Hey, Nick ... do you ever feel like this while working on deck plans??

http://www.msnbc.com/comics/daily.asp?sFile=nq060604


Garth L. Getgen

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, June 04, 2006 - 12:11 pm: Edit

Actually, he's very quick to get good ideas down in design... he just hangs onto them for a while to make us all think it took a long time.

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Sunday, June 04, 2006 - 03:44 pm: Edit

Nope. Sometimes when looking at F&E questions though...

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 12:15 am: Edit

Nick,

I just bought the new APT mini. I have the FT mini, too. I took out my trusty vernier calipers and measured them.

The FT mini is: L=20.5mm/24.5mm, W=17mm, H=5.5mm. That's length (body / overall), width, and height/thickness, of course.

The APT mini is L=23mm/26mm, W=14.5mm (16mm at the middle section), H=3.0mm (3.5 at the middle), not counting the landing gear (??) or bridge.

I measured the FT deck plans in G:PD and came up with L=66.5m / 81m, W=50m, H=10M. The mini is half again thicker than it should be, but the L/W ratio is close enough (1.5mm wider than it should be) to work with.

By keeping the minis is the same approximate scale, I figure the APT should be L=75m/85m, W=42.5m (47m), and H=5.5m (6.5m). The bridge bump is thick enough to be the actual bridge (unlike the Fed POL).

Just a wag on my part, but I'm thinking the lay out would be a ship two decks thick (plus the bridge), but most of it will be one over-sized deck. The five APR units would run down the center line of the ship. There'd be two cargo bays with huge sliding hatches to allow for loading/unloading while landed. The hatches are the thicker/wider mid section of the ship. The cargo bays, being three SSD boxes each, should be appox 300 m^2 (30x10m), which will take up about 3/4 of the stright side of the ship (ie, not counting the beveled ends). Forward of the cargo bays, the ship is two decks with living quarters and such. Aft is one oversized deck for engineering, shuttle, etc.

I suppose you haven't had much chance to look at it, but what do you think??


Garth L. Getgen

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 12:55 pm: Edit

Sounds good.

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 03:10 pm: Edit

Cool. But you still have to finish the POL plans!

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, December 16, 2006 - 04:00 pm: Edit

Nick, I just hope I can get my laptop working again. Either I dumped the video drivers, or I fried the video chip. I'm half afriad it's the later.


Garth L. Getgen

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 05:16 pm: Edit

Ouch.

I have got to finish the klingon F5. The boom is done, but I had to change part of it to conform to a story, but I don't like how I changed it. The rear hull isn't turning out right either, I need to rethink that as well.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 10:11 pm: Edit

Nick, Can you turn it into a GIF and e-mail it to me?? I'll give you some comments, if you want.


Garth L. Getgen

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 07:42 pm: Edit

Thanks, but I know what I want to do, mostly. It is just finding the time to do so.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Saturday, December 30, 2006 - 10:07 pm: Edit

Here's the outline rough draft of the APT:

http://members.cox.net/garth.getgen/APT.gif

The light-grey boxes are 10x10 meter 2-deck high cargo bays. The red boxes are the Warp drive and Impulse.

The forward part of the ship is two 2.75 meter-high decks. The APR units run down the center on the lower deck, with an upper deck above them with the Ph-3, Shuttle, and Tractor control rooms. The bridge will be completely in the bubble on top of the ship.

Comments??


Garth L. Getgen

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Sunday, December 31, 2006 - 03:57 pm: Edit

Okay, I've played with this a little more and have stretched it by six meters long. I added three meters for and aft of the "wings". I alos trimmed the wings, which are giant clamshell cargo doors, to take a meter off the width, so now they only extend two meters (each) from the ship.

Forward of the cargo bays, there's roughly 800 m^2 on the lower deck and 735 m^2 for the upper deck. For a crew of ~40, I think 1500 m^2 is plenty for living space, to include mess hall, medical, etc.


Garth L. Getgen

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Sunday, December 31, 2006 - 06:29 pm: Edit

Fun.

By Gary Plana (Garyplana) on Sunday, December 31, 2006 - 08:50 pm: Edit

It looks very reasonable to me, Garth!

