|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 15, 2008 19:52:50 GMT -5
The "Early Years" module has a YDN, and the Y-series of ships were upgraded to the G-series, but why have I not seen an SSD for a GDN? The description of the YDN says that these ships were used for DECADES after the Early Years which ends in 2235, so we're taking about a design that survived until at least 2255 which means it would've had modern Ph1 and at least 2 overloaded torps.
Was the omission of the GDN just an oversight or what?
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 15, 2008 22:58:44 GMT -5
Excuse the crudity of it for now as it's just a stretched GCA which itself is not completed. If the YDN got uprated as it should have, it would be a DN with 3 X 12 pt engines, 10 X Ph1, and 2 X Photon. And yet the problem I see is that this is a presumed ship, I have not seen an SSD for it yet. PS I know DN's are ugly, but we gotta have them.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 15, 2008 23:28:08 GMT -5
In case ya'll are wondering what the F-GDD looks like, here's how it's probably going to be. I personally favor the topside location for the nacelle because then the shuttlebay would have to be located aft bottomside which is where it is on the NX and is also the most logical location for it. By that I mean a topside aft shuttlebay has the potential to be dangerous because in an accident a shuttle that's coming in hot can smack the bridge, or if it misses that then it could potentially hit the numerous weapons. I know what ya'll might say to that: What about the Galaxy-class which has its main bay near the bridge? My answer: That ship is so large the distance between the bay entrance and the bridge is large enough so it's not quite as dangerous as on the NX-style ships, moreover the Galaxy's saucer is designed as an escape / evac ship so you need a big bay on the saucer, and you can't put it bottomside. Additionally, the F-GFF seems to have its nacelles topside as well, so a theme has been set.
|
|
Bernard Guignard
Commodore
TreknoGraphx Cad Schematics are our Speciality
Posts: 342
|
Post by Bernard Guignard on Aug 16, 2008 6:02:36 GMT -5
I like it but I'd put the shuttle bay in the aft position that way it really makes it different from the Federation class Dreadnought of the TOS period. This make the front facing shuttle bay of the Federation class a testbed idea. ;D
|
|
|
Post by zerosnark on Aug 16, 2008 9:14:39 GMT -5
Personally, I can't fathom the early ships having the same basic layouts of the later ships. Are we saying that the ship design reached perfection in the "Y" era, and was not tweaked again?
|
|
|
Post by Chrystoff on Aug 16, 2008 10:57:04 GMT -5
I like it but I'd put the shuttle bay in the aft position that way it really makes it different from the Federation class Dreadnought of the TOS period. This make the front facing shuttle bay of the Federation class a testbed idea. ;D I agree with BG; a simplified shuttlebay aft sounds like a great idea. Are drone launchers part of the armament on these ships? Maybe some obvious drone launchers/tubes where the botanical section would be on the TMP E.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 16, 2008 12:30:48 GMT -5
Yes, I like the idea of an aft bay better as well. It's just easier to land a shuttle when the ship is moving around.
|
|
Bernard Guignard
Commodore
TreknoGraphx Cad Schematics are our Speciality
Posts: 342
|
Post by Bernard Guignard on Aug 16, 2008 12:55:26 GMT -5
Personally, I can't fathom the early ships having the same basic layouts of the later ships. Are we saying that the ship design reached perfection in the "Y" era, and was not tweaked again? I understand where your coming from unfortunately SFB uses the same SSD Layout Saucer Secondary hull and Saucer warp engine for the Early material as well as the TOS material. Hence making these models look similar to the TOS Designs. its too bad that they didn't take the time to work out some different designs based on the Light cruiser SSD.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 16, 2008 13:11:39 GMT -5
Don't worry Bernard, that doesn't mean we can't remedy that this time around. Feel free to offer suggestions to what you think the YDN and other ships should look like. One thing I've been considering is making the YDN a greyer shade and losing the bronze tint because it comes 21 years after the YCA in the year 2200 on the dot. That way after the Ph1 refit it can serve as a capital warship in the regular fleet and not as a "national guard" ship. Maybe that's why it wasn't in the "System Defense" module.
|
|
Bernard Guignard
Commodore
TreknoGraphx Cad Schematics are our Speciality
Posts: 342
|
Post by Bernard Guignard on Aug 16, 2008 13:41:45 GMT -5
Yes I've got to start drawing more, Now that I have the new system up and running there's no reason not to get the Treknographx muscles excercised (Grin) what about using an enlarged Bonaventure class secondary hull with the NX primary hull and 3 nx warp engines. Rather than have the warp engine off the saucer why not have it connected to the secondary hull. Just thinking out loud here
|
|
Bernard Guignard
Commodore
TreknoGraphx Cad Schematics are our Speciality
Posts: 342
|
Post by Bernard Guignard on Aug 16, 2008 13:45:30 GMT -5
|
|
Bernard Guignard
Commodore
TreknoGraphx Cad Schematics are our Speciality
Posts: 342
|
Post by Bernard Guignard on Aug 17, 2008 6:17:27 GMT -5
I mentioned Bonaventure Class in my last post I mean't Baton Rouge Class that's what you get for going off the top of your head in the morning. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 17, 2008 10:24:36 GMT -5
You mean the triangular Baton secondary hull? Interesting idea, although that hull in my opinion is more suited for a carrier-type starship, as the original description in Spaceflight Chronology describes them as such. Also, for battle purposes a squarish hull stands to get more damaged as rounded hulls deflect more of the impact blast, especially from exploding weapons.
But I understand the need to make the YDN's sec hull not just a copy of the DN's.
Also, this ship would have been the "regular" DN in its day until the "Connie style" ones came along, at which time these ships were either retired or kept in service as ODN's. Maybe that's why there's no listing for a GDN that I've seen.
|
|
|
Post by USS Mariner on Aug 17, 2008 22:04:25 GMT -5
I like keeping the NX drop bay for the GDD.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 18, 2008 7:39:24 GMT -5
I like keeping the NX drop bay for the GDD. A drop bay is not the only option. There could be a bay that sticks out from the aft bottom to allow shuttles to land in the regular way, since there's no pylon there.
|
|