylized? (i think thats a good term to describe it)

[Anichent]

I'm indifferent to the ship however we've seen a good number of very different looking ships in the trailer already, here's a better look at one of them:

Version 1 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot23a.jpg)

Version 2 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot24a.jpg)

Version 3 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot25a.jpg)

Original link: MMOZone (http://www.mmozone.nl/content/view/1446/85/)

The first and third one alone seem unique, but if you add the second ship its weird. Costumizability is good, but those seem like completely different classes that are gradual steps from the first to the third.

[DerManiac]

The first and third one alone seem unique, but if you add the second ship its weird. Costumizability is good, but those seem like completely different classes that are gradual steps from the first to the third.

For me it feels like the same ship with a different "bodykit".

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

maybe it houses the advaced sensor pod but more than likely it helps structural integrity at high warp and transwarp speeds and there may be a classified use we find out in game

[KL0k]

maybe it houses the advaced sensor pod but more than likely it helps structural integrity at high warp and transwarp speeds and there may be a classified use we find out in game

that would actually be pretty cool, to get some insight into the tech already known and newer editions, like:

a:"i know you might be familiar with the ships design, but theres a few changes on this one. for example... this here *technicaljaddajadda*"
like the first episodes of a show introducing the ship to the captain^^

[Silverspar]

With this picture here (http://uploads.startrekonline.com/sto_screen13_0.jpg) I think it's really hard to say it's anything but an impulse drive unit.

[THORN74]

I'm indifferent to the ship however we've seen a good number of very different looking ships in the trailer already, here's a better look at one of them:

Version 1 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot23a.jpg)

Version 2 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot24a.jpg)

Version 3 (http://www.mmofiles.nl/sto/screenshots/screenshot25a.jpg)

Original link: MMOZone (http://www.mmozone.nl/content/view/1446/85/)

there is a major problem with that ship..... look at version 1 carefully, then again at V2 & 3 ...



The Bridge is missing from V2 & V3 !!!! how the hell are u going to command a ship w/o a bridge???

one og Gene's rules was to have the bridge top center of the saucer section.

[THORN74]

With this picture here (http://uploads.startrekonline.com/sto_screen13_0.jpg) I think it's really hard to say it's anything but an impulse drive unit.

i agree its an impules drive, possibly a weapons pod also. but i think its there so the ship can have saucer seperation. the secondary hull would need an impulse drive (like the galaxy had 3) and i dont see one elsewhere on the secondary hull.

[Silverspar]

there is a major problem with that ship..... look at version 1 carefully, then again at V2 & 3 ...



The Bridge is missing from V2 & V3 !!!! how the hell are u going to command a ship w/o a bridge???

one og Gene's rules was to have the bridge top center of the saucer section.

Since when? As evidence of the past, Gene's rules were not always infallible now, not to mention making the bridge an easy target on a starship is a rather bit silly. The simple fact that there are battle bridges on starships to begin with also makes the argument of a visible bridge rather moot.

[THORN74]

Since when? As evidence of the past, Gene's rules were not always infallible now, not to mention making the bridge an easy target on a starship is a rather bit silly. The simple fact that there are battle bridges on starships to begin with also makes the argument of a visible bridge rather moot.

even the battle bridge on the galaxy class is dead center top of the "neck" when in seprate flight mode. look at ALL the FEd ships ..... bridge is ALWAYS top center deck 1 saucer section. Now other races are diff, but the feds are this way.

for referance go here (http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm)

show me a canon Fed ship w/o a bridge on deck 1 "centered" on the Saucer section. Defiant, Miranda, constituiton, intrepid, norway, steamrunner, galaxy, sovereign, promethus, akira, constilation, excelsior, ambassador, saber, nova, and every other starfleet ship is this way.

[LordEnn]

Presently, nobody knows. I think that it's a pathetic attempt to mask extraordinary laziness. If it's a variant of the Sovereign-class, there's no problem. However, if it's presented as a new type of vessel, I'd consider it laughable. If that's what it is, it's heinous. On the other hand, it would be realistic for a military service to modify a reliable design and use it again.
:p

Either way, I think the Red Admiral's design for a similar type is far better. It's an unusual and fascinating design.
:p

See the Cosmos-class ship (http://www.trekmania.net/art/wip.htm).

In fact, I think that the Red Admiral (http://www.trekmania.net) should design ships for the game. His modeling work is phenomenal.
:p

Below are several randomly selected models he created.

