Thank you!

Enterprise theme song STILL sucks! The show, not so much, but that God's awful theme.....

There's a bit of scale weirdness (partly because I was using an incorrectly scaled image as references when I designed it) so that bridge dome is about half the size of the connie refit's, but sizing it back up didn't look right. We'll file that under 'scaling errors? In MY star trek? Impossible' :D I was having some thoughts about the lower section being modular, certainly I have some ideas on the warp core (and a good chunk of engineering) being modular and slotting in vertically through one of the hatches underneath. I don't think its one designed for regular use separation, the Galaxy was supposed to be the first that could reattach without a starbase anyway, nut it could probably be hot swapped for a differently equipped secondary hull *relatively* quickly to suit mission parameters

Funny you say that, I didn't have the Oberth in mind when I made it but theres a similar layout one someone ese has made (with much better quality post-work I might add :D ) that has essentially souped up Oberth nacelles, and I was thinking along those lines if I make a refit

Been playing around a bit with more post processing including getting a good star effect that isn't just a vaguely glowing ball, not quite good enough to show yet!

I definitely have more I want to do with this one, and ideas for different models as well (some trek, some not). *Very* much still learning how to do it though

Thank you so much!

Yeah I'm not at all a fan of how snappy the current effect is (or it looking like hyperspace when you're in it) Grudging props to Disco season 5 showing it looks like a mix of the normal blue light and the Beyond style gravity wake when viewed externally though, that was a neat visual

I'm not a huge fan of the ultra *snappy* warp effect that they're using these days, its a bit too hyperdrive, but then I was raised on 90's trek where its a bit smoother (though not as gentle as in this video). That said Beyond's gravity lens/wake effect was really cool and I am tempted to try and add a bit of that to it

I mean...yes those warp nacelles quite literally date it that is the point, but the original style nacelles makes it LESS Rodenberry? Sure that makes sense

@@RingandRaven Dude, 45 yr sci fi fan and critic..its butt ugly.🤷🏾‍♀️🤷‍♂️

Little? :P She's longer than the Connie! (granted only because of those nacelles :D )

To do list!

What on earth makes you think it *can't* separate? I do in fact have modelled clamps at the connection between the secondary hull and the neck. Additionally the circular hatch on the underside is very deliberatly lined up with the underside of the impulse deflection crystal so that a refit style vertical intermix chamber could be slid out on demand (with the primary usage of the ship being modular and good chicks of its engineering being easily swapped out, but it could easily eject the chamber if required. The majority of starfleet ships don't display this capability anyway, especially in the earlier eras, only some of the big - you might as well say Joe Jennings is a moron because the Miranda class can't separate 🤣

@@RingandRaven, which is why the Defiant suffered such great damage throughout the saucer when Enterprise shot her warp engine off. As Scotty said, “the more you complicate the system, the easier it is to stop up the plumbing.” So, you think you know Star ship design. Why are your warp engines positioned where they are? They’ll have to create a much larger warp bubble to make sure it surrounds the ship. With your design, this means a giant portion of the bubble above the nacelles doing nothing. Not a very efficient design. Besides, let’s say you DO separate the saucer from the secondary. You still have the mass of the nacelles to contend with, which is definitely going to affect the handling of saucer. Try setting that mess down on the surface of a planet. And just what is the mission role that this ship is required to fill that required such a design. You’re just another KZfaqr that just adds another design to the mix. In reality, the Federation and Starfleet would collapse because the logistics chain cannot support so many variations. Amateurs think in terms of tactics. Professionals think in terms of logistics. Beans, bullets, and bedding…