My only question is whether it has enough cubic yards inside to handle all the internals? I think it's going to be close ...

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Monday, January 01, 2007 - 12:41 am: Edit

Gary,

That's why I stretched it a bit, just to make sure. I think there's enough space forward for the crew, but aft looked a little tight for engineering.


Garth L. Getgen

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Tuesday, January 02, 2007 - 09:58 pm: Edit

Question for SVC: In your clip arts of the APT, what I am assuming are the gull-wing cargo doors appear to be flush with the body of the ship, but these are well defined extentions a good two- to three-meters on each side of the ship. Can I presume that the mini is "exagerated"? On the other hand, are these really flush, or is the clip-art just too small to tell?? (Or perhaps it just depends on which company built the particular ship .....)

If these are extentions, I was going to suggest using them to store the fork-lift and such in there. But I don't really "need" the space. I'm still way early enough that I can change it easily.


Garth L. Getgen

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Wednesday, January 03, 2007 - 05:34 pm: Edit

The clip art is one version of the ship. The miniature is another version of the ship. Ted's art is another version of the ship. Your deck plans can be another version of the ship.

There are thousands of these things running around, so as long as you are close, I don't think being a little different is a problem.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, January 03, 2007 - 05:43 pm: Edit

Yeah, differnt model years and dealer packages.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Wednesday, January 03, 2007 - 06:32 pm: Edit

Nick, where can I see Ted's version??


Garth L. Getgen

By Nick G. Blank (Nickgb) on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 04:45 pm: Edit

I don't think there is one actually. But there is a computer cgi version done by the other guy, see the Fed commander booster(s) that come with the extra APTs.

Here:

http://store.starfleetstore.com/merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=S&Product_Code=4208&Category_Code=FCRB

and also in the rulebook I believe.

By Patrick H. Dillman (Patrick) on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 10:34 am: Edit

Ted use to have them Here: http://www.sfbnexus.com/
But He's taken them down.

By Tom Vallejos (Gurps_Gm) on Friday, March 16, 2007 - 09:04 pm: Edit

Have the Klingon deckplans. I plan to laminate them sometime soon. Any word on how they are selling? I like to see more deckplans in the series.

By Darren Kehrer (Kehrer1701) on Saturday, March 17, 2007 - 01:04 pm: Edit

Is it possible that we could ever see a Fed CA aka Enterprise" Deck plans?? THat we be awesome for PD.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, March 17, 2007 - 01:36 pm: Edit

As I understand things there are issues with such an endevor. Naturally we couldn't call the ship Enterprise and I don't know about licensing restrictions if any but there are other issues that are pretty big.

The first is the amount of work involved. Such a ship is pretty big and would require Nicks biggest effort to data. Second, if deck plans are made for gaming then they would have to be big enough for minis which would make the too big to fit in your average living room. One alternative already discussed is that you would only produce sheets of certain common use rooms and lable where they go on the larger plans sheets.
The next issue is sales. The GPD Klingon G1 deck plans didn't do very well, I seem to recall SVC saying. It is my opinion that this is partly due to the ship that was chosen. Now mind you that it was chosen, IIRC, because it was the size of ship that could be run by a player group with minimal to no NPC's. A larger ship like a Cruisers will involve at least 390 NPC's.

I think that the Fed Frigate deck plans would sell better and have a managable NPC crew (should have good details of crew requirements and posts).

Then there is the very big issue (I believe it's pretty big) of there being many deck plans sets of the Enterprise available on the internet for free. Sure you have to print your own but RPG'ers are usually will to do the work if it nets them a bargain.

As such I've come to accept that large ship deck plans are unlikely.

As I understand it though, Nick is working on some Klingon F5 plans and there will be the Tholian PC plans in PDT (already in CL33).

By Patrick H. Dillman (Patrick) on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - 02:01 pm: Edit

Okay, just an observation and comment, but what is with the two types of "grids" used in the G-1 deckplans? Is it some thing needed for Gurps? or is this just to accommadate certain palyers?

Seems to me that having esentially two sets of deck plans for larger ships is going to make the product cost more then it should.