A leap into the future? - The Wolf Class

[jayru]

Sorry for the lengthy post... but one of my current "works in progress," a 24th Century starship - the Wolf Class.

Orthos:


Scale Renders:


Beauty Scale Shots:


And now for some bumph about it:
The Wolf Class was developed around the same time as the Intrepid, and is my answer to Star Trek's lack of design innovation which I feel would have happened in the 100 or so years since TMP (I truly feel that the last innovative starship design to come out of Trek was the Intrepid Class. Everything created after Star Trek: First Contact seemed like a step backwards, and more about look than showing that the technology was moving forward). Like the Intrepid the ship has variable geometry nacelles - however, they move along the x and z axis, rather than just the y axis (in English - the move out to side, and slightly forward, rather than angle up ). I based that idea on something I saw in the TNG Tech manual about a possible future design of exploration ship, which I thought was pretty innovative.

I wanted to create something different, hull geometry wise, so decided to run with a a single hull design, rather than the old saucer/secondary hull format. I also wanted to get away from having the bridge stuck on top, and have it at a more accessible part of the ship for the crew.

The basics of the idea where to create something that was designed to explore strange new worlds, seek out new life, and new civilisations, and boldly go where no one has gone before – a true exploration ship, rather than start with the principle that the ship had to be built for war first and foremost. In saying that, the ship has the same sort of armament to the Intrepid, and can be best seen as that ships equal in battle. Where it differs from the Intrepid is that it has a few more of the exposed sensor pallets – including some on the ventral surface, something the Intrepid lacks (so like, how did they scan stuff from orbit again?). The hump on the bottom is the main deflector, the hump on the top is a powerful long rang sensor array (with the aux deflectors), and twin dedicated probe launchers.

I drafted the original plans for the ship back in July 1997 – I feel it important to state that because I know that the design isn’t perfect. This was the first Star Trek starship I ever designed. In fact, I have revised my original plans somewhat so that I can produce what I consider to be the definitive version of the ship.

As it stands, the ship is 318 meters long, with 14 decks, and probably crews around 130-150 people. I see no reason why it shouldn't be as fast as Voyager was shown to be, but several people have argued that idea because small nacelles means less power (believe me boys, size isn’t everything). I think the fact the nacelles are angled is also something of a scratch head thing for a lot of people. Admittedly when I drew that back in 1997 I did it because it “looked cool” – but in the decade that’s followed, I see no reason why a new type of warp nacelle couldn’t have been created. New ideas, new technology, new ways forward.

The resons to render it up against the Intrepid was to show the scale of the ship - as it lacks enough detail to actually show how big it's suposed to be (aside from the docking hatches).

As I say, my guiding principle in this project/WIP – which is still very much in early stages, was/is to create something that says “innovation” – rather than the “same-old-same-old” ideas used in the TNG universe.

Latest updates on this are that I've gotten round to finally building the detailing in (those who know my work of old know I don't use texture maps for detail, but insanely build it all in... one day I will learn to texture, lol);



Also been thinking about whether this ship should be able to land or not (credit to S-Stephen for the actual Landing Legs themselves);



Let me know what you think - C&C welcome.

[Tenement]

Lovely design.

[gmd3d]

very nice design .. and I like the fact it can landed

[evil_genius_180]

Interesting design. I haven't figured out yet if I like it but it certainly is interesting. (Though I think I'm leaning towards "yes" on liking it.) It's also different, which is never a bad thing.

A couple of points I agree with in your post, there's definitely a bit of a lack of innovation in later Trek, though most of the post-First Contact stuff we've seen is supposed to represent earlier technology than the Ent-E & Voyager (except the Prometheus, which is just inexplicably ugly) so that might be why it looks less advanced. And the 2nd point I definitely agree with is that nacelle size doesn't matter, top speed has more to do with the warp core, nacelle construction (not size) and the overall design of the ship, which would affect the shape of the warp field itself.

Anywho, great work so far. It's always nice to see an original Trek design and this is definitely pretty original. And it's also nice to see you posting a WIP on these boards, I remember your great work from when I used to post at SFM.

