Federation Schematics

[Vanguard]

The eternal damsel in distress...

[Vanguard]

I updated the artwork a smidge for these while repairing and moving my gallery around...

Edit: New Artwork already posted in another thread...

[MikeBurke]

I think that all these pictures are awesome! Can anybody tell me what is it that lowered the diagonal warp nacelles to the horizontal position on most of the Heavy Cruiser variants? Was there any specific benefit in doing that? Also with the "fast warships" Was there anything to be gained by not having the primary hulls totally round as they were on the Constitution class ships? The reason I ask because if there is no resistance in space, no friction, why would it be chosen to make the hull somewhat more aerodynamic? I've been out of it for a while and I'm looking to reconnect.

[Dal Downing]

Ok I will take a shot at this one.

First the Lowering of the Warp Nacelles on the Later Refits of the Dreadnaughts (CV, SCS, DNG, DNH, & DNL) as well as the Strike Cruiser (CS) and the Battle Cruiser (BCF, BCG, BCJ, BCV, and BCS) was originally done on the Dreadnaught “G� Refit. Maybe, it was based off of the Strike Cruiser's Design Data, or maybe it was not. But what was achieved right off the bat was an improvement in the Firing Arcs of the Side Phasers on the Saucer allowing them to be able to track a full 180 Degrees without hitting the Warp Nacelles. The Second advantage that was obtained with this new configuration, it actually improved the Ships overall Hull Integrity allowing an improvement in the DNGs Turn Mode. That is why it was built right in to the Battle Cruiser Design.

Next, from what I have been able to gather contray to popular belief Space is not empty… There actually are small particles of matter in space, fair enough they are widely spaced but they would cause friction/drag so that maybe part of the new “Arrowed� shape seen on all of the Fast Raiders. They also had to add extra bracing to the Ship so it could handle the increased strain of the Over Gunned Engines. And if your going to add a bunch of Metal to a Cruiser shouldn’t it look cool.

There may be better Techno babble for these changes than what I have given but that is what my take on it has been.

[MikeBurke]

Franz Joseph himself told me in 1983 that all designs were not so much as cutting apart existing designs but making them fail safe. I see the reasoning and certainly if it could improve a firing arc or increase structural integrity I think it would make sense.

[djdood]

Another reason for the "flat engines" was licensing. The BC and DNG are unique and completely ADB-designed. The "tv ship" and the Franz Joseph designs carry extra licensing baggage. It's why you almost alway see the BC on covers rather than the "tv ship" CA. It saves ADB money better spent on making more neat stuff. The can use the FJS ships and the tv-ship, it's just easier not to, IIUC.

From what I had gathered, the "spade/arrowhead" saucers of the fast Fed ships was done to both lean-out mass and improve the overall "warp dynamics" of the configuration, probably allows a narrower front profile to the warp field. Real-world reason = "make's 'em look fast".

BTW Mike Burke - I envy you getting to meet FJS. I never had the opportunity before he passed away. I'm aware of how much of an eccentric he could be, but his publications were still a huge inspiration to my current career. I have at least been able to let his daughter know how much respect I had for her dad when I was asking permission to post my DD drawing.

[MikeBurke]

I had a letter from him. I might still have it, I don't know If I find it, I'll post it. I didn't meet him in person just quoted what he said in the letter. I wrote him in 1983.

[Wolverin61]

All your art is great.

btw Kearsarge is NCL not NCA.

I always have trouble remembering what some of the ship class abbreviations stand for anyway. I should make a list.

[Vanguard]

All your art is great.

btw Kearsarge is NCL not NCA.

I always have trouble remembering what some of the ship class abbreviations stand for anyway. I should make a list.

Don't feel bad. I am making the list, and I'm still getting it wrong.

Anyway, conjectural Wyoming Class DDH

[Wolverin61]

What product is that John F. Kennedy class CF in? It's exactly the figure I was thinking about making, and the ship I said I needed in the What new ships do you want? thread. I called it a fast battlecruiser though.

[MikeBurke]

I had a letter from him. I might still have it, I don't know If I find it, I'll post it. I didn't meet him in person just quoted what he said in the letter. I wrote him in 1983.

Ok, I found this letter dated 8308.03 ( 8-3-83) How would I go about posting it? Do I need to post it xsomewhere and make a BBCODE reference to it or something?

[djdood]

If you scanned it and put it up on Photobucket (or something like it) you can link it back here like THIS.

[Sgt_G]

Neale,

The second ship in this topic is listed as "Kearsarge Class (NCA)", but that's actually an NCL. I checked your web site ... you have it the same there, too. I don't know how it's been up here for so long and no one noticed before now.

Also, I checked the toolkit images on your site, and I can't figure out what part was added as the secondary hull to convert the Kearsarge to the Chicago-class NCA. Would you point it out to me, please? Thanks!!

[Vanguard]

Not all the parts I've drawn like this are toolkit parts. A lot of them, particularly pylons and unique hull forms, are just kinda 'on their own' as needed for each ship. Generally, I draw them up first, and if SEVERAL ships use the same pieces, then I throw them up as toolkit parts.

[Shawn350]

What program do you use to draw this stuff it looks Great!!