AWESOME MAN....

I like the mix of styles in the science-fiction section of the Rendo. gallery - and it's good to see this example of a hard-sf spacecraft as well as the more fantasy-derived ones. It's an excellent and plausible design. And having read items 1) and 2) on the legend I wouldn't want to be anywhere near its back-end when it lights up!

A w e s o m e model!! Let us one day see all of them in action ;)

Nice

Your work is always impressive and this is just another example of what one can do with the right tools and knowledge. A very well thought out design that looks very plausible. Your ships are in a class all their own. Excellent in all respects! Keep them coming........... All the best, David...........:-)

excellent work!!

Great looking ship model and backstory! So if the ship flies at one G sustained, I'm assuming the hab modules are only used when coasting or in orbit? The seem too exposed to be a place to be in any battle situation.

Thanks geirla, Excellent question. Yes 1g sustained thrust is standard for these, however, as a requirement of their utility, military vessels require the ability to loiter on station, falling on long elliptical orbits around the assets (planets/ moons/ industrial centers/habitats) they are charged to defend. These vessels are equipped for three to six month deployments (with re-supply by logistic vessels, of course) such loiter times make for the necessity of generated spin gravity. Combat of course might involve rapidly changing conditions, from free-fall to shifting low or high thrust as the vessel maneuvers and in combat one would find the crew strapped-in within hardened bunkered stations located near to the vessels centerline.

geirla brings up an additional point, at least by implication, which we must start to address by acknowledging that: Hollywood almost always gets it wrong. Sorry kids. Everything you have ever seen, from Star Wars to Star Trek to Battle Star Galactica, relies on what is, from a hard SF point of view, magical and non-existent artificial-gravity nonsense physics. If there is some means of force-field generated gravity, science has not yet discovered even the basic principles that might be involved – so far it doesn’t appear remotely feasible. Good examples of realistic spacecraft internal layouts are to be seen in the original 2001: A Space Odyssey. True spacecraft (those designed to forever remain in space) will not be laid out like airplanes or worse, like wet-ocean vessels. (Unless they are designed to enter an atmosphere and glide or fly like an aircraft before landing of course). The physics of space-flight do not support these designs. The best way to think about constant-boost spacecraft is to imagine them having an internal layout like a skyscraper with the rocket engines being in the basement. Shipboard “down,” while the ship is under thrust, will be in the direction the rocket nozzle is pointing, and “up” will be in the direction the ships nose is pointing. For ships designed to spin (or in ships with rotating sections designed to induce centripetal force, or “spin-gravity”) “down” will be in the direction of the engines while under thrust, and will change to “down-is-out,” i.e. meaning "down" is at right angles to the vessel centerline while “under spin.” Vessel fittings, and in some cases entire compartments, will be designed to swing through ninety-degree’s to accommodate these changes. Crew members may be required to re-orient fittings and furniture. So, elevator-lift shafts to arm mounted spin-habitat’s will become horizontal tram-tubes while under thrust and revert to elevator shafts under spin. Of course, the axis of a spacecraft not under thrust remains in zero-g. I have an image, complete with diagrams, which deals with this in a somewhat humorous manner: Life In The Fleet

Fantastic modeling! Corrie

Another nice identification plaque. One thing of note that I might change - given the length and reletive consistancy of the midsection (the radiator pannel array), I would probably shorten it on the plaque with the atypical wavy line breaks seen in some engineering and architectural layouts, with a note of the length of that section. I would probably also include a not of how may pannels are in the complete array. This would allow for the overall imagery to be somewhat larger and more detailed. Just a thought though.

Interesting and well done.......

theKageRyu The compression-ration's required to post these images lend themselves to some visual artifacts, which is regrettable, and your suggestion is one way this might be addressed, however my concern would be that those not versed in the visual technique (which is common practice in modern engineering-diagram's) might miss out on the true appearance of the vessel. I think both the visual field afforded by larger flat-panel displays and high-render-resolution have caught up with Renderosity and perhaps an adjustment is required to allow for larger image-file sizes. Still your suggestion is worth consideration ...