test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

STO's Constitution-variants; How Big are they?

Way back in 2009 the original STO Website put up in-universe Stats for a slew of ships that would be in the game at launch. The Excalibur was given a Length of 350 meters. Since they never did stat pages like this for the Vesper or the Exeter, I figured they were also 350m.
Then I started seeing fan made charts that put the Vesper at 310m. Doing a few searches the Vesper has no 'official' size, just blanks occasionally filled-in by fans. I did find an entry for the Exeter at https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Exeter_class that gave a length of ~300+ meters, which is vague and open to interpretation, as well as being less than clear as to the source for the statistic.
https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Excalibur_class has the STO stats for the Excalibur.

Has STO at some point released the info on the Vesper or the Exeter?
If not, is there a Dev or other STO team member that knows what sizes these ships are scaled at?
4096669.jpg

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
«1

Comments

  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User
    Most likely equivelent to the Refit Connie. So... around 300 meters, give or take a few depending on pylons, nacelles, and saucers. The Exeter saucer is bigger than the Excalibur saucer after all.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    -,-

    Okay then. Until I hear different from someone at Cryptic, I will stick with the stipulation that the other T2 Cruisers are about 350m, like the Excalibur is.
    I may revise my assessment of the Vesper, pending input from roleplayers and fanfic writers. @rattler2 may be right on that one, as most fan charts have it as 300 to 310m, as far as I have seen.
    I personally suspect the Exeter may have contributed to the design of 2009's KT Constitution, as it was design as a 366m ship with a profile closer to the Exeter than the TOS Constitution.
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    Way back in 2009 the original STO Website put up in-universe Stats for a slew of ships that would be in the game at launch. The Excalibur was given a Length of 350 meters. Since they never did stat pages like this for the Vesper or the Exeter, I figured they were also 350m.
    Then I started seeing fan made charts that put the Vesper at 310m. Doing a few searches the Vesper has no 'official' size, just blanks occasionally filled-in by fans. I did find an entry for the Exeter at https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Exeter_class that gave a length of ~300+ meters, which is vague and open to interpretation, as well as being less than clear as to the source for the statistic.
    https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Excalibur_class has the STO stats for the Excalibur.

    Has STO at some point released the info on the Vesper or the Exeter?
    If not, is there a Dev or other STO team member that knows what sizes these ships are scaled at?

    If you're referring to these charts then I never saw any given sizes. I calculated 310 by parking the Excalibur and Vesper next to the Conni. However it's not a perfect system and things may be off by a few tens of metres here and there, especially with the larger ships.

    The sizes may not be accurate but the scales are, so the Excalibur and Vesper are about the same length and the Exeter is a bit longer due to the nacelles. So if the first two are 350m then the latter is about 360ishm. All three have longer nacelles and more elongated saucers than the Conni.

    These scales remain the same so when the size of the Conni is changed to its canon size from ENT and DSC the Excalibur, Vesper, and Exeter will still be larger by the same proportions.
    -,-
    I personally suspect the Exeter may have contributed to the design of 2009's KT Constitution, as it was design as a 366m ship with a profile closer to the Exeter than the TOS Constitution.

    Very unlikely as the Konni predates the Exeter.

    Also, @anubis0sarvour do you happen to have an archive link for these stats? They could be useful.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User
    Why did they use the Archon for BOTH the Archon and Vizier? The Vizier uses the same model as the Sovereign.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Why did they use the Archon for BOTH the Archon and Vizier? The Vizier uses the same model as the Sovereign.

    Because I used the Archon as a placeholder for the Vizier because I had no idea what the hull material was identified as in the code and I forgot to black it out like I did with the Vseta variants.

    I'll add that to the list of changes needed but I need to wait for the DSC ships to work properly in the Foundry before I can update them.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    edited February 9
    artan42 wrote: »
    Way back in 2009 the original STO Website put up in-universe Stats for a slew of ships that would be in the game at launch. The Excalibur was given a Length of 350 meters. Since they never did stat pages like this for the Vesper or the Exeter, I figured they were also 350m.
    Then I started seeing fan made charts that put the Vesper at 310m. Doing a few searches the Vesper has no 'official' size, just blanks occasionally filled-in by fans. I did find an entry for the Exeter at https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Exeter_class that gave a length of ~300+ meters, which is vague and open to interpretation, as well as being less than clear as to the source for the statistic.
    https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Excalibur_class has the STO stats for the Excalibur.

