Bridge Commander Universe

Josh2481 · Cadet 4th Class Joined: 08 Mar 2004 Posts: 3

I was looking at the designs and mine wont really work well in this era it seems. Here is a small wip pic. Done in lw.

BookBomB · **BC2 Spam God** General Joined: 07 Oct 2003 Posts: 2349

Actually, that might work for a Nebula refit, if we were planning on having one . . .

Josh2481 · Cadet 4th Class Joined: 08 Mar 2004 Posts: 3

its really more Miranda Style. Though I dont know if they made a ship to replace the Miranda in tng or not. Might of been the Nebula.

BookBomB · **BC2 Spam God** General Joined: 07 Oct 2003 Posts: 2349

Well, either way, you have my vote.

Glempius · **Posted**: 04-27-2004 02:11 PM

If anyone would look at this thread and take me seriously without using the words "not cannon" I'd do a nice version of a ship which I've done called the Arc Royal....I might just do it anyway.

Core · **Posted**: 05-02-2004 03:46 PM

i've updated my site a bit if some one is interested and I am currently working on aspetial project to update some ships and stuff
here http://www.geocities.com/mike_levin1/index.html is the link to my site
and here http://www.geocities.com/mike_levin1/SecretProject.html is the tiny project im working on

Glempius · **Posted**: 05-12-2004 09:44 AM

And I'd advise every one to look at the USS ragnaok and USS highlander threads in the graphic arts forum.

BUB · **Posted**: 06-06-2004 03:12 PM

Just an Idea for BC2.I think its about time we got an ultimate intrepid with the ability to raise its nacelles and mvam from the aeroshuttle on her underbelly.

Core · **Posted**: 07-17-2004 12:19 AM

http://gallery80344.fotopic.net/ is the new site that im posting my concepts so check them out and if you wat to use some and dont be shay ok

Devron · **Posted**: 07-17-2004 12:38 PM

They are to freaky in my eyes.

May be you should try to think about how the evolution of the different fleets could look like in a near future of TNG.

Core · **Posted**: 07-17-2004 12:46 PM

but most of theas aren't really close to TNG so no point their is their Smile

Core · **Posted**: 07-17-2004 01:54 PM

well some of them could Qualify as an alien ship of sorts

**evamonkey** · **meom** BCU Mod Team Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 26

originality is good, and your designs sure take a different visual spin on federation starship design.

may i suggest a few things though.

1 annotate your drawings. very important.

2 up the level of detail.
a federation ship, even one done by the pros, has to fall into certain guidelines. little things, like engine colours, hull plate colours, those things which act as visual cues to a ships origins. the registry is a perfect example.

3 scale reference - even if its really quick strokes across the page to indicate decks, anything that provides scale reference is essential.

4 create multiple views. plan, elevation, end view, even if its a doodle, helps others see the ship. one view simply isint enough.

but your organic forms are cool, and i hope you keep it up.

Strayhero · **Posted**: 07-22-2004 11:52 PM

Core · **Posted**: 07-22-2004 11:57 PM

there not all organic you know some of the older would qualify as late TNG or Late TMP if you look closely but some are organic

and some do need details but most are as they are and for the most part will not be modified

but i will be adding some more views for the convenience of the modelers and the games that lack a certain diversity in some areas

Strayhero · **Posted**: 07-23-2004 12:03 AM

i can only be bothered to look at the fotopic sit the others can sit and be dull....

Core · **Posted**: 07-23-2004 12:17 AM

Star Hawk · Cadet 4th Class Joined: 24 Jul 2004 Posts: 3

I noticed that the romulan D´Deridex Class Warbird had multiple pulse disruptor cannons in BC and the expansion. What do you think about giving the Warbird one powerful foreward pulse disruptor cannon instead of multiple small disruptors? I would like to ask that question since a mighty ship should have a mighty foreward weapon. Another reason would be the TV series where the Warbird mostly fires from its foreward cannon (sometimes with a beam[DS9] sometimes with a pulse weapon [TNG])
I just think the Warbird should not fire its disruptors from its nacelles. By removing the cannons mounted on the nacelles there is not much space left for other pulse disruptor cannons. Therefore I would vote for a foreward pulse weapon in combination with a foreward beamweapon. That would bring the Warbird very close to the TV-Series.

