Original Starship Design Thread

[Finger13]

It's not about atmo. It's about vaccum. http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/index.html

Would you be more satisfied to see railguns mounted onto the turrets? I've been considering it, but was considering power requirements.

I will atempt to pretend you did't just propose we turn a bunch of leaky tin cans into intergalactic space ships. For one, the refits would have to be so extensive it would be cheaper to build a whole new space ship.

True, but if we built conventional ships with the specs that we already have, and made the adjustments necessary to have them house all of our technologies, then a battleship is just as practical as something like the Prometheus.

I wouldn't advocate taking an aircraft carrier, slapping engines and shields on it and sending it for Mars, but really. There are so many things wrong with the Daedalus and Prometheus too, primarily the thrusters. They have full manoeuvrability yet only appear to use the rear thrusters.

I'm just saying, I'm not going to pretend to be a scientist and make this 100% scientifically sound, but since the official people can take the liberty of bending rules for their ships, I think a few exceptions here and there won't kill anyone.

We don't even know how these ships fly in the atmosphere.

How do ships like the Galactica make sense then? They aren't shielded but they fire cannons in space.

This is all assuming that you don't like idea of the artillery working in a vacuum.

[thekillman]

but for the challenge, we dont know what it has to fight. that thing could just land on a sea and act as a base of operations.

and tom, in your world every ship is just a glorified rocket.

i, instead, lean more to "platforms".

and in space, in stargate, shape is arbitrary

[Crazy Tom]

Would you be more satisfied to see railguns mounted onto the turrets? I've been considering it, but was considering power requirements.



True, but if we built conventional ships with the specs that we already have, and made the adjustments necessary to have them house all of our technologies, then a battleship is just as practical as something like the Prometheus.

I wouldn't advocate taking an aircraft carrier, slapping engines and shields on it and sending it for Mars, but really. There are so many things wrong with the Daedalus and Prometheus too, primarily the thrusters. They have full manoeuvrability yet only appear to use the rear thrusters.

I'm just saying, I'm not going to pretend to be a scientist and make this 100% scientifically sound, but since the official people can take the liberty of bending rules for their ships, I think a few exceptions here and there won't kill anyone.

We don't even know how these ships fly in the atmosphere.

How do ships like the Galactica make sense then? They aren't shielded but they fire cannons in space.

This is all assuming that you don't like idea of the artillery working in a vacuum.

In SG, power requirements are moot, mostly, the naq reactors we use can provide more than enough power for railguns. But you can'tmake them too big or the recoil would send the ship-literarly- flying.

Except the actual shape of wet navy ships is actually detrimental. nce your done turning a wet navy ship into s apce ship- you wan't reconise it as a wet navy ship no more.

Tell me about it.

They fly in atmo on inertial dampeners, that efectively reduce the weight of the ship.

The Galatica uses railguns, and yeas, there are far better ways to design the galactica, but so long as it doen't look like ist's sup[osed to swim on ater, it's OK-creative liense.

Mind you, I'll still pointy out any parts I dissagree with from a practical standpoint. But that's just me, as everyone here can atest to.

[boberth2o]

I did a little work on the solar panels here. Little update

Spoiler:

[Finger13]

I did a little work on the solar panels here. Little update

Spoiler:

I really like the colouring of the solar panels. Those trusses are nice too.

[boberth2o]

I especially like that aswell

[boberth2o]

Spoiler:

[Finger13]

Alright so if everyone can recall my dragonish looking ship, this is meant to be the small version of it, or the bomber variant. Yeah I know that I keep switching gears on my designs, but after the feedback that I was getting on that battleship and some reflection on the design, I decided to abandon that.

This is just the front of the ship. It won't be that long, but will have at least a tail section, if not a small mid-section as well.

Anyways, I'm tired to I'm going to sleep, but here are some renders from tonight:

Spoiler:

I still have to play around with the centre hull in relation to the sides. In these renders I slid them forward of the centre hull to break up the flat front, but I think I might like it more the other way (In the renders that I'll post at the bottom of this). The panelling needs touching up too. I just kind of rushed through the panelling, so I'll touch it up later on.