    Has STO at some point released the info on the Vesper or the Exeter?
    If not, is there a Dev or other STO team member that knows what sizes these ships are scaled at?

    If you're referring to these charts then I never saw any given sizes. I calculated 310 by parking the Excalibur and Vesper next to the Conni. However it's not a perfect system and things may be off by a few tens of metres here and there, especially with the larger ships.

    The sizes may not be accurate but the scales are, so the Excalibur and Vesper are about the same length and the Exeter is a bit longer due to the nacelles. So if the first two are 350m then the latter is about 360ishm. All three have longer nacelles and more elongated saucers than the Conni.

    These scales remain the same so when the size of the Conni is changed to its canon size from ENT and DSC the Excalibur, Vesper, and Exeter will still be larger by the same proportions.
    -,-
    I personally suspect the Exeter may have contributed to the design of 2009's KT Constitution, as it was design as a 366m ship with a profile closer to the Exeter than the TOS Constitution.

    Very unlikely as the Konni predates the Exeter.

    Also, @anubis0sarvour do you happen to have an archive link for these stats? They could be useful.​​

    Thank you for that chart! What was the site/page that you found it? And thank you for your perspective.
    And yes, you are right. I was having an idiot ball moment when I was thinking about the order they were developed in.
    v.v

    I don't know if I have a valid archival link for that data, but I 'should' have a backup I made of the page in my email and on floppy or a flash drive; since I found out floppy disks can fail more easily than flash drives, i'd do best to search my email and my yahoo group, that way if one copy degraded I should have at least one that is clean enough to be reliably intact. I also have some text and word files that I edited those stats into, but those were my personal Frankensteins as I was using elements from 2-3 other games within the framework of the games my group was playin in addition to STO; I had a mixed World of Darkness chronicle that had been using Trek-inspired ships and stories. And I was incorporating things from FASA's rpg & tactical combat games. Good times! Anywho, may take me a while to find the files and when I do i'll mention it here and pm you.
    The basics from those entries seem to be in the Memory Beta pages, so use the link in the first post for the Excalibur, and the other ship that sticks in my memory was, I think, the NX-91001, but I can't recall if it ever materialized in the game or if it evolved into one of the Sovereign-derivates by a different name.
    https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Ships_of_the_Line_(website)
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    The charts are on the STO wiki. here. There's also one on the Dominion page.
    There will be one on the Klingon and Romulan pages eventually but not until the Foundry is fixed as I require it to build the scaling map.
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User
    @artan42
    I got the Vizier so next time I hop in game I'll get that hull material for you if it helps.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • ssbn655ssbn655 Member Posts: 1,857 Arc User
    edited February 9
    Well using the canon AMT/Round TWO 1/350 50th Anniversary kit 18" /Canon POLAR LIGHTS 1/350th 32" kits as reference and feeding those into my conversion software the 1/650th scale kits work out to 297.18 meters long. Feeding the 1/350th kit in works out to 284.48 meters. Which means in the game by STO's charts mentioned by Aratan42 the TOS Constitution is fully 8.18 meters to short based off the canon 1/650 kits and a full 4.52 meters to long based off the 1/350 th. So splitting the difference we reach an agreeable canon true size is 290.83 meters which means in STO the ship is still 1,83 meters short so unless you are a rivet counter this is pretty damn spot on. Software used for scale conversion is the excellent and free Scalemaster program. I use it all the time in building R/C ships and aircraft.
    Post edited by ssbn655 on
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    rattler2 wrote: »
    @artan42
    I got the Vizier so next time I hop in game I'll get that hull material for you if it helps.

