Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 245
# 31
12-07-2012, 04:00 AM
As a matter of fact, yes, I have some experience in 3D modeling.

Modification of the default M46's hull in World of Tanks to properly represent the 60* glacis of an M47.

An early kitbash I did for Bridge Commander.

I know that you don't need to create a pivot-point in a face to finalize the model. There is a physical "spar" that travels thru the chord of the root of the Tor'Kaht's "wings", pylons, whatever you want to call them. At the back of said "wings", they are rounded to suggest a rolling motion. The "plates" on the ventral surface of the Tor'Kaht would suggest that they are there to "stop" some kind of vertical motion of the nacelle pylons, as there is an obvious angular gap.

None of that is required in the 3D model as it's all unique to the Tor'Kaht's model, and indeed suggests that there should be about 15* of vertical movement of the nacelle pylons, with the pylons currently fixed in their extreme-upright position.

What was going on in the modeler's mind when he was designing the Tor'Kaht? We'll never know. It very well could've been designed as a separate class originally with moving parts, but got stuck as a ship costume for the Vor'Cha when it was implemented and then as a variant of teh Vor'Cha in later updates.

That doesn't mean that the ship wasn't originally designed with folding "wings" in mind, as the model just screams "These things are supposed to move!"..

Whether they do or not, I really don't care. I find it extremely attractive (One of the best looking ships in the game in my opinion) just the way it is now.

*EDIT: but you haven't explained what you mean by "cometic uselessness", you only explained why the Feds built a ship with folding (and only 1, must a reason they never developed the concept further)
Someone earlier had said they were probably there "just for looks". Do the Klingons make a habit of building things on their otherwise purpose-built warships that're "just for looks"? Or is there function with form? You said yourself that the wings on the B'Rel were a functional part of it's warp drive. Form following function. We know the D7/K'T'Inga/Vor'Cha/Negh'Var all share similar lines because of similar internal construction of a horizontal warp core that spans the "wings", which is again, form following function. We know they have "heads" because that's where much of the forward battery, torpedo launchers, bridges, sensor arrays, etc are located--again, form following function.

But where have the Klingons ever just stuck something on a warship "just for looks"?

Again, I see the Tor'Kaht as a possible experimental design following the same path as the Intrepid. Especially with the Federation enforcing "warp speed limits" to inefficient older designs.

How successful was it? Who knows. We don't see moving nacelles on many Federation ships that came after the Intrepid either, right?

Last edited by wunjee; 12-07-2012 at 04:09 AM.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 598
# 32
12-07-2012, 09:06 PM
Oh heck, this whole thing is just getting silly and petty.

Lets just have fun and say ok, make them moveable. It's cool, looks neat.

But wings are not needed in non-atmospheric flight. These are not wings. They are weapon sponsons or heat sinks or a method of optimally position the thermionic warp nukum discombobulator to properly deploy the omega 13 device.
Chingachgook told me, Don't try to understand them; and don't try to make them understand you. For they are a breed apart and make no sense.

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:59 AM.