Where are these Gene's rules of starship design? I've looked for them but all I can find is second or third hand info of a guy that told another guy that Gene told him his 'design rules'.
Quote:
I agree with you up to your last statement. If it was just a model then I wouldn't care either but it's going to have that cannon which is special to it. It evidently will be able to shoot through your teamate to hit you to and your buddy behind you (AOE cone of some kind). That goes beyond a model.
Now, if that cannon has the same effectiveness as stuff like the Red Matter converter then it's no big deal but I doubt it will be that gimped since this is a max level ship. I'm not screaming for it's removal or whatever at this stage because we just don't have details but if that gun is a monster, then yes, I will have issue with the Galaxy X.
Until we know what the specifics are it seems somewhat pointless to get too worked up over what "might" be unbalanced, IMO.
Heh, I am actually pretty well versed in warp theory. I'd never bothered to look it up on Wiki before, though. That's pretty awesome!
I just realized just how incredibly nerdy it is to say something like "I'm pretty well versed in Warp Theory" - what, do I think I'm living in the Star Trek universe or something?
I remember reading somewhere, don't remember where, that paired nacelles were simply found to be more efficient than odd-numbered designs so they don't normally use them. (As an in-universe explanation.)
The canonicity of that statement, of course, is highly questionable at best, as I don't even remember where I read it.
("Canonicity" being a word is also highly questionable, at best.)
I remember reading somewhere, don't remember where, that paired nacelles were simply found to be more efficient than odd-numbered designs so they don't normally use them.
The canonicity of that statement, of course, is highly questionable at best, as I don't even remember where I read it.
("Canonicity" being a word is also highly questionable, at best.)
I also read that elves live with Santa but read elsewhere that they are quite abundant in their native Iceland. fantasy eh? Who would have thought it's so difficult to make **** up?
I also read that elves live with Santa but read elsewhere that they are quite abundant in their native Iceland. fantasy eh? Who would have thought it's so difficult to make **** up?
Well it was in a published Trek book but I don't remember which.
But then, all of Star Trek is made up too, so I suppose you are correct.
I edited my original post to mention that was given as an in-show explanation, not a real life one, but you were too fast for me.
Heh, I am actually pretty well versed in warp theory. I'd never bothered to look it up on Wiki before, though. That's pretty awesome!
I just realized just how incredibly nerdy it is to say something like "I'm pretty well versed in Warp Theory" - what, do I think I'm living in the Star Trek universe or something?
You could always just use the Memory Alpha wiki on nacelles, and Rick Sternbach once mentioned that a starships warp nacelles usually had multiple sets of warp coils (forming two long rows) contained within them, so even with one you can still generate a warp field. Though the danger is if you lose that engine you're pretty much stuck, two or more are used on most starships because of redundant backup concerns more than anything else.
This 2 Nacelles or even numbered necelles *rule* is just as much of a rule as "Spaceships can't fire Phasers at Warp".... that wasn't realy a rule for long.
There are enough Ships with one or 3 necelles allready to prove it wrong and those ships are Canon so we gonna have to live with it.
This 2 Nacelles or even numbered necelles *rule* is just as much of a rule as "Spaceships can't fire Phasers at Warp".... that wasn't realy a rule for long.
There are enough Ships with one or 3 necelles allready to prove it wrong and those ships are Canon so we gonna have to live with it.
I haven't seen any. 'Official' Star Trek canon doesn't extend past the TV shows or the movies. The includes the technical manuals, novels, RPGs and so on. If it isn't in the TV show or the movies it's not 'canon'.
Please
It's one of those ships that never should have been... it doesn't work by Gene's laws
BWhaaahahha!! This is funny! Gene's law indeed. First it was vision and now its laws, what next? Does we make Gene a prophet?
Star Trek was his idea true enough, but it was/is a bussiness idea that he was very succeful with - nothing more/nothing less.
I find it funny the cult-ish level at which descriptions like vision and laws get thrown around on this forum when it comes to Gene Roddenberry. Its time to take hime down off the pedastal and just admit that Gene was a talented and creative man,but nothing more than that.
The Enterprise D was the first of it's kind. Many more were made after that. By the time of All Good Things only around 35-40 years have passed since the Enterprise D was launched. I can't believe that the Excelsior could still be in service after 90 years and the Galaxy wouldn't be after only 40. If you have proof somewhere that the Galaxy isn't in service I'll gladly concede on that point.
I believe you are mistaken. If I remember correctly, the ST TNG Tech manual lists the USS Galaxy as the prototype followed by the Yamato, and then the Enterprise-D.
I haven't seen any. 'Official' Star Trek canon doesn't extend past the TV shows or the movies. The includes the technical manuals, novels, RPGs and so on. If it isn't in the TV show or the movies it's not 'canon'.