    @rattler2 is you ingame name the same as the forum one?
    ssbn655 wrote: »
    Well using the canon AMT/Round TWO 1/350 50th Anniversary kit 18" /Canon POLAR LIGHTS 1/350th 32" kits as reference and feeding those into my conversion software the 1/650th scale kits work out to 297.18 meters long. Feeding the 1/350th kit in works out to 284.48 meters. Which means in the game by STO's charts mentioned by Aratan42 the TOS Constitution is fully 8.18 meters to short based off the canon 1/650 kits and a full 4.52 meters to long based off the 1/350 th. So splitting the difference we reach an agreeable canon true size is 290.83 meters which means in STO the ship is still 1,83 meters short so unless you are a rivet counter this is pretty damn spot on. Software used for scale conversion is the excellent and free Scalemaster program. I use it all the time in building R/C ships and aircraft.

    The model kits are not canon. The commonly accepted size of the Conni is 289m for the Pilot and TOS version and 305m for the refit, this is the size CBS provided to Eaglemoss. The current ingame models of the Conni are these sizes.

    The canonical size for the Conni is 442m for the DSC version (scaled to the Crossfield) and 433m for the TOS version as per the MSD seen in ENT.

    STO currently uses the official size for the Conni and not the canonical size but if they plan on cross linking the DSC and TOS Conni then they'll need to change the TOS one to its canonical size from ENT.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    @artan42 did you create the Fleet Charts on the wiki? Or just found them? There is no citation regarding the source of the figures listed in the charts. The history of the images dates them as originating in 2018 (various dates throughout that year. From the wording about the images in the disclaimer/licensing info, it sounds as if it is a fan made image, using screenshots of the ingame assets. The is nothing said regarding the source of the sizes stated on the chart.

    My memory of the "Ships" page on the original STO Website being up prior to STO's Open Beta, is corroborated by info listed on Memory Beta, https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Ships_of_the_Line_(website) (Date created: 25 December 2008, Last update: 24 July 2009).

    My 1st scaling test, using Cryptic's stated size for the Excalibur at 350 meters.
    dczdtos-86fa4ba3-18db-4abb-b5ca-190ce2d64efd.jpg
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    @artan42 did you create the Fleet Charts on the wiki? Or just found them? There is no citation regarding the source of the figures listed in the charts. The history of the images dates them as originating in 2018 (various dates throughout that year. From the wording about the images in the disclaimer/licensing info, it sounds as if it is a fan made image, using screenshots of the ingame assets. The is nothing said regarding the source of the sizes stated on the chart.

    I have replied to you on the wiki as well, but yes I made them. The models are scaled against ships of known length (such as the Oddy or Defiant).
    Some sizes are released by Cryptic or Eaglemoss and some are calculated against them. Where there is a conflict between STOs sizes and other sources I have selected the former as they are comparisons of the game models so it wouldn't make sense to do otherwise (such as the Oberth which is about 120m ingame but over 300m in TNG).
    My memory of the "Ships" page on the original STO Website being up prior to STO's Open Beta, is corroborated by info listed on Memory Beta, https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Ships_of_the_Line_(website) (Date created: 25 December 2008, Last update: 24 July 2009).

    I've reviewed every page on MB relating to STO ships today and some, like the Excalibur and Oslo, are only slightly different from my estimates (which I will correct on the next iteration of the charts), some differ significantly, such as the Tempest, which needs further investigation.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    "The Power of MATH!! Woo-hoo!!"
    *high-fives all around, and a fist-bump for @artan42 *

    Cool! Very nice charts btw! Now that I've been think about it, I think I may have found similar charts years ago, and used them in tabletop gaming. Either another fan's work or possibly earlier charts of yours, idk. But they looked good and well thought-out. And fun to use!

    I think that for my two next charts (01 & 02), I'll have all 3 scaled at 350, but list the Vesper and Exeter as an approximate length as I am still investigate what their size is/should be. Then in 02 have the Exeter a bit larger. Let's say, for argument's sake, your estimations of relative scaling of the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter are proportionally correct.
    310m/315m = 0.98412698412698412698412698412698 differential
    315m/310m = 1.0161290322580645161290322580645, this being our multiplier

    Exeter
    350m x 1.0161290322580645161290322580645 = 355.64516129032258064516129032258m, or 355.645m
    Exeter 355.64516129032258064516129032258m, or 355.645m, or 356m for those who hate decimals.
    Fascinating.
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    "The Power of MATH!! Woo-hoo!!"
    *high-fives all around, and a fist-bump for @artan42 *

    Cool! Very nice charts btw! Now that I've been think about it, I think I may have found similar charts years ago, and used them in tabletop gaming. Either another fan's work or possibly earlier charts of yours, idk. But they looked good and well thought-out. And fun to use!

