Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
Mike Substelny

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 2,118
Reply with quote  #16 
Nice work. I can't wait to see the stations.
__________________
"The Admiralty had demanded six ships; the economists offered four; and we finally compromised on eight."
- Winston Churchill
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #17 
The work on the edge detection in Blender looks pretty good. Of course, I don't want to actually capture the polys of the mesh, but I do want to capture the details of such things as the indention in the engines (what I call a "P-Coil Intercooler") and the "scoops" under the saucer, among other things.

I think the size analysis works because it brings the shuttles into a usable scale. It works particularly well with the carrier. (Which I will redo) I'll note that I previously posted that I thought the carrier was too small, the saucer of the Light Cruiser is about 80 m across, while the saucer on the Carrier is about 50 m across. Which is not to say the carrier can't have a small saucer, but it's a common point of comparison.

I think the size of the Carrier is just right, though. Maybe I will try it at the larger size to see what it looks like, but the fighters fit so perfectly I'm going with the smaller saucer. There's more space in the body anyway, although a lot of that will be taken up with fighter bays and the additional engines.

As for the bases, I'll have less common elements to go on there. Pretty much no common elements, unless I decide, for instance, that the "slots" in the center section of the Deep Space Station, that the tractor beam comes out of, are shuttle bays. I'm pretty sure the scale is larger that it appears on the screen, but the question is how much larger.

I was actually a bit surprised at how much the Ship Editor distorts the ship. Although MeshLab does too, by default. When I selected the profile views it automatically turned off perspective. I never did figure out how to turn it back on. I just downloaded it to work on Strike Force Seven, but I still don't know how to use it. [biggrin]

I'd ask Mark to run some of the other ships to save time, but I think I'd probably only end up redoing them anyway. [biggrin] I want to make sure my profiles are all in the same scale, and don't have to be resized too considerably when putting them on the common image.

MarkBell

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 1,850
Reply with quote  #18 
I've got the camera setup saved, so I can do more if you like.  I'd probably have to rescale the Dreadnought and other ships that have a different scale factor in vesseldata, but it can be done.  I also might want to actually poke at something like this plugin: https://blendernpr.org/edge-node-v1-2-4-july-2015/  It looks like it'd do an awful lot of the heavy lifting, and once it's set up it should be easy enough to crank through several ships.

I think you're probably spot on with the carrier size - unless you think the fighter bays should have some additional wiggle room so they're not scraping the wings on landing [biggrin]  Still, I don't think it'd be tooooo much bigger than the light cruiser.

I'd be interested in the station analysis - if they are shuttle bays, how big would the station end up?  Probably related to final carrier size, in fairness [smile]

__________________
Note - this is in no way intended to be an official position of Thom or Artemis, as I am not an official representative of the creator or game.
Mike Substelny

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 2,118
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBell
I think you're probably spot on with the carrier size - unless you think the fighter bays should have some additional wiggle room so they're not scraping the wings on landing [biggrin]  Still, I don't think it'd be tooooo much bigger than the light cruiser.


FWIW I think the canon will be that fighters and shuttles are teleported into/out of carriers and other capital ships. That maintains consistency with the game mechanics. It also economizes the TSN's budget for wing paint.

I am hoping that the (eventual) cargo handling system will be consistent with this canon.

__________________
"The Admiralty had demanded six ships; the economists offered four; and we finally compromised on eight."
- Winston Churchill
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Substelny

FWIW I think the canon will be that fighters and shuttles are teleported into/out of carriers and other capital ships. That maintains consistency with the game mechanics. It also economizes the TSN's budget for wing paint.

I am hoping that the (eventual) cargo handling system will be consistent with this canon.


1) I don't want canon to have teleporters. That's probably copyrighted by Star Trek. (And was invented in the first place so they wouldn't have to spend budget on showing shuttles taking off and landing all the time)

2) I can see Ximni ships using "Microspace Jump" engines to "jump" fighters in and out of the ship. However, I think jumping into a ship would be too risky for TSN protocol. Thus, the TSN Medium Carrier has very clearly defined landing pads on its sides.

