Depicting Starships...

[Rigel Stardin]

...Naw we're going to leave the pun die here...

I've just posted a variant of Free Trader I designed before building the Havara. The Havara came into being because someone posted a 3-D image of the Defiant from DS-9 and boldly proclaimed “look at my Free Trader”. I stated to myself “I can do better than that.”

What I’ve done to change the Free Trader design was to move the reactor and ‘jump drive’ into the space designated for passenger cabins. Where the Havara has it cargo bay in the front of the ship, this one is towards the rear. I’ve also added a forward lounge with large windows so the passengers can view space in all it’s glory.

 

[Rigel Stardin]

SO, yesterday morning Galaxic Moving Company brought their massive large grav hauler up our street. It took out our transmission station to the Planetary Information Service. Needless to say I was without the PIS for a day and half. My wife went bonkers and I got creative.

I'm going to post a drawing of the Gazelle in the art gallery and the other one in the file library when I finish the narative. I hope you enjoy then .

PS: Far Trader please clear some storgage space on your harddive. You may like this one....

 

[Rigel Stardin]

The Razor Class Close Escort is posted in the File Library. It's what the Gazelle ought to have been had they played by the rules.

 

[Rigel Stardin]

I'm in the process of completing the all the Gazelles that were on the Gazelle Card.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Gallery/images/4946/1_Gazelle_Card.jpg

First I going to say I made a mistake on the one I posted in the image gallery.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Gallery/index.php?n=1348

After review my Seeker Deck plans, I realized the airlock is mounted on top of the Gazelle. Therefore, I am going to have to redo the draw to reflect this and add more detail. Unless, we can say this is the current verision being used by most navies now.

The lack of detail in the drawing I have found in my scant collect of Traveller material, have lead me to improvise some of the detail. I'm trying to keep them within the spirit of the drawing in that material but sometimes it's hard. I'm mashing different artist depictions together in order to come up with something believable and in line with the artist thought process. I'm also throwing in my two cent worth as well.

One thing I've always hated about the drawing of the Gazelle were the drop tanks. And my discuss has only grown since reviewing the material, I have on hand. They are drawn like boxes sticking out from the sides, when they should be rounded and form fitted to the hull to give a much more streamlined appearance. This is what I have done with the Gazelles I'm now depicting. At some point, I'll label one draw and show you all the gear on the outer hull.

Normally, what happens when I do a series of drawing, I keep improving on the drawing by adding more detail. The three drawings, I now have are far more complex than the Gazelle now up in the art gallery (another reason for redoing it).

Please, let me know how you feel about the drawing I've posted this weekend and in a day or two, I'll post the next two drawing in the File Gallery.... thanks.

 

[77topaz]

I'm in the process of completing the all the Gazelles that were on the Gazelle Card.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Gallery/images/4946/1_Gazelle_Card.jpg

First I going to say I made a mistake on the one I posted in the image gallery.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Gallery/index.php?n=1348

After review my Seeker Deck plans, I realized the airlock is mounted on top of the Gazelle. Therefore, I am going to have to redo the draw to reflect this and add more detail. Unless, we can say this is the current verision being used by most navies now.

The lack of detail in the drawing I have found in my scant collect of Traveller material, have lead me to improvise some of the detail. I'm trying to keep them within the spirit of the drawing in that material but sometimes it's hard. I'm mashing different artist depictions together in order to come up with something believable and in line with the artist thought process. I'm also throwing in my two cent worth as well.

One thing I've always hated about the drawing of the Gazelle were the drop tanks. And my discuss has only grown since reviewing the material, I have on hand. They are drawn like boxes sticking out from the sides, when they should be rounded and form fitted to the hull to give a much more streamlined appearance. This is what I have done with the Gazelles I'm now depicting. At some point, I'll label one draw and show you all the gear on the outer hull.

Normally, what happens when I do a series of drawing, I keep improving on the drawing by adding more detail. The three drawings, I now have are far more complex than the Gazelle now up in the art gallery (another reason for redoing it).

Please, let me know how you feel about the drawing I've posted this weekend and in a day or two, I'll post the next two drawing in the File Gallery.... thanks.

Do all of the Gazelle types actually have separate names? Or would one have to refer to them as "Vigilante Edition version of the Gazelle" or "Rigel Stardin's Third Version of the Gazelle" etc.? Those names are a bit long...

 

[DangerousThing]

"Gazelle" is the name of a class. Theoretically, all ships within a class should be identical except for allowed modifications.

However, since Traveller is a living game (there are at least 6 different Traveller games released, but I think mainly only CT, MT, MgT, and T5 are being played much). However, *each* of those slightly different games has released a full set of ships. So yes, you might have to refer to the MgT version of the Gazelle class of close defense ship, or the Vigilante version of ...

Theoretically each of these are small modifications of the original designs, or like AHL, there are retrofits to make them more useful.