I started some minor greebling. I want to keep the body pretty smooth though, so I think I'll be making the panelling shorter to keep it closer to the body.

I also need to mess with my lighting to get the seams and angles to show up better. Haven't had much time for that, I'll play with it tomorrow if I get the chance.

Here are a few different angles. They are renders from yesterday, so they have less detail but show a different angle that I like.

Spoiler:

This means that I'll be pursuing a more traditional bomber. It will still be able to function similarly to the previous design that I described, but it will focus more on conventional bombing tactics.

Thanks to everyone that provided feedback on my last design. You were right, I don't think it really followed the role of a bomber, whereas this hopefully will.

EDIT: Which do you guys prefer, the side portions slid forward of the centre hull (the first renders that are from tonight with more detail), or the one where they're even (the second set of renders from yesterday)?

[thekillman]

not sure what you mean. but for some reason, it looks a bit like a jumper type of ship. the back where the neck will be, add a door and you have an incredible ship.

[Semmer]

Alright so if everyone can recall my dragonish looking ship, this is meant to be the small version of it, or the bomber variant. Yeah I know that I keep switching gears on my designs, but after the feedback that I was getting on that battleship and some reflection on the design, I decided to abandon that.

This is just the front of the ship. It won't be that long, but will have at least a tail section, if not a small mid-section as well.

Anyways, I'm tired to I'm going to sleep, but here are some renders from tonight:

Spoiler:

I still have to play around with the centre hull in relation to the sides. In these renders I slid them forward of the centre hull to break up the flat front, but I think I might like it more the other way (In the renders that I'll post at the bottom of this). The panelling needs touching up too. I just kind of rushed through the panelling, so I'll touch it up later on.

I started some minor greebling. I want to keep the body pretty smooth though, so I think I'll be making the panelling shorter to keep it closer to the body.

I also need to mess with my lighting to get the seams and angles to show up better. Haven't had much time for that, I'll play with it tomorrow if I get the chance.

Here are a few different angles. They are renders from yesterday, so they have less detail but show a different angle that I like.

Spoiler:

This means that I'll be pursuing a more traditional bomber. It will still be able to function similarly to the previous design that I described, but it will focus more on conventional bombing tactics.

Thanks to everyone that provided feedback on my last design. You were right, I don't think it really followed the role of a bomber, whereas this hopefully will.

EDIT: Which do you guys prefer, the side portions slid forward of the centre hull (the first renders that are from tonight with more detail), or the one where they're even (the second set of renders from yesterday)?

Incredible! Why didn't I come up with that idea...

I agree, put a little bit tail and something fun to under the belly and you got yourself a kick-ass bomber

[Finger13]

not sure what you mean. but for some reason, it looks a bit like a jumper type of ship. the back where the neck will be, add a door and you have an incredible ship.

I agree, put a little bit tail and something fun to under the belly and you got yourself a kick-ass bomber

I'm torn! I can't decide which way to go. I think I will save its present configuration for a fighter variant using killman's suggestion with the rear door.

For the bomber though, I think that I will be going with Semmer's suggestion, and make what's seen the upper portion of the head of the ship. I'll slide those side parts down and angle them me thinks, to reveal more of the centre which right now feels a bit squished in.

I'm going to try to flesh out what I have in my mind right now, so I will post it if I can do what I'm thinking of.

[ManiacMike]

why not do both?

[Finger13]

why not do both?

Yeah I'm going to. I'll do the bomber first though, since it's for the challenge.

[boberth2o]

Wow I have so many models going on right now it's not even funny

[Finger13]

Spoiler:

Made some progress on the neck of the ship, which will also serve as the main weapons area. The rectangular things all down the side are missile tubes. I'll add more detail to them later. The bottom will be bomb bay doors.

I also scaled back the panelling to make it less obtrusive.