Author Topic: USS Falmouth Design  (Read 5925 times)

Offline cinqnic

  • Starforce Productions
  • Posts: 339
  • Cookies: 246
  • Cinqnic Member of Delta Force M.A.C.O. STO
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2010, 03:01:41 PM »
Looking good guys!
i hope you like it,ps hope that you ie GMunoz will hardpoint it
any way here a update pic

Offline deadthunder2_0

  • Posts: 1181
  • Cookies: 39
  • Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel
    • Modders of Steel Home page
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2010, 07:09:02 PM »
if not i can hp it
Support the Post TNG Ship Pack

Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel,
We are the Modders that take everything to the next level, We are the Modders of Steel

Offline GMunoz

  • Posts: 466
  • Cookies: 139
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2010, 08:20:59 PM »
I would love to hardpoint the model.  Send her over when you are ready.

Offline Starforce2

  • Master Hardpointer
  • Retired Staff
  • Posts: 1483
  • Cookies: 882
  • Skype: LizardWranger
    • Facebook
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2010, 11:56:30 PM »
it's an excelcibassador :funny Anyone can hp it.
I just realised something. I've released over 300 fully modded ships for bridge commander. Bow to your master :D
Read my mod blog!
http://bcs-tng.com/forums/index.php?action=viewblog;u=1129

Offline ARSE

  • Posts: 42
  • Cookies: 1
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #24 on: January 20, 2010, 05:21:46 AM »
Lol, the idea behind the design is it is only a fraction thinner than the ambassadors saucer and she would have filled the roll of battlecruiser about 5 to 10 years prior to the ambassador class being launched not designed, hence it shares looks with that class. I've mentioned to Cinqnic about my idea for the phasers as the ambassador had four smaller arrays as opposed to the almost complete array that the galaxy class had and two smaller ones on the aft section of the saucer either side of the shuttlebay entrance; I've proposed that the USS Falmouth (I can't decide on a class name yet, maybe Royal Oak, Royal Sovereign, Repulse or Renown (I like the old fashion proper names the Royal Navy used to give its warships they are quite majestic and have meaning or substance to them.)) has even smaller arrays but more of them, kind of between emitter stage and array. So I suggested if the arc was not broken by the shuttle bay and impulse engines that the dorsal side of the saucer would have 10 smaller arrays.  With the impulse and shuttle bay in the way I suggest 7 starting in the centre of the forward section of the saucer working their way around in approximately the same distance out as the ambassador. Then 2 smaller ones aft of the impulse reactors, atop the impulse housing and possibly even one between the bridge and shuttlebay.  This class was meant to be armed to the teeth to be off putting to the buildup of activity by the newly discovered species called the Cardassians, they and the federation had many border skirmishes during the lost era period as well as the Klingons and Cardassian partaking in a 18 year cold war that threatened to explode into full scale war at any moment with the Federation caught between. Therefore a more battle ready cruiser was deemed necessary by Starfleet Command thus the birth of the USS Falmouth and its sister ships the Falmouth the second in her class.

So what do you think to the idea, obviously the ventral side of the saucer would mimic this design of array as well? I was also thinking due to there being a limit in size that engineers could so far make phaser arrays that instead of a longer phaser array across the belly section of secondary hull perhaps two arrays in a FWD to AFT arrangement either side of the centre line in the same position of the belly phaser.

I am also thinking about where the torpedo launchers should be placed, I know for certain that I want it to have 6 launchers FWD and 4 AFT each capable of firing 2 or 3 torpedoes. I would like two to be beneath the shuttlebay on the secondary hull like the excelsior class where the hull first takes a step down, and I was perhaps thinking either a twin launcher above the shuttle bay recessed into the hull or 2 launchers in the rear of the neck section.  The forward facing torpedo launcher give me a little more trouble deciding probably four of them are best placed in twin launchers one pair in the forward section of the neck and perhaps two beneath the deflector housing, as for the other two I am stumped but I do want 6 forward. The reason for this being is at the time of construction torpedo launchers were still only capable of holding 3 torpedoes each to fire in quick succession therefore the resolve to give quicker reloads is to add more torpedo launchers.
Comments and ideas welcome guys.