[jayru]

Thanks guys :thumbup:

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

Anywho, great work so far. It's always nice to see an original Trek design and this is definitely pretty original. And it's also nice to see you posting a WIP on these boards, I remember your great work from when I used to post at SFM.

Cheers EG - the Wolf isn't popular on SFM. I have no idea why. If you're all happy with it having a home here, I'm more than happy to keep the updates coming...

Couple of side projects are gonna be tagged onto this one; first off there will be some sort of "hard-docked shuttle" in the large oval area of the shield grid on the lower hull (or saucer bottom if you prefer). I have no idea what it will look like yet, as I haven't designed it. Also, the Wolf Class has it's own unique type of escape "craft" (not pods - well not as such). They too need to be designed...

Lots of stuff to keep me busy...

More soon ;-)

I like the Orthos design. Looks cool.

They probably don't like it over at SFM because you just dissed alot of designs out there based on the old Gene Roddenberry starship guidelines. I have no problem with your design, it reminds me of the Dauntless.

Oh, and the Intrepid probably doesn't have a big exposed bank of sensors because sensors aren't uni-directional. Think of how the Ent D had its sensors arranged. The only really exposed sensors were just around the rims. It had no panels.

Besides, I doubt you need to expose sensors for them to be effective. That just makes them easy targets.

[evil_genius_180]

I don't know why they had a problem with it at SFM. I think it's a cool design and it's definitely nice to see new stuff in the Trek universe. Plus, I'm usually a fan of unusual designs.

So, if you want to keep those updates coming, I know I'd love to see them.

[jayru]

Originally Posted by farshot

They probably don't like it over at SFM because you just dissed alot of designs out there based on the old Gene Roddenberry starship guidelines. I have no problem with your design, it reminds me of the Dauntless.

Cheers I only broke two, maybe three of the four rules. Believe me, there are official ships that break all four of them, lol.

I knocked up the paper blue-prints long before I saw "Hope and Fear" (heck, the UK didn't use to get Trek episodes that quickly). The Wolf is an old design - at least for me and a group of other people

Oh, and the Intrepid probably doesn't have a big exposed bank of sensors because sensors aren't uni-directional. Think of how the Ent D had its sensors arranged. The only really exposed sensors were just around the rims. It had no panels.

Besides, I doubt you need to expose sensors for them to be effective. That just makes them easy targets.

I quite agree - but then the exposed pallets must serve some purpose, or it was a type of sensor system that was in use around the time the Intrepid & Nova (the Nova has a set of exposed ventral sensor pallets as well) were built and was later superseded by something else. (That, and I need to justify the weeks I spent building in all the greebles within those pallets. It was not fun . I don't use texture maps - everything is built in...) The back history I have for the Wolf is that it was designed and built around the same time as the Intrepid, so I logically saw a relationship between the two (of course, I have revised the design somewhat...).

The Wolf is an explorer first and formost, and a fighter second. There would be some sort of trade off in terms of the design between those two functions - and to me the "cruiser function" in fleet combat situations is secondary to the explorer role this ship would normaly have. That's not to say that the "cruiser function" in fleet combat isn't that good, it has a similar level of armerment to the Intrepid, and of course those sooped-up sensors would allow it to serve as the "eyes" of a fleet, or long range scout.

But yes, I would agree that it's imperfect and it has vunrabilities.

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

I don't know why they had a problem with it at SFM. I think it's a cool design and it's definitely nice to see new stuff in the Trek universe. Plus, I'm usually a fan of unusual designs.

So, if you want to keep those updates coming, I know I'd love to see them.

Cheers, just a small one (as today is a physio day, so wont get much time in front of PC);

A very early and rough deck layout... very much subject to change...


More soon.... (including possibly some renders of my first attempt at making a mesh of this from back in 2002 - a take that was closer to the paper designs...)

[Tenement]

It's a great design and I can't wait to see her completed.

[evil_genius_180]

Nice work on the deck layout.

I always say I'm gonna do those for my ships but I never make it past laying out a bunch of planes that represent my decks in trueSpace for scale purposes.