3) I do like the idea of Microspace Jump being used for launch of all fighters and/or shuttles, TSN and otherwise. It's basically the Artemis version of the BSG launch tubes.

4) Those bright yellow decorations on the horizontal struts on the underside of the TSN Carrier could be the Microspace Jump Coils.

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #21 
Here's a VERY raw take on a deck elevation plan for the Light Cruiser. There's a lot missing, and my drawings of the components I did include are pretty sketchy, but it is a good start. I'll add labels to everything later. 

zDeckElevations.png
My main epiphany here was to set the Warp Drive at a slant, to allow more room for the Impulse thrusters. I think this fits both the layout of the Light Cruiser's engineering diagram, and the Scout's. The Light Cruiser's Warp is depicted as vertical, while the Scout's is an L-shape. I think it makes more sense if they both are slanted.

The plan also shows the layout of the landing bay and pressurized shuttle hangar. The shape under the hangar is the Microspace Jump coils, fed by the drive system. These are able to jump the shuttle out of the hangar, and in emergencies, jump the pilot and any passengers back into the hangar. Landings are performed manually, with the shuttle entering the hangar nose first and turned with the wings parallel to the ship's direction of travel. Once the wings clear the opening, the shuttle can rotate to match the orientation of the ship and land.

The coils are also intercooling P-coils, and glow with the characteristic color which is set by the engineer of each ship. They can be seen on the outside of the ship in the area on the underside of the neck. The glow can also be seen coming from the "grill" at the top of the Warp Drive.

The little man in the center of the saucer is on the bridge. The room behind him is the torpedo stores, the torpedo tubes are in front of the hangar. (The chevron-shaped bit) There is a room that provides access to the torpedo tubes, but it does not contain any equipment that can be damaged during combat. The room in front of the bridge is an observation lounge, and there is another in the center deck and on the bottom deck.

All told, there are 8 decks, plus partial decks for the upper and lower sensors. Most decks are 3 meters high, although deck 4 (the center deck) is 3.5 meters high. The shuttle hangar is 6.5 meters high, and the landing bay is 12.5 meters high by 12.5 meters long by 8 meters wide. A fighter would be able to land in the bay, but it wouldn't fit in the hangar, it's wings would hit the sides! That's because of that gap in the neck that limits the space to either side of the bay.

I considered lining up the shuttle vertically, by the way. That would make the landing bay 12.5 meters by 12.5 meters by 4 or 5 meters, but the passengers would have to get into the shuttle while it was standing upright, like the Space Shuttle. The shuttle would also have to enter the bay backwards, or turn around once it was inside. I think I would prefer it if the hangar doors opened wider. Or there was another obvious place to put the hangar.

MarkBell

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 1,850
Reply with quote  #22 
ERMAGERDNERDGASM

Sorry.

Love it [biggrin]

I think that's pretty reasonable.  Are the between-deck lines thick to accommodate unspecified access and wiring/plumbing?

I don't think loading vertically is that much of a problem, personally - if we've got artificial gravity (which is implied, at least), why not turn it sideways for the hangar?  Or turn it off?

__________________
Note - this is in no way intended to be an official position of Thom or Artemis, as I am not an official representative of the creator or game.
HexCode

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 35
Reply with quote  #23 

Would it at all be possible for there to be a second shuttle bay door on the ventral side? Assuming there could be, that would allow for bi-directional docking/launch, meaning you shouldn't have to worry about orientation between docking and launching.


__________________
Lieutenant, Science Division - TSN Gungnir JN-001
MarkBell

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 1,850
Reply with quote  #24 
Kind of?  There's this port thing on the bottom, but my rough estimate puts it at about 8m long and 6m across.

Light Cruiser Under.png 

It also brings up an interesting question - it looks like the spine isn't solid...  I can't tell if it's supposed to be 2 arms, like the two horizontal ones, or if it's just a few model faces that got missed, but there's definitely a problem there.  Here's part of a cutaway that hopefully shows it better.

0046.png 

I suspect that it's supposed to have closed sides, but I just don't know.  It's got a bit of the angular sweep like the arms, so maybe it's supposed to be open on the side, and closed off into two arms?  Here's a cutaway pass for reference.