1) Challenger-class (http://www.trekmania.net/art/challenger_class.htm).
2) New Orleans-class (http://www.trekmania.net/art/new_orleans_class.htm).
3) Constellation-class (http://www.trekmania.net/art/constellation_class.htm).
4) Merced-class (http://www.trekmania.net/art/merced_class.htm).
5) Nebula-class, second variant (http://www.trekmania.net/art/nebula_class_variant_ii.htm).
6) Galaxy-class (http://www.trekmania.net/art/galaxy_class.htm).
7) Constitution-class refit (http://www.trekmania.net/art/constitution_refit.htm).

Space structures (http://www.trekmania.net/art/space_structures.htm).

Yes. Boredom is terrible.

[LordDave]

Presently, nobody knows. I think that it's a pathetic attempt to mask extraordinary laziness. If it's a variant of the Sovereign-class, there's no problem. However, if it's presented as a new type of vessel, I'd consider it laughable. If that's what it is, it's heinous.

Either way, I think the Red Admiral's design for a similar type is far better. It's an unusual and fascinating design.
:p

Cosmos-class (http://www.trekmania.net/art/cosmos01.jpg).
Cosmoc-class - 2 (http://www.trekmania.net/art/cosmos02.jpg).
Different variant (http://www.trekmania.net/art/cosmos03.jpg).

In fact, I think that the Red Admiral (http://www.trekmania.net) should design ships for the game. His modeling work is phenomenal.
:p

Hotlinking is a crime dude. :P Link the page, not the image.

Also:
A new ship could very easily keep the same shell and use say.... 95% new parts.

If I take a toyota Echo and rebuild the whole interior: Engine, seats, dash, cup holder, ect... but keep the body exactly the same, is it a Toyota Echo?

[Silverspar]

even the battle bridge on the galaxy class is dead center top of the "neck" when in seprate flight mode. look at ALL the FEd ships ..... bridge is ALWAYS top center deck 1 saucer section. Now other races are diff, but the feds are this way.

for referance go here (http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm)

show me a canon Fed ship w/o a bridge on deck 1 "centered" on the Saucer section. Defiant, Miranda, constituiton, intrepid, norway, steamrunner, galaxy, sovereign, promethus, akira, constilation, excelsior, ambassador, saber, nova, and every other starfleet ship is this way.

Wow Thorn, did you just make up a load of hogwash considering the Defiant broke all those rules, plain and simple, and so does the All Good Things... Enterprise, since the coil explanation is a bunch of BS from planet X it's so ludicrous.

[LordDave]

Wow Thorn, did you just make up a load of hogwash considering the Defiant broke all those rules, plain and simple, and so does the All Good Things... Enterprise, since the coil explanation is a bunch of BS from planet X it's so ludicrous.

I don't think the defiant broke the bridge rule. It's still on deck 1 and is in the center of the ship.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org

See?

-edit
Took down the direct link because hot linking was disabled.

[LordEnn]

Hotlinking is a crime dude. :P Link the page, not the image.

I apologize. :p The page itself (http://www.trekmania.net/art/3d_art.htm).

[THORN74]

Wow Thorn, did you just make up a load of hogwash considering the Defiant broke all those rules, plain and simple, and so does the All Good Things... Enterprise, since the coil explanation is a bunch of BS from planet X it's so ludicrous.

what "hogwash" did i make up??? i didnt make the site. just used it as a point of referance for our discussion reguarding the location of the bridge. which by the way you still havent responded to?!:D

as for the rest of the info from that site, did u bother to check out it referances. Their are sites for that article and explinations for your 3 nacelle Ent D. But in the end it is a SOFT canon site.


and i am still waiting for your example of a bridge in a differednt location than DECK 1 center/top.

[LordDave]

I apologize. :p The page itself (http://www.trekmania.net/art/3d_art.htm).

No, http://www.trekmania.net/art/wip.htm
That is.

And fix your links! Geeze!


Anyway - Half of the ship are models he did of canon and virtual canon (soft canon). The rest of kitbash ships. Not unpleasant to look at since that fits with Trek.

But again, we're being shown one ship. ONE! How many will there be? Probably a HELL of a lot more then one. So I think we should wait until we have a list of at least 10 ships before we make a move for or against it. After all, one ship out of say... 50 different base types isn't enough to support or refute any claim.

[Silverspar]

what "hogwash" did i make up??? i didnt make the site. just used it as a point of referance for our discussion reguarding the location of the bridge. which by the way you still havent responded to?!:D

as for the rest of the info from that site, did u bother to check out it referances. Their are sites for that article and explinations for your 3 nacelle Ent D. But in the end it is a SOFT canon site.


and i am still waiting for your example of a bridge in a differednt location than DECK 1 center/top.