    I'm still finding old reposts of my older embarrassingly basic work out there.
    [/quote]
    I think that for my two next charts (01 & 02), I'll have all 3 scaled at 350, but list the Vesper and Exeter as an approximate length as I am still investigate what their size is/should be. Then in 02 have the Exeter a bit larger. Let's say, for argument's sake, your estimations of relative scaling of the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter are proportionally correct.
    310m/315m = 0.98412698412698412698412698412698 differential
    315m/310m = 1.0161290322580645161290322580645, this being our multiplier

    Exeter
    350m x 1.0161290322580645161290322580645 = 355.64516129032258064516129032258m, or 355.645m
    Exeter 355.64516129032258064516129032258m, or 355.645m, or 356m for those who hate decimals.
    Fascinating.

    Assuming the Excalibur is 350m then the Vesper also is give or take 5m either way (the nacelles are longer but the saucer stubbyer) but your calculation for the Exeter looks about right.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • captainbmoneycaptainbmoney Member Posts: 1,296 Arc User
    Still waiting on a Beyond Ent-A style either as a skin for the kelvin box one or as a new one.

    Like my fanpage!
    https://www.facebook.com/CaptainBMoney913
    Join Date: August 29th 2010
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    Still waiting on a Beyond Ent-A style either as a skin for the kelvin box one or as a new one.

    I fail to see what that has to do with this conversation as we are trying to find more details regarding the models already in game, but okay. I actually prefer the original 2009 design, over the Into Darkness & Beyond refits. STO is unlikely to add it unless KT ST4 is made and a success. Trekyards podcasters on youtube did an episode on the Beyond Ent-A you might like.
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    edited February 12
    artan42 wrote: »
    "The Power of MATH!! Woo-hoo!!"
    *high-fives all around, and a fist-bump for @artan42 *

    Cool! Very nice charts btw! Now that I've been think about it, I think I may have found similar charts years ago, and used them in tabletop gaming. Either another fan's work or possibly earlier charts of yours, idk. But they looked good and well thought-out. And fun to use!

    I'm still finding old reposts of my older embarrassingly basic work out there.
    I think that for my two next charts (01 & 02), I'll have all 3 scaled at 350, but list the Vesper and Exeter as an approximate length as I am still investigate what their size is/should be. Then in 02 have the Exeter a bit larger. Let's say, for argument's sake, your estimations of relative scaling of the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter are proportionally correct.
    310m/315m = 0.98412698412698412698412698412698 differential
    315m/310m = 1.0161290322580645161290322580645, this being our multiplier

    Exeter
    350m x 1.0161290322580645161290322580645 = 355.64516129032258064516129032258m, or 355.645m
    Exeter 355.64516129032258064516129032258m, or 355.645m, or 356m for those who hate decimals.
    Fascinating.
    artan42 wrote: »
    Assuming the Excalibur is 350m then the Vesper also is give or take 5m either way (the nacelles are longer but the saucer stubbyer) but your calculation for the Exeter looks about right.​​

    I think I'll also do one (eventually) that includes the NX91001/Noble-class at the NX-91001's stated length of 692 meters, as well as one showing my headcanon scaling for my games & fanfic.
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • trennantrennan Member Posts: 1,953 Arc User
    edited February 13
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 7,939 Arc User
    How big are they?

    They are big. 'Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts' to them.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    edited February 14
    trennan wrote: »

    I am very fond of that site, and the work put into wrangling out the problems in canon (and some side-canon) ships and events. But the STO-exclusive Cruisers that I am discussing, are not on that chart nor any other, as far as I know, Bernd Schneider has not done anything regarding the ships in STO. I will double check sometime. And thanks for the chart! It may not have the ships in question, but it will come in handy!

