|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 18, 2023 1:42:23 GMT -7
I'd say guess what I'm working on, but its pretty obvious.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 18, 2023 9:21:28 GMT -7
Thank you!!!! Thank You!!! I love this little war canoe..
I am the wanderer ya the wonderer...I wonder wonder around
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Dec 18, 2023 15:29:24 GMT -7
|
|
bernard Guignard
Lieutenant
Trek Canon!!! I NO believe in TreK Canon!!!.
Posts: 137
|
Post by bernard Guignard on Dec 18, 2023 16:06:24 GMT -7
Damn that is very nice.
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 20, 2023 0:15:15 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 20, 2023 6:34:05 GMT -7
Man, I am loving her, Great work. In some of our campaigns, we even have some of these ships working with in the Star Fleet for long range intelligence work of certain enemy areas.
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Dec 20, 2023 15:26:02 GMT -7
Stellar work my man! One thing my personal view of the Wanderer though that i gripe over is that the pod or whatever on the port side is not mirrored in some way on the starboard in fasa last i checked. having things not be symmetrical irks me lol
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 21, 2023 1:04:33 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Dec 21, 2023 7:57:09 GMT -7
The ship is symmetrical, I have just managed, by coincidence, to only show it at angles that hide the other pod. I know you're still working on this, but I've noticed that the nacelle pylons are too high relative to the hull and nacelles per the original FASA schematics. The nacelles seem correct relative to the forward pod in the bow view, that's when I noticed the high pylons. I understand that this might be a necessity on a 3D model, compared to notoriously mismatched FASA 3-views, but I think the pylons should be a bit thicker, and meet the nacelles mid point. They seem to flare slightly from nacelle to hull also. As always, I can't do what you're doing in a million years! Appreciate that you've decided to model this blockade runner, the "Orion D-7".
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Dec 21, 2023 8:04:41 GMT -7
Oh guess i'm misremembering things my bad!
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 22, 2023 7:18:32 GMT -7
I know you're still working on this, but I've noticed that the nacelle pylons are too high relative to the hull and nacelles per the original FASA schematics. The nacelles seem correct relative to the forward pod in the bow view, that's when I noticed the high pylons. The Wanderer schematic views indeed do not match. If you look at the top view you can see that the pylons connect to the hull well above the center line but are on the center line in the fore view. I liked the look of them up high so I modeled it that way. I could still change my mind, but I don't think I will. I understand that this might be a necessity on a 3D model, compared to notoriously mismatched FASA 3-views, but I think the pylons should be a bit thicker, and meet the nacelles mid point. They seem to flare slightly from nacelle to hull also. It's not necessary, I could do it either way. I originally made the pylons thicker, but they ended up looking like boring square tubes. I also made some creative decisions regarding the warp nacelles. They aren't as wide as the ones in the schematic. I could still widen them, but they just don't look very good to me in 3D.
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Dec 22, 2023 11:18:57 GMT -7
I know you're still working on this, but I've noticed that the nacelle pylons are too high relative to the hull and nacelles per the original FASA schematics. The nacelles seem correct relative to the forward pod in the bow view, that's when I noticed the high pylons. The Wanderer schematic views indeed do not match. If you look at the top view you can see that the pylons connect to the hull well above the center line but are on the center line in the fore view. I liked the look of them up high so I modeled it that way. I could still change my mind, but I don't think I will. I understand that this might be a necessity on a 3D model, compared to notoriously mismatched FASA 3-views, but I think the pylons should be a bit thicker, and meet the nacelles mid point. They seem to flare slightly from nacelle to hull also. It's not necessary, I could do it either way. I originally made the pylons thicker, but they ended up looking like boring square tubes. I also made some creative decisions regarding the warp nacelles. They aren't as wide as the ones in the schematic. I could still widen them, but they just don't look very good to me in 3D. Oddly enough, I think the FASA Wanderer mini has thinner nacelles. Plus, the outlying pods weren't modelled AT ALL! Just a trapezoid shape that encompasses the space where the arms and pods are in the schematics. The mini is one piece, but I think it was a missed opportunity, as there are quite a few FASA minis with thinner detailed separate pieces, eg, the wingtip disruptors on the FASA L-42 mini, the legs on the Romulan Winged Defender etc. But I digress. Its your 3D model, and I look forward to seeing this little hotrod completed, whatever way you go.