@kennethcollins7665 Okay you remember this is a piece of artwork for a fictional series? I'm not mocking you here, I'm genuinely suggesting chilling a little. Buuuuut since I'm also a nerd who likes details, I'll humour you. 1) the Miranda class was in use 111 years if you count the Reliant's (not the Defiant's) name appearing in...Court Martial iirc, and even if that wasn't the class its still significantly outlasted the Constitution and even Excelsior classes. You are correct that more complicated systems are more prone to error, and while Starfleet is canonically much more fond of complicated systems than the rugged simplicity style I would point out that ships that come apart are more complicated than ships that don't. The Miranda is a simpler more compact design than the Constitution, less powerful perhaps (especially with a logically smaller warp core) but likely more rugged hence why it became starfleets workhorse for a century. 2) the nacelles are placed where they are in accordance with a great many other canonical starfleet designs both before and after the Constitution, which prefers starfleets larger vessels to have rear mounted nacelles, with the Roddenberry design rules being visible from the front of the ship, paired, and line of sight with each other, in particular the grilled sections as that was intended circa TMP to be generating a connecting energy field (prior to that in TOS the conception was purely that they were high radiation propulsion units kept away from the crew, much like the conception for the secondary hull itself, along with the saucer originally intended to be landing regularly rather than separating as a last resort) The nacelles on the Ravenna class have proportionally a little LESS sticking out into empty space than on the TOS Enterprise, which I think you've forgotten the look of. Warp fields are generated by the nacelles yes but you will note that no depiction of them ever shows the field as symmetrical or centered over the nacelles - they are in fact usually highly asymmetrical and centred on the midsection of the ship and conforming to the hull shape, though often half of the field lines originate from the front of the nacelles. They also extend far beyond the hull. Oh and once again under your logic you should be championing the Miranda class for being far more efficient. 4) yes that would leave extra mass, assuming of course one cannot jettison the nacelles as described in TOS: The Apple, which was incidentally one of the very few times a little excess mass on the ship actually made a difference considering the inertial and mass lightening capabilities of these ships and standard engines that can reach high c-fractional velocities. But if it makes you feel better I WAS considering the saucer section itself separating, likely taking the impulse section with it. As with every ship in the history of the franchise it is designed aesthetically first with lore informing but not prohibiting it. Plus the original Enterprise Saucer is....not exactly an efficient aerodynamic design for an emergency landing on a planet. 5) ah, a loredump! Despite the visuals taking precedence I actually personally enjoy lore and making it make sense, so the Ravenna class is an offshoot of the fleetwide upgrades prior to the TMP era (hence the mixed design philosophy) with a specific attempt to take the mission capabilities of the Constitution class and fit them into a smaller, more compact space frame, creating a ship that could serve as mid range explorer, colony support, and fast response, taking a little of the pressure off the Constitution class which was intended for deep space frontier missions but was frequently being called back further into federation territory for requisite missions. The class is of comparable length, but not as tall with a shorter warp core than the Connie refit would have, but compensating with proportionally larger nacelles and a large cooling system in the pylons. This coupled with the smaller engineering section (with more of its volume given over to cargo and auxiliary craft) results in a capital vessel with a slightly higher top speed but a lower cruising speed, 2/3s the crew (and deck numbers in fact, that worked out very nicely in scaling) and in general wouldn't have the long term endurance of the Constitution. Essentially any one of those 'only ship in the sector' missions of the Enterprise's could be accomplished almost as well with a Ravenna, but it would not be as suitable for a five year deep space mission away from starbase support. 6) yes I am throwing another design into the mix because I...like doing spaceship art. Oh the calamity. I wouldn't get too proud of your hard sci-fi 'reality' for trek, because if you go down that route you quickly end up questioning how polities of hundreds of worlds each with billions of people and literally humanly incomprehensible quantities of raw materials solely in their own systems could ever even notice a fleet of 40 ships being destroyed. But even if we scale things back to the much more TV budget friendly, you are still talking about a semi-post scarcity setting with extremely advanced computer aided design and matter synthesis (even before full on replicators exist), not to mention the fact that starfleet engineers tinker with the ships every week for fun, inevitably resulting in every ship being notably different a month after it leaves space dock. Items are standardised because it simplified logistics yes (well done dear for remembering that quote), however this ALSO results in designs using parts not intended for this use and with inevitably lower performance. As manufacturing is made easier by technology you will have a significant increase in bespoke items designed for specific niches, rather than making everything out of one size fits all items. This incidentally is something we are beginning to see more of already in the real world with the increasing presence of 3D printer devices meaning that the actual design of an item is no longer a barrier to manufacturing. All designs are trade offs of pros and cons depending on the context of what is needed at what cost. For a historical example cloaks were the go-to warm clothing item for millennia precisely for logistical reasons, because the limiting factor was the cost of cutting, sewing, tailoring, and generally assembling a garment - a simple circle was much cheaper than a complex coat. The instant machine sewing was invented the cost of production plummeted and coats because preferable to cloaks because the limiting factor was now the cost of the fabric. Technology advanced, the pressures on the logistics changed, and what was once efficient was now inefficient.