    While I welcome fellow fans' insights and points of view, I am hoping one of the devs might have the answer, as A) scaling of the ships would have been an integral part of designing and making the in-game models, regardless of how complete each ship's write up was way back in game development, and B ) even if they aren't keeping an archival record of lore & details for every ship, information like the actual pixel sizes of the in-game models would be useful, as then we can use the ships with 'in universe' stats as yardsticks, and comparing pixel sizes of the models to calculate what the other ships' 'in universe' sizes actually are.

    Using their appearance to us, in the game, is subjective to facets of the game's engine I don't know the fine details of. Something I have noticed is sometimes the KT Constitution appears close to same size as the standard Constitution, and other times it is supersized to the 'alleged' canon sizes.
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User

    Using their appearance to us, in the game, is subjective to facets of the game's engine I don't know the fine details of. Something I have noticed is sometimes the KT Constitution appears close to same size as the standard Constitution, and other times it is supersized to the 'alleged' canon sizes.

    Well... using on screen clues, the guys at Ex Astris have mathed out that the best plausible size for the Kelvin Connie with the least amount of things you need to ignore is 366 meters, which only ignores the HUUUUUGE shuttlebay scene. All other features line up with her prime and prime refit counterparts then.
    monsterprise.jpg
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    Using their appearance to us, in the game, is subjective to facets of the game's engine I don't know the fine details of. Something I have noticed is sometimes the KT Constitution appears close to same size as the standard Constitution, and other times it is supersized to the 'alleged' canon sizes.

    It's just a misunderstanding of incorrect VFX. Like the TOS Conni and Voyager the shuttlebay is too big for the rest of the ship so some fans decided to treat the Koni differently to those two ships and assumed it was the size of the Galaxy Class despite it being easily visible onscreen to have only two decks in its saucer and a bridge window the height of a human.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • ssbn655ssbn655 Member Posts: 1,857 Arc User
    edited February 14
    artan42 wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    @artan42
    I got the Vizier so next time I hop in game I'll get that hull material for you if it helps.

    @rattler2 is you ingame name the same as the forum one?
    ssbn655 wrote: »
    Well using the canon AMT/Round TWO 1/350 50th Anniversary kit 18" /Canon POLAR LIGHTS 1/350th 32" kits as reference and feeding those into my conversion software the 1/650th scale kits work out to 297.18 meters long. Feeding the 1/350th kit in works out to 284.48 meters. Which means in the game by STO's charts mentioned by Aratan42 the TOS Constitution is fully 8.18 meters to short based off the canon 1/650 kits and a full 4.52 meters to long based off the 1/350 th. So splitting the difference we reach an agreeable canon true size is 290.83 meters which means in STO the ship is still 1,83 meters short so unless you are a rivet counter this is pretty damn spot on. Software used for scale conversion is the excellent and free Scalemaster program. I use it all the time in building R/C ships and aircraft.

    The model kits are not canon. The commonly accepted size of the Conni is 289m for the Pilot and TOS version and 305m for the refit, this is the size CBS provided to Eaglemoss. The current ingame models of the Conni are these sizes.

    The canonical size for the Conni is 442m for the DSC version (scaled to the Crossfield) and 433m for the TOS version as per the MSD seen in ENT.

    STO currently uses the official size for the Conni and not the canonical size but if they plan on cross linking the DSC and TOS Conni then they'll need to change the TOS one to its canonical size from ENT.​​

    First off did you even read my whole posting? Clearly you didn't as I went into the sizes and all and that the difference is very minor just over a meter in all. So yes you didn't read my post or failed to grasp it. Second but they are CANON. They are fully licensed by Paramount so they are indeed canon. Even more so when you use the aftermarket pieces that correct necessary changes to facilitate de-molding that were taken from Mr. Kerrs, Drexlers, Proberts and the rest of the restoration teams measurements.
  • anubis0sarvouranubis0sarvour Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    ssbn655 wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    @artan42
    I got the Vizier so next time I hop in game I'll get that hull material for you if it helps.

