Bridge Commander Central
BC Forums => BC Modding => Topic started by: GMunoz on July 03, 2012, 03:51:55 PM
-
Any comment or suggestions are appreciated.
(http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/4136/tostorpedoboat01.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/140/tostorpedoboat01.jpg/)
(http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/5397/tostorpedoboat02.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/tostorpedoboat02.jpg/)
(http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/7570/tostorpedoboat03.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/822/tostorpedoboat03.jpg/)
-
Very sexy!
I'm guessing the registry is a reference to something I'm not getting.
I love the simple lines, and the clear Akira lineage.
-
like it. think there is a connection needed between the two faint catamaran.
Something like that --> (http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/7570/tostorpedoboat03.jpg)
-
Excellent work G!
I take it the registry is in reference to PT boats of WW2. That's cool. But... I'd rather have the standard type of format for the registry. I don't believe Starfleet ever did have letters & numbers together like that. Unless separated by the hyphen of course.
You get a cookie!
-
don't forget "PT 109" *grins*
-
moed, you are correct it was a refrence to to the WW2 PT Boats.
Bash, what would you suggest , a plain strut connecting the Torp launchers or maybe placing a dedicated targeting sensor for the torps on it?
-
A targetting sensor may be a good idea, but isn't that a too easy target for enemy ships to hit?
-
A targetting sensor may be a good idea, but isn't that a too easy target for enemy ships to hit?
If we start on that track, we'll have to start complaining about every single bridge on every single Federation starship. :P
-
looks good reminds me more of the norway class than the akira
-
I like the idea of a pod, but I would have it a circular one like on your scout, smaller of course but have three forward and three aft facing torpedo launchers on it.
The idea being the pod contains high resolution sensors and the torpedos. But great work :)
-
I like it as it is but I'd beef up the catamarans up little. They look like one good torp hit and bye bye nacelle.
-
Added a strut with targetting pod. What do you think, keep or remove?
(http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/2348/rollbar1.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/580/rollbar1.jpg/)
(http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/6991/rollbar2.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/72/rollbar2.jpg/)
-
That looks pretty good. Almost looks like a Lok'nar with the nacelles flipped upside down.
-
Keep it.
-
Keep it.
Agreed
-
I was thinking about her name and registry, and I thought that maybe she should only have something like PT-XX for her name, maybe an NCC which includes her PT number, but no USS as the old torpedo boats didn't have names to them, just their hull number.
Also, I'm getting the feeling that she's a real small boat, with only 3 decks tops, so why do you have the turbolift cylinder behind the bridge module? Unless that's a vertical airlock or something, I'd say get rid of it, or give it a non-turbolift purpose.
just my 2 cents.
-
Agreed with BFGfreak on names'n regs ;) also I think I like the version without targeting module and strut between nacellescatamarans, looks coolest to me ;)
-
I concur with Baz about making the catamarans more beefy.
-
Agreed with BFGfreak on names'n regs ;) also I think I like the version without targeting module and strut between nacellescatamarans, looks coolest to me ;)
I don't agree. I like the U.S.S. designation with no letters after the hyphen. I mean hey, if a Runabout can have a U.S.S. and an NCC-xxxxx then a torpedo-boat (which is larger than a runabout) can have the normal starfleet format.