I've responded to it, you just tend to ignore it, like you always do. Further proof is that you don't even know where the bridge is. You think t's that bub on top but if you actually watched DS9 you will have seen that bub fire phasers to. So since the bridge on a Defiant has never really been defined, and I don't see any official documentation defining it's location, I find it hard to beleive that you can continually even surmise trying to be logical since the Defiant broke all of Gene's holy grail rules when it came to starship creation. For all we know the bridge is that little nose cone portion where we also see the deflector array. Considering the run-abouts also had those bubs on top that fired torpedoes to say it's logically the bridge is foolish.

Finally, all things considered the bridge on a Defiant ship never used a turbo lift, they always walked out the back of it instead of decending down into the ship, so that leads to further questioning that the bub is a bridge at all, with further proof being that if it were a bridge it would be too small for the whole of the ship.

[LordDave]

I've responded to it, you just tend to ignore it, like you always do. Further proof is that you don't even know where the bridge is. You think t's that bub on top but if you actually watched DS9 you will have seen that bub fire phasers to. So since the bridge on a Defiant has never really been defined, and I don't see any official documentation defining it's location, I find it hard to beleive that you can continually even surmise trying to be logical since the Defiant broke all of Gene's holy grail rules when it came to starship creation. For all we know the bridge is that little nose cone portion where we also see the deflector array. Considering the run-abouts also had those bubs on top that fired torpedoes to say it's logically the bridge is foolish.

Finally, all things considered the bridge on a Defiant ship never used a turbo lift, they always walked out the back of it instead of decending down into the ship, so that leads to further questioning that the bub is a bridge at all, with further proof being that if it were a bridge it would be too small for the whole of the ship.

No, no, the bridge of the defiant is in the centerish. Take a look at the MSD for the ship. Look at the upper level. See the curve at the front of the top deck? That's the bridge.

[The_Padre]

even the battle bridge on the galaxy class is dead center top of the "neck" when in seprate flight mode. look at ALL the FEd ships ..... bridge is ALWAYS top center deck 1 saucer section. Now other races are diff, but the feds are this way.

for referance go here (http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm)

show me a canon Fed ship w/o a bridge on deck 1 "centered" on the Saucer section. Defiant, Miranda, constituiton, intrepid, norway, steamrunner, galaxy, sovereign, promethus, akira, constilation, excelsior, ambassador, saber, nova, and every other starfleet ship is this way.

Who's to say that there is no bridge located on the top of those saucer sections? There may not be a "visual" indicator from the outside but the bridge could still very well be integrated into a larger deck 1 on those saucer modules.

[LordEnn]

LordDave, that page is only relevant to three of the pictures I linked to. Either way, It makes no difference. I've replaced the links.
Anyway - Half of the ship are models he did of canon and virtual canon (soft canon). The rest of kitbash ships. Not unpleasant to look at since that fits with Trek.

I was praising the graphical quality of the models.

As for the structure between the nacelles, the following text may hold the answer. :p

An advanced sensor pod can be operated from the bridge or manned directly for intense sweeps, and includes telemetric observation VISOR technology to allow a science officer to interface directly with data transmitted by a robotic exo-probe.

[THORN74]

I've responded to it, you just tend to ignore it, like you always do. Further proof is that you don't even know where the bridge is. You think t's that bub on top but if you actually watched DS9 you will have seen that bub fire phasers to. So since the bridge on a Defiant has never really been defined, and I don't see any official documentation defining it's location, I find it hard to beleive that you can continually even surmise trying to be logical since the Defiant broke all of Gene's holy grail rules when it came to starship creation. For all we know the bridge is that little nose cone portion where we also see the deflector array. Considering the run-abouts also had those bubs on top that fired torpedoes to say it's logically the bridge is foolish.

Finally, all things considered the bridge on a Defiant ship never used a turbo lift, they always walked out the back of it instead of decending down into the ship, so that leads to further questioning that the bub is a bridge at all, with further proof being that if it were a bridge it would be too small for the whole of the ship.

go here (http://www.strekschematics.utvinternet.com/cutaways/orginalcut/orgdefiantcutaway.jpg) for the MSD of the Defiant and you will see the bridge is top floor (deck 1 cetner). so again your are incorrect.

Yes the defiant was a very large departure from the rules gene had layed down, but it was designed after his death. i would imagine it wouldnt look that way had he lives longer, in point of fact i imagine DS9 would not have been made at all, but thats another disscussion in it self. the defiant does posess a "saucer section" (look at it from the dorsal view), it does have 2 nacelles (though they are not in the traditional locations), and most importantly to our disscussion here.... IT HAS A TOP CENTER BRIDGE LIKE ALL STARFLEET SHIPS

[THORN74]

Who's to say that there is no bridge located on the top of those saucer sections? There may not be a "visual" indicator from the outside but the bridge could still very well be integrated into a larger deck 1 on those saucer modules.

SILVERSPAR is saying the bridge is not always center/top of the saucer section. I was listing examples of ships that are that way.