|
Post by Atrahasis on Jul 17, 2008 21:27:15 GMT -5
Here's the direction I'm taking with the Battlehawk, which was supposed to have been a competing design with the Warbird (after the Fed tech was stolen, of course )...So yes, it is a stretched Warbird mesh! Thoughts and opinions welcome!
|
|
|
Post by Johanobesus on Jul 17, 2008 22:16:23 GMT -5
If it's a competing design, shouldn't it be rather different? It doesn't seem like much of a competition if both designs are almost identical. What if you lowered the wings to resemble your old hawk, and took off the bridge section and added something different? Maybe that design put the plasma torpedo mechanisms on the top of the vessel instead of buried inside. That could allow for different variations: the original prototype might have a large weapon section to accommodate the Plasma-R, while the standard production run had much smaller weapon sections, with maybe some redesigning to put the volume to other uses. Of course then it might resemble the Snipe. Maybe you could do an updated version of Ghost's old Legion, which was sort of a TOS R-LN. But then that would get you pretty far away from what you seem to be going for.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Jul 17, 2008 23:58:17 GMT -5
It has a double Plasma-G instead of an R and it seems to be a smaller ship overall, having a crew of 160 (vs 200+ for the Warbird) and is a size class lower. Maybe the idea behind the ship was to keep things simpler so more of them could be produced, but the reason more Warbirds got produced in the end was that the size difference wasn't that great and they needed more flag-like vessels.
For me, this is one of those designs that I feel compelled to stick close to a canon design for, but suggestions are always welcome.
|
|
|
Post by lurker on Jul 18, 2008 17:54:57 GMT -5
I like it!
|
|
|
Post by whiteknight06604 on Jul 19, 2008 13:47:24 GMT -5
yeah this and the rest of the "recently posted Romulan wip are simply stunning,than you.
|
|
Bernard Guignard
Commodore
TreknoGraphx Cad Schematics are our Speciality
Posts: 342
|
Post by Bernard Guignard on Jul 20, 2008 6:26:42 GMT -5
Great work Atra Looking forward to downloading her
;D
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 19, 2008 6:27:34 GMT -5
A new direction for this ship. Excuse the crudity of it for now. It's the NX-era hull with TOS warp engines and Praetor colors. I figure if there's a good candidate for an intermediary form between the two eras, the "Old Hawk / Battle Hawk" has to be it. The Hawk also has double Plasma-G, which coincides with the twin weapons ports at the front of the NX-era ship. I may decide to put a lot of armor plating on it and put some more components on the engines.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 19, 2008 6:48:43 GMT -5
Another possibility is something like this, with a linear engine. The thing to do with this design is maybe show how the Romulans evolved away from linear to circumferential, not unlike how TNG Fed ships did the same as they came out of the TMP era.
|
|
|
Post by James Smith on Aug 19, 2008 16:10:59 GMT -5
A new direction for this ship. That I like. The version with the linear nacelles, less so. However, if this is a competing design to the Warbird it makes sense that it could have a different nacelle design to that ship....so my objection is purely on aesthetical grounds rather than it not making sense
|
|
|
Post by straightwing on Aug 19, 2008 21:10:55 GMT -5
What I use for the BATTLEHAWK and CAPSIZE are ATRA's Romulan T2 DD. Kit-bashed with "wings up" is a CAPSIZE. Kit-bashed with "wings down" is a BATTLEHAWK. "Wings down" with no wing engines and a D7 engine below the hull on the centerline is a BHR or a SNIPE. I personally think that any of these look nicer than what is being proposed in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Aug 19, 2008 21:51:59 GMT -5
You mean that T2 that I did all those years back? That's a FASA design and has its own place in the scheme of things. The thing about the Battle Hawk is that it can explore the assumed "intermediary" form.
|
|
|
Post by zerosnark on Aug 19, 2008 22:38:58 GMT -5
I really like the NX style with the round engines.
Personally, I think the ship differences should be "more pronounced" rather than "all the same". The original version you posted on top of this thread looks much like the Warbird / WarEagle. . . .I like the modified lines later in the thread.
I also like the detail you put on the underside of the hull.
Excellent work!
|
|
|
Post by Johanobesus on Aug 20, 2008 7:45:26 GMT -5
This is definitely an improvement. Since the ship has no cannon status what so ever, there's no reason to make it indistinguishable from the WB. I do wonder about the underside though. The Romulans were famous for painting birds on the bellies of their ships. Would they employ a design that makes it impossible or ugly at this early date? As neat as the detailed underside is, it might make more sense for it to be flat, or at least have a large enough flat area for an impressive bird. Of course, I understand that the pictures are just of a kitbash in the early stages, with little more than a retexture and new wings and nacelles, so maybe you're already addressing this matter.
|
|
|
Post by Kana on Aug 20, 2008 10:09:15 GMT -5
It depends on what you consider 'canon'. Yeah sure this is not canon for Star Trek purposes, but the ship type is completely canon as far as SFB is concerned. It has been made in illustrations and sculpture. It exists. Not that I have a problem with Atra taking artistic licence. Nor the fact that SFB/SFU was rather unimaginative.
|
|
|
Post by zerosnark on Aug 20, 2008 10:55:09 GMT -5
I agree that the SFB ship design team was HIGHLY unimaginative.
I mean. . .look at the "national gaurd ships". They look no different than the mainline warships built 100 years later (supposedly). Totally ridiculous. That is basically saying that the technology put into the ships does not dictate the appearance of the ship. . .which is absurd.
Warship design has ALWAYS been dictated by the technology. Three decked ships-of-the-line had three decks because you couldn't make the ship long enough to put all the guns on two decks!
The HMS dreadnaught (and the 5-8 battleships that followed it) had its special hexagonish gun arrangement because the British did not have a turret design that allowed for one turret to fire over another turret.'
The primary difference between the South Dakota class battleships and the somewhat different looking Iowa class battleships was purely the engines in the hull.
Look how different the structure of the (now deleted) Spurance class superstructures are from the Ticonderoga class cruisers. Purely due to the radars in the structure.
|
|