Resin Illuminati

Resin Illuminati (https://www.resinilluminati.com/index.php)
-   Sci-Fi and Fantasy (https://www.resinilluminati.com/forumdisplay.php?f=36)
-   -   1:350 Sentinel Light Cruiser (https://www.resinilluminati.com/showthread.php?t=16496)

AdmiralBuck 06-28-2015 07:31 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kremin (Post 283804)
As much as I like the design and love all of your builds I would question the registry number for the design, IMHO anything beyond 2000 should be TMP designs

That is a very good point. Some exceptions I have noted was the 3800-3900+ numbers used by the transports as well as the Dreadnought 2100 series. (FJ Tech manual)

I realize that through Starfleet chronology, the registry numbers increase and by the TNG era, they are in the 5 digits, but it hadn't occurred to me that The Motion Picture delineated the 2000+ threshold.

Originally, I was planning a TOS retro-design of the Shangri-La (2575) and that is why those numbers remained in the 2500's. But, I have no problem changing the NCC to another number. Something in the 1400-1600 range could work.

I've had to do a bit of research to come up with ranges of registries for a TOS-era light cruiser class starship. These resources come from canon listings, Franz Joseph, FASA, the John Bullerwell compilation and MasterCom. The FASA numbers are all over the map. The MasterCom registries seemed to make the most sense to me. Here are some of their numbers:

TOS Heavy Cruisers range from 1017 through the 1800's
Coronado Through-Deck Cruisers 1975-1980
Decatur/Belknap strike cruisers 2500-2544
Surya Frigates 1850-1888
Coventry Frigates 1230-1243

The John Bullerwell listing is fairly complete and lists all known relevant ships whether canon or fandon in sequential order. And - by chance - there is a hole in the list between 2549 and 2559. In fact, the TOS medium cruiser Loknar starts at 2700.

While there doesn't seem to be concrete providence that NCC's north of 2000 are strictly for Motion Picture Era starships (Reliant - 1864), when creating a new and maybe unseen vessel, it's good to give all aspects of its place in the fictional universe some due diligence.

Check out this data:

http://stevepugh.net/fleet/StarfleetRegistry.pdf

Kremin 06-29-2015 08:08 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Don't have any issues with that I could even strech to the hull was registered with the 2000 much earlier and the build / development took 20 years or more to get to a working prototype and in the mean time all those others were built.

One the source books I read ages ago for the Decatur / Belknap design had the early designs in a Tos style with the prototype being TMP. Even the Dreadnaughts of the 2100 era could be said as having a less complicated design so faster development than Excelsior, only ones that get me are FZ's Transport tugs (which I have a tmp version in the collection) I have seen some use the NAR prefix instead of NCC but I'm still up in the air on that one.

All in all a lot of it is just made up at the time of production and sometimes just wrong so maybe we just go with what ever makes us happy :)

The Mad Klingon 06-30-2015 06:32 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
I don't like random numbers, I prefer them to have some personal significance. Aside from film-used numbers, I don't follow any predetermined fan-produced system. I base my registry numbers or any number on on mostly birthdays of friends or family. My Amelia Earhart was numbered for my Granddaughter's birthday NCC-3424 (7/24) and my previous design - the Pioneer-class, well, I used my own birth year, 1971.

AdmiralBuck 06-30-2015 06:50 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mad Klingon (Post 283851)
I don't like random numbers, I prefer them to have some personal significance. Aside from film-used numbers, I don't follow any predetermined fan-produced system. I base my registry numbers or any number on on mostly birthdays of friends or family. My Amelia Earhart was numbered for my Granddaughter's birthday NCC-3424 (7/24) and my previous design - the Pioneer-class, well, I used my own birth year, 1971.

I don't like random numbers either. But I like to find holes in the registry lists where I can make it best fit. Part of the fun in this hobby is placing your make-believe ship within a make-believe universe created by other people and doing it so well that it blends in seamlessly. Certainly in the thousands of numbers, I can find one that works. For me, 25 is a favorite and as I celebrate my 25th wedding anniversary this year, it's fitting. 50 - well, because Jack Lord is skipper of the ship. 2550 fits as a predecessor to the Shangri-La as well.

Heavy Melder 07-01-2015 02:11 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AdmiralBuck (Post 283818)
That is a very good point. Some exceptions I have noted was the 3800-3900+ numbers used by the transports as well as the Dreadnought 2100 series. (FJ Tech manual)

I realize that through Starfleet chronology, the registry numbers increase and by the TNG era, they are in the 5 digits, but it hadn't occurred to me that The Motion Picture delineated the 2000+ threshold.

Originally, I was planning a TOS retro-design of the Shangri-La (2575) and that is why those numbers remained in the 2500's. But, I have no problem changing the NCC to another number. Something in the 1400-1600 range could work.