Note the picture in this thread where it fires a foreward pulse weapon:
http://dynamic3.gamespy.com/~bridgecommander/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=12389&highlight=warbird+d+deridex

**evamonkey** · **meom** BCU Mod Team Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 26

i have to say, im a big fan of cannon stuff,but im also a big fan of gameplay. the ability for ships to fire cannon, in literally all directions is sweet. and pretty. but it tears away the feel of bringing weapons to bear at close range, like the old starfleet acadamy did.

perhaps though it may detract from cannon, to have the fore phasers more powerful, and in a limited arc. so you get the all over phaser protection, but have to come to bear to really make an impact.

playing in the defiant is such a fun experience cos you really feel like your piloting something. its very tangible very seat of the pants.

ditto for the nem valdore. good forward guns, a sense of whooping a**.

so id say the powerful fore cannon is a sweet idea.

pepperman · **Posted**: 11-15-2004 09:02 PM

How about the Romulan SHALIMAR CLASS?

http://www.startrekaustralia.com/startrek/romulan/shalimar/

**Senator** · Moderator Joined: 18 Dec 2001 Posts: 2480

This is not so much of a specific ship idea but I have been thinking. Are the impulse engines of ST ships able to push only forward?

An impluse engine which accelerates a ship at at 1/3 of a lightspeed can easily beat any planet's gravity acceleration, in theory any ship should have been able to enter an atmosphere, including the Galaxy class or a Warbird, yet Voyager keeps using thrusters.

In fact the vertical altitude control of ST ships seems to be pathetic and the only proof we have that it exists is that ships, while in battle and they fly like airplanes, are able to turn their nose up or down (something which in space means that a thuster outside the center of gravity of the ship does something).

Someone can very well point out that the impulse engines of ST ships are on the back and thus that the only way they can push, that implies that they are a reaction based system however, in which case the question comes up "how do Star Trek ships stop?" since they do not have impulse engines on the front. "Norma", Reaction thrusters isn't the answer, to deccelerate from 1/3 of a lightspeed in space you need as much power as to accelerate to it. Morever, the impulse engines seem to do that through the saucer since they are located in the back, so having a visible face towards the side they wish to accelerate isn't a problem.

Unlike starships Shuttles seem to have total direction control even if they don't use it in battle, other examples are hover cars, anti-gravs (implying antigravity rather than "thrusters") and the Klingon BoP (which as we know is a Romulan design Razz

) definatly wasn't flying with its wings.

Maybe impulse and anti-gravity is a different technology with the second becomming too much energy demanting in larger ships. Ships also don't seem to use vertical impulse power, something which in space combat could have a lot of advances since it allows you to execute manouvres like flying in a screw keeping the nose pointed at the same spot, avoiding a torpedo by going "up" etc. An explanation would be that impulse engines are able to provide acceleration only in 1 axis, and accelerate deccelerate in it, so since they are built "on the back, facing back" that one is it.

In this case (finally the ship idea) wouldn't it make sense to have a ship with rotating impulse engines V-22 Osprey style? If not impulse engines in every direction. Let's take for example this ship:

It is a hospital ship, it could have rotating impulse engines either in seperate pylon (since they are actually quite small) or on the warp engines itself. That would allow it to decent into a Gas Giant atmosphere for sensor cover and with some good shields go as deep as it likes, a lot of place to hide. Some invaluable for carrier ships which could decent with their strong shields inside gas giants once they release their fighters, down enough for atmospheric interaction to dissipate phaser and the pressure to crush any incoming torpedoes (which are unshielded), down enough for enemy fighters (more valnurable to atmospheric pressure) not to reach it, and out of sensors.

But really, all axis impulse control is just insane "not" to have, if even Infinity is able to accelerate in close to lightspeed speeds in the time ST ships generally do (which is less than 1 million years) it can as well land on a planet and release all the troops it likes.

MLeo · **Posted**: 03-15-2005 03:50 PM

I thought Impulse engines rely on a warp (or was it a subspace) field to reduce the mass so Ion propulsion can be used effectively?

And that they aren't able to create a warp field in the present of a planet.

Fek'Leyr Targ · **Posted**: 07-14-2006 02:02 PM

what about the Voo'DieH class? (the Negh'Var class from the TNG episode: "all good things".

MLeo · **Posted**: 07-14-2006 07:20 PM

I'm afraid that we can't use canon ships due to copyright problems.

Fek'Leyr Targ · **Posted**: 07-15-2006 07:20 AM

what isn't good. ****ing copyrights.
What's up with this:
Chava'kal class (from Armada2)

EDIT: NanoByte

Since you are new, please read the forum rules, no swearing please. Thanx

=Nano=

Borg Expert · **Posted**: 09-24-2006 06:59 PM

I know What I want.

The NSEA Protector from Galaxy quest (MODED PLEASE!!!)

Want to here my ideas for Hard points?

**Nebula** · **Posted**: 09-24-2006 07:25 PM

uhh I think you posted in the wrong thread... (that is we can't have copyrighted ships)