[jayru]

LOL, one of the first things I tend to do when building a 3d ship is work out the deck layout... make sure I've got it right and the like, lol... Although I messed up somewhere, the Wolf is supposed to have 15 decks, not 14. Well - it does on the paper plans, but I have revised things slightly... have some pics to show what I mean on that score, but more on that in a later post...

[evil_genius_180]

I like to do a proper deck layout so that I get the windows in the right spots. One of my pet peeves is ships like the original Enterprise, where the windows don't match the deck plans. It's not that hard to do, IMO. And it's a first step in scaling a ship, IMO. However, apparently not all of the people who built the old physical models for Star Trek took that into account because there are many ships that have that problem. (even though Trek designers were always supposed to take interiors into account when designing ships)

[jayru]

Yes.... the refit Enterprise (from TMP) comes to mind on that score.

I made sure I got the windows sorted out right when I built them into the Ingram... rather than falling into the trap of putting them where they look good.

Although to be fair, that was the first time I've done it... remains to be seen if I get it right with the Wolf :laugh:

What would it take to move the forward torp launcher down a deck, from 10 to 11? Then you could put a mess hall on deck 10 and call it Ten Forward.

[jayru]

Originally Posted by farshot

What would it take to move the forward torp launcher down a deck, from 10 to 11?

A lot of hard work, lol... I did play around with new locations for the forward torpedo tubes.

Then you could put a mess hall on deck 10 and call it Ten Forward.

I have to admit that I did think about doing that, although on the original design the mess hall was set in a cut-in of the forward arc of the saucer on decks 8 and 9. Now it's on deck 11... although it will be a fairly large room still.

Guess you'll have to call it Eleven Forward then.

[evil_genius_180]

Or just the mess hall.

It was on Deck 2 on Voyager.

[jayru]

Ten Forward was a bar, where as the Mess Hall is a place to eat. I'm debating as to whether the area on deck 11 will be a crew loung, and the mess hall will be somewhere else. But i guess you have to balance things out, and ask why you would need both areas, after all this ship is big... but it's not a Tardis :laugh:

Soz for lack of updates... been uber busy with hospitals and the like.

Will have some NEW stuff to post for later....

[jayru]

More back history...

Some pics of the original 1997 design;



Pics of the revised "2009" design



LOL, yep they were done in Max (you can find the tutorial on how to do that here -> http://www.3d-palace.com/xenomorphic...ngineering.htm). The sad thing is I was taught how to do hand drawings like this in school, but thanks to the PC age it's a technique I've lost. Or perhaps during me misspent youth I burned those brain cells out...


Now back in 2002, when i was a little younger, and 40 was a lot further away than it is now, I started playing about with 3D applications with a view to doing my own stuff one day. One of the first things I tried to create was a mesh of the Wolf Class, based off my paper drawings. It's not good mesh, it's fairly crap actually. Looks like a five year old made it (humm, have I just revealed my mental age there?) - but I have ported into Max, so that I can see the difference between "it" and the joy it's going to become;



As I say, the design has been revised somewhat. Ignor the window layouts on the '97 version - I messed up the textures, still haven't managed to get that one down right... one day perhaps... :laugh:

Ok, free afternoon, off to work on the ventral surface some more.

[Thomas P]

I remember this. I really like the lines on this - first class design.

[evil_genius_180]

Your 2002 mesh reminds me of a game mesh.

I certainly like the lines on the original design but your revised version has a better flow to it, IMO. Thanks for showing us the old drawings and mesh. It's nice to see how the design has evolved. :cylon:

[jayru]

Cheers guys...

I did port the low poly version over to Bridge Commander... but it's a "badly made mesh" and crashed the game when it took damage, so I junked it (the game version anyways).

I have a few updates... will try and get them up later... got distracted by the fact my lil' sister is getting married...

[jayru]

Question:

The shuttlebay hatch - to big? (Shown shuttle and people are to scale with the ship)...



I'm thinking I need to scale it down a bit... thoughts welcome on that score.