 

[Rigel Stardin]

I know of four different depictions of the Gazelle, right of hand. However, I can give you 8 depictions from one drawing because of how the artist depicted the ship overtime. 4 dealing strickly with the nacelle, 2 more with the way the hull is drawing and 2 on how the drop tanks are shown. That's not counting my personal touches and how the artists have depicted the Barettes and Turrets.

Doing some research on Wikia and don't know how valid the information is, the ship was designed somewhere around 100 which makes the design well over a thousand years old. Considering the rate of change in technology we could be looking many more variants of the ship. Think of it this way: the ship lifespan is atleast 40 years (Based on loan payment) divide that into a 1000 year and we get 25 variants and that's not counting the planetary navies that decide to put their own twist on the design. AS I stated in the Razor write up, the Equine is a Razor without a gig. What if someone wants Laser Cannons instead of PAW Cannons or as I have depicted a dual laser turrent. Add these into the mix, and you could come up with over a hundred without even blinking an eye.

Therefore I have to base my ships losely on reality. I have to think about each design and what are the major changes. Example of this is the F14 and F15. Technically, one is a fixed wing and the other is a variable geometry wing. One is used by the Air Force and the other the Navy. So I based my designs on the ship's appearance and major compenents: Drop tanks, nacelles, and hull. I'd go insane trying to draw all of them and it would take me a month of Sundays before you'd ever see a drawing.

That being said, I have 4 depictions of the the orginal production model. 3 using material from Traveller and one I designed. I have two more based on the Gazelle depicted from Assignment: Vigilante. Then another from Mega Traveller. That is not counting the two I've design and show on the Gazelle Card in the Art Gallery. Toss in the two verision of the Covenanter and we are up to twelve different verisions of the Gazelle without batting an eye.

...Scratch that I just remember, thirteen different verison because there is a different nacelle configuration for the Covenanter...

 

[rancke]

Doing some research on Wikia and don't know how valid the information is, the [Gazelle] was designed somewhere around 100 which makes the design well over a thousand years old.

I can't find any mention of the year 100 in the Wiki article. Any such mention would constitute a canon conflict, as it contradicts a canonical statement.

In 1105 drop tanks have only been in civilian service for a couple of decades. They are based on a recent invention. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that the invention could have been a military secret for a couple of decades more. The date in the Wiki that puts the date for the laying down of the Gazelle (131-1079) is not canon, but there's a limit to how many decades before 1105 would be described as 'recent'.

My take on the Gazelle is that it's an Imperial Navy's design used to evaluate the newfangled concept of drop tanks. Innate conservatism has led to the IN dragging its feet when it comes to reaching a conclusion. There may or may not be any other IN ships with drop tanks. Variants of the Gazelle are quite likely, but each of them would be an experimental design.


Hans

 

[Rigel Stardin]

http://traveller.wikia.com/wiki/Gazelle_Class

This is the article I read.

According to this article, the Gazelle predates your date by 2 decades.

Planetary navies due to budget constraints may change the Gazelle to fit their needs. For all we know, their could be a squadron of Gazelles out there that don't have jump drives, and drop tanks and are used only for system defense and custom duties.

The Wikia article makes mention of one other vessel which doesn't have drop tanks. Should I depict that one as well?

From a drawing perspective, how many designs are there that need to be depicted in order to tell the story of that class and why there were changes made in the design? Like I pointed out, there are at least 13 different drawing of the Gazelle and it variants? Do I need to make more over every little minor change?

As far as Imperial dates go, I'm not up to speed to what year it is.

 

[rancke]

http://traveller.wikia.com/wiki/Gazelle_Class

This is the article I read.

It's also the article I read.

According to this article, the Gazelle predates your date by 2 decades.

No, it equals my date exactly, since it is my date (As in, I wrote that bit). It's just not a canonical date. If you check the metadata, you'll note that the canonical date is 105-1084 for the laying down of the Unicorn and that the date for the Gazelle was guesstimated from that.

Planetary navies due to budget constraints may change the Gazelle to fit their needs. For all we know, their could be a squadron of Gazelles out there that don't have jump drives, and drop tanks and are used only for system defense and custom duties.

No, I don't think so. A ship class is a group of ships of similar design. If it doesn't have the same jump drive and lack drop tanks, it's not a similar design and thus not the same class. Variations denote lesser changes, such as different weapons.

The Wikia article makes mention of one other vessel which doesn't have drop tanks. Should I depict that one as well?

It does? What vessel is that?

From a drawing perspective, how many designs are there that need to be depicted in order to tell the story of that class and why there were changes made in the design? Like I pointed out, there are at least 13 different drawing of the Gazelle and it variants? Do I need to make more over every little minor change?

I don't know all those different designs. If they all purports to depict the Gazelle -- that is, the single, individual vessel that is the class ship -- then you only need to decide which one is the true Gazelle and depict that, relegating the other 12 drawings to being mistakes. It is, after all, impossible to build the same single ship 13 different ways. If they depict different versions (embodied by different ships), I suppose it would depend on the nature of the differences. A ship with triple turrets instead of PA barbettes would look sufficiently different to warrant a separate rendition. One with a few interior bulkheads changed might only warrant a footnote.