    @rattler2 is you ingame name the same as the forum one?
    ssbn655 wrote: »
    Well using the canon AMT/Round TWO 1/350 50th Anniversary kit 18" /Canon POLAR LIGHTS 1/350th 32" kits as reference and feeding those into my conversion software the 1/650th scale kits work out to 297.18 meters long. Feeding the 1/350th kit in works out to 284.48 meters. Which means in the game by STO's charts mentioned by Aratan42 the TOS Constitution is fully 8.18 meters to short based off the canon 1/650 kits and a full 4.52 meters to long based off the 1/350 th. So splitting the difference we reach an agreeable canon true size is 290.83 meters which means in STO the ship is still 1,83 meters short so unless you are a rivet counter this is pretty damn spot on. Software used for scale conversion is the excellent and free Scalemaster program. I use it all the time in building R/C ships and aircraft.

    The model kits are not canon. The commonly accepted size of the Conni is 289m for the Pilot and TOS version and 305m for the refit, this is the size CBS provided to Eaglemoss. The current ingame models of the Conni are these sizes.

    The canonical size for the Conni is 442m for the DSC version (scaled to the Crossfield) and 433m for the TOS version as per the MSD seen in ENT.

    STO currently uses the official size for the Conni and not the canonical size but if they plan on cross linking the DSC and TOS Conni then they'll need to change the TOS one to its canonical size from ENT.​​

    First off did you even read my whole posting? Clearly you didn't as I went into the sizes and all and that the difference is very minor just over a meter in all. So yes you didn't read my post or failed to grasp it. Second but they are CANON. They are fully licensed by Paramount so they are indeed canon. Even more so when you use the aftermarket pieces that correct necessary changes to facilitate de-molding that were taken from Mr. Kerrs, Drexlers, Proberts and the rest of the restoration teams measurements.

    Actually, licensed works, are NOT canon. FASA was licensed for their books, but they were never canon. Novels, comics and games (including STO) are not canon, just licensed works. Very rarely a book or two will be canon, and deemed not canon later on by whoever (IP Owner or designated official) retconning it out, as was the case with the Spaceflight Chronology; it was considered canon from 1980-1985, only to be tossed out as Roddenberry & co. retconned things left and right as they were developing things for TNG, and the new continuity would have to fit and be accommodated by the old, so they fixed things as needed.
    That's why the Star Trek Wikis are divided; Memory Alpha covers Canon works; the various shows and films. Memory Beta covers Licensed Works; books, comics, games, etc.
    I am not as familiar with Memory Gamma, but that seems to cover Fan Created Works.
    STO Wiki, covers only STO content.

    As for scale models, that program may be very good at what it does and all, but as a fellow modeler, there is one very important caveat & axiom regarding scale models: models mass-produced rarely if ever 100% accurate. Different companies and different product lines have different standards for how close to come to 100%, and to what degree they will fudge the scale so they can put out a product that is good enough. AMT/Ertl is one of the better ones, and from what I hear Polar Lights is even better. But the scales are almost always approximate, with varying margins for error. So even working from the best model kits you can get, they almost certainly are not 100% exact scale, but somewhere between 95 and 99%. And to my knowledge there are no standard model kits made for STO-sourced ships. 3d printing ships is another thing entirely.

    Lastly, we already have the sizes of the TOS & TMP Constitution classes. The Cruisers I was addressing with this article/thread, were the Excalibur (established length 350 meters), Vesper & Exeter (sizes not published), in the hopes a DEV would respond with the info I seek.

    Now that I have made myself clear, I respectfully ask you to not make further comments on this thread regarding model kits, as it is off-topic and derails the thread. If you feel the need to discuss model kits further, please create a new thread for what you want to discuss.
    Thank You.
    4096669.jpg

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User
    @artan42
    Default Hull material for the Vizier is 7 B.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    rattler2 wrote: »
    @artan42
    Default Hull material for the Vizier is 7 B.

    Thank you. I'll see if I can rig it up in demorecord. If not I may need to badger you for a demo of your ship live.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User
    Alright. Although I do have some added blue markings, but I can model somewhere. Can kinda see how she looks in my sig.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 9,804 Bug Hunter
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Alright. Although I do have some added blue markings, but I can model somewhere. Can kinda see how she looks in my sig.

    Can the Vizor be uploaded to Gameprint? Because thinking on, I don't need a size comparison because it's the Sovereign, only the material. If not I'll revert to plan A.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 45,995 Arc User
    Don't see why not. I mean its just hull material.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.