Sketchup Wilkerson Class Destroyer

[JAFisher44]

I've always liked this destroyer for it's simplicity. When I did a 2d schematic re-draw long ago I replaced the extremely thin, split pylons with a single, more substantial central pylon that would have room for things like conduits and access tubes for the crew. How else are the crew supposed to get to the torpedo deck? Anyway, obviously this is a WIP.

[ecs05norway]

I have only two problems with this.

#1; the pylon goes right through the impulse deck.

#2; why is this not available on Shapeways in 1/3125?

[bernard Guignard]

very nice

[trynda1701]

Looking forward to seeing this finished. Nice work as always, Joshua.

Jun 1, 2017 6:45:26 GMT -7 ecs05norway said:

...

#2; why is this not available on Shapeways in 1/3125?

If you can find any Northampton or Remora minis on Shapeways, you could do what I did in 1/3900 scale using FASA parts in my minis thread. Here's the pic I posted.

FASA Northampton Class frigate and FASA Wilkerson Class destroyer kitbash


Mark

[macrossmartin]

A split Impulse system, with emitters to either side of the pylon, would seem to make more sense... If I sculpt one, I might move the torp tube housing below the upper nacelle.

Mark, that's a very neat conversion!

[trynda1701]

Jun 1, 2017 17:36:41 GMT -7 macrossmartin said:

A split Impulse system, with emitters to either side of the pylon, would seem to make more sense... If I sculpt one, I might move the torp tube housing below the upper nacelle.

Mark, that's a very neat conversion!

JAFisher44

I never understood why the torpedo pod was on top of the nacelle. If it were underneath, it would just be an upside down version of the Constitution refit dorsal. While this would probably not allow for a torpedo room ala "Wrath of Khan", it makes more sense than trying to feed torpedos from an ammo reserve thru the nacelle! Or it has a small torpedo load!

macrossmartin

The conversion is very simple and aided by the two small pins/tabs on the nacelle strut that help attach it to the Remora hull. Two small pin vice drilled holes above and below on the Northampton primary hull, remove the top central stub on the Northampton saucer (dark grey on the pic above, ahead of the painted red stripe), some superglue, and voila, a similar enough Wilkerson stand in!

Mark

[Deleted]

As much as I like the original Wiklerson (I actually think it's kind of cool in a simplistic way), this one makes more sense in some ways.
The warp nacelles are fairly generic, and one would have to be inverted to align the structural attachment points within the nacelles themselves, as well as conduits for warp energy to power the nacelles.
The bifurcated impulse drive does not sit quite right with me.

Maybe twin struts (slender ones... like the end-pieces from the Constitution refit), joining the hull on either side of the impulse drive. Keep the lower nacelle inverted. Maybe even more like a twin-nacelled Larson...

Just thinking in text... It's certainly better than the FASA art, but it may be a ship that needs a re-design.

[MajorRacal]

Just an observation about the warp pylon quandary - the pylons of the Larson, which you modelled earlier, appear as thin and as difficult for crew to navigate as those in the original Wilkerson design, so I'm wondering where the reticence to stick with the twin pylon arrangement is coming from?

In relation to the question of access to the photon pod - I can't say I've noticed much debate around how crew access the pod via the Reliant's wafer thin pylons and rollbar, so again, I'm not sure a complete overhaul is entirely necessary.

I do believe that the position of the Wilkerson's photon bay is a little inelegant and arguably a little foolhardy, so a relocation doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

[thescreamingswede]

First off, great work as usual JA.

I have no issue with the nacelle pylons in either this version or the original (which was a great concept, but poorly drawn) since the structural strength of the futuristic materials used to construct them is unknown. The Americans use Carbon Fibre material to build high speed aircraft while the Russians were using iron (see MiG 25). If you told an old aircraft designer that you wanted to build a plane that could break the sound barrier with a material the thickness of paper, he would probably laugh you out of the room.

In ST:TWOK Kirk knocks out the photon controls and the warp drive without actually hitting the launcher itself, which would lend me to believe that the housing was unmanned; controlled by automated systems. Perhaps the photon torpedo launcher on the Wilkerson is also unmanned, controlled by a remote station in the main hull and the operation of it is automated.

[JAFisher44]

Ok, double pylon version.

[rarcher]

See personally I like both of these styles! My only gripe personally is i'd move the torp launcher below the upper pylon in the single pylon version even if you make the launcher bit larger (to acocunt for the warpy stuff) and if you argue that the launcher is automated from elsewhere the torps gotta be fed somehow right? I dont see how they're doing that on the single py lon version going through that nacelle! Least on the dual pylon version you can make that arguement its happening.

Actually now that i think on it you could do a mix of both! Duel pylons up top single on bottom!

[JAFisher44]

In order to put the launcher below the warp nacelle you have to move the nacelle up a lot and ruin the lines of the ship.

[trynda1701]

Coming along nicely, Joshua!

Yeah, I just realised that you can't move the torpedo pod below the nacelle without raising the struts! Only saw that in your latest bow elevation. That's probably why the Akula class has extended upper and lower single dorsal struts!

I say stay with the original FASA style twin struts. The lines do change if you raise them, and it looks fast standing still with the original ones!

Mark

[kaisernathan1701]

Coolies

[MajorRacal]

I like the twin pylon version best as the Wilkerson. You could always continue to experiment with the single pylon version as a variant.

[rabid]

AGreed, twin pylon version looks cool, even though it's impractical.

I've looked at this one and thought maybe the pylons could be thicker, if not then make the pylons a solid triangle up to the base of the nacelle. But when I draw it out it kind of loses something if you can't see through the pylons. I guess it looks too hefty that way.

[Deleted]

Damn, Dude.
Twin pylon version all the way. I'm even okay with the photon launcher location.

But in response to rarcher 's concern... what if the launchers were on the struts? That would probably look pretty slick. Mounted sorta like the Miranda's roll-bar launcher.

[JAFisher44]

Jun 7, 2017 16:21:16 GMT -7 rabid said:

AGreed, twin pylon version looks cool, even though it's impractical.

I've looked at this one and thought maybe the pylons could be thicker, if not then make the pylons a solid triangle up to the base of the nacelle. But when I draw it out it kind of loses something if you can't see through the pylons. I guess it looks too hefty that way.

The pylons on the dual pylon version are 3 meters thick all the way through. There is plenty of room in them.

[JAFisher44]

Added some color and a tiny bit of detail.

[rabid]

Very sharp! The blue highlights are a nice touch. It's like one of those additions that looks like it always should have been there, that's the best kind.

3 meters is plenty of space, and it occurs to me that destroyers have always been cramped and uncomfortable. The Wilkerson is no exception.

[JAFisher44]

Added some more details.

[JAFisher44]

Ok, the Wilkerson is pretty much done! Obviously I haven't done any registry stuff, but the ship itself is complete.

[JAFisher44]

With registry and stuff!

[JAFisher44]

White background orthos for SRMs.

[atolm]

That's sexy bro!