Offline Psyco Diver

  • Posts: 355
  • Cookies: 3
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #25 on: January 20, 2010, 02:58:46 PM »
Maybe being inbetween the excellsior and Ambassador, maybe on the sauser is has a single 1/4 saucer lenght phaser emiters on the top and bottom of the saucer section facing foward and the rest of phasers being the older style phaser arrays like used on the excelsior, it could be the test bed for the "new" phaser emitter technology, but Starfleet not wanting to rely on it, still using the older reliable phaser arrays everywhere else? Just a thought

Offline bankruptstudios

  • Posts: 663
  • Cookies: 60
  • Xander = Host, Co-Host, Producer and Editor
    • Holo Suite Magazine
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2010, 04:37:37 PM »
That actualy sounds good. I second that.
 


Offline cinqnic

  • Starforce Productions
  • Posts: 339
  • Cookies: 246
  • Cinqnic Member of Delta Force M.A.C.O. STO
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2010, 02:36:39 PM »
more updates.

Offline cinqnic

  • Starforce Productions
  • Posts: 339
  • Cookies: 246
  • Cinqnic Member of Delta Force M.A.C.O. STO
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2010, 03:25:53 PM »
more pic

Offline Dalek

  • Posts: 1529
  • Cookies: 206
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2010, 03:27:31 PM »
I think it would look a bit better if the pylons were either perfectly straight or set up like Ambie pylons. It doesn't look right curved like that.
"To live on as we have is to leave behind joy, and love, and companionship, because we know it to be transitory, of the moment. We know it will turn to ash. Only those whose lives are brief can imagine that love is eternal. You should embrace that remarkable illusion. It may be the greatest gift your race has ever received."

 - Lorien

Offline cinqnic

  • Starforce Productions
  • Posts: 339
  • Cookies: 246
  • Cinqnic Member of Delta Force M.A.C.O. STO
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2010, 03:49:36 PM »
the pylons and engs are still to be worked on but thank you for you feed back

Offline Starforce2

  • Master Hardpointer
  • Retired Staff
  • Posts: 1483
  • Cookies: 882
  • Skype: LizardWranger
    • Facebook
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2010, 06:20:51 PM »
engines seem a bit large for the ship when viewed from the side.
I just realised something. I've released over 300 fully modded ships for bridge commander. Bow to your master :D
Read my mod blog!
http://bcs-tng.com/forums/index.php?action=viewblog;u=1129

Offline deadthunder2_0

  • Posts: 1181
  • Cookies: 39
  • Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel
    • Modders of Steel Home page
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2010, 06:35:56 PM »
i would suggest changing it to a more of a excelsior class or connie class nacelle
Support the Post TNG Ship Pack

Tech, Nonstop, General- Modders Of Steel,
We are the Modders that take everything to the next level, We are the Modders of Steel

Offline Starforce2

  • Master Hardpointer
  • Retired Staff
  • Posts: 1483
  • Cookies: 882
  • Skype: LizardWranger
    • Facebook
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #33 on: January 21, 2010, 09:14:17 PM »
the nacelles are fine...however their size is a tad large.
I just realised something. I've released over 300 fully modded ships for bridge commander. Bow to your master :D
Read my mod blog!
http://bcs-tng.com/forums/index.php?action=viewblog;u=1129

Offline ARSE

  • Posts: 42
  • Cookies: 1
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2010, 08:15:46 AM »
That looks great Cinqnic although I agree with the nacelle pylons and the fact that you said the engines need more work, a bit thinner a tad longer, could do with bringing the hull scoop out a little further forward with the pylons and extend the secondary hull section with the shuttle bay in a little further aft.  I think if the pylons came out flat and level like the ambassador to start with and then up a 45 degree angle from there to the engines which also in the original design are angled at 45 degrees so that they are the same as the nacelle pylons.  I think too that the engines need to drop down a fraction.

I love the darker texturing on the saucer it makes it look like its got armoured plates. The bridge looks a little on the large side considering the ship is only a fraction thinner across the hull than the ambassador and the shuttlebay on the saucer is all one bay, but like the sovereign class that has three doors that interconnect across the shuttle bay, the falmouth has two doors but unlike the sovereign they dont interconnect, it has that pillar in the middle within which is the flight control room, rather than being at the rear of the shuttlebay like you see on the connie class in Star Trek 5. Behind this pillar the shuttlebay connects up, with just a catwalk down the middle at the top deck of the bay connecting the pillar to the rear of the shuttlebay, it can also be accessed by a turbolift that goes up the pillar and allows access on to the bottom of the shuttle bay from the base at the rear of the pillar also. This is how I envisaged the ship anyway, I've spent a lot of time thinking and drawing it at home, I have many different sheets of paper with ideas on and rather stupidly have become extremely attached to this design, I am also in the midst of writing a story that is based around this vessel and the lost era period.