__________________
Note - this is in no way intended to be an official position of Thom or Artemis, as I am not an official representative of the creator or game.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #25 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBell

I think that's pretty reasonable.  Are the between-deck lines thick to accommodate unspecified access and wiring/plumbing?


I intentionally tried to leave space for deck plating and wiring between the decks. For instance, that torpedo loading tube doesn't have to be in the ceiling of the deck below, it could be between the decks. A huge advantage to those two rooms being separated by only one deck. [biggrin]

Deck height could be between 2.0 and 2.5 meters, with 0.5 meters between decks. Particularly tall crew members may bang their heads, but I assumed a 1.8 meter height for the little man.

I also forgot to mention in my last post, the Engineering display shows 5 decks, but as Arrew and I have previously discussed in the thread in which we drew up the Battleship deck plans, there could be decks between the ones implied by the SNT files. In fact, it's likely there are decks that are not shown because all ships are 5 nodes tall in the SNT files. Even the Dreadnought. So I think 8 decks is completely reasonable given that I started with a length of 150 meters.

Quote:

I don't think loading vertically is that much of a problem, personally - if we've got artificial gravity (which is implied, at least), why not turn it sideways for the hangar?  Or turn it off?


I was thinking more of the landing bay being a neutral, zero-G "null pocket" in the hull, but yeah, as with any sci-fi TV show I think we can assume artificial gravity is a fairly simple technology, and it is extremely robust and dependable, even if the power goes out.  

The ship certainly isn't big enough to support spinning sections to generate artificial gravity. And IMHO any technology that can warp space should be able to generate gravity easily, by comparison.

It would be interesting if some of the other races didn't require gravity, though. The Torgoth would be a good candidate for ships laid out in zero or low-G, where you "fly" from deck to deck.

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #26 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBell
Kind of?  There's this port thing on the bottom, but my rough estimate puts it at about 8m long and 6m across.


I assumed that was a part of the engine. Above, I called it the "Microspace Jump Coils". It glows, so it is either engine, sensors, or part of the cosmetic markings on the ship. (It should be 8m across, it is probably about 10-12 m long. In fact it seems to be DIRECTLY underneath the hangar doors, or at least partly under the hangar and partly behind it)

Quote:

It also brings up an interesting question - it looks like the spine isn't solid...  I can't tell if it's supposed to be 2 arms, like the two horizontal ones, or if it's just a few model faces that got missed, but there's definitely a problem there.  Here's part of a cutaway that hopefully shows it better.


I'll admit I'm puzzled by that. I assumed the gap between the "arms" and the middle part was a rendering error in Ship Editor, until I went into the game and flew a shuttle over the ship. Lo and behold, that gap is really there! So while there would be plenty of room for the hangar if that gap was not there, the hangar is limited to 8 m wide, like I said above.

I haven't checked to see if that gap in the SIDES of the center neck piece are in the game, but if they are, that means that hangar is open to space. I suspect it's an error in the design of the mesh itself, but unless Thom or Mike wants to weigh in on it, I can't be sure. I honestly don't know what to think about it. On the one hand, it would solve the problem of there not being room for the wings, but there's no way for the shuttle to get into that space! [biggrin]

I should check MeshLab too, to see if it renders that part or leaves a gap in it.

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #27 
Okay, I have looked more closely at the spot in question in game, and it is obvious that there are unexplained gaps in the mesh. I thought the gaps between the "arms" and the "spine" were the only separation, but it's obvious there is some missing polygons on the inside of the spine area. They can't be seen from the side, because the arms of the spine are in the way, but the interior of that area is not right.

My conclusion is that the area is meant to be the same as the old Light Cruiser model. Perhaps there is supposed to be a recessed panel in the gap area, fitting between the gap in the spine and the arms, sealing that area off. That would make some decks continuous, while others would consist of three parallel passages. (Or maybe there is a recess in the roof)
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #28 
I have updated the deck elevation plan above, using a much better version of a cutaway through the centerline of the ship. I basically used MeshLab to cut the ship in half. So I didn't have to "fudge" the actual lines of the rear Warp Drive section, and you can see the outline of the far Impulse Engine on the other side of the deck plan.