@@RingandRaven, I guess autocorrect got me on Reliant and made it defiant. No, I just get a perverse pleasure on busting people who take Trek too seriously and come out with ridiculous designs they really can’t defend and always some how can outdo the Enterprise, which was supposedly the top tier of Star Fleets ships, which was why there were only 12 of them. And the personas they came up with, make Kirk and Picard seem like pikers. Nu Trek with Discovery is full of that nonsense. I’ve been in the Fandom since 66 and remember the write in campaign started by Bjo Trimble that got us a third season of TOS. I got burned out by decades of folks who forgot it was supposed to be fun and thought they could do it better (and they couldn’t) so every now and then, I’ll challenge someone to defend their dissertation, as it were. After all, it seems to be all about the aesthetics and not really about practically. Face it, have you ever seen a garbage scow or a space going dedicated tow truck? Those aren’t glamorous or get legendary crew members. You did good. You’ve defended just about every point I challenged. There used to be a Star Fleet International design section where fans would submit designs, and if approved, they were put into an internet database and became beta canon. I still think your nacelles are too high on the vertical plain, but still think this design would be a worthy contender for submission. I’ll see if I can find the link if you want to submit it. I don’t do video games, but think you can also do the same with Star Trek Online. And I’m quite fine mentally. Between motorcycles, RC helicopters, model trains, and target shooting, and my grandkids, I have plenty. I still enjoy trek, just not as much as I used too… Look up “Advanced Starship Design Bureau”

Funnily enough it was originally a full circle early when modelling, I cut out the back section because it made the shape flow *much* better.

I'd forgotten how much I love that theme, its excellent

Trek Music is always quite emotional!!!

​@@RingandRaven the music is so uplifting and hopeful.

Re the jitteryness.. I think you just need to enable motion blur in whatever render software you are using.

@@RobertMcNamara3DMc oh that's possible, I didn't as the ship was static and I wanted it nice and crisp, didn't know it would effect frame rates thanks! The camera motion is definitely too sharp at the start, tbh this started just as a test to see how long the render would take without any post processing in blender (it's entirely davinci here) and I didn't want to spread it out too far as I thought it would take longer than it did 🤣 I wanted the basic movement in place here where it swoops around the whole thing, but I didn't want that sudden jerkyness

Huh funny it's this video you say that on, it SHOULD be moving pretty smoothly here. The Old Astronomer one IS jerky/near stop motion in places, because I had the render preview set wrong and spent an entire night rendering far fewer frames than I thought so I had to stretch them further than I should 🤣 How is the most recent one? That one is definitely smooth at my end, if it's jerky then I presume it's KZfaq doing something (Also, thank you!)

@@RingandRaven If you're referring to the "Flyaround Beauty Shots" video, that one is significantly smoother. Your ship design is intriguing, probably the best I've seen where the primary hull is not a full circle or oval. Excellent "feel" of the ship being similar to the 1701 refit era, which is where I believe Starfleet design was the most aesthetically beautiful.

@@gregbirger5810 that's the, and thank you so much!

Almost 😅 it's intent is pre-refit era, putting the Connie's capabilities in a more compact space frame, but I could easily see some of its design elements eventually leading to Excelsior with the secondary hull shape. (It's actually I think just a smidge longer than the Constitution 2, and a slightly wider, flatter saucer iirc, but a lot shorter and I'm eyeball guessing 2/3s the volume. That's scaling off saucer rim thickness/windows and deck placement. The bridge module is smaller than the Connie 2's because I was working off scaling plans with errors. Scaling it back up to be the same size really didn't look good, so I made an artistic call to leave it and call it a prototype 🤣 but if you judge it based on the bridge module it gets a lot bigger than intended 🤣) (Scaling errors? In MY starfleet ships? At this time of year?!?)

So awkwardly I actually like the G 😅 that said I *prefer* the Shangri-la (or them..refit one that backdates some of the G's differences - I think Howie Day's Titan model?) and I feel it needed more than a weekend to update it for Picard and I was the *first* to say it feels out of place - but the base design I largely quite like (except the bit above the deflector where it's oddly square).

Is that doable if the windows are part of the model? I'd turned off the Boolean for the cutter mesh, but the windows themselves are shader based holes to the inside of the model

I mean this is a wholly original design of mine but I'm curious what class you mean 🤣 I hadn't seen one like it when I came up with it but it would be cool to see!

@@RingandRavenwhat if someone violated the temporal prime directive??

I was.literally walking to work in the morning when it clicked in my head 🤣

thank you!

thats on the to do list!

Thank you!