Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
10-25-2011, 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvsaris View Post
I don't mind the New Orleans. To me it's just an alternate, and more compact, Galaxy configuration... just like the Nebula is.
HMM except she uses the same alternate scale the Cheyenne uses making her a whole lot smaller.
She's actually only about 340 meters long which is roughly the size of the Prometheus; shorter but wider.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dvsaris View Post
Springfield was an interesting idea... I believe Nebula is the same concept with a much better execution.
Given how oddly the lower hull is attached I could imagine her as an attempt to replace the Oberth...maybe.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
10-26-2011, 04:02 PM
I feel like a minority now, I actually love those ships, well the freedom and the challenger.

Single nacelle do work, no heres the bit I have to get my flame suit and engage it.

In Voyager, Year of Hell, Pt2 One of Voyagers Nacelles is beyond repair and it still has warp capability. Also in Enterprise (yes I cringe when I use that as a Star Trek reference) in the episode called Twilight, Enterprise collides with a Xindu ship with its Starboard nacelle and Trip later references he can get warp 1.9 if memory serves with 1 nacelle.

So yes the 2 nacelle rule is used for efficiency but set-ups could work with 1, although I must add both of those instances are based in alternate timelines where the magic reset button was used.

Back to the subject, adding the ships as skins might be the option, all the haters don't have to use them and they'd be lower level vessels anyway. I think it would be good to add a bit more diversity to the game.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
10-26-2011, 07:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerous_Daswe
I feel like a minority now, I actually love those ships, well the freedom and the challenger.

Single nacelle do work, no heres the bit I have to get my flame suit and engage it.

Back to the subject, adding the ships as skins might be the option, all the haters don't have to use them and they'd be lower level vessels anyway. I think it would be good to add a bit more diversity to the game.
I despise those ships, but I would very much support having them added as Tier 1 or Tier 2 ships for those who reallly really want them.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
10-26-2011, 09:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adml_shake View Post
If I recall correctly there is a rule for Feddy starship design that says that there has to be an even number of Nacells. And to the best of my knowledge there has only been one exception, and that being the Enterprise from the end of TNG. Though there excuse was that canon wise that ship never really existed. There are some others, like the bridge having to be on top of the ship as opposed to buried deep inside of it like any sane person would do.
Canon explanation is each nacelle has two warp coils, giving the Galaxy-X an even number of warp coils (6) in three nacelles.

That being said, 'single nacelle' ships could have a nacelle with two warp coils in them, thereby satisfying the 'even number of coils' rule.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
10-27-2011, 03:24 AM
... Please Lord... No Freedom Class... It looks like they ran out of Star Ship materials so they hooked a Connie Saucer to a Galaxy Nacelle...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
10-31-2011, 07:15 AM
Single Nacelle ships make about as much sense as cars with single wheels in the front, or even some planes. You get a more effieicnet, more stable ride if you have an even number of engines or controls. Maybe I'm just speculating without any foreknowlege...

But fact is, if I see a ship flying around without a second Naccell, I am going to assume the crew was involved in a disaster, and tractor them into the nearest Starbase.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
10-31-2011, 08:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elusive-Burn View Post
Single Nacelle ships make about as much sense as cars with single wheels in the front, or even some planes. You get a more effieicnet, more stable ride if you have an even number of engines or controls. Maybe I'm just speculating without any foreknowlege...

But fact is, if I see a ship flying around without a second Naccell, I am going to assume the crew was involved in a disaster, and tractor them into the nearest Starbase.
So you are saying is basically a single nacelled ship would act like a car with only one front wheel....http://youtu.be/130OVZcMEcA
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
10-31-2011, 09:31 AM
The only time I've seen a single-nacelle design that looked good was the USS Kelvin in the new Star Trek movie.

The reason it looked good? It was balanced against a hull section. The general designs of Starfleet ships tend to preclude the aesthetic appeal of single-nacelle designs simply because, more often than not, there's a delicate balancing act to the overall design (the Galaxy-X doesn't work for me with its third nacelle poking up like it was some kind of starship mutant, but that's just me).

Besides, let's be honest... the only reason those ship designs exist at all was because they needed to fill up the starship graveyard at Wolf 359. We've never seen them in proper service, so it can be surmised that even the production staff thought those ships were only useful as garbage. The only other time we've seen a one-nacelle design was the aforementioned Kelvin, and it was specifically to show an antiquated starship design.

If your fingertips are blazing right now ready to type, "But we got the NX-01 and it's even more antiquated!", let me cut you off by saying that if there hadn't been four seasons of that show, and instead the NX-01 were just a page in a calendar somewhere and nothing more, it wouldn't be in the game. Hell, it's the same with the Galaxy-X; if it were a calendar page rather than a featured ship of the TNG series finale, its inclusion would be just as laughable.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
11-03-2011, 10:41 AM
You need to remember something.

Star Trek was created in the middle 60's and those decisions the great bird made about nacelle requirements where not made until the middle 80's.

Till then the Franz Joseph Tech manual was considered canon. So much so that in the back ground of TMP you can hear radio traffic issuing orders to ships from that manual. Including not just names but Hull Numbers like U.S.S. Revere NCC-595

The same can be said for the Federation Class Dreadnaught. Which is where the original dreadnaught classification comes from im sure.

These things where considered so canon that at the time of TMP and TWOK they used images of these ships on bridge view screens. Should they be canon? Personally I think they should. Especially since the ONLY Star Trek movie ever made, that he was in charge of, they were mentioned and quite prominently. From the early 70's, till roddenberry made that decision, they where canon. I think the only real reason Roddenberry made that choice was for more "artistic" look and style. I know he wanted in the 80's, with what input he had, to create a more pacifistic organization. However, based on the cultures they had encountered in TOS this was guaranteed to fail.

You had two star nations on each side of the Federation with a completely martial outlook or philosophy. Empires who believed in conquering and subjugating others to their will. This alone would have required starfleet to maintain some form of military side to patrol the neutral zones and maintain the peace.
So they would have had ships designed along a more military standard with military classifications. Anyway there are way too many inconsistencies in the entire universe on this whole issue to say “Oh they can’t be canon because”

Anyway that’s my 2 cp
Reply

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 06:49 AM.