Been working on the landing strut placement - yeah I know, that's hardly working on the ventral surface I hear you say... but when i know where the landing gear goes, i can build the hatch and bays in for it

I've moved the front gear as far forward as I dare (I need to leave space for the hard-docked shuttle going in), and I've moved the aft gear back, and twisted the legs a bit further round as well.




C&C welcome

[gmd3d]

I think it kinda large for the size of the ship . but that me , other than that every thing looks fantastic

Here's what I have for the shuttle bay, hope it's clear enough:

The ship looks good.

[evil_genius_180]

There's a couple different schools of thought on the shuttlebay door size. On one hand, you don't want the internal bay to take up too much room. On the other hand, I'd rather try to land a shuttle in a huge opening than a small one. I always wondered what they would do on the Enterprise-D if the tractor beams were out and they were trying to land a Type-6 shuttle in bays 2 & 3. That thing barely fit through the doors! On the other hand, it wasn't a problem on the original E where the hanger bay was friggin' huge and you had lots of room for landing shuttles. So, long winded explanations aside, my thought it maybe cut the size down a little because it is a bit cavernous but don't make it so small that it seems unrealistic that they'd be able to land a shuttle there (maybe 3/4 its current height.)

The landing gear looks great.

[Tenement]

The big hanger bay does make sense. Could you imagine a carrier with a flight deck that was just a bit wider than the aircraft?

[jayru]

Originally Posted by Taranis

I think it kinda large for the size of the ship...

My thoughts exactly - after sleeping on it.

Originally Posted by farshot

Here's what I have for the shuttle bay, hope it's clear enough:

Cheer's farshot - that's pretty much how the shuttlebay was configured on the 1997 version of the design :thumbup: - and your take on the internal layout is pretty close as well... somewhere I have an MSD (completed no less) for the "original" version. Will dig it out...

Originally Posted by evil_genius_180

There's a couple different schools of thought on the shuttlebay door size. On one hand, you don't want the internal bay to take up too much room. On the other hand, I'd rather try to land a shuttle in a huge opening than a small one. I always wondered what they would do on the Enterprise-D if the tractor beams were out and they were trying to land a Type-6 shuttle in bays 2 & 3. That thing barely fit through the doors! On the other hand, it wasn't a problem on the original E where the hanger bay was friggin' huge and you had lots of room for landing shuttles. So, long winded explanations aside, my thought it maybe cut the size down a little because it is a bit cavernous but don't make it so small that it seems unrealistic that they'd be able to land a shuttle there (maybe 3/4 its current height.)

My partner pretty much made the same comments last night, when I asked. The question is why would you need such a large hanger bay? On the NCC-1701 the hanger bay entrance doubled as a loading port for cargo as well - so a larger opening made sense. TNG ships - even those the size of the Wolf, have multiple hatches/access points for cargo bays, so the shuttle-bay becomes just that - a shuttle bay.

I never actually designed any cargo hatches on the original version... I kinda forgot... When I did the shuttlebay on the revised version I made it big because in my mind that became not just the shuttle-bay, but the primary loading port for cargo (yeah, yeah, yeah, they have transporters - but that just takes all the fun out of it :laugh. There are going to be a couple of secondary cargo hatches in other locations (as I've rememebred this time)...

All that aside, the door needs to be made smaller, but like you say - not too much smaller. I like the idea of a larger landing bay - especially on an exploration ship. You just never know what they are going to take onboard, and a larger hanger bay allows for better shuttle access, and the oportunity to carry larger craft if need be.

From what I've been able to work out, the shuttle facilities will allow for a few different types of shuttles be carried. The arse end of this ship is fairly big, and the hanger bay will follow suit I have no doubts, lol.

Originally Posted by Tenement

The big hanger bay does make sense. Could you imagine a carrier with a flight deck that was just a bit wider than the aircraft?

Frigates - modern day ones anyway, manage with just a small pad for 'copters, so a smaller bay in the TNG sense with there much more modern craft would be doable. Look at the Defiant and it's hanger bay (the one we saw anyways).

But yeah, I do agree that a big hanger makes more sense - especially with the role this class is going to have :thumbup:



Cheers guys for the comments... will have a play around with the hatch... more laters