There were one-nacelle and 3-nacelle designs in the Wolf 359 debris field (they really went into an orgy of kitbashing for that one). The 4-nacelle Cheyenne class, which is the canonical anchor class for the tier-3 cruisers, is from that set. If you're wondering why the nacelles on it look funky compared to other Galaxy-era things like the Nebula, it's because they used drafting markers they had lying around the office instead of putting together more Galaxy nacelles.
You mean the ship that people are boycotting STO for that's so exclusive and cherished amongst trekkies to be taken away? I agree. That is one fugly piece of ship. Glamor plays a big part in our killing.
Theres some nice Bridge commander renditions of this ship, and even an Elite force mod for the interior.
I guess some Trek fans have a thing for 3 nacelles
(I personally like, but certainly do not love the Galaxy-X.
I always enjoyed the look and feel of the Sovereign, Defiant, Akira, Steamrunner etc over the looks of Galaxy and Nebula.)
1. If you don't like the look of the ship, don't bother trying to get one.
2. If you think that because the design was in an alternate timeline, it doesn't belong here-- I could argue that by saying that the Olympic-class shouldn't be here either, then. But really, who are we to say that those elements of the future would ONLY exist in the alternate timeline? How many starship design elements have remained the same, through all of the "zomg alternate timeline" episodes?
3. It doesn't look any uglier than the Imperial-class.
Thanks,, though I was hoping for something laid out by Roddenberry more than what someone said he said. Maybe I'm just too picky.
Roddenberry's Design Rules
The following are Gene Roddenberry's official design rules. I found them at Jim Stevenson's Starship Schematic Database.
"Years ago, I was lucky enough to attend an Industrial Design class conducted at a Star Trek convention by Andrew Probert, head of the design team for the Enterprise in ST:TMP and primary designer of the Enterprise-D. He was nice enough to relay to me the 'Unofficial Starship Design Rules' as told to him by Gene Roddenberry..."
Rule #1 Warp nacelles *must* be in pairs.
"The 'All Good Things' Enterprise is explained not to violate these because it has two warp field coils in each nacelle, thus creating three pairs. The Franz Joseph Designs single-nacelle ships are not official canon..." Rule #2 Warp nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight on each other across the hull.
Rule #2 Warp nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight on each other across the hull.
Rule #3 Both warp nacelles must be fully visible from the front. Rule #4 The bridge must be located at the top center of the primary hull.
the front. Rule #4 The bridge must be located at the top center of the primary hull.
Recently Andrew Probert confirmed at Trekplace that these are really the design rules that Roddenberry and he himself nailed down for TNG.
Heh, I am actually pretty well versed in warp theory. I'd never bothered to look it up on Wiki before, though. That's pretty awesome!
I just realized just how incredibly nerdy it is to say something like "I'm pretty well versed in Warp Theory" - what, do I think I'm living in the Star Trek universe or something?
You...didn't know about Alcubierre's drive?
That drive is the reason I put his name into the naming contest back before STO went live.
I've seen very old plans for a Starfleet dreadnought with three nacelles. The ship was never used in the shows, but at least it was adapted into the Star Fleet Battles game.
Well here's the thing. Franz Josephs designs with odd numbers of nacelles have always been a tricky thing, but they HAVE been shown on displays in the movies, so it becomes tough to claim they CAN'T be canon.
Here they are in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - though this is the one-nacelled Hermes class not the three-nacelled Federation class.
I thought the proposed explanation was that these odd-number designs where in fact somehow two-in-one designs, and so despite the Hermes having one housing, there were doubled internals within...
I of course admit this is stretching things, merely furthering the conversation.
Comments
The plan existed before the games. It was also featured on the cover of the Star Trek novel Dreadnought!
Edit: Oh wait, you're right. That was the Franz Joseph plan. Never mind.
It's still a Franz Joseph design. he made a few with one nacelle and your dreadnought. It's not official canon design.
But I misspoke. It was not designed for the RPG games but for his own publications. I think they later appeared in the games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Joseph_%28artist%29
Pre-dates the Galaxy-X by several years at least, and is a canon ship, since the Princeton, a Niagara-class ship, was at the Wolf359 graveyard scene.
It's canon
It pre-dates the Galaxy-X (Both in reality and in-universe)
It has 3 nacelles.
Of course, it uses Galaxy-class nacelles, so we can fall back on the "Two sets of coils per nacelle" explination once again.
There's also the Freedom-class USS Firebrand, which was also in the Wolf359 graveyard scene.
The Freedom-class has 1 nacelle. But again, it's Galaxy-class.
I agree, which is what I was trying to say. I'm not worried till we get details on that cannon.
Thanks,, though I was hoping for something laid out by Roddenberry more than what someone said he said. Maybe I'm just too picky.
Heim-Droscher drive for the win!