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 23, 2023 21:37:10 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Dec 24, 2023 9:23:10 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 24, 2023 13:30:51 GMT -7
Close up Fore and Aft views showing the ship's weapon systems.
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 24, 2023 14:00:39 GMT -7
I decided to move the warp pylons down a little to clear up some of the field of fire for the disruptor turrets. I liked them up high, but it doesn't make sense to prioritize aesthetics over functionality, especially aft fields of fire on a ship that will spend lots of it's time running away.
|
|
|
Post by schoon on Dec 24, 2023 18:10:00 GMT -7
What program are you using for your modelling?
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 25, 2023 0:05:05 GMT -7
Sketchup.
|
|
|
Post by rarcher on Dec 25, 2023 9:52:34 GMT -7
so my head canon lore is that ring on the back is the impulse drive vents whats your thought on what it is?
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 25, 2023 12:19:03 GMT -7
Yes, that was my intention when I put that ring there. Obviously the original schematic doesn't have an aft view and the other views have nothing that was obviously intended to represent impulse drive nozzles. For me, part of the fun of rendering these ships in 3D is finding ways to reconcile the different views and finding clever ways to include stuff that isn't shown wihtout changing the overall look of the ship too much.
|
|
|
Post by thescreamingswede on Dec 25, 2023 13:15:48 GMT -7
It's really cool to see this ship represented in a proper 3d rendering. Very often the high profile guys get all the glory. There is one thing I fell compelled to point out, and that is the weapons locations. Page 76 of the Orion Book of Common Knowledge states that the "the most striking feature of this ship is its outrigger weapons pods, carried at the waist of the narrow hull. Not only are these pods convenient for mounting heavy and dangerous weapons, but they are also easier to access for repair or to jettison in case of explosion, fire, or leakage...." So in my mind, each pod is carrying two torpedo launchers, one forward, one aft, and two of the disruptor emitters. While I actually like where you have placed the disruptor mounts on your render, they do seem to be contrary to the book. If you were to use the outrigger pods as the mounts for the weapons as indicated by the book, you wouldn't have to drop the nacelle support pylons in order to give the weapons a better clearance for firing. Otherwise, excellent job, and I am looking forward to the full texture package when you get it done.
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Dec 25, 2023 14:04:21 GMT -7
It's really cool to see this ship represented in a proper 3d rendering. Very often the high profile guys get all the glory. There is one thing I fell compelled to point out, and that is the weapons locations. Page 76 of the Orion Book of Common Knowledge states that the "the most striking feature of this ship is its outrigger weapons pods, carried at the waist of the narrow hull. Not only are these pods convenient for mounting heavy and dangerous weapons, but they are also easier to access for repair or to jettison in case of explosion, fire, or leakage...." So in my mind, each pod is carrying two torpedo launchers, one forward, one aft, and two of the disruptor emitters. While I actually like where you have placed the disruptor mounts on your render, they do seem to be contrary to the book. If you were to use the outrigger pods as the mounts for the weapons as indicated by the book, you wouldn't have to drop the nacelle support pylons in order to give the weapons a better clearance for firing. Otherwise, excellent job, and I am looking forward to the full texture package when you get it done. I had forgotten about the text describing where the weapons are, but also like where the shown disruptors are. They allow for the stated weapon arcs.
|
|
|
Post by kaisernathan1701 on Dec 25, 2023 21:25:30 GMT -7
looks sweet been tempting to connect the front hull piece to a Klingon ship hull someday to make as Pirate ship
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 25, 2023 23:22:58 GMT -7
There is one thing I fell compelled to point out, and that is the weapons locations. Thank you. I really appreciate you pointing this out for me. I probably wouldn't have noticed how much I messed up. Wanderer with proper weapon pods
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Dec 26, 2023 1:20:24 GMT -7
|
|