I definately would like to see the pylons and engines like I mentioned just to see what it looks like if anything, if it looks wrong then it?s all part of the designing phase certainly slightly lower the engines though, looks too much like the TOS connie with them up that high, meant to be more like the excelsior in proportions than the ambassador chunkiness, although there is nothing wrong with the ambassador I love it.

Another thing for the engineering section looking front end on at it I think it should not be entirely circular but more egg shaped with the thinner part being at the bottom again keeping part of the excelsior lineage it being u shaped from front profile, its just adding a rounded section to the flat part.

Finally I have decided where to put the last two forward torpedo launchers If the nacelle pylons are bulked a bit around the root on the topside , where the pylon meets the hull, slightly pod shaped like you see on commercial jetliner aircraft (although the commercial jetliner pod section are on the underneath of the wing to accommodate the landing gear) and mount them within that. From head on it would look pretty mean two on the lower section of the neck two beneath the deflector array and one either side in the nacelle roots, I?d say it would look off putting from a Cardassian cruisers point of view from the lost era period with that bearing down on you. I like the ambassador frill that goes from the pylons around to the shuttlebay opening., although I?m not a fan of the Enterprise C touch to the underneath of the aft shuttle bay with that even smaller shuttlebay, that just looks awkward to pilot into.

Going back to the Phaser design I think I prefer the smaller array sections around the ship, It would look a bit Frankenstein with both.
All in all this beauty is beginning to look marvelous!

Offline ARSE

  • Posts: 42
  • Cookies: 1
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #35 on: January 24, 2010, 09:33:43 AM »
Now for an idea I've had in mind for this ship, looking at the nacelles in the side profile you will note that from just aft where if mounts onto the pylon it steps up. Within here is where auxiliary impulse engines are located and they are also used for venting drive plasma quickly. They are not conventional impulse engines in as such as they do not use a fusion reactor to power them, they are the same as the impulse engine from manifold aft (manifold being the connection between the reactor and impulse driver coils) They are force fed drive plasma from a bleed off from the warp coil assembly using what would otherwise be a byproduct of the warp engines when not being used at warp, seeing as the impulse engines are deactivated within warp they will not affect the ships warp performance, a design I have had in mind for starships for a very long time and it makes actual sense. ?efficient? to put it into Borg phraseology and ?logical? for Vulcan phraseology. The reason for these extra engines, one to give an extra speed boost in emergency situations, these engines also have the ability to close bucket like shutters across the exhaust and open forward facing vents in the root of the nacelle / pylon junction and force the thrust out the front to act as emergency aft impulse power, i.e. this system deploys for emergency stop at sublight speeds and for and aft impulse power speed boost and also by deploying these engines individually it allows for quick hard turns port or starboard again giving it an added advantage. (This is the option for added speed and agility until the newer impulse engine designs come out with the sovereign class, which enable her to reach speeds and maneuver like a vessel quarter her size, I?m not making this up I have read this and I?m sure a lot of you have as well.) So in essence that act like huge RCS thrusters for the lateral plain. The main reason for this is the ship like the constitution and excelsior the ship is able to separate the two hull sections but seeing as the galaxy was the first able to reintegrate without the aid of a dock or starbase or another vessel, I?ll leave it that the Falmouth requires aid to reintegrate.

Offline ARSE

  • Posts: 42
  • Cookies: 1
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2010, 09:43:32 AM »
Sorry for double post just adding a pic so cinqnic can see how the aft view of the ship looks...

Offline Martyn_Myst

  • Posts: 19
  • Cookies: 0
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #37 on: January 24, 2010, 10:05:35 AM »
i like the nacelle set up very nice gives it a unique look
"the starship doesn't make the man, the man makes the starship" - Starfleet military annum

Offline cinqnic

  • Starforce Productions
  • Posts: 339
  • Cookies: 246
  • Cinqnic Member of Delta Force M.A.C.O. STO
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #38 on: January 24, 2010, 01:41:56 PM »
more up dates

Offline GMunoz

  • Posts: 466
  • Cookies: 139
Re: USS Falmouth Design
« Reply #39 on: January 24, 2010, 02:08:55 PM »
Looking good.  Can't wait to get my MPE on her.