Thats why no one wants to make games for us...
The canonicity of that statement, of course, is highly questionable at best, as I don't even remember where I read it.
("Canonicity" being a word is also highly questionable, at best.)
I also read that elves live with Santa but read elsewhere that they are quite abundant in their native Iceland. fantasy eh? Who would have thought it's so difficult to make **** up?
Well it was in a published Trek book but I don't remember which.
But then, all of Star Trek is made up too, so I suppose you are correct.
I edited my original post to mention that was given as an in-show explanation, not a real life one, but you were too fast for me.
You could always just use the Memory Alpha wiki on nacelles, and Rick Sternbach once mentioned that a starships warp nacelles usually had multiple sets of warp coils (forming two long rows) contained within them, so even with one you can still generate a warp field. Though the danger is if you lose that engine you're pretty much stuck, two or more are used on most starships because of redundant backup concerns more than anything else.
There are enough Ships with one or 3 necelles allready to prove it wrong and those ships are Canon so we gonna have to live with it.
I haven't seen any. 'Official' Star Trek canon doesn't extend past the TV shows or the movies. The includes the technical manuals, novels, RPGs and so on. If it isn't in the TV show or the movies it's not 'canon'.
BWhaaahahha!! This is funny! Gene's law indeed. First it was vision and now its laws, what next? Does we make Gene a prophet?
Star Trek was his idea true enough, but it was/is a bussiness idea that he was very succeful with - nothing more/nothing less.
I find it funny the cult-ish level at which descriptions like vision and laws get thrown around on this forum when it comes to Gene Roddenberry. Its time to take hime down off the pedastal and just admit that Gene was a talented and creative man,but nothing more than that.
I believe you are mistaken. If I remember correctly, the ST TNG Tech manual lists the USS Galaxy as the prototype followed by the Yamato, and then the Enterprise-D.
There were one-nacelle and 3-nacelle designs in the Wolf 359 debris field (they really went into an orgy of kitbashing for that one). The 4-nacelle Cheyenne class, which is the canonical anchor class for the tier-3 cruisers, is from that set. If you're wondering why the nacelles on it look funky compared to other Galaxy-era things like the Nebula, it's because they used drafting markers they had lying around the office instead of putting together more Galaxy nacelles.
Theres some nice Bridge commander renditions of this ship, and even an Elite force mod for the interior.
I guess some Trek fans have a thing for 3 nacelles
(I personally like, but certainly do not love the Galaxy-X.
I always enjoyed the look and feel of the Sovereign, Defiant, Akira, Steamrunner etc over the looks of Galaxy and Nebula.)
1. If you don't like the look of the ship, don't bother trying to get one.
2. If you think that because the design was in an alternate timeline, it doesn't belong here-- I could argue that by saying that the Olympic-class shouldn't be here either, then. But really, who are we to say that those elements of the future would ONLY exist in the alternate timeline? How many starship design elements have remained the same, through all of the "zomg alternate timeline" episodes?
3. It doesn't look any uglier than the Imperial-class.
Roddenberry's Design Rules
The following are Gene Roddenberry's official design rules. I found them at Jim Stevenson's Starship Schematic Database.
"Years ago, I was lucky enough to attend an Industrial Design class conducted at a Star Trek convention by Andrew Probert, head of the design team for the Enterprise in ST:TMP and primary designer of the Enterprise-D. He was nice enough to relay to me the 'Unofficial Starship Design Rules' as told to him by Gene Roddenberry..."
Rule #1 Warp nacelles *must* be in pairs.
"The 'All Good Things' Enterprise is explained not to violate these because it has two warp field coils in each nacelle, thus creating three pairs. The Franz Joseph Designs single-nacelle ships are not official canon..." Rule #2 Warp nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight on each other across the hull.
Rule #2 Warp nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight on each other across the hull.
Rule #3 Both warp nacelles must be fully visible from the front. Rule #4 The bridge must be located at the top center of the primary hull.
the front. Rule #4 The bridge must be located at the top center of the primary hull.
Recently Andrew Probert confirmed at Trekplace that these are really the design rules that Roddenberry and he himself nailed down for TNG.
FROM: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm
This is not a fact
O, i know. Just pointing it out that i didn't like it (though i bought it) just like people who don't like the Galaxy X don't have to get it lol.
trying to be funny but failing it seems.
You...didn't know about Alcubierre's drive?
That drive is the reason I put his name into the naming contest back before STO went live.
Well here's the thing. Franz Josephs designs with odd numbers of nacelles have always been a tricky thing, but they HAVE been shown on displays in the movies, so it becomes tough to claim they CAN'T be canon.
Here they are in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - though this is the one-nacelled Hermes class not the three-nacelled Federation class.
I of course admit this is stretching things, merely furthering the conversation.