As far as Imperial dates go, I'm not up to speed to what year it is.

CT started in 1105 and went on till 1116. MT started in 1117. TNE in 1202. T4 in 0. T20 in 992. GT in 1120 (and an alternate world with a divergence point around 1114). MgT went back to 1105.


Hans

 

[Rigel Stardin]

I have just posted all the designs I have created thus far.

10,20, 12 and 52 are based on Traveller Material and are drawn as close as I could depict them.

The others in this drawing have changes using Artistic License and mainly deal with drop tanks, nacelles and PAW Barrette. The rest of the drawing are cobbled together from cannon sources.

 

[DangerousThing]

What if someone wants Laser Cannons instead of PAW Cannons or as I have depicted a dual laser turrent. Add these into the mix, and you could come up with over a hundred without even blinking an eye.

Changing out a PAW for lasers isn't a huge change. It's the sort of thing you do when you order it: I'd like the color to be green and I want lasers where the PAW goes.

Yes, because PAW uses barbettes (what is a barbette anyway?) instead of a normal turret, it's more complex than the paint job, but I think the ship builder should be up to it.

I view it like cars. The Mazda Protege came out in a couple of models, but they were mostly the same with different flash (nicer hubcaps or leather interior). These things don't really matter to the technical design of the car; it still looks like a Protege.

It's like Type S ships. They have a turret, but you could change that out and put a different type of turret in it (T5 has quad turrets). I doubt anybody would ask for a deck plan of each different combination of weapons that could go into the turret. Well, you've got your choice of 1 pulse laser, or 2 pulse lasers, or ..., or we could add a sandcaster, or we could have a couple of missile racks...

 

[Rigel Stardin]

This is probably the easiest way to look at my delema.

If I were draw a 1967 corvette through today how many different body styles would I have?

This is what I'm concern about with the Gazelle. How many different body styles are there and which ones should I attempt to draw?

 

[Rigel Stardin]

I'm starting the write up on all those variants I've posted thus far. Since there is no clear evidence of when the first Gazelle built and my limited Traveller libraray shows them being in use throughout the Imperium, I'm wondering if I should keep the description generic or add my MTU to the mix?

Just from looking over the number of variants I have come up with, I can trace the Gazelle back 250 to 300 years based of the 40 year loan payment idea.

Another thought which would explain the changes in design would be this little joke I came up with about escort crew. "You can tell a rookie Gazelle crew by how many dings they have in their nacelles."

Simplification of the hull design would also be an indication of production concerns and method of speed up construction.

I don't want to ruffle and feathers by adding My thoughts on the design but at the same time I don't want to make it boring either. We know the design was fudged, but it is still a peice of Traveller history. I want to balance my thoughts and those who have input on the matter. So if anyone wants to add their two cents please do.

 

[77topaz]

I'm starting the write up on all those variants I've posted thus far. Since there is no clear evidence of when the first Gazelle built and my limited Traveller libraray shows them being in use throughout the Imperium, I'm wondering if I should keep the description generic or add my MTU to the mix?o.

Well, half the variants are YTU, aren't they? You'll have to delve into YTU to find some reason why they are all different.

 

[DangerousThing]

This is probably the easiest way to look at my delema.

If I were draw a 1967 corvette through today how many different body styles would I have?

This is what I'm concern about with the Gazelle. How many different body styles are there and which ones should I attempt to draw?

Just thinking out loud, but I've always thought of the Imperial Navy as highly conservative. And they did spend a large amount on a Naval Architect to get those plans. I can't picture the Navy *allowing* any changes to the base design, if this is a Naval ship.

And yes, I think that the architecture that goes into a naval vessel should cost far more than that of a civilian vessel. If only to deal with the forms required for the Imperium's version of a "cost savings process" that anybody dealing with the US government has to deal with. :rofl:

 

[Rigel Stardin]

There are four depictions which are taken from the canon sources. 10,20,12 & 52. The rest of the drawing are MTU. However, militaries will alter design rather quickly if there is a problem. The way the drop tanks are positioned and how they must be dropped could and possible can strike the nacelle. Another reason just off the top of my head is that they are off center and slung low on on the main hull. This may cause added stress to the ship during high speed manuvers. I mean if you look at the Fiery as a logical progress of the design. The Naval architects did fine something wrong with the design but kept the basic armaments the same.

30 is an example of how a military may not spend the money to armor the drop tanks. They're expendable, so why add armor or make them more complex than they have to be?

...dinner... so I have to cut my explaination short...

 

[Rigel Stardin]

Just posted a Safari ship based on the B-2 Spirit. Have one other on the drawing board which I see being used by Pirates. Hope to have it up in a day or two...

 

[Rigel Stardin]

Just posted the stats for the Spirit in the Art Gallery...

 

[selunatic2397]

Looking forwards to the new art...thanks for sharing!