I've had to do a bit of research to come up with ranges of registries for a TOS-era light cruiser class starship. These resources come from canon listings, Franz Joseph, FASA, the John Bullerwell compilation and MasterCom. The FASA numbers are all over the map. The MasterCom registries seemed to make the most sense to me. Here are some of their numbers:

TOS Heavy Cruisers range from 1017 through the 1800's
Coronado Through-Deck Cruisers 1975-1980
Decatur/Belknap strike cruisers 2500-2544
Surya Frigates 1850-1888
Coventry Frigates 1230-1243

The John Bullerwell listing is fairly complete and lists all known relevant ships whether canon or fandon in sequential order. And - by chance - there is a hole in the list between 2549 and 2559. In fact, the TOS medium cruiser Loknar starts at 2700.

While there doesn't seem to be concrete providence that NCC's north of 2000 are strictly for Motion Picture Era starships (Reliant - 1864), when creating a new and maybe unseen vessel, it's good to give all aspects of its place in the fictional universe some due diligence.

Check out this data:

http://stevepugh.net/fleet/StarfleetRegistry.pdf

I had no idea that list existed. Thanks for that.

Jim NCC1701A 07-01-2015 02:37 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AdmiralBuck (Post 283573)
Thanks Jim! No, this was originally a design I found on DeviantArt by LordSchtupp:
http://lordschtupp.deviantart.com/ar...-WIP-294962064

I've modified the secondary hull and designed new warp engines but the configuration is roughly the same.

Thanks Bill.

Sorry, I was a little OT - shoulda clarified a little more in my original post about the FASA ship.

SCI-FI made the comment that Lagrange reminded him of a particular FASA ship.

When I Googled it I found this:
https://starstation.files.wordpress....refit_102c.jpg
which I'd only seen before in work by an artist who goes by the handle Lt. Kevin Riley...

Mea culpa.

AdmiralBuck 07-01-2015 05:27 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim NCC1701A (Post 283857)
Thanks Bill.

Sorry, I was a little OT - shoulda clarified a little more in my original post about the FASA ship.

SCI-FI made the comment that Lagrange reminded him of a particular FASA ship.

When I Googled it I found this:
https://starstation.files.wordpress....refit_102c.jpg
which I'd only seen before in work by an artist who goes by the handle Lt. Kevin Riley...

Mea culpa.

Ah! Now I see what you were referring to. My bad. Yep, I've got a slew of those Ranger images saved here as reference material. Good stuff. ;)

AdmiralBuck 07-01-2015 06:24 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
Still working on the stern view of the Sentinel plans but I keep coming back to the bow. In this case, I had a few other ideas for the shape of the navigational deflector. Since I'm going for a sleek, compact profile, I've had to shrink the dish and raise the bottom of the primary hull to allow better clearance for the deflector. This makes for a small round dish on a fat secondary hull.

Other options are to widen the dish into an oval or rounded rectangle to make better use of this limited area:

http://vagabonddecals.com/chevereto/..._1JUL15.md.jpg

zysurge 07-01-2015 06:26 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
IMHO, the oval is too Next Gen. I'd go with the rounded rectangle.

Isurus 07-01-2015 07:04 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
My two cents, well after adjustment for inflation is about $22.37, I like the "oval". If it were all rainbow lit up then yes it would be too TNG. but as an actual dish, I love the way it contours to the front profile of the hull! The "rectangular" just doesn't look as slick and kind of throws off the flow of the front profile (sorry zysurge). Now the "round" is just classic and I don't think you could go wrong with that! Of course Admiral, you could always build 3! Give zysurge the rectangular one, me the oval, and you keep whatever's left :lmao:

AdmiralBuck 07-01-2015 09:48 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
I too liked the way the oval dish fit the bottom curve of the secondary. I will definitely build several versions and try them on for size once I get to that point. On that note, another stupid idea popped into my head:

http://i791.photobucket.com/albums/y...psw5y1uyeu.jpg

SCI-FI 07-01-2015 11:20 AM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
I'm overcome by the urge to call it the "USS Owl"...

My suggestion on the deflector: split the difference between the square and oval-- a sort of "D" shape with the "belly" of the D facing downward...

Of course, round is classic, a gold standard, if you will...

zysurge 07-01-2015 01:43 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
That's a nice pair of D's she's got there!

Tiberious 07-01-2015 03:26 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
We only need one Boob Ship in Sci Fi Hero-dum!

And I'd say go with the classic round. It's as TOS as can be, and it doesn't look like it too much.

The Mad Klingon 07-01-2015 03:53 PM

Re: 1:350 TOS Light Cruiser
 
I was drawn to the rectangle shape. For my Abbe-build I was thinking of cutting the top section of the standard round dish off.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.