I was also able to grab some images of the Impulse engines from the model and use them, and the sensors, after tinting them yellow. I also made the Warp Drive quite a bit slimmer.

In regards to the matter of the gap in the neck, my initial cutaway image also showed the gap pretty nicely. Here's a picture of it after running it through the edge detection:

Cutaway.png   
In response to HexCode's suggestion, I would say it is possible to fly straight through the neck, but given that Mike suggested the idea of using teleporters or jump engines to "launch" a shuttle or fighters, I think my idea of the Jump Coils work pretty well. According to the deck plan, the shuttle is right behind that indentation, and it could be an exit point for the Jump energy.

Ill add that the edges of the torpedo launch tubes are also marked with the accent color. I also note there are grills at the ends of that structure, possibly to vent the torpedo exhaust as it launches.

Mike Substelny

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 2,118
Reply with quote  #29 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryleyra
1) I don't want canon to have teleporters. That's probably copyrighted by Star Trek. (And was invented in the first place so they wouldn't have to spend budget on showing shuttles taking off and landing all the time)

2) I can see Ximni ships using "Microspace Jump" engines to "jump" fighters in and out of the ship. However, I think jumping into a ship would be too risky for TSN protocol. Thus, the TSN Medium Carrier has very clearly defined landing pads on its sides.


The idea from the beginning has been to have cargo modules with miniature jump drives for loading/unloading cargo, supplies, passengers, pirate booty, space marines, prisoners, damage control teams, etc.. I envision the same mini jump drives loading/unloading shuttles and fighters. If Thom ever incorporates them, escape pods would also work the same way.

If tech levels are ever implemented, the cargo modules would start to get "bigger on the inside," with higher tech modules able to carry more cargo/marines/booty/etc. without needing more space aboard the capital ship.

It's a small point, but I am assuming that a capital ship does not use its own power for these miniature jump drives. The are built into the shuttle/fighter/cargo module. In the long run I want a stranded capital ship to be able to bring aboard much needed supplies, or send a shuttle to go get help, even if that ship has no power. This might affect your thinking as you develop the blueprints.

__________________
"The Admiralty had demanded six ships; the economists offered four; and we finally compromised on eight."
- Winston Churchill
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Substelny

It's a small point, but I am assuming that a capital ship does not use its own power for these miniature jump drives. The are built into the shuttle/fighter/cargo module. In the long run I want a stranded capital ship to be able to bring aboard much needed supplies, or send a shuttle to go get help, even if that ship has no power. This might affect your thinking as you develop the blueprints.


I was actually thinking of leaving the physical way of moving in and out of the ship as a backup in case of power failure, but the system could be self-contained. It would have to be recharged after use, though.

In the case of the Ximni, there doesn't seem to BE a physical way of moving in and out of the ship, so in their case they wouldn't have one. It fits the Ximni character, though. Danger? What danger? [biggrin]

The TSN ships would also have to have a way of transporting things before the jump technology became that precise, too. In most cases the older ships got retrofitted with the new technology, leaving hangar doors that were no longer used.

And note I had already thought up the technology to explain how fighters' "escape pods" were returned to the ship, without hearing about your idea first. So we were definitely thinking along the same lines.

BTW, any comment on the "gap"? I actually think it looks kind of neat to have those passages going around the "hangar", but the gap on the inside calls the whole structure into question.

Here's another edit on the topic of teleporters versus a self-contained Jump engine in a single seat craft. I would assume that the experience of being "ejected" from the craft and returned to the hangar would not be an entirely pleasant one. Yet another reason why it would be considered an emergency measure only, and not the normal way of moving personnel and cargo on and off a ship.

Taking a quote from Douglas Adams:
"It's unpleasantly like being drunk."
"What's so unpleasant about being drunk?"
"You ask a glass of water."

Jumping within a craft, with its hull and shielding around you, reduces this sensation to a minor level. Jumping back to the hangar in an ejection pod might save your life, but for a minute or two you might wish you were dead. Even worse if you're exposed to the vacuum of space and the distortion of the wormhole.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.